The Nuclear decision...what if?

They should have had them at all times. I imagine in some situations soldiers 'forgot' or weren't issued gas masks...but it was standard equipment.

Civettone said:

But did they really carry it with them all the time? Or was it simply available at HQ? Just so difficult to imagine German soldiers fighting in the Ukraine, or fighting in North Africa with gas masks in their bags.

Kris

Click to expand...

No it was carried at all times.

You dont leave them at HQ and then a gas attack comes and you have to run back to HQ to get them.

If you are gassed you have litteraly seconds to get your equipment on. In the military we litterally trained for it in gas chambers.

Same thing in WW2 they carried them so that they had them if they needed them.

Civettone said:

But did they really carry it with them all the time? Or was it simply available at HQ? Just so difficult to imagine German soldiers fighting in the Ukraine, or fighting in North Africa with gas masks in their bags.

Kris

Click to expand...

As Adler said, yes, they did carry them all the time; if you look at pictures of Wehrmacht infantry in WWII, most of them have their gas mask canisters with them. It would hang off the back of their webbing, mostly out of the way, but immediately available if necessary.

I do believe if any of the other countires had perfected the A-bomb, they would have surely used it. It had the potential to kill the most enemies with one weapon.
I do not believe Germany had all the resources to build their own bomb. I do not know all the details as intimately as you gentlemen do, but as Syscom has said, they were missing the resources, (ie factories, industrial base) and I think did not have the forsight to concentrate on the A-bomb instead of the V2. The V2 was nothing more than a terror weapon. Which one had a greater impact on the war? The A-bomb by far. What are the figures for total killed by both weapons? If they both cost about the same, the a bomb is the better value by far. I guess my point in this is that although Germany had the potential to build a bomb, those in charge lacked all the tools to build one either because of miscalculations, or because of lack of infrastructure, but most importantly, they thankfully missed the opportunity to perfect the bomb and build one because they chose to direct their resources into a weapon that did little to win the war for Germany, and stole valuable resources and manpower that the US had in ample supply. Once again, Germany's lack of a long term plan cost them dearly in the war.

Germany has had hundred thousands of tons of Chemical weapons and many production facilities to produce them.
Among this, more than 12.000 tons of Tabun, more than 30 tons of Sarin and little amounts of Soman. I think, this is more than enough for everything what you want to finish... They have had also the granates and the bombs to deliver them. They have had also more than enough Lost, Clark I, Clark II, Adamasit, Phosgen, Zyklon B and and and...
Let say it on this way. With Tabun, bombs and cases to deliver them and the AR 234 or the V2 (I'm not sure, but I remember to heared/read, they have had warheads to deliver Tabun with the V2), Germany has had the the stuff to less or more finish every enemy town in europe.

After WW2 the allied forces stored much of the chemical weapons (under it with Tabun filled granates and bombs) on several ships (like the Leipzig) and sunk them mainly in the baltic sea but also in the northsea.

I would just say, Germany didn't need to develope the A-bomb.
Also the allied forces didn't need them in WW2.
The Royal Air force over Germany and US-Air Force over Japan prooved several times that it is possible to wipe out a whole town just with convential weapons (firestorm), just think of Dresden, Hamburg and several japanese towns.

It sounds to be unbelievable but it has been shown, that AH was not willed to use chemical weapons in WW2.
It is known, that Bormann, Goebbels and Ley tried to force him to allow the use of Tabun.
There could be several reasons, why AH was not willed to use them.
1. He was wounded by gas in WW1.
2. The germans feared, the allied would have something comparable (we now know, they didn't).
3. There was no drug to heal there own with Tabun or something comparable wounded soldiers (Atropin).
4. The germans believed the allied forces knew of the german gas program. Now we knew they didn't know anything.
5. Because of the typical wind direction, gas weapons were not realy useful against allied western forces.

I'm think, if the allied forces would have used a A-bomb against a german town...
Germany would have answered with Tabun against a allied town.
In my opinion, if someone uses a weapon of mass destruction against you (especially against civilians), you are allowed to answer with weapons of mass destruction.
I think, germany would have send an horrorfiing answer.

T4.H? Do you think Germany would have used the A-bomb against the Allies had they perfected it first?
I am saying that Germany would have. One bomb too wipe out London? Hitler was trying to wipe out London by bombing and with the V2. Here was one weapon that could do it. How could he not use it?
Mitsuo Fuchida himself was quoted as saying that the US did the right thing by dropping the bomb on Japan. He said that the dropping of the bomb saved many lives on both sides as the Japanese people were willing to resist the American invasion down to the last man, woman and child. Amercian casualties would have been far greater that Okinawa, Iwo Jima, etc.
Another Japanese pilot said that he could not hold any hatred towards the US for dropping the bomb as Japan would have surely used the bomb had they had it available.
All this is most likely at home on another post.

A good question.
A question, only one person could answer...
And thisone is ash...and is good so...

To answer, what I think is one of your questions...
I don't think, germany would have surrendered, after one or two german towns had been wiped out by A-bombs. Why? Good question. Even as german I can't answer why it is so. I only knew, it is so.
In WW2, Germany fighted to the end. At least, there was just nothing left, less or more no airforce, no navy, no army...

AH would wipe out London with one A-bomb? They wouldn't throw it on London, if they would use it...
The would use Dover or Birmingham or something else as target.

AH could wipe out London at any time...

10 AR 234, each with 2 bombs filled with Tabun...
And you have only dead and deceasing bodys lying around. Much more than after a A-bomb explosion.
They didn't do it.

If AH would believe, the allied side would answer with gas on german towns.
No...
If not... yes, perhaps yes, may be...

Did AH fear only chemical weapons or did he fear all weapons of mass destruction...This is the question, I can not answer.

Why didn't they just wear the Gas masks most of the time then?

Obviously they didn't wear them for identification purposes, but other than that

We are talking about Tabun.
I 'm not sure, that the allied standard filter systems of the masks were working/properly working against Tabun.
It is a neuronal toxin, which is also going through the skin.

I knew, that in Great Britain each civiian has had a gas mask, in difference to germany.

You have to know, that you are attacked by gas, to use the mask.

A filter system is only working for a special amount of time, than it starts to fail and has to be exchanged. Do you have enough exchange filters?

I too dont think that Hitler would have dropped a bomb on London. Hitler was not trying to wipe out London just to wipe it out. He was trying to bring England into submission.

I think he if had the Bomb he would have used it on the Eastern Front against Russia not England...

That is a very good point Adler. From what I have read and heard, Hitler did not hate the English. But he did hate the Russians. Would this be a correct statement?

AH did hate jews.
The russians were less or more "just only" living on the wrong place, a place, where the germans "should" life...(Lebensraum im Osten). Stupid idea.
AH did hate the communists. And the russians were not aryan.
I would just say, he didn't like the russians..

Yes Hitler didn't hate the Tommys. He hoped to work together with them.

A-bomb against russia?
You can't stop someone like Stalin just by wiping out some towns.
Perhaps you can kill him.

I think, it would be impossible for germany to attack an english town with an A-bomb.
An A-bomb is too heavy. The V2 is too small. The germans had aircrafts, which could transport an A-bomb. But these are to slow to get through the english air defence.
All one, who where fast enough...were to small.


At the end of 44 no one would be stopped by some A-bombs (in europe).

Messy1 said:

That is a very good point Adler. From what I have read and heard, Hitler did not hate the English. But he did hate the Russians. Would this be a correct statement?

Click to expand...

I will not say it is true but I will say he respected the English.

10-4.

At least at first.
After the BoB and the first major British bomb raids he hated them as much as any other enemy nation.

Well in fact, what's curious about it is that his hate was also demonstrated by looking down on them. He looked down on Americans as they couldn't produce a decent car, and as such wouldn't be able to build decent tanks or aircraft. Naturally he thought the Russians would be even worse at it. This stuckup superiority feeling basically made him lose the war. But that's off-topic...
Kris