British use of banned weapons against the Germans ?

General WWII era German military discussion that doesn't fit someplace more specific.
Beershark
Supporter
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 5:12 am
Location: Over the Moon

British use of banned weapons against the Germans ?

Post by Beershark »

In another Forum I posted a message to the effect that :-

In World War Two the British Government were so concerned as to the possible use by the Germans of flamethrowers against British soldiers, that they threatened to retaliate by using poison gas. It is possible that I may have gotten the part of the use of gas wrong, since I have later been advised that the use of gas had been made illegal.
However, it may have been that the Brits, actually threatened to use either chemical or biological weaponry instead. Whatever weapon that was threatened to be used as a retaliation, I have read that this threat was made against the Germans. Has anybody else heard of this threat and can offer a tangible source to obtain confirmation as to it having been made ? Because not ONE member of the other Forum has heard of it being made, I am being severely criticised.
Cheers
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

Beershark, I'd only have one major issue over it happening - the BRITISH proceeded to use flame weapons themselves. Churchill Crocodiles come to mind, Popski's Private Army had a JEEP with a flamethrower mounted - though I dont think it ever saw combat, and recently I've seen pics of a number of light armoured vehicles - armoured cars I believe - being tested in England. As early as the summer of 1940 there were those plans - tested and filmed - to use burning oil on the surface of the water to defend against invasion. And I THINK flamethrower-equiped glider troops landed at Arnhem - not sure if that scene in A Bridge Too Far was cinematic licence or anecdotal. They were certainly on inventory for engineers - they just weren't popular to use.

If it was a literary reference, give them it and let them take exception with the source. If it was a reputable source then let them proceed to enquire apropriately.

Just thinking on another level entirely; I doubt the British would threaten gas warfare - because they knew the Germans had developed and possesed nerve agents in useable quantities. It was mentioned in the Oslo File, the scientific intelligence dossier that was passed to the British. Any escalation to gas warfare would have the Germans retaliate with a weapon that all British gas precautions of the day were not proof against.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
User avatar
DXTR
Contributor
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:37 pm

Post by DXTR »

In 1925 "The Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare." was signed in Geneva. A number of nations however had reservations to this protocol, such as Britiain. The reseervation was in regards to the "first use" dillema. If one nation violates the protocol , theUK would not feel obligated to honour the protocol anymore:
(1) The said Protocol is only binding on His Britannic Majesty as regards those Powers and States which have both signed and ratified the Protocol or have finally acceded thereto.

(2) The said Protocol shall cease to be binding on His Britannic Majesty toward any Power at enmity with him whose armed forces, or the armed forces of whose allies, fail to respect the prohibitions laid down in the Protocol.

SOURCE: SCHINDLER/TOMAN, The Laws of Armed Conflicts, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1988, p.123
In this context the british saw themselves freed from any obligation to abstain from the use of gas, biological or chemical weapon.

I am not sure whether someone inside the british leadership saw the flamethrower as a chemical weapon (??) in this case the use of chemical weapons (the flamethrower) by the opposing side, would legalise a british retaliation with chemical, biological and/or gas weapons.

However as I fear that the interpretation as the flamethrower as a chemical weapon is a bit farfetched, the explanation for this case you bring forward could be that you got it wrong and that the british feared german use of gas or chemical weapon(??)

Anyway, flamethrowers was not an illegal weapon in WWII.

Regards
Cott Tiger
Associate
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:44 am
Location: England

Post by Cott Tiger »

It is often remarked, although I have never seen it backed up with any evidence, that the British were willing to use gas (mustard/nerve?) on the Germans as a last resort, were they to attempt an invasion.

I apologise for not being able to back this up with any verifiable facts and for only stirring up the already muddied waters, but I have heard this on several occasions, even in a TV documentary if I remember rightly.

Regards,

Andre
Up The Tigers!
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

Andre, most certainly. It was one of the "area denial" elements that was to be used to focus the incoming germans towards the arillery in the GHQ Line. But not very often publically acknowledged.....
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
redcoat
Contributor
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 3:32 am
Location: Stockport, England

Post by redcoat »

phylo_roadking wrote:If it was a literary reference, give them it and let them take exception with the source. If it was a reputable source then let them proceed to enquire apropriately.
I was one of these members on the other forum who responded to his question.
We did politely ask him for a source, but he replied that it wasn't for him to provide a source, but for us to disprove it !!!
As you can imagine he got told where to get off from us after that.

http://www.fun-online.sk/forum/viewtopi ... sc&start=0
if in doubt, PANIC !!!!
sid guttridge
on "time out"
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am

Post by sid guttridge »

Hi Guys,

Britain certainly had gas, like many other countries. However, like them, it regarded gas as a retaliatory weapon, not a first use weapon.

It was also certainly prepared to use unorthodox weapons to defend the country (there werre dozens of such ideas and devices).

However, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence that any first-use of gas was ever contemplated or planned.

If anyone has a source otherwise, I would be interested to hear of it.

Cheers,

Sid.
User avatar
M.H.
Patron
Posts: 1742
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:00 pm
Location: Berlin

Post by M.H. »

sid guttridge wrote:...
However, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence that any first-use of gas was ever contemplated or planned.

If anyone has a source otherwise, I would be interested to hear of it.
...


"... 1. I want you to think very seriously over this question of poison gas. I would not use it unless it could be shown either that (a) it was life or death for us, or (b) that it would shorten the war by a year...."


Winston Churchill's Secret Poison Gas Memo

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHU407A.html

"...7. I quite agree that it may be several weeks or even months before I shall ask you to drench Germany with poison gas, and if we do it, let us do it one hundred per cent. In the meanwhile, I want the matter studied in cold blood by sensible people and not by that particular set of psalm-singing uniformed defeatists which one runs across now here now there. Pray address yourself to this. It is a big thing and can only be discarded for a big reason. I shall of course have to square Uncle Joe and the President; but you need not bring this into your calculations at the present time. Just try to find out what it is like on its merits.

[signed] Winston Churchill [initials]..."
sid guttridge
on "time out"
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am

Post by sid guttridge »

Hi MH,

That seems to cover the "contemplated" side of the question.

Have you anything on the "planned"?

What was the response to this memo?

Cheers,

Sid.
User avatar
M.H.
Patron
Posts: 1742
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:00 pm
Location: Berlin

Post by M.H. »

sid guttridge wrote: ...
What was the response to this memo?
.
How should I know??? I wasn't there....
redcoat
Contributor
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 3:32 am
Location: Stockport, England

Post by redcoat »

sid guttridge wrote:Hi MH,

That seems to cover the "contemplated" side of the question.

Have you anything on the "planned"?

What was the response to this memo?

Cheers,

Sid.
Churchill also ordered the preparation of mustard gas for use if the German's invaded Britain in 1940, and there were some plan's developed for its use, if needed.

The response to the memo of 1944 was total opposition from his military staff, and it went no further.
if in doubt, PANIC !!!!
sid guttridge
on "time out"
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am

Post by sid guttridge »

Hi M.H.,

A simple, "Sorry, I have no further information", would have done.

If we all had to "be there", to have knowledge of something, Feldgrau would have no members under pensionable age and their acceptable knowledge would be severely restricted to whatever occurred under their immediate gaze!

I suspect that you probably weren't in the cabinet room when Churchill dictated his gas memo, but I don't see any good reason why that should preclude you from offering useful information on that!

Cheers,

Sid.
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

Sid, the operational name for the plan was "Banquet". The gas was to be delivered by the now-legendary converted Tiger Moths in preparation in Norfolk, and while many references to "Banquet" have been removed from documentation subsequently, they can still be found in documentation regarding preparations for the invasion a couple of "times removed" - such as in Fighter Command's published list of priorities for tasking fighter aircraft in the event of Sealion; under the section regarding taks to be carried out after any landings, along with protecting British forces on the ground from dive bombers, for cannon-armed aircraft to attack any landed armour etc. - is that note that they were to provide escort for BOTH "Bomber Command AND Banquet aircraft" - so I'd guess these were tasked to the Army??? Certainly regarded as seperate from both Fighter and Bomber Command.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

However, as far as I am aware, there is no evidence that any first-use of gas was ever contemplated or planned.
Sid - After Anthony Eden's inspection tour of XII Corps on 29th June 1940, and reported the acute and "reckless" shortage of heavy weaponry, Churchill ordered tha Gen. Andrew Thorne, commander XII Corps covering the entire South-East, join him for lunch at chequers on 30th June, 1940. As a result of this lunchtime discussion, Churchill became much more aware of the parlous state of the expected invasion area, INCLUDING the fact that XII Corps' only completely-equiped and trained division, 3rd Division...was due to be sent to Northern Ireland!

The meeting, being "off the record" was not minuted, but John Colville, in Fringes of Power, records that immediately after the meeting Churchill ordered that the 3rd Division remain in the South-East and that it remain under Thorne's command. Although Churchill was not sanguine about the Army's ability to hold river lines, he was less pessimistic about the actual landings...until he met with Thorne. After this, "the next day", according to Colville, he ordered Ismay to evaluate and plan for "drenching" the invasion beaches with mustard gas. Which makes it 1st July.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
awaygood
Supporter
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:27 pm
Location: United Arab Emirates

Post by awaygood »

After the Americans entered the war, the Germans were alarmed when they read an intelligence report stating that the Americans were 'storing gas'... it turned out that the Americans were storing 'gasoline'!
Post Reply