Why did no one use chemical or bioweapons in WW2 (apart from Japan)?
>>61962202Because chemical weapons absolutely suck against semi-prepared militaries. They're great against civilians, but it is not very smart to use them against someone who's capable or using them right back at you.The Japs didn't have this problem, as the Chinese would never be able to target Japanese cities.
>>61962202>apart from JapanWarlords had biological weapons and killed themselves, the retards.
>>61962226Oh, and I think the Italians used some as well in Africa, or was that before ww2?
Because they're not actually very effective as weapons of war.
>>61962202Hitler considered it, but quickly dropped the idea once he was informed bongs have enough chemical weapons to kill 99.9% of germs.
>>61962271Pretty much everyone was ready to commit to it once the other asshole did, but no one was willing to start shithttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_John_Harvey
>>61962271Hitler had nerve gas, brits only had mustard and phosgene. V1 + V2 rockets filled with sarin/tabun could have killed most of bongland.
>>61962379Kek, no they couldn't you absolute dumb fuck, and the germs didn't have nerve gas
>>61962202Old Brits had no chill.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vegetarian
>>61962379-> >>61962401
>>61962241Yes the Italians used chemical agents against the Ethiopians.
>>61962271Hitler was if anything reluctant to take the jump. The Reich's nerve agent predates the nazis. And while he certainly didn't stop it he also didn't push it.
>>61962397Are you clinically retarded. IB Farben which was a synthetics and chemical company in Germany invented the G series in 1936 and manufactured Tabun and Sarin.
>>61962271>enough chemical weapons to kill 99.9% of germs
>>61962202>almost all the major staff officers and other big figures across the war were either outright veterans or pretty closely linked to WW1, and absolutely did not want to have things devolve to that kind of shit >WW2 was much more mechanized and mobile, which hinders the effectiveness of chemical weapons pretty significantly >not gonna be a good look when saturation bombings target a chem weapons depot Everyone had some but they (outside of Japan who were just comically barbaric in general even for the time) were not willing to be the ones who used them first.
>>61962379Brits had anthrax
>>61962202The USA was prepared to and had a ship loaded with some kind of Chemical agent in port during the Italian campaign. It got drilled by a Stuka and blew up and dispersed the gas and killed a lot of italian civilians nearby. The Italian doctor who did a lot of the autopsies and post exposure care noticed that several of the people who had been his patients and had cancer saw their cancer go into remission or spread more slowly after they were exposed and survived. That's how chemotherapy was discovered for cancer treatment interestingly enough. So at least something good came of it.
>>61962560sounds interesting, got more on this?
>>61962202>>61962202We were planning to coat Germany in anthrax spores to create an artificial famine but then the fucking burgers just had to have their Normandy landing and diverted all bombers to France and the Low Countries.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_VegetarianThe island we were testing the strains of Anthrax on is still unfit for life. VHG…. What might have been…………
>>61962271>enough chemical weapons to kill 99.9% of germs.CARLOS
>>61962437Even so, not not nearly in the quantity enough to kill most of England.
>>61962202Knowledge that your enemies have them too, and are only not using them because you currently aren't either.If I remember correctly there was supposedly a similar thing with napalm in the Falklands.
anchovy's smelly bioweapons
>>61962583>>61962371
>>61962379>Winston Churchill issued a memorandum advocating a chemical strike on German cities using poison gas and possibly anthrax. Although the idea was rejected, it provoked debate.[19] In July 1944, fearing that rocket attacks on London would get even worse and that he would only use chemical weapons if it was "life or death for us" or would "shorten the war by a year",[20] Churchill wrote a secret memorandum asking his military chiefs to "think very seriously over this question of using poison gas." He said: "it is absurd to consider morality on this topic when everybody used it in the last war without a word of complaint," Bongs were wishing a nigger would
>>61962401>>61962602God, I wish we were still this evil. Modern bongland is no fun.
>>61962379>>61962397The Germans had a stockpile of nerve gas; and while chemical weapons today suck vs militaries etc, in the 1940s a nerve gas attack would have not have. It would have been deadly. The Germans thought the Allies also had nerve gas because the basic science for it was public knowledge in the WW1 and interwar period. So there was mutual deterrence, since Allied air power with nerve gas would have been much worse than anything Germany could do. But yes, in an alternate history where you, anon, travel back in time to warn Hitler to launch a nerve gas strike on London or Moscow with stockpiled V1s in 1940 the outcome of the conflict would be quite different.
>>61963927>stockpiled v1s>1940anon...
>>61963964It was developed at Peenemunde Army Research Center in 1939. I recommend reading the post-war operations research Hap Arnold did on the V1. It'll make you a wehraboo.
>The plan consisted of disseminating linseed cakes infected with anthrax spores into the countryside of Nazi Germany. These cakes would have been eaten by the cattle, which would then be consumed by the human population, leading to widespread death and disruption.>i shall call this>Operation VEGETARIAN Lmao what the actual fuck
>>61963984Well it is an operation to make the germans vegetarian innit
>>61963964they had the technology and the facilities to produce V1s in sufficient numbers to wipe out major population centers even in 1940that they didn't has a lot to do with what they where aiming for with rocket research. Having been set up originally to cover for the lack of heavy guns due to the Versailles treaty. But they broke the treaty so it wasn't needed to do that kind of work and so they shifted their focus.It's much like how the germans could have flooded the seas with a lot of submarines early on. Had Dönitz managed to convince hitler of going with subs instead of capital ships.
>>61962202Polish resistance planned to spread Anthrax in Berlin and Breslau, but the operation got busted.
>>61964013more a operation to kill nearly everyone on the continent even the brits own allies. hoping off course that it wouldn't spread to the british isles but all it would take to do so is one infected person making it across the channel.the brits basically planned to kill 9/10 people north of the sahara and west of the urals if they thought that they where going to lose the war
>>61964039>but all it would take to do so is one infected person making it across the channelAnthrax very rarely spreads from human to human, it's almost always only from contact with the spores themselves. So whether or not anywhere else would have gotten fucked would be down to the wind.
>>61962202Germany used it when capturing Odesa to clear out the catacombs, as you could expect Hitler was not happy
>>61962202America was going to rely on chemical weapons to clear out Japanese cities if the nuclear bombs failed. They learned from liberating Manila that street fighting was too costly and resulted in the city being mostly destroyed anyways.
>>61962602>the fucking burgers just had to have their Normandy landingStaling forced the Normandy landing. If he had his way it would have happened in 43 instead of in 44.
>>61962379Hitler had the ability to deploy it against battlefield targets, brits had the ability to dump thousnads of tons of it right into german cities.>but muh V1+V2Every ton the krauts would have been able to dump on bongland, the bongs would have been able to drop a hundred tons onto krautland in return.>>61963927>the outcome of the conflict would be quite differentYeah, Germany being reduced to an uninhabitable, absurdly NBC-contaminated wasteland by the end of the war - with over 90% population fatalities likely - would have been quite a different outcome.
>>61962461The Japs used chemical weapons because they didn't have the experience using them during WW1 like the Europeans did. They quickly came to the realization of their general ineffectiveness and phased them out of service, just like the Europeans had done. China was also not a signatory of the Geneva Protocol, so Japan did legally nothing wrong in trying them out on China. America and the UK on the other hand did sign the protocol, which is why Japan never used them against them.
>>61962202The tl;dr is that MAD actually works, both sides clearly understood that you coould not stop teh other sdie from using gas agaisnt cities.And on top of that chemical weapoons pretty much suck balls if you are on the offensive. Sure, you can incapacitate the enemy, or drive them from their positions. But then your owon troops go there, and they'Rr now equally forced into masks, and potentiallly stuck in an area that has just been shelled with mustard.
>>61964062Yes human to human is rare.But if the infected person dies and their body isn't properly disposed off you now have the anthrax in your soil.Considering that the brits where planning to do this at the point where they had already lost the war. With not just a german landing but the germans securing port facilities and then beating the brits on their own soil. The brits wouldn't have been able to prevent the anthrax getting into Britain and spreading.
>>61962371So it was basically nukes before nukes? Interesting. Gives me hope for conventional war between nuclear powers, if Nazis weren't as retarded as to pull the chemical warfare trigger, maybe people nowadays won't be as retarded to pull the nuke trigger.
>>61963984>>61964013The mind of the Bong-Unleashed is a terrifying realm
>>61962202Because the hwaat mayn is civuhlized see
>>61964104Stalin did indeed want the Allies to open a western front in Europe sooner rather than later, but the biggest reason it took until the summer of '44 for that to happen was British autism about the Mediterranean demanding Italy be removed from the equation first, even though they were virtually zero threat.
>>61962602>We were planning to coat Germany in anthrax spores to create an artificial famineAnd surely the anthrax would have stopped right at the French/Swiss/Danish border... right?Why is history so full of idiots?
>>61962202You can protect against most chemical agents with gas masks and covering clothing, while it takes significantly more to protect a person against an equivalent mass of explosives. Every major combatant had large stockpiles of gas masks, and could pretty easily afford to give them out to their civilian population in the line of fire. Explosives also damage infrastructure, which makes it much easier to disrupt the enemy industry and infrastructure.
>>61962371>>61962271>>61962379Why is it okay to carpet bomb london every day for years but not okay to use chlorine gas? That makes no fucking sense
After WW1 both sides realized that if they opened the door for chemical weapons the enemy would too so they had an agreement to just not use them. They put it into the Geneva convention. The japs just didn't give a fuck about "humane" warfare
>>61965473Still won't last you very long for industrial gas like chlorine gas, and they certainly didn't have as effective protection like our MOPP gear back then. Even our M50 masks can't last more than a few minutes against chlorine gas and such and are basically useless against ammonia and carbon monoxide.
>>61962371>but no one was willing to start shitThe bongs fully intended to carpetbomb every patch of farmland in occupied Europe with pucks of anthrax spores, a plan which would kill at least 10 million civilians.The only reason they didn't was that producing all the anthrax took longer than expected, and by the time the spores were ready for use, the Normandy landings had already happened, so the bio-warfare plans were halted since they didn't want to infect their own troops.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vegetarian
>>61962202>TFW England was almost shelled with chlorine triflouride, but Hitler thought it was too extremeImagine the kino, a gas that ignights almosy everything on fire, even concrete, asbestos, sand, explodes in certain environments, precipitates hydro chlorine and hydrochloric acid in the air and lungs .
>>61965513Had that happened the bongs would've done operation vegetarian out of sheer spite.
>>61962202Because chemical weapons are garbage.Here's a little metaphor. Ever heard of the 3 laws of robotics? Basically, first law robot does not harm humans, second law it follows orders, third law it protects itself. This isn't just something good for robots, it is good for any tool - including weapons. A good weapon should:>Not kill you or your soldiers.>Do what you want it to.>Have good reliability, and not break randomly or need lots of maintenance.And chemical weapons violate all of those principles. ALL OF THEM.
>>61965527>hurr, we will try to infect cows with anthrax randomly, so some may get sick, and then some people may get sick, in a few months, if no kne takes antibiotics, meanwhile our cities are saturated with literal hell gas that makes you, and nearly everything, even stone, burst into flames
>>61965527Lmao, so?That's like Japan saying they will bomb pearl harbor a second time, but only with 2 planes because the US nuked them twice.You have a dumb, slow, ineffective plan by the brits, vs what would probably be considered the most devastating and cruel attack on a city ever done.
>>61965547Tip: nerve gas wasn't garbage especially against pre-1970s protective gear.
>>61965513>TFW England was almost shelled with chlorine triflouride, Almost? I thought the Germans gave up CIF3 during initial testing since they quickly realised that shit is too much of a headache to deal with.>>61965575>You have a dumb, slow, ineffective plan by the brits,Considering how much Anthrax the Bongs had I wouldn’t consider the aftermath ineffective.>vs what would probably be considered the most devastating and cruel attack on a city ever done.Yeah but it’s CIF3, I wouldn’t stand next to a V1 caring the stuff even if Hitler himself ordered me too.
>>61964227This is what's going to happen, a conventional war between two Nuclear powers, with no use of nukes from either. Defeat is preferable to destruction.
>>61965618It's garbage in an actual warzone. We're not talking about sheer lethality, if that was the only stipulation then hurr bring out the quicklime, mustard gas, and sarin gas. But none of that is controllable, and that's what warfare is actually about: controlled violence. Anyone who thinks it is solely about killing the enemy and who cares about anything else is underage.
The amount of sheer retards in this thread is astonishing.No, noone used chemical weapons not because they were so great and good people, especially Hitler. They didn't use it because it is inefficient plus it kills civilians. You know, the drones you actually want to rule over. Even when exterminating and genociding Poles Hitler and Stalin targeted only higher ups and elites. Because they wanted drones to do drone work. Yet here we are in the 21st century and people who think they are fucking smartest on earth are too stupid to understand how war works.This is also why noone wants to use nuclear weapons. Because it does not achieve a thing you want to achieve as warlord.
>>61962202The Germans used gas at Odesa and the Crimea campaign.
>>61962202>WMD category includes pathogens that transfer to individuals via air respirationJapan did a WMD first.
>>61964104Tbf, the US also pushed for a cross channel invasion in '43.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Roundup_(1942)
>>61966076poles weren't genocided
>>61962202there were treaties in place and they were useless as weapons, even civilians had gas masks by then, nerve gas + arty was good but it was not ready to be used at scale and nobody wanted to break the treaties first
>>61966076>retards in this thread>noone
>>61964104stalin wanted it in 42, which was impossible, and american generals didn't want torch because it was seen as a move to liberate the british colonies, in the end it was roosevelt that forced torch to shut up the pacific first advocatesThe fact allies even listened to that dumb georgian manlet is fucking sad, they feared he would sue for peace, but hitler never wanted to negotiate with the soviet union in the first place, they gave him half of europe and rushed operations for nothing, when they could have let him grind the germans until 44 with minimum support and then mop up western and central europe up to poland
>>61965513>From 1938, construction commenced on a partly bunkered, partly subterranean 14,000 m2 (150,000 sq ft) munitions factory, the Falkenhagen industrial complex, which was intended to produce 90 tonnes of N-Stoff per month, in addition to sarin (a deadly nerve agent). However, by the time it was captured by the advancing Red Army in 1945, the factory had produced only about 30 to 50 tonnes, at a cost of over 100 German Reichsmarks per kilogram.Not exactly an economically viable weapon of war.
>>61966141>because it was seen as a move to liberate the british coloniesbut north africa wasn't British, the only bit of a "british colony" the axis was a bit of desert in egypt. Egypt not even being a colony but a country the brits simply bossed them around.
>>61962202western allies because of moral high ground(although they had stocks shipped to europe just in case). The krauts for the simple reason they knew the allies ability to deploy chemical weapons strategically was vastly superior to theirs
>>61962241>I think the Italians used some as well in AfricaBased Italians
>>61965724There's a vast difference between nukes and chemical weapons. If Hitler could have launched something with the destructive power of nukes, he would have. He couldn't use chemical weapons in every major city around the world once he started losing, but he would've if he could've.
>>61964112>Germany being reduced to an uninhabitable, absurdly NBC-contaminated wasteland by the end of the war - with over 90% population fatalities likely - would have been quite a different outcomeVGH
>>61964039Gigabased.
>>61964080They used tear gas for that, and only because the Red Army refused to surrender after 4 repulsed assaults and a 2 week siege that had them sucking the moisture off walls to stay alive
>>61965468You mean all the countries collaborating with the Germans?
>>61965513That sounds like a massive pain in the ass for everyone involved. Imagine trying to capture and utilize a port city that got hit with that stuff
>>61965618The only thing nerve gas is good for, operationally speaking, is completely preventing movement through an area. Even then if the wind blows you lose control of it and block areas you might want to cross through or occupy
>>61965677The SS was fanatical enough in 1944-45 to use human piloted flying bombs and they had more volunteers than bombs
>>61967115It was just a spaz attack, there was realistically 0 chance of Germany invading the UK. Even today i can only think of the US that could achieve that and then it would come at a massive casualty risk.Tl:dr Islands stronk
>>61962241It was in 1935-36, before ww2
>>61965677>I thought the Germans gave up CIF3 during initial testing since they quickly realised that shit is too much of a headache to deal with.They had at least 30 tons of it by the end of the war.
>>61966122>aha my opponent made a typo!Faget
>>61962202I think they just suck ass and are a waste of logistics
>>61962397>and the germs didn't have nerve gasU wot m8?Krauts fucking invented them, what do you think the G in G-series nerve agents stand for?
>>61962271>enough chemical weapons to kill 99.9% of germs.
>>61965677>Almost? I thought the Germans gave up CIF3 during initial testing since they quickly realised that shit is too much of a headache to deal with.>>61967270>They had at least 30 tons of it by the end of the war.Because they thought of using it as rocket fuel, the Walther subs were hogging all that sweet peroxide so they tested several compounds including ClF3 since it was unused in its intended role
>>61962379>V1 + V2 rockets filled with sarin/tabun could have killed most of bongland.
>>61969283fuck, meant Walter subs obviously
>>61962379yep>>61962397They had enormous quantities of nerve agent. They were on the cutting edge of chemical weapon production. Enough to easily wipe out bongstan. It's one of the major holes in the holohoax narrative, which originally began as Russian and Bongstani propaganda.
>>61966076>genociding Poleslol, neat how post DNA detection the yids and their pawns stopped trotting out all of the absolutely real and 100% authentic atrocity propaganda artifacts.There is absolutely a use case for introducing poison gas behind the enemy line. After all, according to the state enforced narrative, Germany wanted to kill everyone on Earth who wasn't the German Master Race to assert their racial supremacy. The Germans were simply not as ruthless as the obviously fake propaganda pumped into Russia, the US, and Europe claims. If Germany's posture had been to exterminate all of the enemies it contacted the way the Russians did, they would have probably won the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_made_from_human_corpses
>>61969345He's correct. Germany could have wiped out England with their tabun stockpile.
>>61963927different anon but...In the alternative timeline I would have begrudgingly told Hitler not to invade Russia until England had been conquered. Then to ally with the US against the bolsheviks in Russia.
>>61962202Because by WW2, everyone, and I do mean everyone, in the West had access to massive stockpiles of nerve agents, and no one wanted the retaliation that would happen if they used them first. The Japs knew no one would care if they gassed a bunch of chinks and flips, though they did get their comeuppance. Twice.>verification not required
>>61970165>Because by WW2, everyone, and I do mean everyone, in the West had access to massive stockpiles of nerve agents,lol nogermans discovered them just before wwII, no one else had any significant stockpiles of nerve agents at that timeThe reason Hitler didn't use is them is speculated to be him tasting a bit of mustard gas himself during wwI and thus having an aversion towards chem warfare or, according to Goring, the more pragmatic reason- horses, the backbone of their logistics would be fucked over by choking/blister agents anywayIn the end, when they could have used them to the most effect german cities were already getting bombed to bits so it would be basically shooting themselves in the knee
>>61962202>Why did no one use chemical or bioweapons in WW2
>>61962202its boring
>>61965476Fritz Haber asked the same question.Then his wife killed herself
>>61965476the bombing of london was a response to firebombing in germany. he didnt want to do it.Churchill once in a drunken stupor ordered the use of anthrax bombs over western europe ,but luckily nobody listened to his drunk fat ass.
