WW2 Poison Dart

Big Dave · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:27 am Post subject: WW2 Poison Dart

Lifted from the BKC forums:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8119653.stm
_________________
The Man, The Legend - BUY MY STUFF!
Dave's Wiki

http://www.amazon.co.uk/shops/indavesworld

Purple · SGP Joined: 21 May 2007 Posts: 2321 Location: Lancs

" To our modern sensibilities it seems shocking and there's a real sense of viciousness about this weapon "

What as opposed to a bullet in the head or shrapnel? Douchebags lol
_________________
"I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members"

Peewee · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:04 am Post subject:

brian horrocks · General Joined: 09 Oct 2006 Posts: 3098

We were dealing with one of the most malevolent enemies in world history what did they think we should use?
_________________
next trains gone!

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:25 pm Post subject:

I noticed the bit about killing people without damaging property - guaranteed to generate moral outrage from the chattering classes. Remember the reaction to the neutron bomb in the 1980s, designed to stop the hordes of Warsaw Pact tanks without rendering Europe uninhabitable?

Good comment Purps - here's what Churchill had to say on the matter (this is the memo usually cited as evidence he ordered the gassing of the Kurds):

Winston S. Churchill: departmental minute (Churchill papers: 16/16) 12 May 1919 War Office

I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread
a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.
_________________
Muttley, you snickering, cloth-eared hound - when courage is needed, you're never around.
Those medals you wear on that moth-eaten chest, should be there for bungling, at which you are best.

WDP · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:56 pm Post subject:

Ronan, as I read it Churchill is advocating the use of non-lethal gas, certainly on a greater scale than crowd control with teargas and with greater potential for casualties but without any intent to kill large numbers.

As for sensibilities , take the public image of the weapons of the Great War. Which one is regarded as the most insidious weapon ?

The machinegun that mows down row upon row of charging soldiers ?
The artillery that blows up scores of soldiers with a single hit ?
The poison gas that asphixiates or blinds as it creeps into the trenches ?

Bullets and explosions have the appearance of delivering a quick death. A loud crack, a man falls dead. That's how people expect them to work.
Despite the agony of a stomach wound or the slow death of lungs burst by overpressure, that is not regarded as their main effect.

Poison weapons, chemical or biological, on the other hand cause choking, convulsions and twitching muscles,.. the effects are expected to be gruesome and although they might kill relatively quick, they are regarded as slow and relentless killers.

Cornet · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:03 pm Post subject:

I'm against the use of chemical weapons, despite Mr. Churchill's considered opinion. But I was left wondering if you're going to just use the same compound in a dart, why not just use the damn gas. The dart would seem to make the gas dramatically less likely to find its target while retaining all the terror.

Needles should be banned in warfare. No one likes to be stabbed with a syringe, especially if you're not expecting it.
_________________
Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those/ Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes.

Gungnir · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:08 pm Post subject:

I had a guy in my training platoon who didn't mind firing any type of gun, but was opposed to hand grenades, as being to impersonal.
_________________
Handle every stressful situation like a dog.
Pee on it and walk away.

Cornet · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:10 pm Post subject:

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:10 pm Post subject:

When the pin is out, Mr Grenade is not our friend.

WDP - Yes, he was actually advocating the use of non-lethal gas on villages in mountain valleys, where the contours would hold the gas in the inhabited areas rendering them temporarily uninhabitable.

Cornet - During Gulf War 1 there was revulsion expressed in the British newspaper The Guardian (or it might have been its Sunday version, The Observer) at the tactic used by tanks of driving over infantry foxholes and slewing the tank round to one side to use the weight of the vehicle to collapse the trench and bury the occupants.
_________________
Muttley, you snickering, cloth-eared hound - when courage is needed, you're never around.
Those medals you wear on that moth-eaten chest, should be there for bungling, at which you are best.

goat major · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:12 pm Post subject:

"War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it"

Cornet · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:33 pm Post subject:

So you guys have just given up on the Geneva Conventions?
_________________
Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those/ Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes.

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:48 pm Post subject:

At my age I just can't get to them any more.
_________________
Muttley, you snickering, cloth-eared hound - when courage is needed, you're never around.
Those medals you wear on that moth-eaten chest, should be there for bungling, at which you are best.

Cornet · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:52 pm Post subject:

if only my wife were a signatory.
_________________
Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those/ Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes.

Battledamaged · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:01 pm Post subject:

The Geneva Conventions code of conduct, which is a wonderful thing in my opinion, has some, not all mind you, high moral expectations that go against a lot of instincts when your life is in immediate danger, or emotions are high as for instance, you`ve just seen a lot of friends die and the person who killed them then wants to surrender before you kill them. Even signatories to it have flaunted the letter of the rules more than once to win whatever war/conflict they are embroiled in. Thats not taking into consideration individuals who dont know it to the letter(you`d be surprised how many people dont know what they can and cant do as POW`s and/or combatants taking POWs).
It basically boils down to "do I want to win and live, or lose and die?" And trust me, most people want to live! As I said, a fantastic ideal to try to live up to, another thing when "real life" gets up and kicks in.
_________________
"follow me men, I`ll be right behind you!"

Battledamaged · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:04 pm Post subject:

Just wanted to add, generally the vast majority of combatants do try to live up to it, certain regimes and individuals dont care and will totally ignore even its basic tenets.
_________________
"follow me men, I`ll be right behind you!"

Big Dave · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:37 pm Post subject:

IIRC Churchill wanted to Gas the V2 launch sites since everything else had failed, and it came down to Ike threatening to quit to put a stop to the plan.
_________________
The Man, The Legend - BUY MY STUFF!
Dave's Wiki

http://www.amazon.co.uk/shops/indavesworld

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:43 pm Post subject:

Duck Crusader · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:53 pm Post subject:

1) you don't need the poison, this is what an anti-personnel flechette round is essentially without that and we use those.

2) If you have to fight a war, it is the height of stupidity to fight it with one hand tied behind your back, it merely drags it out and increases casualties on both sides.
_________________
When you're discussing MRE's in terms of acres you know something has gotten truly screwed up.

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:10 pm Post subject:

Norman D. Landings · Brigadier Joined: 02 Oct 2006 Posts: 1632

I'd like to see more weaponry based on pub games.
Snooker balls in a football sock, anyone?

Cornet · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:19 pm Post subject:

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:27 pm Post subject:

Timmo · General Joined: 29 Sep 2006 Posts: 3377

They used to drop bundles of darts out of planes over troop formations in WW1.

When my dad was flying in the FAA they had a modification made to their drop tanks for low level anti personnel attacks â€“ basically the tank was filled with ball bearings which were released in a fan shape sprayâ€¦

Ronan the Librarian · Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:33 pm Post subject:

Basically a flying Claymore Mine.
_________________
Muttley, you snickering, cloth-eared hound - when courage is needed, you're never around.
Those medals you wear on that moth-eaten chest, should be there for bungling, at which you are best.