Great Chemical Industries. Thus it is that our Government today is giving most serious heed to the need of building up a great chemical industry in the United States. We have the raw materials. We need only the factories and the trained men that go with them. We need, of course, in addition to the development of the coal tar industry, a production of heavy chemicals such as chlorine, sulfuric acid and the like, all of which, however, are bound together by community interest in peace as well as in war.
Reserves of Chemists. A part of the strategy of peace is the card-indexing of the manpower of a nation divided into special groups. In one great group must come those who have a knowledge of chemistry and the chemical industries. That must be so worked out that if war should come on a moment’s notice, within twenty-four hours thereafter every chemist could be given his job, jobs extending from the firing line to the research laboratory. And that is the task of the Chemical Warfare Service. And right here it is well to know that Congress, among the other features of its Army Reorganization Act of June 4, 1920, provided for a separate Chemical Warfare Service with these powers:
Chemical Warfare Powers
The Chief of the Chemical Warfare Service under the authority of the Secretary of War shall be charged with the investigation, development, manufacture, or procurement and supply to the Army of all smoke and incendiary materials, all toxic gases, and all gas defense appliances; the research, design, and experimentation connected with chemical warfare and its material; and chemical projectile filling plants and proving grounds; the supervision of the training of the Army in chemical warfare, both offensive and defensive, including the necessary schools of instruction; the organization, equipment, training, and operation of special gas troops, and such other duties as the President may from time to time prescribe.
Why Power Is Needed. These rather broad powers indicate that Congress realized the unity of effort that must be made from the research laboratory to the firing line if America was to keep pace with Germany or any other nation in chemical warfare. Some have raised the question as to whether a service should be both supply and combat. Perhaps the best answer to that question is that so organized Chemical Warfare was a success in the World War. It was a success notwithstanding it had to be developed in the field six months after our entry into the war and with no precedents, no materials, no literature and no personnel. Through its officers on the staffs of commanding generals of armies, corps and divisions, and through its fighting gas troops in the front line, it was enabled to direct its research, development and manufacture more quickly along lines shown to be necessary by every change in battle conditions, than any other service.
Chemical Warfare Troops. And why should there not be fighting Chemical Warfare troops? They fight under exactly the same orders as all other troops. They conform to the same general plan of battle. They bring, however, to that battle experts in a line that it takes a long time to master. And where has there been any live commander in the world’s history who refused aid from any class of troops that might help him win?
Specialists in War. The wars of the future will become more and more wars of the specialists. Your Infantry may remain the backbone of the fighting force, but if it has not the Artillery, the Aviation, the Chemical Warfare, the Engineers, the tanks and other specialists to back it up, it will be overcome by the army which has such specialists. Indeed the specialist goes into the very organization of the Infantry itself with its machine gun battalions, its tank battalions, and as now proposed, the Infantry light howitzer companies.
Duties of Chemical Warfare Staff Officers. The Chemical Warfare officers on the staff of armies, corps and divisions are there for the purpose of giving expert advice as to the quantities of chemical materials available, the best conditions for using them, and the best way of avoiding the effects of enemy gas upon our own troops. The conditions that must be kept in mind are so many that no other officer can be expected to master and keep them if he does his own work well. The general staff officers and commanding generals will not have the time to even try to remember the actual effects of clouds, wind, rain, trees, valleys, villages and plains upon each and every gas. They must depend upon the Chemical Warfare officer for accurate information along those lines, and if he cannot furnish it they will have to secure some one who can. The history of war is filled with the names of generals who failed because they could not forget how to command a company. These Chemical Warfare officers will also furnish all data as to supply of chemical warfare materials, and will furnish the best information along lines of training, whether for defensive or offensive use of gas.
Gas Used by all Arms. As before stated, we cannot confine the use of gas to any one arm. We may then ask why, if it is applicable to all arms, it should need special gas troops. Special gas troops are for the purpose of putting off great quantities of chemical warfare materials by special methods that are not applicable to any other branch now organized or that any other branch has the time to master. Long-range firing of gas by the artillery can be done just as well by the artillery as by gas troops. Why? Because in the mechanics of firing chemical ammunition there is no difference whatever from the mechanics of firing high explosives or shrapnel. The same will be true of gas rifle grenades and smoke candles in use by the Infantry. The same will be true of the dropping of gas bombs and the sprinkling of gas by the aeroplanes. In this connection just remember that all of the army is trained in first aid, but in addition we have our ambulance companies, our hospitals, and our trained medical personnel.
Arguments Against Use of Gas. It has been many times suggested since the Armistice that the use of poisonous gas in war may be done away with by agreement among nations. The arguments against the use of gas are that it is inhumane and that it might be used against non-combatants, especially women and children. The inhumanity of it is absolutely disproven by the results of its use in the World War. The death rate from gas alone was less than one-twelfth that from bullets, high explosives and other methods of warfare. The disability rate for gas patients discharged was only about one-fourth that for the wounded discharged for other causes. The permanently injured is likewise apparently very much less than from other causes.