If Nazi Germany used chemical weapons in Normandy, would it have affected the outcome of the war?

If a heavy chemical weapons defense(area denial) was used to kill the troops as a last resort by the Germans, would it have a twist in the War outcome?
 
The Morgenthau plan looks like child's play compared to what is done to the shattered remains of Germany and its glow-in-the dark cities.

So you think chemical weapons in normandy lead to a nuclear attack on the USSR? Because those german cities will likely be soviet once the first nuke is ready.
 
Hitler refused to use chemical weapons on allied troops because he Knew he'd lose the WMD game. It doesn't even have to be nukes, the Allies had 4 times the chemical stockpiles the germans did. . .
 
The Germans used chemical weapons in WWI and the Allies didn't lay waste to them after the war. The Japanese did the same during WWII, yet the allies didn't engaging in mass murder just to satiate some revenge driven bloodlust. Everyone on this board needs to step back from the doomsday fantasies and look at things in a more realistic fashion.
 
The Germans used chemical weapons in WWI and the Allies didn't lay waste to them after the war. The Japanese did the same during WWII, yet the allies didn't engaging in mass murder just to satiate some revenge driven bloodlust. Everyone on this board needs to step back from the doomsday fantasies and look at things in a more realistic fashion.

In WWI the Entente retaliated with chemical weapons after the Germans used them, and in WWII the Japanese only used them against the Chinese, who had no stocks of their own.

Your examples betray you
 
In WWI the Entente retaliated with chemical weapons after the Germans used them, and in WWII the Japanese only used them against the Chinese, who had no stocks of their own.

Your examples betray you

True. But the Entente didn't march into either of those countreis and literally strip it of all industry, use biological/chemical weapons to kill millions of civilians, or procede to iniate a mass starvation program after victory.
 
True. But the Entente didn't march into either of those countreis and literally strip it of all industry, use biological/chemical weapons to kill millions of civilians, or procede to iniate a mass starvation program after victory.

No, but then the Entente hadn't suffered through a mass bombing campaign in London in WWI either. The rules of war had changed somewhat. I could see a chemical bombing of Berlin Happening in response to a Chemical attack at Normandy.
 
No, but then the Entente hadn't suffered through a mass bombing campaign in London in WWI either. The rules of war had changed somewhat. I could see a chemical bombing of Berlin Happening in response to a Chemical attack at Normandy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_strategic_bombing_during_World_War_I#Campaign_against_Britain

You seem to be forgetting that bloody Winston was PM.

You act as though Churchill is a discount General Ripper or some sort of a crazed lunatic.
 
Given WAllied air supremacy over the Western Front and that they could not finish chemical warhead design for the V-weapons were not completed before the war ended, German effective delivery methods at this time is solely limited to either artillery-delivered chemical shells or static containers to be opened when the wind conditions are right. Given that and the total surprise which the D-Day landings achieved, the Germans would not be in any position to utilize such weapons until the invasion was already well established ashore. Compromised German strategic communications means that surprise is unlikely and the Germans are liable to hit Anglo-American troops briefed and ready for a chemical attack. All of this means the effect on the frontlines will be minimal, just adding more misery to a already miserable war. Note that a lot of the this can be applied to the usage of chemical weapons on the Eastern Front in this time period as well, if to a lesser extent in some areas.

The Allied retaliation will be much more effective. Less importantly it is because the Allies simply have more arty with which to fire chemical shells allowing them to lay down much denser gas clouds on the German lines and suppress the Germans own batteries. More importantly, WAllied air supremacy over the Western theater of operations and air superiority over the Eastern theater of operations mean they can drop chemical weapons not just on the German frontlines, but on their LOCs as well. Yet even more importantly, WAllied air superiority over the German homeland means they'd be able to strike back at the Germans far more effectively. The civilian death tolls to WAllied strategic bombing utilizing gas (and Anthrax) will be hideous as while soldiers are equipped and trained to operate in a chemical environment, civilians are not. The wholesale loss of skilled German workers and unskilled slave laborers will do bad things to the German war economy.

On the whole, the Germans utilizing chemical weapons in 1944 does nothing but hurt them. Allied air and artillery superiority means that both the WAllies and Soviets can use chemical weapons much more effectively then the Germans by virtue of being able to deliver them both far deeper into the Germans rear areas, even as far as the German homeland, and to many more locations simultaneously. The advantages provided by the German's access to more effective nerve agents are not only modest, but temporary as the much vaster and more sophisticated Anglo-American chemical industries will be handily able to reverse engineer them once samples have been acquired. Those who are talking about it embittering the already hostile attitudes among the WAllies (the Soviets can't really get any deeper in their hatred) against the Germans are essentially correct, even if I think their overblowing it. Talk of Morgenthau Plan and other stuff after the war is overblown as the WAllies weren't that kind of people (the Soviets are, again, another matter) but the WAllies won't have much scruples in the mass gassing of German cities during the war even if it results in a German death toll in the millions.
 
Last edited:
its far more likely they'd use them against the soviets than Britain and the United States. but even that is unlikely
 
its far more likely they'd use them against the soviets than Britain and the United States. but even that is unlikely

Wouldn't be much different in the end. The Allies had agreed that any use of German chemical weapons would see full blown retaliation across the board all the way back in 1942.
 
I'm not sure the Allies would jump straight to obliterating cities in mustard gas, nor would the Germans for that matter.
 
I'm not sure the Allies would jump straight to obliterating cities in mustard gas,

Of course not. It'll take a couple of weeks to get the chemical munitions readied and incorporated into the raids. Everything after that is incidental.

nor would the Germans for that matter.

The Germans couldn't even if they wanted too. Their capability to do so doesn't exist by then. It's the WAllies who were routinely putting a thousand heavy bombers over the skies of German cities in 1944 while the German Air Force by then had lost air superiority everywhere, including over the dead center of Berlin. The best they were able to do is launch minor irritating night raids.
 
Without doubt the Allies would retaliate and use it on the frontlines in Italy or to clear the beach on DDay 2, so Germany probably looses even faster. But they could refrain from using it on non military targets, partly to claim the upper moral ground on the issue esp since German defeat is certain at this point, partly out of concern the Germans do it in turn (even if they can't, which they can't know for sure).
 
The chemical bombs and shells sit patiently aimed at Calais waiting for the real Allied invasion rather than the Normandy feint.
 
Top