Were not mustard gas effects well known from WWI? Why would they put the youngsters at risk in 1943 To test the effects in a tropical environment.
Tested to check new delivery systems, by air, mortar or artillery on the battlefield. Army Ordnance Services Part 7 Pamphlet No. 7 Chemical Warfare Ammunition – 1946
[FONT="]MARSHALLESE HONOR NUCLEAR VICTIMS, SURVIVORS[/FONT][FONT="] Remembrance Day held on March 1[/FONT] [FONT="]MAJURO, Marshall Islands (Yokwe, March 1, 2012) – [/FONT][FONT="]In observance of the 58th anniversary of the Bravo Shot and the 2012 Nuclear Survivors Remembrance Day, many gathered at the International Conference Center today to commemorate and honor the victims and survivors of the nuclear tragedy. The Parliament (Nitijela) had set aside March 1st as Nuclear Survivors Remembrance Day, a significant day in the history of the Marshall Islands where the legacy of the nuclear radiation continues to affect the lives of many. During the gathering, Ambassador Campbell expressed “regret” for the affects cause by the U.S. nuclear testing program conducted in the Marshall Islands. Minister of Foreign Affairs Phillip Muller, speaking on behalf of the President Loeak, assured the commitment and effort of the RMI Government to pursue the long standing nuclear issues of the Marshallese people with the Government of the United States. Afterward, Utrok Councilman and survivor, Charles Takao Domnick, spoke of the horrible tragedy and the experiences he endured while growing up in Likiep Atoll. He described the health conditions he suffered plus the loss of many close family members and friends. His dramatic life experiences, like many affected by the nuclear tragedy, captured the attention of the gathering audiences at ICC. To read more of Takao’s remarks. The final speaker was Minister of Public Works Hiroshi Yamamura, who is also Utrok Senator, spoke on behalf of the Four Atolls about the continue suffering of Four Atoll people and the pending Nuclear Tribunal awards. [/FONT]
This is a post I made some time back answering a question about the US Army Chemical Corps and it's origins. Quote: Originally Posted by Slipdigit They never made it to a forward area and did not earn any campaign ribbons. The only thing that I can find is that they were attached to teh South Pacific Base Command, so service at Guadalcanal during that time frame would be a strong probablity. I'm not even sure what a Chemical Service Battalion did. In WW1 the US Army created the Gas Service Section, and by the end of the war it had also created the 1st Gas & Fire Regiment. Actually, the 1st G&F Regt was the new name given to the 30th Engineer Regt (Gas & Flame). On 1 Nov 18 the GSS was re-named the Chemical Warfare Service (yes, a much better name). The section maintained that name up to and through WW2. It was re-named the US Army Chemical Corps that we all know and love in 1946. So, from what I've read Jeff, chemical service battalions were made up of chemical smoke producing companies, decontamination companies, and 4.2" (four-duce) mortar units that provided smoke screens, served up willy pete, and had mustard gas/phosgene rounds on hand just in case (better to have them and not need them than to need them and not have them you know). There were also entire 4.2" chemical smoke mortar battalions in the ETO. The "service" part of "chemical service battalions" was derived from the name of the parent branch, the Chemical Warfare Service. The CWS was not only comprised of units in the field, but also of a large civilian apparatus who designed, built and tested flame-throwers, chemical ammo, flame tanks and incendiaries in addition to conducting bio-warfare research. Ta-daaaah. source: Stanton's WW2 OOB, wiki and a lot of google
Hallo, This thread is going about chemical warfare. Is this the same as 'biological warfare'? I have read that in 1943 young men were used as quiney pig for test? Were this test done at Porton Down? Did these men had later in live illness or other problems caused by these tests? I am interessted because my uncle was send to Porton Down. Exposed to a b.w agent (experimentaly). I found this in his service record. Greetings Tanja
Tanja, biological warfare is the use of viruses or bacteria to incapacitate an enemy. In theory a biological warfare agent could be anything from helping the spread of gastric flu to something far more dangerous like bubonic plague or HIV. Without knowing what agent your uncle was exposed to, it's impossible to say what long term effects they may have been. As an interesting sidenote, samples of all propaganda leaflets dropped over Britain by Germany during the war were tested to see if they were contaminated with any bacteria or viruses. All came back negative. Lee
So .. in theory it is possible that soldiers were exposed in 1943 to a b.w. agent, without getting sick of it.on a short term. Because a lot of them did not servive the war, we will never know what the result was or what type of agent was used. Thanks for the answer. I would think at wartime you would try this on your enemy if realy need to do so, but not on your own people. My first reaction ? This is realy sick. What I was wondering about as well. Did UK soldiers volunteer for these experiments and did they get payed for it? And how many were used for this? Greetings Tanja
Tanja, HIV probably isn't a good example as no doubt something that causes incapacitation much more quickly would be wanted. Something to disable troops in minutes, hours or a few days. It doesn't seem likely that someone would have been exposed to something that had little effect at the time but was expected to severe illness and death years later. I would imagine the experiments conducted at Porton Down were as much about prevention and defence against biological weapons than the creation of offensive weapons. For example monitoring how a virus may spread, detection of contagions and possible treatments against them.
Yes, that would be more logical. I have placed the information out of the service record in the thread about my uncle. I thought that this thread was not the place for this. Thank you for sharing your information with me. Greetings Tanja
The freedom of information act allows access to some facts. Yes we did develop offensive biological weapons with the means of delivery made to fit Blenheim and Wellington bomb bays. There are claims that an area many of us know well and also know that it is very secure and well patrolled contains WW2 biological stores that need to be stored as there is no safe way of disposing of them. Some British broadsheets have run investigations too. A British MP summed it up 'nefarious and sinister!'
Hi, Chemical Weapons are classified as follows. 1. Lethal Agents. Designed to kill as many troops as possible as quickly as possible. Example = Nerve Agent of which the amount of liquid on a Pin head is classed as a leathal dose. 2. Damaging Agents. Designed to cause as many casualties as possible thus swamping the Medical Services, and lowering morale. Example = Blister Agents such as Sulpher, Nitrogen and Hydrogen Mustard. Slow to act and insidious in action. Incapactitating Agents. Divided into Physical Agents and Mental Agents. Examples Physical Agents. Nose irritants to delay donning the respirator causing inhalation of Lethal vapour delivered at the same time. Mental Agents Mescalin and LSD based to cause confusion and disoriantation. Note Riot Control Agents, Smoke and Flame are excluded from the NATO Defination of a Chemical Agent. For more reading on CBRN see "A Higher Form of Killing by Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman" Regards, Mick D.
Just noticed this The freedom of information act allows access to some facts. Yes we did develop offensive biological weapons with the means of delivery made to fit Blenheim and Wellington bomb bays. Actually - the smallest size of chemical munition could be carried on a Light Series Carrier...so could have been carried on any RAF aircraft that could carry underwing ordnance I came across a report on them on the Net a while back when researching the Light Series Carrier on the Lysander's undercarriage pylons...and of course the BP Defiant!
Sorry I don't mean to flame but so you would agree the Atom bomb on Japan the chemicals on Vietnam and all the Napalm was a crappy way to fight a war +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The answer is ,of course, 'yes'. Frankly, we lost somethng when soldiering stopped being 'blade on blade'. The dividing line is , IMHO, the conduct of war wherever civilians are not well out of the way first...
Big difference between chemical and biological warfare is that exposure to a biological agent will generally only begin to adversely affect a person after a matter of days. A chemical agent will generally have an instantaneous effect and therefore is more suitable to military use where the aim is to incapacitate the enemy and take ground. An example of this is the use of mustard gas etc in WW1. It was intended to incapacitate the enemy quickly but cause minimum effect to the land itself thereby allowing soldiers to move forward and occupy the enemy's territory.
Hi Wills, The RAF Hawker Hunter was used as a "Spray" attack aircraft to simulate an enemy aircraft releasing "Chemical Agent Training Mixture" aka CATAM in Liquid or Aerosol form to train units to respond to surprise attacks. CATAM reacted with Chemical Agent Detector Paper allowing Alarm as well as decontamination and contamination area survey drills to be carried out. The aircraft was never used to release CS which is not a Gas but a particulate irritant. CS was dispensed using the various munitions on the ground by trained instructors. Regards, Mick D.
CS was dispensed using the various munitions on the ground by trained instructors.-------True - I have gas tested a few lads in my time over in the chamber just off the square at Pirbright. Bring them in one at a time. I have passed by a squad marching back from gas training to feel the stuff in the back of the throat and eyes as it clings to clothing. We had two Guardsmen lifted by the MPs in Germany, they had kept some cs pellets back and powdered them into ashtrays in a club. Not clever one local collapsed.
Hi Wills, Quote "We had two Guardsmen lifted by the MPs in Germany, they had kept some cs pellets back and powdered them into ashtrays in a club. Not clever one local collapsed." I found that always to be a problem when training. It got so that I made each instructor make a declaration that he had no CS Training aids on him as per ammunition after a range or exercise. Here's a link to "A Higher Form of Killing" http://www.granddistraction.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Harris-Paxman-A-Higher-Form-of-Killing-The-Secret-History-of-Chemical-and-Biological-Warfare-1982.pdf It makes very interesting reading. Regards, Mick D.
I don't think that WMD has ever been an official military term, not least because chemical weapons don't do mass destruction. In WW2 UK had quite large stocks of chemical weapons, first there was all the stuff left over from WW1, notably 4.5 and 6 inch artillery shells. During WW2 The were chemical shells for 25-pr and I think 5.5 inch. Not forgetting 4.2 in mortar. When I did the NBC instructor course, the story was that the Germans did not use nerve agents (Sarin etc) in WW2 because they'd detected allied chemical research effort and assumed the allies had the means to retaliate with their own nerve agents. In fact the allied effort was DDT. Post war 1950s UK did not have any chemical stocks (apart from a bit of mustard for training purposes at Porton), although the US did. However, a small number of UK officers were trained in chemical target analysis, consistent with the UK position of reserving the right to retaliate (this training wasn't done in UK).
