It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

World War 1: With Todays Firearms

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Very little affect on the conflict? Do you even grasp chem warfare?

Chem warfare is the most hideaous thing on earth.

I had to train in that shIzeet.

As did many others.

WW1 was known for chemicals.

that's nastier than anything.

Thankfully we don't do that in today's warfare. AT least that we know of.


[edit on 7/19/07 by EastCoastKid]




posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Sure chemical warfare in WWI was unpleasant - and we have much nastier agents how - but the effect on the war was miminal.

85,000 killed out of over five million is a drop in the ocean.
en.wikipedia.org... - and even the number injured by gas (over a million) pales besides the numbers maimed by less sophisticated means.

In fact, even after the war many continued to argue that gas was more humane than conventioal weapons.

However, given that this thread is about WWI with modern firearms, the gas thing is a bit of a red herring.

[edit on 20-7-2007 by Wembley]



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wembley
85,000 killed out of over five million is a drop in the ocean.
en.wikipedia.org... - and even the number injured by gas (over a million) pales besides the numbers maimed by less sophisticated means.

In fact, even after the war many continued to argue that gas was more humane than conventioal weapons.
[edit on 20-7-2007 by Wembley]


The effects of gas had far greater psychological impact on the already low morale of the troops in the trenches, much in the same wat that its' threat has duch a disproportionatly high impact on the training doctorines of today. To cite a poem Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori (It is sweet and right to die for your country).

Back on track, the use of modern weapons would force a dramatic change in doctorines, much the same as it did origionally. Traditional war-fighting methods were not suited to the types of weapons used.

I think that the question should be 'What would WW1 have been like with todays knowledge?'



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wembley
Sure chemical warfare in WWI was unpleasant - and we have much nastier agents how - but the effect on the war was miminal.


Unpleasant? That statement shows a complete lack of understanding.

nastier agents?

I assure you, when the mustard gas leaked, humans began twitching and frothing at the mouths and seizing and wretching, and skin peeling back of the bone....

Nothing on earth is worse than mustard gas (used in WW1). I don't care how nasty it is.



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join