Does anyone have an idea why there were no major gas attacks in ww2? i mean after everything was lost for the germans...

V2 rockets buried themselves several meters deep before exploding. They were really shitty for explosives for that reason, and would be completely ineffective for gas.

oh i didnt know that, ok that would be a major problem

The V2 generally sucked in general, generally speaking.

If I am not mistaken Hitler had personal experience with chemical weapons, so he was likely conservative about it.

Speaking about Nazis, they were often even more evil when they were retreating. So I don't see your point.

>they were often even more evil when they were retreating

Ecks Dee.

t. American Propaganda.

That's a bold statement considering the same person I got this information from also said that "everything immoral came from the USA".

>If I am not mistaken Hitler had personal experience with chemical weapons, so he was likely conservative about it.
the same argument can hold about general war, whcih was a major point for people thinking that hitler will not start a war because he experienced it

An early form of MAD basically. Everyone had chemical weapons, so noone wanted to be the first to use them and provoke a retaliation.

I highly doubt the level of your assumed intelligence if you think those two statements are in any way related.

There is so much wrong with your statement it's not even funny. It's got nothing to do with nazi's. It's simply war, and what it does to people painted by the winners to justify their war.

You are a literal retard.

Anything to do with WWII is American propaganda, at least Allied propaganda.

There is no way you can get an unbiased source of information regarding this war, all you can do is read a mismatch of everything and HOPE you get the right picture.

Like, if you were to think about the Japanese, I can almost guarantee you the way you think about them is still how the Americans expressed them in their 1945 propaganda film. THey probably do not even look human in your mind.

Everything, everything about this war is propaganda.

But yeah no, Nazi's were inherently evil, right? Every German soldier was a Nazi serving hitler wanting to kill da jews, right?

>he is unaware that there are thousands of books written by German and Axis soldiers describing their versions of events

The pop-meme history answer I've been exposed to is that Hitler himself was staunchly opposed to it (as a result of WWI experience) and nobody else wanted to be the first to use it.

>it's another apologist who takes a valid argument regarding a skewed historiographical perspective and jams is so far in contrarian-tier reverse that it becomes twice as retarded.

Saying American progaganda influences our view of the nazis is valid, but when you start crying Hitler dindu nuffin or pull out "AMERICAN PROPAGANDA!" whenever anyone so much as mentions German misbehavior is retarded.

We know, the Nazis were too busy handing out chocolate and flowers to the Jews and that's why they lost the war.

If gas sucks so bad, why is it used in Syria? I was under the impression that gas is a psychological weapon more than anything

nice fabulations heinrich

>Anything to do with WWII is American propaganda, at least Allied propaganda.
There is also Soviet propaganda, have you through about that, you silly?

>There is no way you can get an unbiased source of information regarding this war
My Grandparents? Old people in general that actually remember it?

>It's got nothing to do with nazi's
Its got a lot of to do with nazis. Their barbarity and aggresiveness was simply something unheard of for centuries.

>But yeah no, Nazi's were inherently evil, right?
correct

>Every German soldier was a Nazi serving hitler wanting to kill da jews, right?
plenty of them were, plenty of them were just sheep

>Everything, everything about this war is propaganda
Yup, there is no evil, no objective truth, everything is gray. Let's also ban courts shall we? All evidence is propaganda after all and no evil exists.

hitler wanted to employ the use of nerve gas, but incorrectly assumed the allies had developed the technology to the same degree. the assumption would be that the introduction of chemical warfare on civilian populations would incite the allies to do the same. hitler and his administration, however, saw no viable means of protecting his own population from such an attack and opted out of it.

This.

By the end of WWI, basically any warring country had developed good military countermeasures for fighting under the effect of chemical weapons. The only people that were really at risk from chemical weapons were the civilian populations, that could be hit by bombers dropping gas bombs. Most pre-war bomb drills involved some sort of defence against gas attacks.

So basically each side knew that, in the event of such an attack, the other one would immediately retaliate with gas bombardment of population centres. It was basically a kind of proto-MAD.

>If gas sucks so bad, why is it used in Syria?

The same reason it was used in the Iran / Iraq war in the 80's, and later in Iraq by Saddamy Hooosayin, and for the same reason ragheads are publishing videos of themselves lighting fuckers on fire, shooting them, and running them over with tanks, because Muslims are fucking inhuman savages, that's why.

Hitler never had the intentions of attacking London. He wasn't a psychopath like Churchill.

Gas honestly isn't that effective unless your enemies are enclosed in something like a tunnel complex. Gas masks were definitely around in WW2, and it was honestly more effective in almost all instances to just use conventional explosives.

The Germans had developed Sarin Gas, but the British and Americans had more gas and more airplanes to disperse it from and Churchill was looking for even the slightest excuse to use it.

Not engaging in chemical warfare, even in the last hours of the Reich was one Hitler's better decisions

Little known story about the Allies and chemical warfare in WW2, during the invasion of Italy they had a ship crammed with mustard gas munitions sitting in a harbor, apparently just in case the Germans started using chemical weapons. The Luftwaffe hit the harbor a surprise attack and this ship was one of several busted up by the bombing. Several of the gas bombs ruptured or exploded and spread their contents all over the area and hundreds of people including the local population were affected as a result, dozens died. Unsurprisingly the Allies did their best to keep a lid on the incident.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raid_on_Bari

>but when you start crying Hitler dindu nuffin or pull out "AMERICAN PROPAGANDA!" whenever anyone so much as mentions German misbehavior is retarded.
That's surely NOT projection.

>We know, the Nazis were too busy handing out chocolate and flowers to the Jews and that's why they lost the war.
Yeah, more projection, did you actually make a point, not based in projection?

Yes, yes, evil Nazi's. Pure evil.

>not knowing Americans did the exact same thing
>but won the war
>so it's okay.

Literally said it in my post mang, war is war, both sides do fucked things. But yeah, Nazi's were especially evil, because reasons. Not because the entirety of pop media and where you are getting your information from is controlled by those who were oppressed in the war, totally unbiased and reliable sources. You would notice I said THIS war, meaning it's specific to WWII, WWII is a fucking clusterfuck of information, 2006 files were LEAKED about Americans, over 70 fucking years after the war. You simply cannot have an accurate view of this war, that's what the Americans did. Like, you can call it Nazi apologetic all you want, it just proves your ignorance. This argument has literally nothing to DO WITH NAZI's but the ones who won the war and ARE skewwing it.

>There is also Soviet propaganda, have you through about that, you silly?
Soviets were part of the allies, yes.

>My Grandparents? Old people in general that actually remember it?

Kek, that's a heavily biased source of information you moron. That picture is of my family, who I know nothing about because my German grandmother will not talk about it. Family is not a reliable source, are you an actual moron? You buy what they say as fact because 'they remember it'? Noice.

>Its got a lot of to do with nazis. Their barbarity and aggresiveness was simply something unheard of for centuries.
xD

>correct
Why didn't you post that first, nice b8. This is where I stop replying to you.

The Nazis assumed the allies had an edge in gas technology. The Nazis actually did, but their intelligence was shitty. So they assumed as soon as they opened up on gas, they'd get gassed to shit.

You could have just not replied in the first place.

user doth protest too much, I think.

However I do find it interesting how every major power did messed up shit yet Hitler is the archetype for it all. Even people who point out Stalin was worse will still jump to Hitler as an insult when calling out people who disagree with them online. You never hear
>wow, you're literally Stalin right now

>If gas sucks so bad, why is it used in Syria?
What kind of a dumb fucking statement is this?

>one side can send thousands of bombers into your air space
>this side also has a fuck ton of anthrax
>the other side can lob a few rockets
Gee I wonder who had an edge in this fight.

This and also the Wehrmacht relied on horses for logistics, and they couldn't figure out how to make a horse drawn carriage work if an area is saturated with nerve gas.

HURR CHEMICAL WEAPONS ARE EVULL

Imagine how much people you could kill if you deployed explosives that released a fast moving low density gas that fucks up your nervous system once inhaled?

>However I do find it interesting how every major power did messed up shit yet Hitler is the archetype for it all
It happened all the time throughout histroy.

It is just much more prevalent in WWII because of the state of technology. Propaganda had no real place in war like it did during WWII, and it still continues to this day.

From my earlier post about the Japanese (>Like, if you were to think about the Japanese, I can almost guarantee you the way you think about them is still how the Americans expressed them in their 1945 propaganda film)

Here is the propaganda film, just watch it and see just how much of these literal lies are infested into your ideas about MODERN Japanese. youtube.com/watch?v=I-lQ3BrzQO4
.

No real point, just food for thought.

Anthrax is a bacterial infection, not poison gas. They Allies were planning to try and wipe out Germany's beef supply (and a chunk of the population) with air-delivered anthrax cakes but they thought better of it I guess.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vegetarian

>Anthrax is a bacterial infection, not poison gas
Did anyone say it was poison gas?

Less than you could if you just dropped bombs.

The post replied to was speaking exclusively of poison gas.

In May 1943 Hitler held a secret conference with Otto Ambros the leader of IG Farben factory in Auschwitz. They discussed the used of Tabun, a new nerve gas that could penetraded every gas filter system.
Ambros said that the same thing would happen like in WWI. The allied would also develop nerve gas in short time and the German industry could not guarantee a total German superiority for a long time.
Hitler was convinced against it. He said that for only limited advantage Germany will not start gas warfare again.

Read sticky, there's a part about high leve
>Soviets were part of the allies, yes
But their propaganda was not "American propaganda", rendering your claim about American propaganda wrong.

>Kek, that's a heavily biased source of information you moron
Is it? We are talking about objectively judgeable things like murdering whole family just as show of force. You know stuff my gramps agrees happened, other village elders agree and so do official records. But of course its subjective evil American propaganda and deeply subjective thing.

> Family is not a reliable source, are you an actual moron?
How so? Because you come from family that might have commited atrocities? I've got no reason to think my family would lie to me.

>xD
Yup. stuffing millions of people into gas chambers was just common occurence in central Europe. And Empires often blobbed from Volga to Brittany.

>Why didn't you post that first, nice b8. This is where I stop replying to you.
Why? Because #notallNazis? Because there are no inherently evil ideologies? Do you also think I am retarded brainwashed moron, when I think all of them are evil?

*Look at ISIS, do you also think I am retarded brainwashed moron, when I think all of them are evil?

>I've got no reason to think my family would lie to me.

Not him, but why do you think your grandpappy would be so willing to admit he committed war crimes to little Billy, assuming he did? There's a lot of veterans took shit to their graves even if they didn't commit atrocities.

do you actually want to start organizing things once everything is lost? most people don't.

cruelty tends to arise opportunistically and in shitty armies. also so for nazis.

Gramps was just a kid in wheelmaker's family (*1935) back then and that part of family are apolitical pacifists and loners, they don't have guts to hurt someone. Certainly not people who would take up arms in defense of fatherland.

>If gas sucks so bad, why is it used in Syria?

The rebels can't buy or make high explosives.

So Madame President has an excuse to cement her legacy as a wartime shortly before the 2018 midterm

Hitler was against the use of gas as a weapon because he also has suffered under gas attacks during the first world war.

^^^^^^^^^
This. This was also the reason why Hitler was against machine guns. His compassionate mind wouldn't allow him to subject other people to the horrors he experienced first-hand.

Japan did in China.

But they were noobs to gas attacks (didnt use it in WWI) and killed their own men as well as the Chinese and Chinese civilians in the process

Gas was used in WW1 because it was new and promised strong breakthroughs and an end to the war.
Of course, then the other guy just develops countermeasures and uses his own gas and all it serves to do is make the war even more miserable for soldiers.

But by that point not using gas was hard, because it's already been used once. There's no guarantee the other side will stop using it, and it's an effective enough weapon.
Hindsight was the cause it was unused in WW2. The minute one side used gas was the hour the other side would use gas. The horrors of gas were well known by this point and nobody wanted to relive them. Even more, the logistical impact of gas masks, cleanup, and your own gas made actually using gas unattractive. Once someone used gas it would have been used until the war ended, and it wouldn't have been pretty. Using it as a last ditch fuck you would have been even worse, because when you have nothing left to lose but your life, pissing someone off just means they'll kill you slowly.

...

>confusing ideology with actual motives
t. literally every western person talking about history

You need to have a collective experience of totalitarianism to understand that literally everything that is publicly proclaimed is bullshit. It's all about controlling people for wealth and the rest is just the means.

This. Japan used gas weapons in China and is one of the major reasons for their condemnation and embargoment. Since they had no experience in using gas weapons, their usage of it was hilarious: with troops waiting for the wind and using canisters to blow it to the enemy as per early WWI, only for the wind to change and kill their own men.

Oddly they didn't use it anywhere else.

It's not that odd, really. The Italians pulled the same shtick, Saddam pulled it in the 80's and Assad is pulling it now. Gas is only useful in two terms:

1. Against modernized armies, it makes them put their masks on. A few will become casualties, but the bigger thing is that men are less effective while wearing a gas mask.

Not exactly a war-winner there.

However,

2. Against non-modernized armies or civilians, gas is horrendous. They simply don't have the equipment or the training to not get maimed or killed by it.

So, both sides in WWII kept it around but didn't use it because yes, it was unpopular with the civilian population due to its use in the WWI and waited for the other side to use it first. They also didn't use it first because it wouldn't have brought much to the battlefield.