Talk:Defense of the Adzhimushkay quarry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Germany Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Additional information:

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:

Referencing and citation: not checked
Coverage and accuracy: not checked
Structure: not checked
Grammar: not checked
Supporting materials: not checked

To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call:

|B-Class-1=yes/no

|B-Class-2=yes/no

|B-Class-3=yes/no

|B-Class-4=yes/no

|B-Class-5=yes/no

An entry from Defense of the Adzhimushkay quarry appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 27 September 2006.

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	German military history task force
	Russian and Soviet military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
	World War II task force

[edit] "Toxic gases"

Can anyone provide a citation for this? I think it may well be the first instance that I have ever heard of chemical weaopns being used on the battlefield during WWII, although I'm hardly much of a historian. Badgerpatrol 13:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It wouldn't be the first time that WP or some other standard smoke round was mistaken for chemical weapons in WWII. I suspect if you did fill a small confined space (like these catacombs) it would cut the oxygen in the air, creating the impression of being gassed. - Anon

A lot of Russian sources do (see [1] for instance)

And there is a mention in Halder's diaries: (Halder F. Kriegstagebuch. Tägliche Aufzeichnungen des Chefs des Generalstabes des Heeres 1939-1942. — Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1962-1964)

Looking up entry of June 13, 1942: "General Oxner: Report on using of chemical forces in the fight for Kerch". Kerch itself fell on May 17 (or 19), so they can only refer to Adzhimushkay. I will add these refs... -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 13:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The Wehrmacht did NOT use chemical weapons in WW II. All information to the contrary is wrong. There were, however, combat engineer units that were equipped with an explosive gas (hydrogen at first, later 80% carbon oxide and 20% ethylene) code-named Taifun. This gas was pumped into bunkers to detonate them from within. Even with the later mixture it would have been extremely difficult to achieve a fatal concentracion of gas. Thus the use of Taifun can hardly be labeled chemical warfare (although the Soviets did). N.B.: The success of the Taifun units was rather poor. 141.13.8.14 15:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Then would you please be so kind to explain what Halder refers to in his diary then? Thanks, Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 15:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)