In 1940 Churchill actually proposed spraying mustard gas on British

>>33247206
why not? It would be very last ditch, but Britain was in a very last ditch place and would need to pull all the guns up they could. I wouldnt doubt if any countries back was against the wall that they would start using everything they have to survive.

>>33247445
fpbp
Erst kommt die Fressen, dann die Moral.

>>33247206
USA has a law that the gubment will use nukes on it's own soil if invaded, so I imagine chemical weapons aren't out of the question

Probably, if desperate enough, I can't imagine there being that many ready to use deployment systems or trained personnel though

>>33247206
That would make sense. I could see it as a last ditch attempt at shore defense or to displace a civilian populous.

I could see it be used if we ever went to war with NK or China. The brainwashed population and large cities could make it a viable choice to prevent global thermonuclear war.

>>33247206
Britain also had a massive stockpile of oil (since they basically ran dry in WW1) so there was a plan to literally dump a shit ton of it into the sea and light it on fire.

A Nazi invasion of Britain would have made Stalingrad look like a fucking picnic with friends.

>>33247206
Using gas weapons just when your enemy is raining down ordnance on your cities and you have no way to retaliate? Sounds like a bad idea desu. And the nazis had just developed nerve agents too (though I don't know wether the allies knew about them.)

>>33248806

No it doesn't you retarded faggot.

>>33247206
Chemical weapon in not as effective as people think.

>>33247445
Hitler had gas and didnt use it in battle.

File: hitler hat.jpg (77KB, 700x609px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 700x609px

>>33251259

>>33251259
>>33251891
What if God was one of us

File: doubt.jpg (16KB, 200x303px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 200x303px

>>33248976
>A Nazi invasion of Britain would have made Stalingrad look like a fucking picnic with friends.
Are you serious?

>>33248806
0/10 Doubtful.

Come on, if the US was going to nuke something why would it nuke itself instead of focusing the fires of Armageddon on its enemies?

>>33252222
Is this bait?
It would be D-Day and push for Berlin all rolled into one , except in a smaller area and with more people

>>33252379
An offensive strategic strike is likely going to be targeting civilian infrastructure and invites a nuclear counter-attac. It also makes you look bad internationally and would quickly burn any goodwill or even invite neutral parties to intervene against you.

A tactical, defensive strike on an aggressor military force on your own soil doesn't come with these complications.

>>33247469
*das Fressen

>>33252868
And what makes you think that the Brits would fight harder than the rest of Europe, or the Soviets?
The BEF was fucked up after Dunkirk and with their armies deployed all over the world they wouldn't have a chance against the wehrmacht.
I mean the whole debate is pointless because even if the Germans could win the air superiority, they'd never get through the Royal Navy blocking the channel, but if they somehow managed that and got their land troops to Britain they'd wreck the bongs just as fast as they did the French.

>>33253008
Air superiority fucks up Naval assets faster than you can say "dive bomber"

>>33251259
Gas probably wasn't that much of a tactical advantage by then when gas masks were pretty widespread. It just was a respect for the laws regarding it, because both sides didn't really want to deal with the hassle of gas warfare.

>>33252868
Look at this post

This is what happens when you have a very limited knowledge of history and use the only 2 examples you know of to convey your ill-conceived knowledge of a subject that you just know absolutely nothing about

>>33247206
what's the MAD policy on when a country used a nuke or some sort on its own soil?

>>33253131
Brits had more airpower than the Germans even after the battle of Britain and the RN would've raped any German invasion force

>>33253290
If you have the capability to nuke something you should probably nuke the country invading you, not the force on your own beaches.

Then again the country might surrender if they think their cities are next because their enemy is insane enough to nuke themselves first

>>33253008
Because the brits had more time to prepare than the French and were just as determined as the Soviets, Britain was made to be an 'island fortress', Britain had a lot of soldiers defending it at its heart , many millions- both from britain and its colonies, as well as its armies fighting in asia and africa- they would have had a perfectly good chance in fighting the Wehrmacht, the german soldiers were no better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkTw3_PmKtc

But of course they couldnt win the battle of britain or gain naval superiority so they couldnt invade which is sort of the point of having

>>33253008
>I mean the whole debate is pointless because even if the Germans could win the air superiority
but they didn't we won the Battle of Britain.

>>33253290
>Mutually Assured Destruction policy for when your opponent starts nuking itself.
I believe that's the moment you begin to negotiate.

>>33252222
Every mile there is a settlement or fortifications all the way to London.

File: wrong.jpg (26KB, 460x368px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 460x368px

>>33253219
I actually have a very extensive knowledge of history, i study it.
I can tell you are American, so fuck off trash

>>33252222
A british man isn't happy if he's not at war or drunk

Denser population and infrastructure of readily armed men with a thousand year history of warfare in one of the most militarised portions of the nations history

An invasion of the UK would've seen the isles burn and the pricks would've lit the match and poured the fuel themselves just to spite anyone who dared step foot on their spit of land

>>33253385
Then go use it to get a degree and not shitpost

>>33253373
Some are still there today. Concrete pillboxes near rail lines and what we're strategic points.
Back in 70s Warham especially were held between the British and German officers to see if Op Sealion would have worked. Even if there was no Royal Navy blockade and air attacks were nil the Germans wouldn't have got as far as London.

>>33253560
*War games

>>33251259
>t. Fuhrer.

File: 1484692219191.jpg (73KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 800x600px

>>33253519
I can multitask

>>33251259
I had gas too after lunch and deployed it all over the office on my way back to my cubicle and you don't see me bragging about it.