This study will explore the shape and scope of the Manhattan Project scientists’ political movement between 1942 and 1945. It will examine the messages they brought into the political realm and investigate how they approached political questions. It will further examine why the scientists were unable to influence wartime policy regarding the use of nuclear weaponry.
In fear that Nazi Germany was developing an atomic bomb, on December 6 1941, scientists, engineers and the army raced to build the first man-made atomic bomb. These combined efforts provide the United States with wartime military advantage was dubbed ‘The Manhattan Project’. However, when by late 1944, concrete intelligence confirmed that Germany’s work on atomic weaponry had basically stalled in 1942, many scientists were given cause to pause and reassess their commitment to the project. Joseph Rotblat, for instance, quit the project maintaining that, ‘the fact that the German effort was stillborn undermined the rationale for continuing’. Indeed, he was the exception. Nevertheless, the scientists’ apprehensions reached a high plateau when Germany surrendered in May 1945. These events, among others, suggested that the bomb would be used, if at all, against Japan (a reversal, in a way, of the racism and genocide issues within Germany). Many scientists, thus, began to debate among themselves the moral and ethical implications of using an atomic bomb in the war and the fate of humanity in the imminent atomic age. In doing so, the scientists with a stronger sense of responsibility, resolved that, as they had created the bomb, they possessed both the legitimacy and intellect to formulate proposals regarding its use. On their political mission, the scientists fastened...
... middle of paper ...
... in American history’, there is much evidence to suggest otherwise. Nevertheless, Strickland’s study does offer a valuable guide to the development of ideas, organizations and associations the formed by atomic scientists immediately after the World War II. It, however, not does include an extensive analysis of the Manhattan Project scientists’ wartime messages, nor does it investigate the tenets behind them. Correspondingly, Robert Gilpin’s study extensively covers the scientists’ role in atomic energy policy-making in the post-war decades. Although his study in useful for evaluating how scientists can be more successfully integrated into matters of nuclear weapons policy, it fails to consider the varying forms of the atomic scientists’ wartime movement and its relevance for considering their successes and failures in influencing post-war nuclear weapons policy.
As long as there is love, there will be hatred; as long as there is peace, there will be war, and as long as there is a positive side, there is a negative side. During the Second World War, the Nazis were very powerful. Due to the fear of the Nazis, Americans started a project called “The Manhattan Project" in order to build a very deadly weapon that could even blow cities apart. The allied powers were so concerned with Nazi domination, that they never considered the outcomes of creating an atomic bomb which are also positive and negative. The development of the atomic bomb boosted the level of understanding in terms of physics and chemistry of that particular time period.
In The Manhattan project, Jeff Hughes claims that the development of atomic weapons in World War II did not create “Big Science,” but simply accelerated trends in scientific research and development that had already taken place. Hughes was able to support his argument by introducing the Big science and the atomic bomb which was a main factor of World War II. Hughes introduce “Big Science” saying, during the twentieth century, almost every aspect of science changed. He went on to explain that geographically, science spread from few countries to many. Institutionally, it spread from universities and specialist organizations to find new homes in government, public and private industry and the military. Intellectually, its contours changed with the development of entirely new disciplines and the blurring of boundaries between old ones. Hughes introduce the atomic bomb in his argument saying it was the mission by British and American scientists to develop nuclear weapons. This was known as the Manhattan project. Ways in which the construction of the atomic bomb reflect a “Big Science” approach to research and development was by making scientist share their work with each other, including universities as their laboratories for
Wood, Linda K. “Men and Mission of the Manhattan Project.” World War II July 1995: 38-45. SIRS Research. SIRS Knowledge Source. Manheim Township H.S. Library, Lancaster, PA. 13 Feb. 2003.
One of the most argued topics today, the end of World War II and the dropping of the atomic bombs still rings in the American ear. Recent studies by historians have argued that point that the United States really did not make the right choice when they chose to drop the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Also with the release of once classified documents, we can see that the United States ...
Truman, Harry S. "Statement by the President of the United States." SIRS Decades. ProQuest, 25 Apr. 2005. Web. 14 Feb. 2014. . This source is a statement given by President Truman to the people of the United States. In the statement he discusses the use of atomic energy in order to ensure US safety in the war. This source is valid because it is a primary source from a trusted research database, SIRS Decades. The article's bias is evident because it is pro-US and does not show alternative viewpoints. I will use this document to show how the use of atomic energy brought the US into the forefront of global politics and made the US a superpower.
The Manhattan Project The Manhattan Project was a research project, that created the United States first nuclear weapon, and led to its creation of the nuclear department during World War II. M.A.U.D. / M.A.U.D. group was created in 1940. Also, M.A.U.D was the secret name given to the group and it came from a phrase in a message from Niel Bohr (Cohen). This group produced a report that said that producing a fission bomb was possible. James Chadwick, a new member of the British M.A.U.D group, later wrote that at that time he realized that a nuclear bomb was able to be built in his lifetime.
Imagine a society where everyone has a different opinion about dropping an atomic bomb to country that they are fighting with. What is an atomic bomb? An atomic bomb is a bomb which derives its destructive power from the rapid release of nuclear energy by fission of heavy atomic nuclei, causing damage through heat, blast, and radioactivity. The atomic bomb is a tremendously questionable topic. Nonetheless, these literary selections give comprehension on the decision about dropping the atomic bomb for military purposes. For example, the “Speech to the Association of Los Alamos Scientists” by Robert Oppenheimer, argues that we should have drop the atomic bomb, “A Petition to the President of the United States” by 70 scientists, asks President
In today’s society, many countries and even citizens of the United States question the U.S. government’s decision to get involved in nuclear warfare. These people deemed it unnecessary and stated that the U.S. is a hypocrite that preaches peace, but causes destruction and death. Before and during World War II the U.S. was presented with a difficult decision on whether or not to develop and use the atomic bomb. The U.S. decided to develop the atomic bomb based on the fear they had for the safety of the nation. In August 1939 nuclear physicists sent manuscripts to Albert Einstein in fear the Germany might use the new knowledge of fission on the uranium nucleus as way to construct weapons.
The war was coming to a victorious conclusion for the Allies. Germany had fallen, and it was only a matter of time until Japan would fall as well. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson was at the forefront of the American war effort, and saw atomic weaponry as a way out of the most monumental war ever. As discussed in Cabell Phillips’ book, The Truman Presidency: The History of a Triumphant Succession, Stimson was once quoted as saying that the atomic bomb has “more effect on human affairs than the theory of Copernicus and the Law of Gravity” (55). Stimson, a defendant of dropping the bomb on Japan, felt that the world would never be the same. If the world would change after using atomic weapons, could it possibly have changed for the better? One would think not. However, that person might be weary of the biased opinion of White House personnel. He or she should care more for the in depth analytical studies done by experts who know best as to why America should or should not have dropped the atomic bomb. As more and more evidence has been presented to researchers, expert opinion on whether or not the United States should have dropped the two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has also changed. More and more researchers seem to feel that the atomic bomb should never have been used (Alperovitz 16). Despite several officials’ claims to enormous death estimations, an invasion of Japan would have cost fewer total lives. In addition, post atomic bomb repercussions that occurred, such as the Arms Race, were far too great a price to pay for the two atomic drops. However, possibly the most compelling argument is that Japan would have surrendered with or without the United States using the atomic bomb. In defiance of top...
The Manhattan Project had various short and long term affects around the world. Primarily, the research done to create an atomic bomb led to the discovery of how to harness nuclear power which affects our lives to this day. However, the Manhattan Project also led to the creation of two more atomic bombs which would be used in WWII, radiation poisoning resulting in the death of many , fear of nuclear weapons during the Cold War, the end of the Second World War which was still taking place in Japan, and the threat of nuclear weapons around the world that still exists.
When it come to be publicly acknowledged that the United States government planned on using atomic bombs to fight the war against Japan, a group of scientists who had worked on the atomic bomb for many years, felt the need to protest the idea. Leo Szilard who was a head of the group of scientists came up with a petition for the president for his associated scientists to look over. In his petition he asked the President “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs” (Szilard, par. 1). Szilard’s thoughts mentioned in the petition sought the strength and persuasion needed to sway the President that the use of the atomic bomb was uncalled for because of the shortage of facts presented, their poor reasoning found in the writing, and the failure to communicate the significance that their arguments held in the decision.
In 1939, brilliant and German born scientist, Albert Einstein wrote to Franklin D. Roosevelt and warned that the Nazis might try and build "extremely powerful bombs." Roosevelt gathered a group of scientists to study this technology and in 1941 British scientists came to America to study it too. This technology was studied at the University of Chicago. This project was called the Manhattan Project, and in 1942 scientists built the world's first nuclear reactor. These scientists thought this could be built into an atomic bomb. They were right, in Los Alamos, Mexico, another group of scientists built an atomic bomb. They tested it in a desert near a place called Alamogordo. Lots of people debated whether or not to use it. Harry s. Truman became
Maddox, Robert. “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb.” Taking Sides: Clashing View in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras & James SoRelle. 15th ed. New York, NY. 2012. 280-288.
Hughes, J. (2003). The Manhattan Project : big science and the atom bomb. Cambridge: Icon.
The answer to this question considers events dealing with atomic energy, the Manhatten Project, and controversial issues about when, where, how, and if the bomb should have been used. There are several events prior to the 1940s that led to the making of the bomb, but the majority of events and controversy snowballed during the 1940s. It is always important to examine the causes of world changing events so that the human race will learn from and be more aware of such issues in the future.