Gas in World War I

In a way, it's strange wars have "rules", whether or not they're followed. I guess the idea is that if you stick to it, hopefully the other side does as well. (It must be the same logic as when two guys are in a streetfight, you still don't employ the highly effective crotch-kick.) Essentially, most of them follow some sort of "reduce excessive human suffering" ideals; taking in prisoners, rules against torture (I'm looking at you, Jack Bauer, in my extremely dated 24 reference), only fighting combatants as opposed to citizens, no name-calling, etc. etc.. I'm sure both sides of the coin appreciate those rules, but when one side starts losing, well, maybe they're a little more willing to bend. In the Great War, gas was one such rule.

Gas bomb, gas bomb, you're my gas bomb!
Sidenote: While researching this joke, I watched the video for
Tom Jones' song "Sexbomb" which, if you haven't seen, is well worth your time.

Neither side particularly liked the use of gas. To shoot your enemy was one thing, but there was something about sending noxious fumes over a field and asphyxiating and blinding the enemy felt to the common soldier so far from the romanticized, gallant ideals of warfare that it was frowned upon pretty much everywhere. Don't forget, these wars were fought predominantly in countries that still had knights in their collective conscience. When the Germans first employed the use of chlorine on the battlefield, they downplayed the number of casualties, maybe in the same way a student won't brag about a high mark on a test they cheated on. Nevertheless, it was effective, and considering the scope of the First World War it only makes sense that it would be employed. At some point, chivalry goes out the window when it's winner-take-all for the whole of Europe.

British soccer team, equipped with gas masks. Because if you're
fighting in what looks like a post-apocalyptic hellscape, you've
still got to get some footy in.

So what do the allies do in this moral quandary? Sink to the level of the Germans, or hold out with their moral code? The decision was made mostly due to the effectiveness of the first few attacks against them. At Ypres, the sight of the first gas attack, broke through the French with incredible ease, unprepared and unfamiliar with gas as a weapon as they were. It took the Canadians, fearlessly and selflessly charging into the gaps - quite often accepting the grim fate of holding positions overwhelmed with gas - and held the line long enough for reinforcements. They won the day, but they knew it would be used again. In order to fight on a level playing field, they had to do the same.

Although feelings were mixed, the British were the first on the other side to try it out, quickly realizing that it wasn't the easy fix to trench warfare many thought it would be. Wind conditions can easily blow the gas right back in the direction from which it came, it was difficult to move, hard to release, and once respirators came out in force, not even all that effective. (The exception for this is on the eastern front, where poorly equipped Russian troops often lacked respirators, and gas attacks were often extremely effective. This goes with the Russian World War ethos of using an abundance of men in lieu of an abundance of material.)

Both sides quickly learned that gas was a weapon that wasn't meant to win straight away, but rather an attrition weapon. Most people wouldn't die from gas, but rather be severely injured, blinded (temporarily or occasionally permanently) or beleaguered by having to wear cumbersome, uncomfortable respirators for long hours. Only 5% of those gassed died, as opposed to 25% for conventional weapons. That's what's interesting about gas casualties; plenty of casualties, but not that many deaths. Many that were gassed came back, although in a sense, so did the gas. Countless soldiers had respiratory problems upon returning from the war. However, even if it didn't often kill outright, it had to be addressed, as gas was becoming increasingly common (and more potent) as the war went on. 

A group photo demonstrating a variety of gas masks on the Western -
hey, wait a minute, the guy on the bottom isn't wearing a mask! He just has
an incredibly large head!

In comes the importance of gas discipline. Masks were to always be near, practice was to be done to put on the respirator with speed, and it was never to be taken off early. The latter had a few exceptions as commanders, who were hit especially hard by gas attacks, felt they had to call orders to their troops and thus had to remove their respirators, choosing to heroically fall victim to gas in order to continue to lead. The Canadians soon had men strictly devoted for instructing those at the front on the importance of gas discipline, as well as the basic knowledge behind it. Don't forget, most of the troops were uneducated, and didn't know very much about basic scientific theories. The way they'd usually learn was to have men go into a gas chamber wearing a respirator, and show them that they'd come out unharmed - except for the occasional mask that was put on improperly, or when a man would remove it in a panic. 

With proper gas discipline,

Soldiers wearing hypo helmets, one of the first anti-gas masks.
When the world leaders heard about the front lines, they thought
"It just isn't scary enough. Make everyone wear spooky masks!
Can we go even scarier?"

 casualties, even with the advent of mustard gas, went down significantly. Respirators were very commonly used, as even during artillery barrages some gas shells were lobbed in as well. With mustard gas having the ability to stay in small pockets on the ground for days, sometimes weeks, respirators were worn very frequently. Unfortunately, the respirator was often a heavy burden. The first, called the hypo helmet, was blinding, extremely hot, and in one soldier's description, smelled "like last year's bird seed." While they got better with time, they were never welcome, always keeping the same core issues of overheating, general discomfort, and varying degrees of difficulty in breathing. Nevertheless, the Canadians were excellent with their gas discipline, and as a result took much fewer casualties. The Americans, coming late into the war and not having the same battlefield experience, had 27% of their casualties due to gas. This was in stark contrast to the Canadians, which came in around 5%. 

"Not that scary, dial it back a notch" the world
leaders said upon seeing a child's gas mask.

Of course, the respirator was still preferable. Gas attacks were typically split into two different kinds; harassing agents and non-persistent. Non-persistent attacks were ones that would be short-term, high damage gasses that would tend not to linger for very long. Ideally, they would catch the enemy off-guard and create as many casualties as possible. The harassing agents were typically used to constantly force the use of respirators to wear away at the enemy's resolve. If they had to wear a respirator more frequently, their entire lives got much, much harder. 

Gas leaves a strange legacy in the World Wars. Initially thought of as a means to end the war, it was not nearly as effective as planned. Nevertheless, it was used with incredible frequency, and forced both sides of the line to adapt quickly. If anything, it was just another factor in making life in the trenches that much worse, helping to solidify in my mind World War I as the worst war to be in of all time. After all, in the second, mostly due to the much greater quality of respirators, gas all but disappeared. The idea of it dissipated into thin air I guess, just like... heck, I don't know.

-------------------

Information for this blog comes from Tim Cook, the preeminent Canadian war historian, and his book on all things gas in "No Place to Run: The Canadian Corps and Gas Warfare in the First World War."