Evening star., 1923-08-12

usually because of the fact that he
so chose his position as to have his
flank protected by river. mountain
range or some naturally strong barrier.
Much of the strategy of these bat
ties consisted in maneuVering so as
10 obtain the advantage of position.
with the use of gas IL is possible to
saturate piece of ground so that no
troops can cross it. and thus make an
artificial barrier for the flank or pro-
tect the lines of communication More
over, these artificial barriers can be
kept barriers for just as short a time
as the strategy of the particular bat
tie demands. These are but hints but
show the tremendous uneXploited Dos
Slb1lltleS of gas in warfare.
First Use of Guns.
''One can easily imagine the situation
at the time the fighting was hand-to-
hand with the spear CT the sword and
gunpoWder was first introduced, which
in those days perhaps permitted the
antagonists to fight at range of 100
or 2OO yards. There must have been a
great outcry as to prohibiting the hor-
rlble new mode of warfare, and it musr
nave been felt that ii was very unfair
10 stand on 200 yards rather than to
meet IN combat man to man.
But no one looking back on that
period would attempt to say that il was
possible 10 have stayed the hand OF
progress and to have prevented by any
Or agreement the use of gun
powder in warfare. Moreover, the con-
SenSuS of opinion today would be that
the hand-to- hand fighting with smear
ana the sword was more cruel and in
humane than the fighting with the gun
and the bullet. Similarly, at the pres
ent time we cannot cffectually stay the
progress OF science, and to attempt to
do so Is not only unWiSe but is also
preventing the possibilities of really
more humane type of war.
Like every one else who was on the
other side, | hate war and would ardent
ly support every possible means which
would tend towards its abolishment. But
II we must have war, let US be prepared
to wage ii in the most efficient and AT
the same time IN the most humane way.
The most efficient warfare involves
the use of gases. On this statement I
| believe there will be no disagreement
but ! state that the most humane war
fare involves the use of gases. With this
statement considerable portion of the
people Of this country would nroba bIl.
disagree. because they do not understand
what gas warfare really is. In fact. most
OF the proposals looking TO the abolish :
ment of the use of gases and Other
chemicals in warfare are based on the
assumption that 1t is Il tiendiSh and ,n-
fair method Of fighting, which entails
more than the usual amount of suffering
on the part Of those involved
This attitude of the public is due
luIlt IdIStiN 10 lurlu descriptions of
the effect OF gases on troopS at the
front. We have today too many soh-
stun writers who have seized on tho
novel thing for its news value. They
have pictured the soldier lying on the
ground SaSplng for breath after the
poison gas attack. or coughing away
his life. due to Irritation of the lungs
or, blinded by gases, cropping his way
to place Of safety 1t is a horrible
picture, and it is true picture
All War Cruel
But there is also the soldier casn-
ing for breath whose lungs are pune
tured by the machine gun bullet
There is the soldier. whose arm or
leg is literally torn away by shrap-
mel or high explosive shell, and there
is also the soldier who is blinded be-
cause hit in a vital spot by bullet or
fragment of shell. For all warfare
is cruel-unspeakabIy horrible
The effect of these older agencies
of war have not been pictured BY
the sensational writers because they
are old. 1t is only the newer things
which have been so much dealt with
in descriptions of war. Hence in the
imagination of the people, all the hor-
rorS of war are laid on some of the
new weapons. Ample statistics have
already been presented by Gen. Fries
and others showing that even today
gas warfare is by far the most hu-
name method Of warfare. Further
development of gas warfare offers
the possibility of ideal war"