Introduction The Manhattan Project Introduction Importance of Core Engineering Disciplines to the Manhattan Project Significance of Communication Morality of the Manhattan Project Conclusion References Abstract The pivotal engineering and scientific success of the Twentieth century was the Manhattan Project. The Manhattan Project assimilated concepts and leaders from all scientific fields and engineering disciplines to construct the first two atomic bombs. From the study of nuclear physics and chemistry to the practical engineering and processing of uranium 235 and plutonium 239 and the final construction of the weapons, scientific knowledge grew at an exponential rate to critical levels. The presence of communication amid scientific minds was equally important to the success of the Manhattan Project as scientific intellect was. The only cloud hanging over the impressive achievement of the atomic researchers and engineers is what their success truly meant; hundreds of thousands of innocent lives obliterated. Yet this grave definition of success cannot diminish the impressive collaboration and efficiency of the Manhattan Project. Index Terms � Atomic Bomb, Fat Man, Little Boy, Manhattan Project, Oppenheimer, J. Robert. Introduction The Manhattan Project was the American program for researching and developing the first atomic bombs. The weapons produced were based solely upon the principles of nuclear fission of uranium 235 and plutonium 239, chain reactions liberating immense amounts of destructive heat energy. Although originally established in Manhattan, New York by the Manhattan Engineer District of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the majority of the research took place under director General Leslie Groves at the Los Alamos laboratory in New Mexico. The goal of the Manhattan Project was effectively summed up by scientist Robert Serber when he deduced, �Since the one factor that determines the damage is the energy release, our aim is simply to get as much energy from the explosion as we can.� [1] Thus, due to the nature of the program�s objective, the Manhattan Project is one of scientific engineering�s foremost successes. In the quest for an atomic-powered weapon, the secrets of nuclear physics and chemistry were exposed. Following the theoretical assessment of producing a controllable nuclear chain reactor, physical engineering was employed to construct the specific mechanics required. Communication contributed as much to the success of the Manhattan Project as did scientific discovery. Although the creation of the first atomic weapon was clearly a technological triumph, the question of morality and responsibility to ethics will forever plague the topic. Regardless of whether America was morally justified in deploying atomic weaponry on Japan, though, the Manhattan Project will always be an excellent example of collaboration and communication in scientific and engineering fields. Importance of Core Engineering Disciplines to the Manhattan Project�A little bomb like that,� declared physicist Enrico Fermi, enthralled by his first taste of nuclear fission, �and it would all disappear.� [2]. The Atomic Age, a period of incessant discovery and revelation of atomic and subatomic wonders - an age that revolutionized the physical world - began on a vacant playing field beneath the University of Chicago stadium on December 2, 1942. In the late afternoon of this momentous day, Fermi and Leo Szilard created the first controlled nuclear reactor, a model later reconstructed into five different reactor prototypes. [3] From the first controllable chain reaction to the dropping of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, the fields of physics, chemistry, and mathematics - the core disciplines of modern engineering � raced mercilessly ahead to godly enlightenment: the power of life and annihilation. The first atomic bomb, a weapon harnessing the devastating power of nuclear fission, was developed as an end to World War II and all war thereafter. Comprehension of the bomb and its historical development is attained by breaking the subject into three related components: chemistry, nuclear physics, and the practical engineering that realized the theoretical dream. The Chemistry Aspect Fission is an elementary chemical interaction between subatomic particles. Nuclear fission is defined as the splitting of an atom by nucleus bombardment. Atoms consist of three subatomic particles: negatively charged electrons, positively charged protons, and neutrons, which have no electrical charge. Atomic nuclei are dense cores of atoms composed of neutrons and protons, and are thus positively charged. Chemical reactions, from basic acid-base titrations to nuclear fission, involve the collision of atomic particles. Fission begins with the high-energy collision of neutrons with the nucleus of another atom. Protons cannot partake in nuclear bombardment because of the electrostatic repulsion between positively-charged protons and nuclei. For fission to proceed, a neutron fired at the atom must fuse with the nucleus, producing a less-stable isotope. The �heavy� atom, chemically volatile, will split into two stable atoms, discharge neutrons, and generate energy (in the form of Gamma radiation). The neutrons released are free to collide and fuse with nuclei of other nearby atoms � a chain reaction ensues, progressing exponentially throughout the sample of atoms, releasing more and more heat radiation. It is this constant amplification of energy that constitutes the devastating power of an atomic weapon. If every atom were fissionable, there would be no stability to matter and the world would be an uninhabitable chaos of energy transformations. Thus, only certain isotopes of few atoms will undergo a fissile chain reaction. Nobel physicist Neils Bohr discovered that Uranium, the ninety-second element, is an example of a fissionable atom. [4] the predominant form of uranium has a mass number of 238 and is relatively stable; U-235, a rare isotope, easily undergoes nuclear fission and can sustain a chain reaction. If a neutron traveling at adequate velocity and the appropriate angle collides with a uranium-235 nucleus, the unstable nucleus absorbs the neutron, consequently increasing to an exceedingly unstable state. Instantly the U-236 splits into two atoms of different elements, emitting 2 neutrons that carry on the chain reaction, and liberating large quantities of gamma radiation. Subsequent to John Dunning and Eugene Booth�s successful separation of uranium 235 from uranium 238 in 1941 [5], uranium became the leading example for fission research. As scientists probed further into the capabilities of fission, they began to visualize, as Fermi did, the awesome destructive potential of only a minute mass of uranium 235. Thus, the dream of a weapon with unmitigated atomic power was spawned. With this basic knowledge of atomic chemistry and the motivation of a world crisis, the Manhattan project began in 1942. Two prominent challenges delayed the successful unleashing of nuclear energy: processing of sufficient fissionable material, and the actual design of a nuclear bomb that would maintain and maximize a fissile chain reaction. Dunning and Booth managed to separate the two isotopes of uranium before the institution of the Manhattan project, proving that it was indeed possible. But the level at which their research was performed was purely scientific; a project tasked with ending a world war required much more intensive and efficient processing. Additionally, no one had any experience constructing a dimensionally-feasible nuclear reactor in deployable size. As the Manhattan team quickly learned, the relative abundance of uranium 235 was not only extremely small, but when found, uranium ore was nearly impossible to purify into U-235. Natural uranium ore is comprised of a mixture of isotopes 235 and 238. Typically, one percent of the mass of uranium ore being considered is composed of the unstable isotope, while the rest is relatively useless U-238. [6] Therefore, to develop the prophesized weapon, engineering innovations were essential. Ernest O. Lawrence of the University of California, Berkeley developed the first technique to isolate a practical amount of uranium 235, using a modified mass spectrometer. [7] Lawrence�s method dealt with the electromagnetic properties of atoms, an integration of chemistry and physics. Uranium 235 is a lighter isotope than Uranium 238. Thus, when equal physical forces act on atoms of U-235 and U-238, the isotopes will behave simply as two different masses. Therefore, as Newton�s laws describe, the force acting on the lighter mass will show greater affect on the motion of the mass than the force acting on the heavier mass. In Lawrence�s apparatus, the magnetic force exerted by an electromagnetic arch attracted the electrically charged portions of atoms, and thus, uranium atoms traveled along the raised arc. Uranium 235 atoms, naturally lighter than the stable isotope, would pass closer to the magnetic tract than the heavier U-238 atoms, and could thus be collected. To mobilize the uranium atoms into gaseous particles, fluorine gas was circulated over solid uranium ore, creating uranium tetrachloride gas. The gaseous particles were then passed across the arc multiple times, each trial gaining a more purified sample of uranium 235 tetrachloride. To Lawrence�s chagrin, his method of uranium purification proved largely inefficient. Due to high maintenance costs and the time-consuming nature of the process, only one gram of uranium 235 was harvested after millions of dollars spent in production and repairs. [8] Lawrence�s design was quickly abandoned. General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project, purchased land in Oak Ridge, Tennessee to pursue another proposed method of uranium separation. Centered on the theory of gaseous diffusion of uranium hexafluoride, principles of chemistry and physics were again assimilated in an attempt to accomplish a feat of engineering. Similarly, the technique Groves pursued dealt with the motions of particles of different masses. When contained in a porous vessel, gaseous particles will randomly collide and bounce until passing through a pore in the container � a process known as effusion. At constant temperature, all gaseous particles have equal kinetic energies, and therefore, through the properties of thermodynamics, less-massive particles move with higher velocity than heavier particles. When applied to effusion, lighter gases travel across a porous membrane faster than heavier gases. Uranium 235 hexafluoride, the lighter of the two isotopic gases, diffuses faster than U-238 hexafluoride. Over intervals of time, Groves concluded, this process could be used to separate uranium isotopes. The foremost problem with this technique was the quality of materials used in construction. The masses of the two isotopes of uranium are so similar that the diffusion must be run in completely airtight conditions. Grease could not be used to seal the miles of tubing, however, because uranium hexafluoride reacts so quickly with organic compounds. Thus, materials engineering was incorporated to fabricate new plastics to assemble the contraption. The engineering efforts resulted in an effective material known as Teflon. [9] Higher quality porous membranes were essential to the process as well. The final product was a $100,000,000 facility consisting of thousands of consecutive membranes and diffusion tanks across miles of Teflon tubing � an engineering masterpiece. [10] Due to restrictions of the budget, however, construction on the Oak Ridge plant was only carried far enough to produce a mixture of the two isotopes, half stable, half unstable. [11] This end product was subsequently fed into other series of separation techniques, becoming the main source of U-235. Following Bohr�s discovery of fissionable uranium in 1941, Glen Seaborg capitalized on years of research by the discovery of the ninety-fourth element, plutonium. [12] Later, in 1942, another team of researches concluded that, although not as fissile as uranium 235, an isotope of plutonium, Pu-239 could sustain a chain reaction. [13] Furthermore, it was found that uranium 238, if exposed to alpha particles (Helium nuclei) in a reactor for extended periods of time, could actually increase in atomic number to become plutonium 239. The discovery of this correlation between stable uranium and fissionable plutonium led to rapid advances in the production of atomic weaponry: not only was another fissile material available, but a method for its accumulation was already conceived. Engineering the Gadget Although the problem of understanding, processing, and purifying fissionable materials was solved, the actual design of a working bomb had yet to be determined. To date, all nuclear reactors were much too large and uncontrollable to be released as an aerial bomb. If the gadget did not meet certain dimensional specifications, then it would not function correctly. If released, it was essential that the bomb detonated � Germany was simultaneously conducting research on atomic power, and it would prove disastrous for stores of fissionable material to fall into the enemies� hands. Conversely, if not constructed properly, fission could occur at such a rapid rate that the bomb would be uselessly nondestructive. Thus, the Manhattan team now faced a challenge of mechanical construction and calculations. A specific mass of fissionable material, termed the �critical mass,� is necessary to begin and maintain a nuclear chain reaction. Critical mass is calculated as the ratio between volume, density, and surface area, such that during the reaction, released neutrons collide with fissionable nuclei more often than they escape from the mass, ensuring that a chain reaction occurs. [14] If an amount greater than the critical mass, a �supercritical mass,� reacts, then the chain reaction will begin and end so quickly (in millionths of a second), that the net energy released from the reaction will be far less than the theoretical potential. [15] Additionally, critical mass of a fissionable material can only exist for a fraction of a moment due to the material�s instability. Thus, enough neutrons must collide with nuclei at exactly the instant critical mass is attained to create a nuclear chain reaction. The first design for a feasible atomic bomb was based upon using uranium 235 in a gun-type detonator. The basis for the bomb was the collision and fusion of two sub-critical masses of U-235 by conventional, external explosions into one, critical mass. A sphere of uranium 235 was the heart of the bomb. A section of the inner core of the sphere was removed and placed far away from its complementary mass. This inner section, the �bullet�, was then surrounded with explosives so that when detonated, the blast would propel the bullet into its target, the larger sphere of uranium. At this point, neutrons would collide with nuclei from the explosion and critical mass obtained. Plutonium 239, a less fissionable substance than uranium 235, required a different design to function as the fissile material of an atomic bomb. Scientist Seth Neddermeyer conceived the basics behind a workable plutonium bomb built upon implosion. [16] Neddermeyer showed that upon beginning of the fission reaction, a core of plutonium would expand and the reaction would quickly diminish. Consequently, the volume of the plutonium mass must remain constant for fission to continue to its optimal capacity. Thus, an original sphere composed of beryllium and polonium (both radioactive elements), surrounded by equally spaced sections of Pu-239 was placed at the center of the bomb. This core was then surrounded by traditional explosives. Upon detonation, the force of the outer explosion would propel the sub-critical plutonium fragments together, resulting in a critical mass with fixed volume do to external pressure of the surrounding explosions. Certain components were common in both implosion and gun-type bombs. A uranium 238 tamper, or shell, surrounded the fissionable critical mass in both bombs, functioning to deflect any stray neutrons back into the chain reaction. Both weapons also contained machinery to measure the air pressure during their descent (thus making them altimeter bombs), ensuring that the bomb would take no damage upon impact with the ground and maximizing range of destruction. Specific materials were used to construct the intricacies of each weapon as well, such as lead to absorb radioactive emission from the fissionable material to protect all of the bomb�s components. Finally, as the summer of 1945 approached, years of engineering efforts and studies were finalized into Little Boy, a uranium gun assembly bomb, and Fat Man, a plutonium implosion bomb. Mechanical, chemical, civil, materials, and electrical engineering collaborated with the fields of physics, chemistry, and mathematics to further previous knowledge, discover the unknown, and make history, a tremendous scientific engineering success. Significance of Communication Communication played both a scientifically positive and morally negative role throughout the production of the first atomic weapons. Scientifically, it was only through the interaction among dozens of professionals from all scientific, physical, and mathematical fields that gave birth to the atomic bombs. Lack of communication, however, and an outright isolation of the project scientists from the military�s exact intentions bred bitterness and regret amid many. Regardless of this and whether guilt loomed in the minds of scientists towards the final weeks, the original goal of the Manhattan project was ultimately realized and surpassed because of scientific and mathematical brilliance as well as coordinated research and development. Departmental rivalry and personal pride fueled much of the findings leading up to the creation of atomic weapons. A prime example of this is the work of Ernest Lawrence, creator of the first attempted large-scale separation of uranium ore. Lawrence had his dreams set upon being appointed as the project director and Berkeley laboratories becoming the center of atomic and nuclear research. Thus, upon completion of his modified mass spectrometer, Lawrence instantly promoted his innovation and himself, spreading his findings. Although not directly cooperative, this breed of scientific greed led to much interaction between scientists. An even more prominent source of collaboration and communication was the overall work of the Los Alamos lab. When General Groves repositioned the heart of the atomic research in the isolated New Mexico lab, brilliant minds from all reaches of the nation and refuges from diverse countries of Europe were brought together to bounce ideas off of one another and pick at the inner-thoughts of everyone present. Such a gathering of enlightened thinkers naturally led to heightened communication and productivity, unquestionably accelerating the research performed. While communication led to the overall scientific triumph of the Manhattan project, an intentional lack of communication between military and government superiors and the Los Alamos laboratory led to one of the most devastating moral disasters of the twentieth century. Aside from scientific curiosity, the main motivation of the Manhattan project scientists throughout the duration of the development of the atomic bomb was a fear of a nuclear-empowered Hitler. The scientists reasoned that if the United States was the first major power to wield atomic weapons, then peace could be brought to the world and Hitler�s reign stopped short of attacking Americans. On May 5, 1943, however, five members of the Military Police Committee, including director General Leslie Groves, met to discuss possible targets of the developing weapon. Germany was instantly ruled out for fear of the bomb malfunctioning and Hitler gaining control of the precious fissionable material. Consequently, from May fifth until the end of World War II, Japan was the sole target of nuclear strike, a fact everyone was ignorant to. [17]Morality of the Manhattan Project The Manhattan project was undeniably a scientific success. Whether the United States was justified in its actions pertaining to the use of atomic warfare in World War II is still inconclusively debated to this day. The school of thought that scolds both the scientists and their superiors for irresponsible action cite all of the other possibilities that existed the summer of 1945 other than atomic weaponry. Those who morally support the decisions of President Truman justify the creation and use of the bomb as the least devastating of options available. In the end, it is impossible to determine who was right and what would have been best for humanity, let alone whether delaying the harnessing of nuclear fission would have accomplished anything. One can only study each presented case and speculate based on personal morals and conviction. Against the Use of Atomic Weaponry In early 1945, during the final stages of bomb development, political clouds covering the eyes of the project scientists began to clear as they realized that Japan was the prime target for nuclear bombardment. Germany had already agreed to terms of unconditional surrender, and Japan was retreating from its Pacific empire. The question of who would win the war was no longer at stake, only how long the Japanese would hold out. On June 11, 1945, a document entitled �Report of the Committee on Political and Social Problems,� better known as the Franck Report, found its way to government hands. [18] In the report, various scientists of the Manhattan Project vehemently argued against the use of what they had worked so diligently to create. The scientists reasoned that although America was the atomic leader of the world at the time, their dominance was only assured for a few years, whereupon every major national power would house weapons of mass devastation. The committee argued that America�s large stock of poisonous gas could have been utilized at the beginning of America�s involvement to shorten the length of the war, yet it was not for ethical reasons, and that atomic weaponry should not be used for those same reasons. The report went on to offer alternatives to deploying atomic weapons, such as demonstrating the capability of an atomic bomb to world powers before using one, as well as waiting for the USSR to enter the war to aid in the invasion of Japan. For the Use of Atomic Weaponry Several factors led to the final decision of employing the atomic bomb on Japan. It was feared that the USSR under Stalin would attempt to expand its communist power if the war was allowed to continue. The Japanese also denied demands for unconditional surrender on numerous occasions. Scientist James Byrnes logically deduced that, ��if the Japanese were told that the bomb would be used on a given locality, they might bring our boys who were prisoners of war to that area� If we were to warn the Japanese of the new highly destructive weapon in the hope of impressing them and if the bomb then failed to explode, certainly we would have given aid and comfort to the Japanese militarists.� [19]Whether it was morally right or not to drop two atomic bombs on Japan in the month of August, 1945, nuclear weaponry would still be in existence today. An arms race would always have ensued, no matter when the first bomb was developed. Such is the nature of humanity: continual curiosity and lack of responsibility. Thus, the Manhattan Project can be viewed as a success, with or without regard to ethics; a group set out with a mission, and in the end, everyone�s expectations were exceeded. Fields of science and engineering, including mathematics, physics, chemistry, materials, civil, and mechanics were all advanced. The Manhattan Project was a positive incident in the history of humanity. Conclusion The Manhattan Project integrated all scientific and engineering fields and was responsible for truly beginning the �Atomic Age.� Throughout the three-year endeavor, invaluable discoveries were made concerning bomb dynamics and mechanics, materials and plastics, atomic particles, nuclear fission and the beginnings of fusion, uranium, plutonium, and the efficiency of collaboration among multiple scientists and field leaders. Although the goal of the program was not morally humane, the project certainly achieved and surpassed everyone�s ambitions. Whether the bombs� employment and the execution of hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives were necessary will never be known. But the research completed in the 1940�s on atomic energy continues to show significance and promise in today�s world and will persist to play an increasingly important role in America�s history � yet another reason why the Manhattan Project is the epitome of scientific engineering success. References Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 461Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 275�60 Years Ago�, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 58, No. 6, May/June 2003, pp. 54Bracchini, M. A., �The History and Ethics Behind the Manhattan Project�, April 30, 1997, http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/manhattan/project.html Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 942Bracchini, M. A., �The History and Ethics Behind the Manhattan Project�, April 30, 1997, http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/manhattan/project.html Bracchini, M. A., �The History and Ethics Behind the Manhattan Project�, April 30, 1997, http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/manhattan/project. html Bracchini, M. A., �The History and Ethics Behind the Manhattan Project�, April 30, 1997, http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/manhattan/project.html Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 494Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 492-494Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 495Bracchini, M. A., �The History and Ethics Behind the Manhattan Project�, April 30, 1997, http://www.me.utexas.edu/~uer/manhattan/project.html Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 355Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 321Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 462Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 466-467Makhijani, A, �Nuclear Targeting the First 60 Years�, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 59, No. 3, Nov/Dec 2002, pp. 60-66Franck, J, �Report of the Committee on Political and Social Problems�, June 11, 1945, pp. 1Rhodes, R, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, 1986, pp. 461Back To The Top 
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki The United States dropped nuclear bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 72 years ago, bringing about the end of World War II and ushering in the atomic age. View Gallery Next Share Galleryf t p e X  What was the immediate effect of the American Revolution? Homework Help > American Revolution What was the immediate effect of the American Revolution?print Printdocument PDFlist Cite Expert Answerspohnpei397 | Certified Educator The immediate effect of the American Revolution was that the American colonies became a free and independent country. This revolution did not bring about any other huge and immediate changes. This is why many historians argue that it was not a real revolution at all. After the end of the Revolutionary War, the British left the colonies (for the most part) and ceded control to the new American government. Americans ruled themselves instead of being ruled from afar. The new nation was set up under the Articles of Confederation. The new nation was a loose confederation of states, not the centralized system we now have. Outside of this, there was little change. The same people who had been important before the war were, for the most part, important after it. There was no change in the status of women. There was no change in the status of non-white people. The system of government did not change radically. Therefore, this was not a revolution with immediate effect. There are those who say that the Revolution caused a long-term shift towards more egalitarianism and democracy, but that shift would not become clearly apparent for decades. The only real immediate effect was the independence of the former colonies.list Citelink Link  An immediate effect of the Lend-Lease program was that? Arts & Humanities History An immediate effect of the Lend-Lease program was that? An immediate effect of the Lend-Lease program was that 1. Western Europe recovered from the damage caused by World War I 2. the Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact 3. Japan declared war against the United States 4. the United States provided critical aid to Great Britain and the Soviet Union Follow 2 answers Answers Best Answer: # 4. Please also try to reason it through, so that you develop critical reasoning skills that will come in handy later!Anna P · 10 years ago1 1 Comment Asker's rating#4 The lend lease act provided arms and other war supplies to Allies during World War II, before the entrance of the United States. It was a way of still staying technically neutral, while aiding the countries the United States agreed with. Source (s): AP US History Mir Cat · 10 years ago1 0 Comment Maybe you would like to learn more about one of these? Best Home Security System? Online education an option? Get Photos Printed On Canvas See Framed Art Prints Online  How did the development of nuclear weapons affect American society? Flag How did the development of nuclear weapons affect American society? Answered by The Wiki Answers ®Community Answers.com ® is making the world better one answer at a time.1945 marked the beginning of the Atomic Age for mankind. Not just for the United States, but for the whole world. Nuclear weapons led to to nuclear energy and a cold war. A cold war is a military stand-off between two nations. In this particular case, the cold war was a military stand-off between two NUCLEAR ARMED nations. The US & the rest of world were affected by the cold war, and atomic energy. Pros of nuclear energy: It is clean burning and lasts nearly forever (no need to refuel). Cons of nuclear (atomic) energy: ultimately there is a wasted product (by-product) that must be disposed of; and currently there is NO way of disposing of it, other than burying it somewhere. Secondly, the nuclear material that creates the atomic power is in itself a deadly poison. Third, all man made machines and systems are not perfect; sometimes they break...when an atomic plant has a malfunction, things can become serious (such as a nuclear meltdown). See Film: The China Syndrome, starring Jane Fonda.2 people found this useful Was this answer useful? Yes Somewhat No  APUSH VOC:26 42 terms Inimical Mitch APUSH VOC:26Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Maybe later Sort Serviceman's Readjustment Act (GI Bill) (1944) The G. I. Bill of Rights or Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944 provided for college or vocational education for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as GIs or G. I.s) as well as one-year of unemployment compensation. It also provided loans for returning veterans to buy homes and start businesses. Baby boom many countries around the globe, notably those of Europe, Asia, North America, and Australasia experienced a baby boom. By the end of the decade, about 32 million babies had been born, compared with 24 million in the lean 1930s. In 1954, annual births first topped four million and did not drop below that figure until 1965, when four out of ten Americans were under the age of twenty Suburban growth policies of the Federal government in the post-World War II era, such as the building of an efficient network of roads, highways and superhighways, and the underwriting of mortgages for suburban one-family homes made suburbs grow. In effect, the government was encouraging the transfer of the middle-class population out of the inner cities and into the suburbs. Sunbelt Region, south and southwestern U. S. It is characterized by a warm climate, rapid population growth since 1970, and relatively conservative voting patterns. Comprising 15 states, it extends from Virginia and Florida in the southeast through Nevada in the southwest, and includes southern California. Employment act of 1946 Its main purpose was to lay the responsibility of economic stability onto the federal government. Committee of Civil Rights established by U. S. President Harry Truman's Executive Order 9808 on December 5, 1946. The committee was instructed to investigate the status of civil rights in the United States and propose measures to strengthen and protect the civil rights of American citizens. Taft-Hartley Act (1947) A United States federal law that greatly restricts the activities and power of labor unions. The Act, still largely in effect, was sponsored by Senator Robert Taft and Representative Fred A. Hartley, Jr. U. S. President Harry S. Truman described the act as a "slave-labor bill" and vetoed it, adding that it would "conflict with important principles of our democratic society". The Senate followed the House of Representatives in overriding Truman's veto on June 23, 1947, establishing the act as a law. The Taft-Hartley Act amended the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA, also known as the Wagner Act), which Congress had passed in 1935. Henry Wallace FDR's vice president in 1940. Headed the Board of Economic Warfare, a position vital to US entry into WWII. After the declaration of the Truman Doctrine, he made an unsuccessful run as the Progressive Party Candidate in 1948, advocating an end to segregation, full voting rights for blacks, and universal health insurance. States' Rights party (dixiecrats) Splinter party of the Democrats who aimed to protect states' rights and the southern way of life from the expanding federal government; supporters of racial segregation, the party formed after delegates walked out of the Democratic convention when Truman endorsed the Civil Rights card. Strom Thurmond An American politician who served as governor of South Carolina and as a United States Senator representing that state. He also ran for the presidency of the United States in 1948 under the segregationist States Rights Democratic Party banner. He garnered 39 electoral votes in that race, making him the first third party presidential candidate to receive electoral votes since Robert La Follette in 1924. He later represented South Carolina in the United States Senate from 1954 to April 1956 and November 1956 to 1964 as a Democrat and from 1964 to 2003 as a Republican. Thomas Dewey Republican candidate in 1944 and 48. In 48 he was widely expected to beat Truman, who was losing popularity, so Dewey centered his campaign around doing and saying nothing. His political stances revolved around clever witticisms like, "Our future lies ahead. "Fair Deal Truman's policy of social improvement, which included support for increasing welfare, slum clearance, and civil rights. Most of his Fair Deal bills were shot down, save his initiative to expand unemployment benefits. Cold War A constant nonviolent state of hostility between the Soviet Union and the US; began shortly after WWII with the rapid extension of Soviet influence over eastern Europe and North Korea; ended with the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. United Nations An international organization whose stated aims are to facilitate co-operation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress and human rights issues. It was founded in 1945 at the signing of the United Nations Charter by 50 countries, replacing the League of Nations, founded in 1919. World Bank an international bank established in 1944 to help member nations reconstruct and develop, esp. by guaranteeing loans: a specialized agency of the United Nations. Officially named the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Communist Satellites Refers to a country formally independent but primarily subject to the domination of another, larger power initially used to refer to Central and Eastern European countries of the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War. It implied that the countries in question were "satellites" under the hegemony of the Soviet Union Iron Curtain Winston Churchill reviewed the international response to Russian aggression and declared an "iron curtain" had descended across Eastern Europe, referring to the rise of communism there as satellite nations under the USSRWinston Churchill (1874-1965) An English statesman, solder and author, best known as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during the Second World War. Well-known as an orator, strategist, and politician, Churchill was one of the most important leaders in modern British and world history. He won the 1953 Nobel Prize for Literature for his many books on English and world history. George Kennan U. S. diplomat and historian. Among the most influential Americans in the Foreign Service in the 20th century he served from 1927 in various diplomatic posts in Europe. He sent his Long Telegram (1946), which with his 1947 Foreign Policy article (published under the pseudonym X) was pivotal in the establishment of the cold war U. S. policy of Soviet containment. In 1947 he became chairman of the policy-planning staff of the Dept. of State, and contributed to the development of the Marshall Plan . He also was influential in the development of what became the Central Intelligence Agency's clandestine service. Dean Acheson (1893-1971) American statesman and lawyer; as U. S. Secretary of State in the late 1940s, he played the central role in defining American foreign policy for the Cold War. He likewise played a central role in the creation of many important institutions including Lend Lease, the Marshall Plan, NATO, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, together with the early organizations that later became the European Union and the World Trade Organization. His most famous decision was convincing the nation to intervene, in June 1950, in the Korean War. Containment Policy Refers to the foreign policy strategy of the U. S. in the early years of the Cold War in which it attempted to stop what it called the domino effect of nations moving politically towards Soviet Union-based communism, rather than European-American-based democracy. Truman Doctrine Truman wanted to prevent the spread of communism. He wanted it "contained". The first implementation of the Truman Doctrine was $400 million given to aid Greece and Turkey to prevent a communist takeover. Germany's Division In 1945 occupied Germany was divided into U. S., British, French, and Soviet zones. In 1949 the U. S., British, and French zones were combined as West Germany, while the Soviet zone became a communist state as East Germany. Declared a sovereign country in 1955, it became a founding member of the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet bloc's equivalent of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) a military alliance established by the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. With headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, the organization establishes a system of collective security whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party. Arms race competition between two or more parties for military supremacy. Each party competes to produce larger numbers of weapons, greater armies, or superior military technology in a technological escalation. the most prominent instance of such a competition was the rapid development by the United States and the Soviet Union of more and better nuclear weapons during the Cold War ( nuclear arms race)Chiang Kai-shek Chinese Nationalist leader. He was also called Chiang Chung-cheng. After the war ended Chiang failed to achieve a settlement with the Communists, and civil war continued. In 1948 Chiang became the first president elected under a new, liberalized constitution. He soon resigned, however, and his moderate vice president, Gen. Li Tsung-jęn, attempted to negotiate a truce with the Communists. The talks failed, and in 1949 Chiang resumed leadership of the Kuomintang to oppose the Communists, who were sweeping into S China in strong military force and reducing the territories held by the Nationalists. Taiwan Following the end of World War II in 1945, under the terms of the Instrument of Surrender of Japan, which is an armistice and Modus Vivendi ending the WWII, Japan provisionally accepted the Potsdam Declaration which referenced the Cairo Declaration under which the island was to be transferred to China. The ROC troops were authorized to come to Taiwan to accept the surrender of Japanese military forces in General Order No. 1 issued by General Douglas Mac Arthur on September 2, 1945, and were later transported to Keelung by the U. S. Navy. The ROC troops were initially hesitant to accept the surrender of the Japanese garrison and undertake military occupation of the island. Mao Zedong Ld the Communist Party of China (CPC) against the Kuomintang (KMT) in the Chinese Civil War, allowing the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. Caused many Chinese deaths People's Republic of China The Chinese Civil War ended in 1949 with the Communist Party of China in control of the mainland, and the Kuomintang (KMT) retreating to Taiwan and some outlying islands of Fujian. On October 1, 1949 Mao Zedong proclaimed the People's Republic of China, declaring "the Chinese people have stood up. Joseph Stalin After Lenin died in 1924, he defeated Trotsky to gain power in the U. S. S. R. He created consecutive five year plans to expand heavy industry. He tried to crush all opposition and ruled as the absolute dictator of the U. S. S. R. until his death. Kim II Sung the leader of North Korea from its founding in 1948 until his death. He held the posts of Prime Minister from 1948 to 1972 and President from 1972 to his death. He was also the General Secretary of the Korean Workers' Party where he exercised autocratic power. Syngman Rhee the first president of South Korea. His presidency, from August 1948 to April 1960, remains controversial, affected by Cold War tensions on the Korean peninsula and elsewhere. Rhee was a strong anti-Communist, and led South Korea through the Korean War. His presidency ended in resignation following popular protests against a disputed election. He died in exile in Hawaii. Korean War; U. N. Police fiction occurring between June 25, 1950 and a ceasefire on July 27, 1953, was a civil war between the states of North Korea and South Korea that were created out of the post-World War II Soviet and American occupation zones in Korea, with large-scale participation by other countries. The principal support on the side of the North Korean communists was the People's Republic of China, with limited assistance by Soviet combat advisors, military pilots, and weapons. South Korea was supported by United Nations (UN) forces, principally from the United States, although many other nations also contributed personnel.38th parallel Dividing line between North and South Korea first established to separate Soviet and US occupation zones after Japan's defeat in 1945; the Korean War began in 1950 after North Korean communists crossed the parallel into South Korea. Dennis et al. v. United States 1951, The Supreme Court upheld the conviction clearing the way for prosecution of other communist leaders. In July 1048, the administration charged eleven top communists with violating the Smith Act of 1940, which made it a crime to conspire to "advocate and teach" the violent overthrow of government. After ten months of trial and deliberation, a lower court declared the Smith Act constitutional and the communists guilty. Smith Act (1940) Required fingerprinting and regulating of all aliens in the US. It made it a crime to teach or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. The basis of later prosecutions of members of the Communist and Socialist Workers parties. Mc Carran Internal Security Act (1950) Passed by Congress in 1947 and it created the Department of Defense. It also established a National Security Council (NSC) to advise the president on security matters and a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to coordinate the government foreign fact-gathering. House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) Created on temporary basis to monitor activities of foreign agents. Made a standing committee in 1945. During WWII most investigations involved fascists, following the war the committee focused on communists. Alger Hiss A former State Department official who was accused of being a Communist spy and was convicted of perjury. The case was prosecuted by Richard Nixon. Whittaker Chambers An American writer/editor who was a defected communist and soviet union spy. Best known for his testimony against Alger Hiss. Rosenberg case Involved Julius and Ethel Rosenberg who were American communists. They were executed for passing nuclear weapons secrets to the USSR. Joseph Mc Carthy Wisconsin Senator who began sensational campaign in February, 1950 by asserting that the U. S. State Department had been infiltrated by Communists. In 1953 became Chair of the Senate Sub- Committee on Investigations and accused the Army of covering up foreign espionage. The Army-Mc Carthy Hearings made Mc Carthy look so foolish that further investigations were halted.  Fat Man Fat Man From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedianavigation search This article is about the World War II nuclear weapon. For other uses, see Fat Man (disambiguation). Fat Man Replica of the original Fat Man bomb Type Nuclear weapon Place of origin United States Production history Designer Los Alamos Laboratory Produced 1945–1949No. built 120Specifications Weight 10,300 pounds (4,670 kg)Length 128 inches (3.3 m)Diameter 60 inches (1.5 m)Filling Plutonium Filling weight 14 pounds (6.4 kg)Blast yield 21 kt (88 TJ; 1 g mass equivalent)" Fat Man " was the codename for the atomic bomb that was detonated over the Japanese city of Nagasaki by the United States on 9 August 1945. It was the second of the only two nuclear weapons ever used in warfare, the first being Little Boy, and its detonation marked the third-ever man-made nuclear explosion in history. It was built by scientists and engineers at Los Alamos Laboratory using plutonium from the Hanford Site and dropped from the Boeing B-29 Superfortress Bockscar. For the Fat Man mission, Bockscar was piloted by Major Charles W. Sweeney. The name Fat Man refers generically to the early design of the bomb, because it had a wide, round shape. It was also known as the Mark III. Fat Man was an implosion-type nuclear weapon with a solid plutonium core. The first of that type to be detonated was the Gadget, in the Trinity nuclear test, less than a month earlier on 16 July at the Alamogordo Bombing and Gunnery Range in New Mexico. Two more Fat Man bombs were detonated during the Operation Crossroads nuclear tests at Bikini Atoll in 1946. Some 120 Fat Man units were produced between 1947 and 1949, when it was superseded by the Mark 4 nuclear bomb. The Fat Man was retired in 1950. Contents [ hide ]1 Early decisions2 Naming3 Development4 Bomb interior5 Assembly6 Bombing of Nagasaki7 Post-war development8 Notes9 References10 External links Early decisions [ edit]In 1942, prior to the Army taking over wartime atomic research, Robert Oppenheimer held conferences in Chicago in June and Berkeley, California, in July, at which various engineers and physicists discussed nuclear bomb design issues. A gun-type design was chosen, in which two sub- critical masses would be brought together by firing a "bullet" into a "target". [1]Richard C. Tolman suggested an implosion-type nuclear weapon, but the idea attracted scant consideration. [2]The feasibility of a plutonium bomb was questioned in 1942. James Conant heard on 14 November from Wallace Akers, the director of the British " Tube Alloys " project, that James Chadwick had "concluded that plutonium might not be a practical fissionable material for weapons because of impurities." [3] Conant consulted Ernest Lawrence and Arthur Compton, who acknowledged that their scientists at Berkeley and Chicago respectively knew about the problem, but could offer no ready solution. Conant informed the director of the Manhattan Project, Brigadier General Leslie R. Groves Jr., who in turn assembled a special committee consisting of Lawrence, Compton, Oppenheimer, and Mc Millan to examine the issue. The committee concluded that any problems could be overcome simply by requiring higher purity. [4]Oppenheimer, reviewing his options in early 1943, gave priority to the gun-type weapon, [2] but as a hedge against the threat of pre-detonation, he created the E-5 Group at the Los Alamos Laboratory under Seth Neddermeyer to investigate implosion. Implosion-type bombs were determined to be significantly more efficient in terms of explosive yield per unit mass of fissile material in the bomb, because compressed fissile materials react more rapidly and therefore more completely. Nonetheless, it was decided that the plutonium gun would receive the bulk of the research effort, since it was the project with the least amount of uncertainty involved. It was assumed that the uranium gun-type bomb could be easily adapted from it. [5]Naming [ edit]The gun-type and implosion-type designs were codenamed " Thin Man " and "Fat Man" respectively. These code names were created by Robert Serber, a former student of Oppenheimer's who worked on the Manhattan Project. He chose them based on their design shapes; the Thin Man would be a very long device, and the name came from the Dashiell Hammett detective novel The Thin Man and series of movies by the same name; the Fat Man would be round and fat and was named after Sydney Greenstreet 's character in The Maltese Falcon. Little Boy would come last, as a variation of Thin Man. [6] The use of the term "little boy" for the uranium-235 gun-type device is not known to have had any connection to George L. Harrison 's use of the same term on the morning of July 18, 1945, in his report to President Harry Truman, while he attended the Potsdam Conference, concerning the success of the Trinity test two days earlier. [7]Development [ edit]Neddermeyer discarded Serber and Tolman's initial concept of implosion as assembling a series of pieces in favor of one in which a hollow sphere was imploded by an explosive shell. He was assisted in this work by Hugh Bradner, Charles Critchfield, and John Streib. L. T. E. Thompson was brought in as a consultant, and discussed the problem with Neddermeyer in June 1943. Thompson was skeptical that an implosion could be made sufficiently symmetric. Oppenheimer arranged for Neddermeyer and Edwin Mc Millan to visit the National Defense Research Committee 's Explosives Research Laboratory near the laboratories of the Bureau of Mines in Bruceton, Pennsylvania (a Pittsburgh suburb), where they spoke to George Kistiakowsky and his team. But Neddermeyer's efforts in July and August at imploding tubes to produce cylinders tended to produce objects that resembled rocks. Neddermeyer was the only person who believed that implosion was practical, and only his enthusiasm kept the project alive. [8]Replica mockup displayed in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Museum, beside the Bockscar B-29 that dropped the original device – black liquid asphalt sealant was sprayed over the original bomb casing's seams, simulated on the mockup. Oppenheimer brought John von Neumann to Los Alamos in September 1943 to take a fresh look at implosion. After reviewing Neddermeyer's studies, and discussing the matter with Edward Teller, von Neumann suggested the use of high explosives in shaped charges to implode a sphere, which he showed could not only result in a faster assembly of fissile material than was possible with the gun method, but which could greatly reduce the amount of material required, because of the resulting higher density. [9] The idea that, under such pressures, the plutonium metal itself would be compressed came from Teller, whose knowledge of how dense metals behaved under heavy pressure was influenced by his pre-war theoretical studies of the Earth's core with George Gamow. [10] The prospect of more-efficient nuclear weapons impressed Oppenheimer, Teller, and Hans Bethe, but they decided that an expert on explosives would be required. Kistiakowsky's name was immediately suggested, and Kistiakowsky was brought into the project as a consultant in October 1943. [9]The implosion project remained a backup until April 1944, when experiments by Emilio G. Segrè and his P-5 Group at Los Alamos on the newly reactor-produced plutonium from the X-10 Graphite Reactor at Oak Ridge and the B Reactor at the Hanford site showed that it contained impurities in the form of the isotope plutonium-240. This has a far higher spontaneous fission rate and radioactivity than plutonium-239. The cyclotron -produced isotopes, on which the original measurements had been made, held much lower traces of plutonium-240. Its inclusion in reactor-bred plutonium appeared unavoidable. This meant that the spontaneous fission rate of the reactor plutonium was so high that it would be highly likely that it would predetonate and blow itself apart during the initial formation of a critical mass. [11] The distance required to accelerate the plutonium to speeds where predetonation would be less likely would need a gun barrel too long for any existing or planned bomber. The only way to use plutonium in a workable bomb was therefore implosion. [12]Flash X-Ray images of the converging shock waves formed during a test of the high-explosive lens system. The impracticability of a gun-type bomb using plutonium was agreed at a meeting in Los Alamos on 17 July 1944. All gun-type work in the Manhattan Project was directed at the Little Boy, enriched-uranium gun design, and the Los Alamos Laboratory was reorganized, with almost all of the research focused on the problems of implosion for the Fat Man bomb. [12] The idea of using shaped charges as three-dimensional explosive lenses came from James L. Tuck, and was developed by von Neumann. [13] To overcome the difficulty of synchronizing multiple detonations, Luis Alvarez and Lawrence Johnston invented exploding-bridgewire detonators to replace the less precise primacord detonation system. [13] Robert Christy is credited with doing the calculations that showed how a solid subcritical sphere of plutonium could be compressed to a critical state, greatly simplifying the task, since earlier efforts had attempted the more-difficult compression of a hollow spherical shell. [14] After Christy's report, the solid-plutonium core weapon was referred to as the " Christy Gadget ". [15]The task of the metallurgists was to determine how to cast plutonium into a sphere. The difficulties became apparent when attempts to measure the density of plutonium gave inconsistent results. At first contamination was believed to be the cause, but it was soon determined that there were multiple allotropes of plutonium. [16] The brittle α phase that exists at room temperature changes to the plastic β phase at higher temperatures. Attention then shifted to the even more malleable δ phase that normally exists in the 300–450 °C (570–840 °F) range. It was found that this was stable at room temperature when alloyed with aluminum, but aluminum emits neutrons when bombarded with alpha particles, which would exacerbate the pre-ignition problem. The metallurgists then hit upon a plutonium–gallium alloy, which stabilized the δ phase and could be hot pressed into the desired spherical shape. As plutonium was found to corrode readily, the sphere was coated with nickel. [17]A pumpkin bomb (Fat Man test unit) being raised from the pit into the bomb bay of a B-29 for bombing practice during the weeks before the attack on Nagasaki. The size of the bomb was constrained by the available aircraft. The only Allied aircraft capable of carrying the Fat Man were the British Avro Lancaster and the American Boeing B-29 Superfortress. For logistic and nationalistic reasons, the B-29 was preferred, but this constrained the bomb to a maximum length of 11 feet (3.4 m), width of 5 feet (1.5 m) and weight of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg). Removing the bomb rails allowed a maximum width of 5.5 feet (1.7 m). [18] Drop tests began in March 1944, and resulted in modifications to the Silverplate aircraft due to the weight of the bomb. [19] High-speed photographs revealed that the tail fins folded under the pressure, resulting in an erratic descent. Various combinations of stabilizer boxes and fins were tested on the Fat Man shape to eliminate its persistent wobble until an arrangement dubbed a "California Parachute", a cubical open-rear tail box outer surface with eight radial fins inside of it, four angled at 45° and four perpendicular to the line of fall holding the outer square-fin box to the bomb's rear end, was approved. [20] In drop tests in early weeks, the Fat Man missed its target by an average of 1,857 feet (566 m), but this was halved by June as the bombardiers became more proficient with it. [21]The early Y-1222 model Fat Man was assembled with some 1,500 bolts. [22] [23] This was superseded by the Y-1291 design in December 1944. This redesign work was substantial, and only the Y-1222 tail design was retained. [23] Later versions included the Y-1560, which had 72 detonators; the Y-1561, which had 32; and the Y-1562, which had 132. There were also the Y-1563 and Y-1564, which were practice bombs with no detonators at all. [24] The final wartime Y-1561 design was assembled with just 90 bolts. [22]Because of its complicated firing mechanism and the need for previously untested synchronization of explosives and precision design, it was thought that a full test of the concept was needed before the scientists and military representatives could be confident it would perform correctly under combat conditions. On 16 July 1945, a Y-1561 model Fat Man, known as the Gadget for security reasons, was detonated in a test explosion at a remote site in New Mexico, known as the " Trinity " test. It gave a yield of about 20 kilotonnes (84 TJ). [25] Some minor changes were made to the design as a result of the Trinity test. [26] Philip Morrison recalled that "There were some changes of importance... The fundamental thing was, of course, very much the same." [27]Bomb interior [ edit]The bomb was 128 inches (3,300 mm) long and 60 inches (1,500 mm) in diameter. It weighed 10,300 pounds (4,700 kg). [28]One of four AN 219 contact fuzes. Archie radar antenna. Plate with batteries (to detonate charge surrounding nuclear components). X-Unit, a firing set placed near the charge. Hinge fixing the two ellipsoidal parts of the bomb. Physics package (see details below). Plate with instruments (radars, baroswitches, and timers). Barotube collector. California Parachute tail assembly (0.20-inch (5.1 mm) aluminum sheet). Assembly [ edit]Fat Man's detonation method Fat Man's "physics package" nuclear device about to be encased Fat Man on its transport carriage, with liquid asphalt sealant applied over the casing's seams Preserved Tinian "bomb pit #2", where Fat Man was loaded aboard Bockscar To allow insertion of the 3.62-inch (92 mm) diameter plutonium pit, [22] containing the 0.8-inch (20 mm) diameter "Urchin" modulated neutron initiator, as late as possible in the device's assembly, the spherical 8.75-inch (222 mm) diameter depleted uraniumtamper surrounded by a 0.125-inch (3.2 mm) thick shell of boron impregnated plastic had a 5-inch (130 mm) diameter cylindrical hole running through it, like the hole in a cored apple. The missing tamper cylinder, containing the pit, could be slipped in through a hole in the surrounding 18.5-inch (470 mm) diameter aluminium pusher. [29] The pit was warm to touch, emitting 2.4 W/kg-Pu, about 15 W for the 6.19 kilograms (13.6 lb) core. [30]The explosion symmetrically compressed the plutonium to twice its normal density before the "Urchin" added free neutrons to initiate a fission chain reaction. [31]An exploding-bridgewire detonator simultaneously starts a detonation wave in each of the 32 tapered high-explosive columns (positioned around the explosive material at the face centers of a truncated icosahedron, [32] a geometry popularly known from the pattern of common soccer balls ). The detonation wave (arrows) is initially convex in the ...... faster explosive ( Composition B: 60% RDX, 40% TNT ). [32]The wavefronts become concave in the ...... slower explosive ( Baratol: 70% barium nitrate, 30% TNT). [32]The 32 waves then merge into a single spherical implosive shock-wave which hits the ...... inner charges' faster explosive ( Composition B ). [29]The medium-density aluminum "pusher" transfers the imploding shock-wave from the low-density explosive to the high-density uranium, minimizing undesirable turbulence. [33] The shock-wave then compresses the inner components, passing through a ...... boron -plastic shell intended to prevent pre-detonation of the bomb by stray neutrons. [33] The shock-wave reaches the center of the bomb, where the...... beryllium – 210polonium "Urchin" is crushed, [34]pushing the two metals together and thereby releasing a burst of neutrons into the compressed ...... pit of the nickel -plated delta-phase alloy of 239plutonium – 240plutonium – gallium (96%–1%–3% by molarity ). [35] [36] A fission chain reaction then begins. The tendency of the fissioning pit to blow itself apart prematurely is reduced by the inward momentum of the ......natural- uranium "tamper" (inertial confinement). The tamper also reflects neutrons back into the pit, accelerating the chain reaction. If and when sufficient fast neutrons are produced, the tamper itself undergoes fission, accounting for up to 20% of the weapon's yield. [31]The result was the fission of about 1 kilogram (2.2 lb) of the 6.19 kilograms (13.6 lb) of plutonium in the pit, i.e. of about 16% of the fissile material present. 1 gram (0.035 oz) of matter in the bomb is converted into the active energy of heat and radiation, releasing the energy equivalent to the detonation of 21 kilotons of TNT or 88 terajoules. [37]Bombing of Nagasaki [ edit]Main article: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki § Nagasaki Mushroom cloud after Fat Man exploded over Nagasaki on 9 August 1945The first plutonium core, along with its polonium-beryllium Urchin initiator, was transported in the custody of Project Alberta courier Raemer Schreiber in a magnesium-field carrying-case designed for the purpose by Philip Morrison. Magnesium was chosen because it does not act as a tamper. [31] The core departed from Kirtland Army Air Field on a C-54 transport aircraft of the 509th Composite Group 's 320th Troop Carrier Squadron on 26 July, and arrived at North Field on Tinian on 28 July. Three Fat Man high-explosive pre-assemblies, designated F31, F32, and F33, were picked up at Kirtland on 28 July by three B-29s; two, Luke the Spook and Laggin' Dragon, from the 509th Composite Group's 393d Bombardment Squadron plus one from the 216th AAF Base Unit, and transported to North Field, arriving on 2 August. Upon arrival, F31 was partly disassembled in order to check all its components. F33 was expended near Tinian during a final rehearsal on 8 August, and F31 was the bomb dropped on Nagasaki. F32 presumably would have been used for a third attack or its rehearsal. [38]In August 1945, the Fat Man was assembled on Tinian by Project Alberta personnel. When the physics package was fully assembled and wired, it was placed inside its ellipsoidal aerodynamic bombshell and wheeled out, where it was signed by nearly 60 people, including Rear Admiral William R. Purnell, Brigadier General Thomas F. Farrell and Captain William S. Parsons. [39] It was then wheeled to the bomb bay of the B-29 Superfortress named Bockscar after its normally assigned command pilot, Captain Frederick C. Bock, [40] who flew The Great Artiste with his crew on the mission. Bockscar was flown by Major Charles W. Sweeney and his crew, with Commander Frederick L. Ashworth from Project Alberta as the weaponeer in charge of the bomb. [41]Bockscar lifted off at 03:47 on the morning of 9 August 1945, with Kokura as the primary target and Nagasaki the secondary target. The weapon was already armed, but with the green electrical safety plugs still engaged. Ashworth changed them to red after ten minutes so that Sweeney could climb to 17,000 feet (5,200 m) in order to get above storm clouds. [42] During pre-flight inspection of Bockscar, the flight engineer notified Sweeney that an inoperative fuel transfer pump made it impossible to use 640 US gallons (2,400 l) of fuel carried in a reserve tank. This fuel would still have to be carried all the way to Japan and back, consuming still more fuel. Replacing the pump would take hours; moving the Fat Man to another aircraft might take just as long and was dangerous as well, as the bomb was live. 509th Composite Group Commander Colonel Paul Tibbets and Sweeney therefore elected to have Bockscar continue the mission. [43]Effects of the Fat Man's detonation on Nagasaki The original target for the bomb was the city of Kokura, but it was found to be obscured by clouds and drifting smoke from fires started by a major firebombing raid by 224 B-29s on nearby Yahata the previous day. This covered 70% of the area over Kokura, obscuring the aiming point. Three bomb runs were made over the next 50 minutes, burning fuel and repeatedly exposing the aircraft to the heavy defenses of Yawata, but the bombardier was unable to drop visually. By the time of the third bomb run, Japanese anti-aircraft fire was getting close, and Second Lieutenant Jacob Beser, who was monitoring Japanese communications, reported activity on the Japanese fighter direction radio bands. [44]Sweeney then proceeded to the alternative target, Nagasaki. It too was obscured by cloud, and Ashworth ordered Sweeney to make a radar approach. At the last minute, the bombardier, [42] Captain Kermit K. Beahan, [41] found a hole in the clouds. The Fat Man was dropped and, following a 43-second duration free fall, it exploded at 11:02 local time, at an altitude of about 1,650 feet (500 m). [42] Because of poor visibility due to cloud cover, the bomb missed its intended detonation point by almost two miles, and damage was somewhat less extensive than that in Hiroshima. An estimated 35,000–40,000 people were killed outright by the bombing at Nagasaki. A total of 60,000–80,000 fatalities resulted, including from long-term health effects, the strongest of which was leukemia, with an attributable risk of 46% for bomb victims. [45] Others died later from related blast and burn injuries, and hundreds more from radiation illnesses from exposure to the bomb's initial radiation. [46] Most of the direct deaths and injuries sustained from the bombing were munitions or industrial workers. [47] Mitsubishi's industrial production in the city were also severed by the attack; the dockyard would have produced at 80 percent of its full capacity within three to four months, the steel works would have required a year to get back to substantial production, the electric works would have resumed some production within two months and been back at capacity within six months, and the restoration of the arms plant to 60 to 70 percent of former capacity would have required 15 months. The Mitsubishi-Urakami Ordnance Works, the factory that manufactured the type 91 torpedoes released in the attack on Pearl Harbor, was destroyed in the blast. [47] [48]Post-war development [ edit]Espionage information procured by Klaus Fuchs, Theodore Hall, and, to a lesser extent, David Greenglass, led to the first Soviet device, " RDS–1 " (above), which closely resembled Fat Man, even in its external shape. After the war, two Y-1561 Fat Man bombs were used in the Operation "Crossroads" nuclear tests at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific. The first, known as Gilda after Rita Hayworth 's character in the 1946 movie of the same name, was dropped by the B-29 Dave's Dream. The bomb missed its aim point by 710 yards (650 m). The second bomb, nicknamed Helen of Bikini, was placed, without its tail fin assembly, in a steel caisson made from a submarine's conning tower, and detonated 90 feet (27 m) beneath the landing craft LSM-60. The two weapons yielded about 23 kilotonnes (96 TJ) each. [49]The Los Alamos Laboratory and the Army Air Forces had already commenced work on improving the design. The North American B-45 Tornado, Convair XB-46, Martin XB-48, and Boeing B-47 Stratojet bombers, then on the drawing boards, had bomb bays sized to carry the Grand Slam, which was much longer but not as wide as the Fat Man. The only American bombers that could carry the Fat Man were the B-29 and the Convair B-36. In November 1945, the Army Air Forces asked Los Alamos for 200 Fat Man bombs. At the time there were only two sets of plutonium cores and high-explosive assemblies. The Army Air Forces wanted improvements to the design to make it easier to manufacture, assemble, handle, transport, and stockpile. The wartime Project W-47 was continued, and drop tests resumed in January 1946. [50]The Mark III Mod 0 Fat Man was ordered to be put into production in mid-1946. High explosives were manufactured by the Salt Wells Pilot Plant, which had been established by the Manhattan Project as part of Project Camel. A new plant was established at the Iowa Army Ordnance Plant. Mechanical components were made or procured by the Rock Island Arsenal. Electrical and mechanical components for about 50 bombs were stockpiled at Kirtland Army Air Field by August 1946, but only nine plutonium cores were available. Production of the Mod 0 ended in December 1948, by which time there were still only 53 cores available. It was replaced by improved versions, known as Mods 1 and 2, which contained a number of minor changes, the most important of which was that they did not charge the X-Unit firing system's capacitors until released from the aircraft. The Mod 0s were withdrawn from service between March and July 1949, and by October they had all been rebuilt as Mods 1 and 2. [51] Some 120 Mark III Fat Man units were added to the stockpile between 1947 and 1949, [52] when it was superseded by the Mark 4 nuclear bomb. [53] The Mark III Fat Man was retired in 1950. [52] [54]Due to the limitations of the Mark III Fat Man, a nuclear strike would have been a formidable undertaking in the post-war 1940s. The lead-acid batteries that powered the fuzing system remained charged for only 36 hours, after which they needed to be recharged. To do this meant disassembling the bomb, and recharging took 72 hours. The batteries had to be removed in any case after nine days or they corroded. The plutonium core could not be left in for much longer, because its heat damaged the high explosives. Replacing the core also required the bomb to be completely disassembled and reassembled. This required about 40 to 50 men and took between 56 and 72 hours, depending on the skill of the bomb assembly team, and in June 1948 the Armed Forces Special Weapons Project had only three teams. The only aircraft capable of carrying the bomb were Silverplate B-29s, and the only group equipped with them was the 509th Bombardment Group at Walker Air Force Base in Roswell, New Mexico. They would first have to fly to Sandia Base to collect the bombs, and then to an overseas base from which a strike could be mounted. [55]As much of the Manhattan Project data leaked by the spies Klaus Fuchs, Theodore Hall, and David Greenglass to the Soviet Union concerned Fat Man, the Soviet Union's first nuclear weapon, designated " Joe 1 " by the United States, was based closely on Fat Man's design. It was detonated on 29 August 1949 as part of Operation "First Lightning". [56] [57]Notes [ edit]^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 42–44.^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 55.^ Nichols 1987, p. 64.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 64–65.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 87.^ Serber & Crease 1998, p. 104.^ Jones, Vincent (1985). Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb (PDF). Washington, DC: United States Army Center of Military History. p. 517. OCLC 10913875. Retrieved 25 August 2013.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 86–90.^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 130–133.^ Teller 2001, pp. 174–176.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 228.^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 240–244.^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 163.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 270–271.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 293, 307–308.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 244–245.^ Baker, Hecker & Harbur 1983, pp. 144–145.^ Hansen 1995, pp. 119–120.^ Campbell 2005, pp. 8–10.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 380–383.^ Hansen 1995, p. 131.^ a b c Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 52.^ a b Hansen 1995, p. 121.^ Hansen 1995, p. 127.^ Jones 1985, pp. 465,514–517.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 377.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 53.^ Hansen 1995, p. 145.^ a b Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 186.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 49.^ a b c Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 45.^ a b c Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 41.^ a b Hansen 1995, pp. 122–123.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 48.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 57.^ Sublette, Carey (3 July 2007). "Section 8.0 The First Nuclear Weapons". Nuclear Weapons FAQ. Retrieved 29 August 2013.^ Malik 1985, p. 25.^ Campbell 2005, pp. 38–40.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 67.^ "Bockscar … The Forgotten Plane That Dropped The Atomic Bomb « A Little Touch Of History". Awesometalks.wordpress.com. Retrieved 31 August 2012.^ a b Campbell 2005, p. 32.^ a b c Rhodes 1986, p. 740.^ Sweeney, Antonucci & Antonucci 1997, pp. 204–205.^ Sweeney, Antonucci & Antonucci 1997, pp. 179, 213–215.^ Columbia universcity center for nuclear studies: Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The Long Term Health Effects Archived 23 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine ., updated 7/3/2014^ Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 723–725.^ a b Nuke-Rebuke: Writers & Artists Against Nuclear Energy & Weapons (The Contemporary anthology series). The Spirit That Moves Us Press. 1 May 1984. pp. 22–29.^ "UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT (Pacific War) THE EFFECTS OF THE ATOMIC BOMBS". U. S. Strategic Bombing Survey. p. 24.^ Coster-Mullen 2012, pp. 84–85.^ Hansen 1995, pp. 137–142.^ Hansen 1995, pp. 142–145.^ a b Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 87.^ Hansen 1995, p. 143.^ Hansen 1995, p. 150.^ Hansen 1995, pp. 147–149.^ Holloway, David (1993). "Soviet Scientists Speak Out". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Educational foundation for Nuclear Science. 49 (4): 18–19. Retrieved 14 August 2011.^ Sublette, Carey (3 July 2007). "Section 8.1.1 The Design of Gadget, Fat Man, and "Joe 1" (RDS-1)". Nuclear Weapons FAQ. Retrieved 12 August 2011. References [ edit]Baker, Richard D.; Hecker, Siegfried S.; Harbur, Delbert R. (1983). Plutonium: A Wartime Nightmare but a Metallurgist's Dream (PDF). Los Alamos Science. Los Alamos National Laboratory. pp. 142–151. Retrieved 22 November 2010. Campbell, Richard H. (2005). The Silverplate Bombers: A History and Registry of the Enola Gay and Other B-29s Configured to Carry Atomic Bombs. Jefferson, North Carolina: Mc Farland & Company. ISBN 0-7864-2139-8. OCLC 58554961. Coster-Mullen, John (2012). Atom Bombs: The Top Secret Inside Story of Little Boy and Fat Man. Waukesha, Wisconsin: J. Coster-Mullen. OCLC 298514167. Craven, Wesley; Cate, James, eds. (1953). The Pacific: Matterhorn to Nagasaki. The Army Air Forces in World War II. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. OCLC 256469807. Hansen, Chuck (1995). Volume V: US Nuclear Weapons Histories. Swords of Armageddon: US Nuclear Weapons Development since 1945. Sunnyvale, California: Chukelea Publications. ISBN 978-0-9791915-0-3. OCLC 231585284. Hewlett, Richard G.; Anderson, Oscar E. (1962). The New World, 1939–1946 (PDF). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-520-07186-7. OCLC 637004643. Retrieved 26 March 2013. Hoddeson, Lillian; Henriksen, Paul W.; Meade, Roger A.; Westfall, Catherine L. (1993). Critical Assembly: A Technical History of Los Alamos During the Oppenheimer Years, 1943–1945. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-44132-3. OCLC 26764320. Jones, Vincent (1985). Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb (PDF). Washington, D. C.: United States Army Center of Military History. OCLC 10913875. Retrieved 25 August 2013. Malik, John (September 1985). "The yields of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear explosions" (PDF). Los Alamos National Laboratory. p. 16. LA-8819. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2008. Retrieved 27 February 2008. Nichols, Kenneth D. (1987). The Road to Trinity. New York: William Morrow and Company. ISBN 0-688-06910-X. OCLC 15223648. Rhodes, Richard (1986). The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-81378-5. OCLC 13793436. Serber, Robert; Crease, Robert P. (1998). Peace & War: Reminiscences of a Life on the Frontiers of Science. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231105460. OCLC 37631186. Sweeney, Charles; Antonucci, James A.; Antonucci, Marion K. (1997). War's End: An Eyewitness Account of America's Last Atomic Mission. Quill Publishing. ISBN 0-380-78874-8. Teller, Edward (2001). Memoirs: A Twentieth-Century Journey in Science and Politics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing. ISBN 9780738205328. OCLC 48150267. External links [ edit]Wikimedia Commons has media related to Fat Man. Video footage of the bombing of Nagasaki (silent) on You Tube Fat Man Model in Quick Time VR format Samuels, David (23 January 2009) [15 December 2008]. "Atomic John: A truck driver uncovers secrets about the first nuclear bombs". A Reporter at Large (column). The New Yorker. Essay and interview with John Coster-Mullen, the author of Atom Bombs: The Top Secret Inside Story of Little Boy and Fat Man, 2003 (first printed in 1996, self-published), considered a definitive text about Fat Man; illustrations from which are used in the Physics Package section above. The Half-Life of Genius Physicist Raemer Schreiber (2017) on IMDb —Biographical film about the life and times of physicist Raemer Schreiber [ show]v t e United States nuclear devices [ show]v t e Manhattan Project Nuclear technology portal History of science portal Weapons of mass destruction portal Cold War portal World War II portal Categories: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Code names Cold War aerial bombs of the United States History of the Manhattan Project Nuclear bombs of the United States World War II weapons of the United States  Chapter 17 - The United States in World War II 83 terms mw15bps Chapter 17 - The United States in World War IILearn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Maybe later Sort Effects of Pearl Harbor on enlistment Led to 5 million men voluntarily joining the armed forces; the Selective Service Act was expanded to draft another 10 million soldiers General George Marshal Army Chief of Staff who pushed for the formation of the WAACWomen's Auxiliary Army Corps (WAAC) (later WAC) Allowed women to volunteer to serve in non-combat positions within the army; these women had official status and a salary, but far fewer benefits than male soldiers; most worked as nurses, amublance drivers, radio operators, electricians, and pilots Minority groups in the armed forces Many joined or were drafted; Over 300,000 Mexican Americans joined and suffered very heavy casualties; about 1 million African Americans served (mainly in noncombat roles in segregated units); 13,000 Chinese (about 1 in 5 adult males); 33,000 Japanese (many of whom served as spies); and 25,000 Native Americans including 800 women Effects of WWII on the Auto Industry Stopped production for private use; many plants were retooled to create materials necessary for war (an example of what happened across all industries)Henry J. Kaiser Developed a method of creating ships, tanks, trucks, etc. for the war by prefabricating parts at other locations and quickly assembling them Liberty Ships Kaiser's ships that could be built in less than a week (the record was 4 days) through the use of prefabricated parts Women in Labor More than 6 million women became industrial workers during WWII to meet the increased demand for labor; they worked in non-traditional industries (ex. using heavy machinery like riviters) and earned about 60% what men made; these women are sometimes referred to as Rosies (i.e. Rosie the Riveter)Treatment of Minorities in Industry Though about 2 million minority workers were hired during WWII, many were discriminated against in hiring or in the level of work they were given (i.e. given only the menial jobs)A. Philip Randolph President of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters and a key African American labor leader; organized a march on Washington for more equality in labor which he called off when FDR agreed to call on employers to allow minorities to participate in defense industries Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) Organized by FDR to bring scientists into the war effort; spurred on improvements in radar and sonar, use of pesticides like DDT to reduce insects, and developed miracle drugs like penacillin; their biggest achievement was the Manhattan Project Manhattan Project The code name for the research into developing an atomic bomb performed secretly during WWII; headed by scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer; called the best-kept secret of the war since over 600,000 Americans were involved in the project, but few knew its purpose. Office of Price Administration (OPA) Created to control the economy during the war by fighting inflation; froze prices on most goods Ways to fight inflation during WWII OPA set price controls, Congress raised the income tax so people had less to spend, people were encouraged to spend spare money on war bonds War Production Board (WPB) Regulated industries to decide which companies would convert from peacetime production to wartime production, allocated materials to key industries, and organized nationwide drives to collect important resources like scrap iron Rationing Set up by the OPA during WWII; determined which goods were essential to the military and limited the quantity households could purchase through issuing ration books with coupons for buying scarce items (ex. gasoline, sugar, meat, shoes, coffee)US focus early in the war After a meeting with Churchill, FDR determined that Germany and Italy posed the greater threat and concentrated more forces on defeating them than Japan Battle of the Atlantic German U-boats were ordered to raid ships along America's East Coast to prevent materials from reaching Europe; Initially Germans were able to sink a great number of ships, but the Allies began using convoys equipped with sonar and accompanying airplanes equipped with radar to detect and destroy U-boats faster than the Germans could produce them; additionally, the US began producing ships faster than the Germans could sink them Battle of Stalingrad After waiting out the winter of 1941-42, the German forces in Russia went on the offensive to try to take Stalingrad; the Luftwaffe began a nightly bombing campaign and seemed sure to win, but Stalin would not allow his namesake city to fall and the Soviets began a huge counterattack by trapping the Germans in the city. As the fighting continued into winter, the Germans ran out of food adn supplies and had to surrender in January of 1943; the Soviets lost more soliders in Stalingrad (1,100,000) than the Americans did in the entire war; marked a turning point in the war--after this the Soviets went on the offensive Second Front Stalin wanted the Allies to open a second front in Western Europe to divert attention from the Soviets by invading across the English Channel, but Churchill and FDR viewed it as too risky and opened a second front in Africa instead Operation Torch The invasion by the Allies of Axis-controlled North Africa commanded by American General Dwight D. Eisenhower Dwight D. Eisenhower American General who led the Allied invasion of North Africa and was in charge of Operation Overlord (D-Day)General Erwin Rommell German General in charge of the Afrika Korps (German forces in Africa)Decisions made at Casablanca The Allies would accept only unconditional surrender from the Axis powers and the next target for attack would be Italy The Italian Campaign Began in summer of 1943 with the capture of Sicily that resulted in Mussolini's forced resignation, but did not end there since Hitler was determined to stop the Allies in Italy. Italy was not completely free from German control until 1945 when Germany itself was near collapse Bloody Anzio Terrible, 4-month battle for Anzio outside Rome that cost 25,000 Allied causalties and 30,000 Axis casualties; occured because Hitler was not willing to let Italy give up and was determined to keep the Allies from entering Germany through Italy Tuskegee Airmen The all-Black 99th Persuit Squadron who were recognized for their impressive combat and heroism against the German Luftwaffe Buffalo Soldiers The all-Black 92nd Infantry Division who also distinguished themselves for their courage and contributions to the Allied fighting Nisei American citizens whose parents had immigrated from Japan, made up the 100th army batallion who became known as the Purple Heart Batallion for the fact that they became the most decorated unit in US history Operation Overlord The code name for the D-Day invasion of Normandy, France D-Day June 6, 1944; invasion of Normandy, France, across the English Channel; included dropping parachutters behind German lines shortly after midnight followed by thousands of seaborne soldiers who invaded the beaches and suffered heavy casualties Omar Bradley General who led a massive air and land bombardment against the Germans at St. Lo to create a gap in the German lines George Patton General who led his soldiers through the gap in the German lines created at St. Lo to reach the Seine River south of Paris and eventually allowing the Allies to liberate the French captial Why did FDR get elected to a 4th term? By 1944, the Allies were making great strides toward victory (liberated Paris, Belgium, and Luxembourg) and Americans didn't want to "change horses in midstream" (change leaders when they seemed to be winning)Harry S. Truman FDR's VP who would eventually become president and be faced with the decision to drop the Bomb on Japan The Battle of the Bulge After the Allies captured the German town of Aachen in October 1944, Hitler organized one last offensive to try to recapture Antwerp and disrupt Allied supply lines. The Germans pushed 60 miles into Allied territory through a focused offensive (creating a bulge in the lines), but never broke through and were left with no choice but to retreat after the plan failed Majdanek, Poland Site of the first Nazi death camp to be liberated by Soviet troops, who sent word of what they saw to the horrified Allies Hitler's response to the invasion of Berlin He committed suicide with his wife Eva Braun V-E Day May 8, 1945; Victory in Europe Day - The day General Eisenhower accepted the unconditinoal surrender of the Third Reich FDR's Death He died of a stroke before V-E Day in April 1945 leaving Harry S. Truman as the next President Japanese Territorial Gains Hong Kong, French Indochina, Malaya, Burma, Thailand, much of China, the Dutch East Indies, Guam, Wake Island, the Soloman Islands, and two islands within the Alaskan Aleutian chain General Douglas Mac Arthur Commander of the Allied forces in the Philippines Doolittle's Raid Spring 1942; Consisted of a daring bombing raid on Tokyo that lifted American spirits after Pearl Harbor Battle of the Coral Sea May 1942; Five-day long battle where the Allied forces in the Pacific (mostly American and Austrailian) stopped the Japanese advancement toward Australia; Famous for fighting being done from airplanes that took off from aircraft carriers; Turning point in the Pacific since this was the first time since Pearl Harbor that the Japanese advancement had been stopped Battle of Midway Battle for a strategic island northwest of Hawaii; Americans used scout planes to find the Japanese fleet and attack them before they could even get their own planes off their aircraft carriers; Turning point in the Pacific War that allowed Allies to begin island hopping into Japanese territory Island Hopping Allied strategy of taking territory back from the Japanese island by island by selecting strategic islands to strike, all the while moving closer to Japan itself Admiral Chster Nimitz Commander of American naval forces in the Pacific Guadalcanal August 1942; First Allied offensive in the Pacific; First Japanese defeat on land Kamikaze Suicide-plane attacks utilized by the Japanese to damage Allies by flying bomb-laden planes into ships; translates to "divine wind"Battle of Leyte Gulf Allied victory in the Philippines; marked the beginning of the end of the Japanese Imperial Navy which would only play a minor role in the remaining defense of Japan Iwo Jima "Sulfer island"; Would serve as a critical base from which to attack Japan; Most heavily defended spot on Earth (20,700 Japanese in tunnels and caves); Over 6,000 marines died taking this island (highest casualties in any Pacific battle up to this point); Only 200 Japanese survived Raising the Flag at Iwo Jima An iconic photo was taken of this moment, commemorating the terrible cost of the hard-won victory. Okinawa April 1945; Another critical island from which to attack Japan itself; Japanese used over 1,900 kamakaze attacks during this battle; by the end of the battle, over 7,600 Americans and 110,000 Japanese had died; Showed the Allies what the cost of invading Japan itself could be Why didn't the Allies choose to invade Japan? The potential loss of life was predicted to be too high and the war would drag on even longer. What did Truman learn after becoming president? That the Americans had developed a powerful weapon, the atomic bomb, that could be used against Japan. Hiroshima First target of America's atomic bomb on August 6, 1945; An important Japanese military center that was completely decimated by the bomb Enola Gay Infamous plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima Little Boy Nickname of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima Nagasaki Second city to have the atomic bomb dropped on it Fat Man Nickname of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki Estimated number of casualties due to the atomic bombs 200,000What did Japan do in response to the two atomic bombs? Surrendered Yalta Conference February 1945; Meeting of the Big Three as victory in Europe seemed eminent; Discussions included how to govern post-war Germany; Concessions were made to Stalin in order to keep him committed to fighting for a victory in the Pacific and involved in the new United Nations Big Three Winston Churchill (Britain), FDR (US), and Stalin (USSR)Decisions made at Yalta Germany would be temporarily divided into four zones (British, French, American, and Soviet); Stalin promised "free and unfettered elections" in Poland and Eastern Europe occupied countreis; Stalin agreed to continue fighting Japan and to participate in the UNNuremberg War Trials Trials of Nazi leadership responsible for crimes against humanity, crimes against the peace, and war crimes; established the principle of individual responsibility in times of war, even if one is just "following orders"Occupation of Japan Occured under the command of Douglas Mac Arthur included the trial of over 1,000 Japanese including Tojo (who received a death sentance); Japan's government and economy was completely rebuilt, free-market practices were instituted, and a new (relatively democratic) constitution was written The Mac Arthur Constitution Drafted during the occupation of Japan and included democratic elements like women's suffrage adn a guarantee of basic freedoms; still what the Japanese constitution is known as today Effects of WWII on American unemployment Caused it to fall, reaching a low of 1.2% in 1944Effects of WWII on wages Rose 10% on average Effects of WWII era on farmers Good weather and increased demand, improved technology and methods, and rising crop prices led to good times and decreasing debt Effects of WWII on women Employment gains (6 million entered the workforce), though many lost these jobs when the war ended; more challenging jobs and more opportunities Effects of WWII on domestic population Huge mass-migration of people from the south to cities to work in defense industries (many were African American)Effects of WWII on the family More children were left in child care as fathers left for war and mothers worked; increased delinquency within teenagers; rush to marry before soldiers shipped out increased marriage rates and decreased marriage age Servicemen's Readjustment Act a.k.a. GI Bill of Rights Intended to help returning servicemen adjust to domestic life by providing support for soldiers seeking eductaing, job training, or loans to buy/start homes, farms, or businesses James Farmer Founder of CORECongress of Racial Equality (CORE) Interracial organization intended to confront urban segregation in the North Effects of WWII on racial tensions As more African Americans moved to industrial cities (many of which were already overcrowded), a wave of racial violence swept the nation, resulting in riots in many major cities in 19431943 Detroit Riot June 1943; 3-day riot that ended up killing 34 people and had to be ended by federal troops Zoot Suit Riots Riots in 1943 in LA between Mexican-Americans and sailors (named for the style of suit popular with Mexican-American men at the time)Internment Confinement of around 110,000 Japanese Americans in 10 prison camps across the US during WWII without specific charges being brought against these individuals Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) Organizingation of Japanese citizens who pushed the government for compensation for Japanese Americans detained unlawjustly during the war; finally gets restitution for individuals in 1990. Korematsu v. US (1944) Supreme Court case that decided that the internment of Japanese Americans was a military necessity durign a time of war and not unconstitutional  World War II 42 terms FISDSocial Studies World War IIWorld War II unit vocab for 11th grade US History Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Sort Atomic weapons These were developed during World War II as a result of the Manhattan Project. Two of these would be used on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Baby Boom During this time over 30 million babies were born in the United States during the postwar era of prosperity. Vernon Baker This First Lieutenant was awarded the Medal of Honor by Bill Clinton for his efforts in WW2. He was in the all black 92nd Infantry. Bataan Death March This was the 60 mile march of U. S. and Filipino POWs by the Japanese. They suffered starvation, disease, physical abuse and murder. Omar Bradley He commanded the 1st US Army during the D-day invasion. It was under his command that Paris was liberated and the Germans were turned back at the Battle of the Bulge. Concentration Camps During World War II, Adolf Hitler ordered the Jews to be contained in these. Many were killed in these camps. Conventional weapons These would include the weapons of war such as machine guns, tanks, and airplanes. It would not include atomic weapons. Dwight D. Eisenhower This General commanded the Allied Expeditionary Forces in Europe. He is known for success during Operation Torch and D-Day. Enlistment The military saw an increase of this in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor. Over 5 million Americans volunteered for military service. European Theatre The fighting in World War II that occurred in Europe. This consisted of the Allied forces of Great Britain, United States, Russia and France against primarily Germany. Executive Order 9066 This was the order given by President Franklin D. Roosevelt that called for the internment of all Americans of Japanese ancestry. Flying Tigers These were the volunteer American flyers supplying the Chinese with war materials. They destroyed over 300 enemy planes and raised morale. GI Bill This law passed in 1944 to provide returning servicemen educational opportunities, low interest loans and unemployment insurance. Adolf Hitler He became the leader of Nazi Germany and led an attempted genocide known as the "Final Solution. "Holocaust This was the name for Hitler's mass extermination of people during WW2, totaling over 11 million. Many were kept in concentration camps. Homefront The efforts by many that were home in the U. S. to support the war effort. The home-front was called to support the war effort by supporting rationing, buying war bonds, and planting Victory gardens. Internment This is the term for detaining Germans, Italians and Japanese during WW2. Island Hopping This was the term for the military strategy for U. S. military advancement through the Pacific Islands through Japanese territory to the mainland. Japan The military faction in this country invaded Manchuria, allied with Germany and Italy and led the attack on Pearl Harbor. Korematsu v US Fred Korematsu filed this case claiming that his rights as a U. S. citizen were denied by the internment of Japanese Americans. The court ruled that the relocation of these citizens was constitutional. Douglas Macarthur This General commanded the U. S. forces in the Pacific Theater. He later was in charge of the U. S. occupation of Japan. Manhattan Project This was the name for the development of the atomic bomb. The first successful test took place in New Mexico, 1945. George Marshall He served as FDR's chief consultant during World War II and would go on to become Secretary of State under President Truman. It was during this time that he proposed the Marshall Plan which was an economic plan to rebuild post war Europe and insure that the speed of communism was contained. Midway This battle is considered the turning point for the Pacific Theater. Americans broke the Japanese code and resulted in destroying 4 Japanese aircraft carriers. Benito Mussolini He became the dictator of Italy, formed the Fascist Party and invaded Albania and Ethiopia. Navajo Code Talkers These Native Americans devised a code for transmitting messages in their language on the frontlines of the Pacific Theater. Chester A Nimitz Born in Fredericksburg, Texas he would command the Pacific Fleet during World War II. In 1945, he represented the U. S. when the Japanese surrendered aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay. Nisei Executive Order 9066 permitted the military to require Japanese Americans or ____________ to relocate to internment camps in the U. S. Normandy The invasion at this location is also referred to as "D Day," June 6, 1944. This began the effort to liberate western Europe. Office of War Information This organization was created to encourage Americans to work for the war effort, photograph the war to use as propaganda to promote patriotism. Pacific Theatre The fighting in World War II in the Pacific. This consisted of island hopping as the United States fought against Japan. Patriotism Pride in one's country. During WWII many Americans showed this pride by displaying George Patton A commander in World War II, where he led the Third Army into battle following D-Day at the Battle of the Bulge. He ordered a 90 degree turnaround of forces to relieve American troops that were surrounded. Pearl Harbor Japanese forces attacked this military base on December 7, 1941. As a result of this attack, the U. S. officially entered the war. Rationing This policy regulated the amount of goods that a consumer could obtain during the war. Exercising this policy was to work against anger over shortages. Rock and Roll This was a new type of music that blended traditional blues and electronic instruments to become "American music." (Included Elvis Presley and Chuck Berry)Harry Truman He was the President after Franklin D. Roosevelt at the end of WW2. He approved the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Tuskegee Airmen This was a group of African American fighter pilots in the US Army Air Corps. They escorted pilots on bombing missions. Victory Gardens These were also call "War Gardens," grown by Americans to help with the food supply during a period of rations. Volunteerism During World War II, many on the home front were called upon to volunteer and assist the war effort. This included buying of war bonds, conserving raw materials, and planting Victory gardens. WAAC The acronym for the women's organization that volunteered during the war. Many of them served as nurses, Radio operators, drivers, etc. War Bonds Americans were encouraged to buy these to help finance the war effort. They reduced the currency in circulation and curbed inflation. Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Features Quizlet Live Quizlet Learn Diagrams Flashcards Mobile Help Sign up Help Center Honor Code Community Guidelines Students Teachers About Company Press Jobs Privacy Terms Follow us Language© 2018 Quizlet Inc.  This Week In History: US drops bomb on Hiroshima Special Passover Price for The Jerusalem Post Annual Conference- coupon code NYC2018 Save Your Seat Now April 05 2018 | Nisan, 20, 5778 |Arab Israeli Conflict Israel News Opinion Middle East Diaspora Green Israel International news Hi tech news JERUSALEM Gaza News BDS Antisemitism Health & Science CRYPTO CURRENCY business news Blogs Premium This Week In History: US drops bomb on Hiroshima Einstein and other Jewish scientists played significant role in developing the atomic bomb. By Tamara Zieve August 5, 2012 19:21> This Week in History: Yasser Arafat dies in Paris> This Week in History: Prisoners arrive at Auschwitz Share on facebook Share on twitter Hiroshima 370. (photo credit: reuters)On August 6, 1945 the United States Army Air Forces dropped the atomic weapon "Little Boy" on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, becoming the first and only nation to have used nuclear weapons in war to date. The bomb released a mix of shock waves, heat rays and radiation, causing widespread devastation. The city was instantly flattened and an estimated 140,000 of the total 350,000 people who lived there were killed or died within months after the American B-29 bomber Enola Gay dropped the bomb. Three days after the attack on Hiroshima, the United States dropped a second atomic bomb, "Fat Man," on the southern Japanese city of Nagasaki, killing some 80,000 people. Japan surrendered to the Allies six days later, marking the end of World War II. Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page. The invention of the atomic bomb and the drive for the Unites States to build it during the war against Nazi Germany, lay largely with a group of Jewish scientists. Scientific genius Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, and particularly his famous equation E=mc² explaining the relationship between mass and energy, was at the root of the development of the nuclear bomb. But it was physicist Leo Szillard who conceived the nuclear chain reaction in 1933, and together with Italian Catholic physicist Enrico Fermi, patented the idea of a nuclear reactor. An infamous letter delivered to then US president Franklin Roosevelt, signed by Albert Einstein on August 2, 1939, and written at the request of Szillard and physicist Eugene Wigner, is widely cited as the spark that ignited the flame - the Manhattan Project. These two scientists, with the help of Edward Teller, visited Einstein to persuade him – as the generation's most renowned scientist in the world - to sign the letter urging Roosevelt to support the construction of an atomic bomb. Their motive to create the atomic weapon was born out of fear that Nazi Germany would develop the weapon first, the same fear that persuaded former pacifist Einstein, to pen the letter. "In the course of the last four months it has been made probable -through the work of [Frédéric] Joliot in France as well as Fermi and Szilard in America - that it may become possible to set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of power and large quantities of new radium-like elements would be generated. Now it appears almost certain that this could be achieved in the immediate future. This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable - though much less certain - that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed," the letter read. Addressing concerns regarding Germany, the letter continued, "I understand that Germany has actually stopped the sale of uranium from the Czechoslovakian mines which she has taken over. That she should have taken such early action might perhaps be understood on the ground that the son of the German Under-Secretary of State, von Weizsäcker, is attached to the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institute in Berlin where some of the American work on uranium is now being repeated." American economist Alexander Sachs delivered the letter to Roosevelt, and according to some accounts, verbally summarized the letter for the president out of concern that he would not look at it otherwise. On June 28, 1941, Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8807, which created the Office of Scientific Research and Development, in order to coordinate scientific research for military purposes. One unit of this was the top-secret "S-1 Section," later to become known as the Manhattan Project. American physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer was appointed director of the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos in 1942, and was subsequently dubbed the "father of the atomic bomb." He selected the scientific team, which included Fermi, Hans Bethe, Edward Teller, Victor Weisskopf and Richard Feynman among others. Canada and the United Kingdom also participated in the US-led project. Einstein played a minor role in the creation of the nuclear weapon, sending several subsequent letters to Roosevelt, and helping with a specific problem involving the separation of isotopes that shared chemical traits. Due to his pacifist past, Einstein was considered to be too much of a security risk to be included in the project. And on August 6, 1945, Einstein was devastated upon hearing the news that the US had dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The sought-out scientist had agreed to the correspondence with Roosevelt under the conviction that a nuclear weapon would serve as an effective deterrent against Nazi Germany. He lived to regret his part in the creation of the deadly weapon: "I made one great mistake in my life when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made," Einstein confessed in 1954, just five months before his death. "But there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them," he countered. Then-US president Harry S. Truman, however, had no regrets. He maintained that the move was necessary to end the war as quickly as possible with as few casualties as possible. Following a rare, positive column in the Chicago Sun Times about Truman's use of the atomic bomb, he replied to columnist Irv Kupcinet in a letter: "It (the bombing) was done to save 125,000 youngsters on the American side and 125,000 on the Japanese side from getting killed and that is what it did… I have no regrets and, under the same circumstances, I would do it again." Historian, activist and writer Gar Alperovitz has notoriously challenged this justification, arguing that the use of the deadly weapons were unnecessary, that there was "very substantial evidence that by that late summer of 1945 the decision was primarily influenced by diplomatic considerations related to the Soviet Union" following the end of the war. Three months after "Little Boy" and "Fat Man" were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Oppenheimer resigned as project director, and opposed the development of the even more deadly thermonuclear bomb. As he, Einstein and other scientists advocated nuclear disarmament, Teller adopted the role of the father of the Hydrogen Bomb along with Stanisław Ulam, and successfully developed the weapon in 1951. While several countries in the world have since developed nuclear weapons, the Truman Administration remains to date, the only government in history to have given the green light to drop the deadly bombs. The issue of nuclear weapons is today more pertinent than ever, as Western powers and particularly Israel, continue an ongoing battle to prevent the Iranian regime from joining the list of nuclear-armed states. "What we have today is far more powerful," the last surviving member of the crew that dropped "Little Boy" warned in an interview with the BBC in 2010. Flight navigator Lieutenant Theodore "Dutch" Van Kirk said that the bombs they used, "were midgets compared to those that exist today. Nuclear bombs…can destroy the world if they are released. I would hope that atomic bombs will never again be used, for any reason. "Tags: japan world war ii Share on facebook Share on twitter Related Content August 28, 2014Grapevine: September significance By GREER FAY CASHMANSecurity and defense: The test of deterrence By YAAKOV LAPPINSearching for the middle ground between war and peace By HERB KEINONPolitics: Has Hamas killed the Zionist Left? By Gil Stern Stern HOFFMANNot like lambs to the slaughter By GREER FAY CASHMANPopular In the Community Sponsored Sponsored Can one book interweave Israel's past, present and its prophecies? Curt195611h Psalms and Proverbs... Job and Lamentations... Exodus and Daniel... how beautiful are the Hebrew Holy Scriptures, new and old. Gaza Health Ministry: 16-year-old Palestinian teen killed by IDF live fire Blue Seas19h It’s more likely Hamas killed her Let us examine the body In pictures: 20,000 Palestinians protest in Gazacorleone200016h20.000 OF THESE SCAMS AGGREGATED IN ONE PLACE , What a better opportunity fo Israel to score a big hit . ISRAEL BE SERIOUS WIPE THESE VERMIN OUT, CLEAR THE AREA. Hamas chief: We will remove the borders and implement the right of return Blue Seas16h Every “ Palestinian “ that even attempts to come to the border fence will be shot and killed - Hamas has been warned multiple times over Sinwar - you should be the first. please step up to the border fence Ahed Tamimi sexually harassed during interrogation, lawyer says Red Band Aid19h Why does the POST participate in such disgraceful pseudo reporting and reckless misinformation?????????????? Into the black smoke: Inside the 'Great March of Return'Gabor Ujvari23h Israel should use jet engines to blow the fire and fumes deep in to Gaza. The mob lit up Gaza on order from Hamas. It is like when Nero lit up Rome. Human insanity is repeated in Gaza. The haredi draft quandary may topple the government yet Willie Sam5h The Haredi is a truly disgusting sect of Judaism. It's bad enough that they are taking over Israel but unfortunately their tentacles are now making their way into New York and New Jersey politics as well. Someone must stand up to these parasites before it is too late. Polish journalist calls World Jewish Congress 'gang of blackmailers'Szczepan_EW1d As usual JP is omitting WHY he said that which makes this article nothing less than propaganda piece ;) He said this in relation to story of Jewish lady killed and burned in France. Among few information about her one in particular is disturbing: this lady, a Holocaust survivor was very poor and living on social welfare. His point was this: how is it possible she was left with such poor help from Jewish community when SO MUCH MONEY was squeezed off by Holocaust Industry Gang of Blackmailers from Germany, Switzerland and France Railways to supposedly SUPPORT URGENT NEEDS OF DYING HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS ? Considering relatively small number of current living Holocaust survivors and billions of dollars received from Germany, Swiss and France as compensation for them how is it possible they do not have the best possible health care and housing? Hey JP - will you have enough spine to press WJC about that?? Gunning for reasonable restrictions Olive Flask12m In the 18th century, a musket was a military weapon. Using the theaory that the second amendment doesn't apply to todays arms is like saying the 1st amendment isn't relevent today as the founding fathers could not have imagined the technology we have today to spread gossip, rumor and false news thus isnt relative today and free speach should be regulated or banned. UN watchdog urges Hungary to halt hate speech, protect refugees Olive Bus1d The Magyars are smart and do not want to follow Sweden, Germany, and others and let their country be turned into what President Trump called s*#t holes. LIVE COVERAGE: Standoff resumes Gazans set thousands of tires ablaze Blue Cupcake1d It seems the winds are eastern so the smoke fro the tyres will cover the Gaza Strip and it’s population! Their stupidity has no limits!Calm, poised and a steady hand Blue Pizza2d You know, Katz, you and your mates have bashed Bibi so much over the years, while he has dragged our once moribund socialist economy kicking and screaming into the twenty first century, stonewalled Obama and formed alliances that would have been unthinkable just a few short years ago, that we no longer believe you. Who knows? You may be right this time but you have cried wolf so often that is difficult to even muster a yawn. The Bibi witch hunt has made the lefty press an object of derision; no thinking person believes a thing you say any more and that is a great disservice to the public. Encountering Peace: Getting the story straight Red Cone2d Man, this is a confused article. What exactly do you want, Mr. Baskin? Shall we end the blockade against importation of offensive weapons to Gaza? Then you, me, and all other Jews in Israeli may expect nightly shelling. Shall we allow unrestricted access of Gazans into Israel? We had better allocate new ground for cemeteries. Shall we supply Gazans with free water (free because they cannot pay for it, and have refused for years to invest money in desalination)? Shall we supply Gazans with free electricity (free because again they can’t pay, and the Palestinian Authority stopped paying due to a dispute with Hamas)? If the goal of the article is to make people sympathy for civilian suffering, OK, I feel sympathy. Are you saying something else? Larry M. Goldstein IDF live fire wounds 40 Palestinians in Gaza protests Blue Seas22h Message to the “ Palestinians “ Jerusalem is the undivided capital of the Jewish state of Israel, and there is no right of return - both issues are dead, and off the negotiating table End of story Danon demands U. N. condemn Hamas for exploiting children Elena_7h Again, the Western “consumer” of a mass media “product” has received his daily portion of DRAMMATIC “reality show” called “Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. Western community like “on-line” wars. Wars as “reality shows”. For us it’s a war for survival, for the West it’s just an “entertainment” . It seems that this protest was AGAIN orchestrated by Reuters and rehearsed with Reuters. For the “protesters” to behave in the most DRAMMATIC (for Western “consumers” of Reuters’ product) Hollywood-style “horror film” way and for Reuters’ crew to come and shoot it in the appropriate angles. It is seems the Western “consumer” LONGS for a bloody “incident”, where they can see the “bloody nature of Jews”! It is Western media, which incites and inflames those blood “incident” for their “consumers” fun . The Western community like “on-line” wars. Wars as “reality shows”. Westerner “consumers” of mass media “production” sit in their comfortable homes and watch the “reality show” of war, a Hollywood-style “horror film”. And the Western “consumers” cannot “consume” a “horror film” without a blood. OUR FREE DAILY NEWS BLASTSUBSCRIBEBy subscribing I accept the terms of use Hot Opinion Yaakov Katz Calm, poised and a steady hand Caroline B. Glick Our fair weathered Saudi friend Michael Freund Fundamentally Freund: Demography and Jewish destiny Gershon Baskin Encountering Peace: Getting the story straight JP Videos WATCH ALLWATCH: International exhibition showcases Israeli whisky distilleries WATCH: Israeli comedians find the funny in 'The Jerusalem Post'WATCH: The voice behind Israel's most influential women JPOST GREEN ISRAELJPOST ULPAN-ONLINEREAL ESTATE MAGAZINEBANK HAPOALIM GATEWAYJPOST LITEREAL ESTATE CLASSIFIEDSJUDAICA WEBSTOREMost Read Writer of Jewish dating op-ed in Washington Post apologizes‘It’s time to come back home,’ Trump says of U. S. troops in Middle East Major Israeli websites targeted in large anti-Israel cyberattack One month old baby drowns in jacuzzi at southern Israel hotel Israel Weather21 - 31 Elat15 - 32 Tiberias14 - 30 Beer Sheva14 - 27 Tel Aviv - Yafo15 - 26 Jerusalem14 - 24 Haifa21 - 31 Elat15 - 32 Tiberias14 - 30 Beer Sheva14 - 27 Tel Aviv - Yafo Sign Up For Our News Letter Follow Us Information About Us Feedback Staff E-mails Copyright Advertise with Us Statistics Ad Specs Terms Of Service Privacy Policy Subscriber Agreementjpost-jobs Cancel Subscription The Jerusalem Post Group NYC Conference Diplomatic Conference Israel Health Conference Learn Hebrew The Jerusalem Report Our Magazines Edition Francaise Green Israel Jerusalem Post Lite Ulpan Online Tools and services JPost Mobile Apps JPost Premium JPost Newsletter JPost News Ticker JPost RSS feeds JPost.com Archive JPost Alert Find us on Google+Digital Library Promo Content Promo Content Commercial Espresso Machines Undercounter Ice Makers Cash Counting Machines Portable Solar Generators Personal Loans Guru Mortgage Moving In Israel Sites Of Interest Jerusalem Hotels KKL-JNFPoalim Online Promo Code Watch: Online Coupons Jewish Broadcasting Service Personas Media Follow Us The Jerusalem Post Customer Service Center can be contacted with any questions or requests: Telephone: *2421 * Extension 4 Jerusalem Post or 03-7619056 Fax: 03-5613699E-mail: subs@jpost.com The center is staffed and provides answers on Sundays through Thursdays between 07:00 and 14:00 and Fridays only handles distribution requests between 7:00 and 13:00 For international customers: The center is staffed and provides answers on Sundays through Thursdays between 7AM and 6PM Toll Free number in Israel only 1-800-574-574 Telephone +972-3-761-9056 Fax: 972-3-561-3699 E-mail: subs@jpost.com Copyright © 2018 Jpost Inc. All rights reserved • Terms of Use • Privacy Policy ux design by: studio Inbar Edut •  . As of December 31, 2014, I retired from full-time teaching in Humboldt State University's Department of History. While this website will remain online, it is no longer maintained. History 110 -Dr. Gayle Olson-Raymer Political, Economic and Social Consequences of Manifest Destiny Our last two meetings focused on the geographical growth of the United States during the era of Manifest Destiny. Today, we will turn to the other part of our ongoing story - the political, economic, and social realities of Manifest Destiny. We have seen how Americans rapidly moved across the North American continent and using their belief in Manifest Destiny, rounded out our borders in just 53 years. Now, let's look at another type of growth that arose during these same decades - the economic and political growth of the railroads. When examining these maps, you can clearly see that the northern or federalist economic vision of America is marching westward. And why is the vision of the industrial agenda of the federalists - of those living primarily in the North and who favor strong federal governmental involvement in the promotion of industry - is prevailing? The geography of the north favors industry over agriculture. Many northerners believed that strong industrial growth in textiles benefited the entire nation - southern cotton growers, northern industrialists, and western expansion advocates. But many powerful southerners believed that they were unfairly fueling the economy of the North. These economic and political realities - the two separate visions for the expanding United States - will shape the era of Manifest Destiny and ultimately, will push us further on the pathway to war. Discussion Goals - Political, Economic and Social Consequences of Manifest Destiny, 1800 to 1860To explore the factors that facilitated the transition between a local market economy and a national market economy. To discuss the consequences of economic change upon American society. To discuss changes in the national political climate and the ways such political changes were directly related to national economic changes. To explore the presidency of Andrew Jackson and understand how it changed American politics. To understand the controversies over tariffs that arose during Jackson's presidency and how this moved us closer to war To examine the early reform movements designed to deal with the political, economic, and social consequences of Manifest Destiny. Discussion Goal #1: To explore the factors that facilitated the transition between a local market economy and a national market economy Both the colonies and the fledgling United States were tied into a free market economy - Americans depended upon the laws of supply and demand to voluntarily produce what people want and to sell their products to whom they want, with little to no interference from the government. Prior to the 1820s, the market economy was primarily dependent on international trade whereby goods were generally produced within the United States, but most goods were sold to international markets.. What this means is that while many parts of the U. S. produced goods locally, they traded these goods largely with Europe. Why - because we had not created the industrial or transportation infrastructure to allow us to trade among the new states. Beginning in the 1820s, the market economy began to depend on domestic trade whereby we not only produced our goods within the United States, but we also sold our good to domestic markets. In so doing, we created a national market economy. The transition to a national market economy was facilitated by three factors: The work force changed from manufacturing by hand to industrial manufacturing. The invention of the cotton gin allowed cotton production to dominate the economy and made its exportation a vital force for the entire American economy. A national transportation and communication network was created to link people and goods between regions. FIRST FACTOR: Changing from Manufacturing by Hand to Industrial Manufacturing - a change fueled by new industrial technologies. Before 1800, the market economy in New England, the middle state, and the South shared the following characteristics: Manufactured goods were produced inside the homes and small shops by artisans who made a small number of finished goods for local customers. Familes controlled and owned the means of production and products; workers/craftsmen were both employer and employee. Work was task oriented and the environment was unstructured - geared to seasons and community values. Artisans took on apprentices who became part of the family. Incentives for upward mobility existed for apprentices who worked hard and developed skills; they could become owners of their own shops. In the South, cotton production was slow. Seeds were removed by hand; a slave could clean one pound a day. Cotton crops were less profitable than tobacco, rice, and indigo. Transportation of goods could only occur via water routes. Only 100 miles of canals and 69 steamboats existed by 1820. No railroads. From 1815 to 1840, a national market economy arose. After 1815, both the old-style manufacturing system and the behavior and patterns of the work force began to change. The change from manufacturing by hand to industrial manufacturing was gradual and evolutionary - happening in stages throughout the 19th Century. Manufactured goods were now produced outside the home in small factories by hired workers on a piecework basis that allowed for mass production of goods. The means of production and product were owned and controlled by business owners. Owners were the employers; workers became the employees. Transportation of goods was facilitated by the growth of canals, steamboats, and roads. The first phase of American industrialization began as small factories appeared in the north where unskilled and semiskilled laborers tended new machinery based on new technology. Textile mills were the first factories to use new technology on a large scale. Between 1820-1840, textile manufacturing became the nation's leading industry. One of the largest in the nation was the Boott Cotton Mill built in 1823 in Lowell, Massachusetts shown in this drawing. Note its geographical location, right next to the Merrimack River upon which it depended for power. In 1821, a group of Boston capitalists purchased land and water rights along the river and a nearby canal, and began to build a major textile manufacturing center. The first factory employed young women recruited from the nearby countryside. Additional mills were constructed until, by 1840, ten textile corporations with thirty-two mills valued at more then ten million dollars lined the banks of the river and nearby canals. Adjacent to the mills were rows of company boarding houses and tenements which accommodated most of the 8,000 factory operatives. By the 1840s, the rise of textile factories and the use of less expensive labor enabled Americans to achieve competitive superiority over Britain. This edge increased with the widespread use of interchangeable parts. In these factories: Work was based on fixed rates of production; the working environment was structured and based upon fixed schedules. Employers hired employees with whom they had only an economic relationship. Employees had a chance of some upward mobility - largely from unskilled to semi-skilled or skilled workers and occasionally into management - but there was very little chance of becoming an owner/employer. SECOND FACTOR: The invention of the cotton gin allowed cotton production to dominate the economy and made its exportation a vital force for the entire American economy Cotton production vastly improved with invention of cotton gin in 1793. Now, one slave could clean 50 pounds per day. Both Southern and Northern economies improved - factories turn raw cotton into cloth; merchants profit from shipping; plantation owners profited from growing cotton. As the maps below indicates, by 1821 cotton production accounted for a large portion of the Southern economy. And by 1859 when most farmers owned and used the cotton gin, cotton accounted for 75% of the world's supply and two-thirds of all American exports. In some states, its production had increased from 500-1000% (Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi) Cotton production was not just good for the south. Southern planters sold the cotton to northern textile firms and used the income to purchase foodstuffs from the West and goods and services from the North. In turn, northern factories made money by turning raw cotton into cloth and northern merchants profited from shipping the cotton and reshipping the finished textiles. THIRD FACTOR : A national transportation and communication network was created to link people and goods between regions During the first decade of the 19th Century, western settlers relied on roads and rivers for transportation. Roads. Most roads were turnpikes or toll roads. In 1811, construction began on the National Road from Maryland across the Appalachians to Wheeling, Virginia. By 1838, it stretched to Vandalia, Illinois. Rivers. Steamboats and canals led the way to creating a national market during this period. Steamboats. Steamboats were invented in the early 1800s, but it took Robert Fulton to demonstrate the commercial possibilities of propelling a boat by steam. In 1807, he took the Clermont from New York City to Albany on the Hudson River. By the end of that year, only 17 steamboats were operating on western rivers; in 1820 there were 69 and by 1855, there were 727. The carrying capacity on western rivers increased 100-fold between 1820-1860 and the steamboat became the major form of western transportation during this time period. They were, however, quite dangerous: between 1825 and 1830, 42 exploding boilers killed 273 people. Canals. In 1816, the U. S. had 100 miles of canals, none longer than 28 miles. Farmers in New York pressed to build a canal to get their products to market in NYC. Thus, between1818-1825, the Erie Canal was completed and stretched 364 miles from Albany on the Hudson River to Buffalo on Lake Erie. The canal linked the Atlantic Ocean to the Great Lakes. By 1840, over 3,300 miles of canals were completed, mostly with the help of state and some federal money. Consequences: Transportation costs were greatly reduced: in 1820, cost of shipping a ton of goods from Buffalo to NY City was 19 cents a mile - the canal dropped the price to less than 3 cents a mile. New towns grew up along the canal routes and were populated by people involved in moving goods and serving markets. By the 1850s the popularity of canals and steamboats was dwindling in favor of the increasingly dominant new transportation mode - the railroad. The first significant railroads appeared in the 1830s, mainly to serve as feeder lines to canals. In that year, 13 miles of track existed; by 1840, 3,325 miles of train track had been constructed; and by 1850, 8,879 were in operation. Along with the railroads came a new way to communicate - the telegraph. Railroad entrepreneurs wanted a way to quickly forward messages from one station to another to report arrivals, accidents, delays. Samuel B. Morse invented the telegraph which sent signals over wires strung from city to city. In 1843, the federal government gave Morse money to build the first line from Washington, D. C. to Baltimore. It was completed in 1844. Thereafter, a telegraph line ran alongside all railroad tracks. In short, the transition to a national market economy was facilitated by improved manufacturing, advanced technology, and a new transportation system. Discussion Goal #2: To discuss the consequences of economic change upon American society American farming experienced many changes. Farmers increased their yields and sold their surplus at far-away markets. With the profits, they cultivated more acres and bought more modern machinery - like the first mechanical reaper invented by Cyrus Mc Cormick in 1834 which harvested grain seven times faster than by hand and with half the labor, and the steel-tipped plow invented by John Deere in 1837 which cut planting time in half. Farmers began to work longer hours due to more markets, more yields, and more acreage. Farmers in certain regions of the country began crop specialization: Eastern farmers could not compete with wheat yields of western farms, so became involved in dairying and producing fruit; Western farmers grew foodstuffs, especially grain; Southern farmers grew staple crops for export; and the Northeast became the manufacturing center that looked to the growing western and southern domestic markets for raw materials. Farmers began to rely entirely upon cash and credit for purchases, rather than traditional bartering. Farmers began to deal with regional merchants - middlemen - rather than marketing the crops themselves as they had traditionally done.2. Society made its first large shift from rural to urban and at the same time, the U. S. p opulation boomed. From 1820 to 1860, the U. S. witnessed the most rapid rate of urbanization in American history. While the United States remained primarily a rural nation, a significant rise in urbanization occurred between 1820 and 1860 - much of it due directly to the growth of the national market economy. In 1820, there were only 9 cities with populations over 10,000; only three of these had populations exceeding 50,000 - Baltimore, Philadelphia, and NY (largest). In 1820, the national census classified about 9% of the population as urban (living in towns with populations exceeding 2500); by 1860, 20% was urban. By 1860, two cities had over a half million people - NY and Philadelphia; six cities had populations between 250,000 and 500,000 - Boston, Baltimore, New Orleans, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Chicago. And six others had somewhere between 100,000 and 250,000 people - Louisville, Buffalo, Albany, Providence, Newark, and Washington. The rate of urbanization differed in the three geographical regions of the U. S. The Northeast was the most urbanized (by 1860, more than a third of population was urban). Most cities were commercial seaport centers: Boston, NY, Philadelphia. The South was the least urbanized (about 10% of its population was urban)The West was somewhere in between - although by 1850, 40% of the nation's urban population lived in interior cities. Why do you think Americans were building and flocking to cities at a rate higher than ever before?3. More goods and services became available, were more reasonably priced, and were especially affordable to the growing middle class. Books and magazines were cheaper to print and buy. Clothing prices dropped with decreasing costs for manufacturing cloth. Fabric fell from 18 cents a yard in 1815 to 2 cents a yard by 1860. Availability and affordability of items like the Franklin stove, lamps, bathing stands and bowls provided greater comfort.4. Labor became more specialized. Transportation made it possible for farmers to concentrate on producing more profitable crops while factories could focus on making a single item. The manufacturing process within the factories became more specialized through the division of labor. The division of labor contributed to the rise of a permanent working class of the unskilled which began shortly after substantial numbers the poor Irish began to arrive in the factories during the 1840s. With each succeeding decade, more white Americans lost their economic independence as they became wage earning employees with little employment security and control over their working condition - a condition referred to as wage slavery. Labor also became more diverse, with the work force increasingly fueled by immigrants. In the 1820s, about 128,000 immigrants came to America; by 1850s, 2.5 million had arrived.5. Traditional laboring values and control systems disappeared. Pride in craftsmanship gave way to increasing rates of productivity. Factory work required a sober, dependable, self-disciplined worker who must follow strict schedules. Factory work separated the laborers from managers and also prevented most laborers from ever rising to management positions.6. Women's role in society was redefined at the same time that the family structure was reorganized. As families adapted to the pressures of a competitive market society, the women’s role in society was gradually transformed. Rather than the household being an integral part of the family workplace, the home was increasingly a place where women and children dominated. Thus, the ideal of domesticity was born. Based upon the notion of separate sexual spheres, the ideal held that each sex had a part of life in which each reigned supreme. Men’s sphere was the outside world where they were the breadwinners. They were expected to be aggressive. Their occasional moral lapses of fidelity were to be tolerated by their families and society. Women’s sphere was the home where they were the caregivers who found fulfillment in dispensing love and comfort to their husband and children. Women were to be reliant upon male protection, morally strong, and sexually loyal. They were to be passive and were expected to submerge their identities to those of their husband. Early 19th Century women did not see domesticity as a rationale for male dominance. Rather they argued that making the home a female domain gave women real power as moral custodians of the nation’s future. In reality, the ideal of domesticity was only practiced in middle-and upper-class homes. Farmers wives had to work hard and constantly, and lower-class wives had to supplement the family’s income. The modern family began to evolve from the 1820s forward. Changes included: Rise of privacy - the family was seen as a sheltered retreat from the outside world. Marriage was delayed until a man was sufficiently established to support a wife and family - thus resulting in smaller families. Use of birth control and abortion - resulting in lower birth rate. Many urban middle-class women began to use birth control to space children farther apart and minimize risks of pregnancy. Recent estimates suggest that before 1860, one abortion was performed for every five or six live births. (Davidson, et. al., 423. )New values stressed that a smaller family indicated self-restraint and the knowledge that one’s family must live within its means. Thus, family size was directly related to the success ethic.5. Wealth became a sign of American status and a symbol of respect and recognition. As most Americans hoped to attain great wealth, a tolerance arose for accumulating wealth in any way possible. Few Americans were concerned about the method of becoming wealthy.6. Environmental degradation occurred. Deforestation and soil erosion was widespread due to need for wood as fuel, clearing lands for agriculture, and housing construction. The flow of rivers changed to meet agricultural, sawmill, dam, and canal needs. Air pollution became a reality as a result of using coal as a major power source.7. American society was both democratized and improved, as well as stratified and hindered. Society became more urbanized and multicultural due to immigration of foreigners and northern migration of blacks. At the same time, urban society became more socially and economically stratified, as well as increasingly intolerant of Catholics, immigrants, and freed blacks. Quality of life improves for middle and upper classes who have more variety in their diet and cluster in wealthy neighborhoods with fashionable furniture, cast-iron stoves. At the same time, the quality of life decreases for lower classes who cluster in crowded, dirty conditions in tenements. Many, like the young girls in the Boott Cotton Mills in Lowell, Massachusetts, began to strike for better working conditions. A small but growing number of slaves receive freedom. By 1860, almost 1/2 million free blacks live in the US, about 11% of the total black population. At the same time, free blacks remain at the bottom of the social and economic scale. In 1850, average white Bostonian earned $872 annually; freed blacks earned $91. Middle and upper class women stay at home in their own "sphere" where they educate their families. At the same time, lower class and farm families must depend on two incomes, forcing women and children into jobs. Economic and social gap between upper and middle classes decreases. At the same time, gaps between the upper and lower classes increase and wealth is increasingly concentrated at the top of the social scale. By 1800, 10% of nation's families owned between 1/3 and 1/2 of the nation's wealth; by 1860, 10% of the nation's families own more than 2/3 of the nation's wealth. By 1840, half of all freemen over 30 have acquired moderate wealth - a house, furniture, a little land, and some savings. Upward mobility exists for middle class skilled workers. At the same time, half the nation's free workers labor for wages rather than profit. Most wage earners/wage slaves are unable to move from unskilled to skilled work. Low wages and unstable jobs gave them little hope for a better life. Recreation became more widely available to middle and upper classes with the introduction of "penny" newspapers, urban theaters, and museums. At the same time , recreation is still not affordable for laboring classes who have niether the time or money for leisure or enjoyment. Increased number of beautiful upper class homes and neighborhoods. At the same time, increased problems appear of disorder, violence, and riots associated with stratified neighborhoods. This leads to the creation of police departments to keep the poor controlled and confined their their areas of the city. Discussion Goal #3: To discuss changes in the national political climate and the ways such political changes were directly related to national economic changes Before the Revolutionary War, Americans were interested in local matters and had little interest in national or state matters - economic or political. After the War, interest in national and state politics was minimal and involved only a minority of privileged, male Americans. However, from 1800 forward, many people began to realize that federal, state, and local governments could support economic projects in which they would benefit. As a result of this new interest, more people became involved in the political process. More people gained a sense of national identity, without giving up their regional and state identities. They could be New Englanders and Bostonians, as well as Americans. More people were eligible to vote. No state admitted to the Union after 1815 set property requirements for voting. The new western states extended the right to vote to all white males over 21 years of age. By 1820, all new states and most of the older states had followed suit. By 1840, more than 90% of adult white males in the nation could vote. Despite their ability to vote, however, many Americans did not exercise that privilege. A study of early 19th Century voting patterns found that in presidential elections held in 1808, 1812, 1824, and 1828, turnouts of eligible, white men in the nine states with complete results were as low as 12.4% in Rhode Island's election of 1824 and as high as 75.8% in Ohio's election of 1828. In 1828, the average voter participation for all the states was 56.3%. Turnout began to increase in 1840 when there was 80.2%; 1860 there was 81.2%; 1876 = 81.8%. Each of these were times when the public faced huge sectional disagreements and turned to the vote for help. Throughout most of these years, voters participated more extensively in state elections than those involving the presidency. And how do these rates compare with today? According to recent data from George Mason University, in the 2012 election, 58.7% of eligible Americans voted in the election. By the middle of the century, more people began to vote in national elections than ever before, especially as political parties emerged with which people could identify. Increased voting and more interest in political parties combined with a new recognition among Americans that the federal government could be the instrument of stimulating or depressing local economies. Consequently, federal stimulation of the economy largely occurred via two avenues: Series of Supreme Court decisions that created an economic climate favorable to investment and which, in turn, protected the new forms of businesses that comprised a national market economy. In five major decisions made by the U. S. Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice John Marshall between 1801-1835, economic risk-taking was clearly protected and encouraged. The decisions collectively protected property and contracts by limiting state interference and creating a climate of business confidence. National political leadership fell to men who wanted to use the federal government to promote rapid economic development. Led by Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and John Quincy Adams, they adopted economic policies designed to foster prosperity in all regions and to strengthen the political union between all states. States, in turn, enacted measures to stimulate commerce and economic development. Such policies created the commonwealth system, which elevated the public good (common-wealth) above that of private individuals, and which involved two actions: Granting corporate charters to private businesses to promote private investment in roads, bridges, canals, railroads, banks, iron-mining, textile manufacturing,etc. Using private corporations for public purposes by promoting economic development thought to be for the good of all. Thus, the economy grew - at the same time that the economic and political power of capitalist entrepreneurs also grew and more white men were able to vote. And with this new economic growth, came political growth and further differences between the federalists and anti-federalists. We can especially see this in two very interesting presidential elections in 1824 and 1828. The Election of 1824. While four men actually ran for office, the race came down to two very different candidates: John Quincy Adams - the federalist - believed that a strong federal government should stimulate economic growth by investing in internal improvements and supporting protective tariffs. Andrew Jackson, a military hero, believed in strong state governments and a federal government that did not meddle in economic growth. Jackson believed that the federal government should support state and local investment in internal improvements and free trade - and such state and local investments must not be subject to federal interference ( laissez faire). These issues - which made party politics increasingly partisan and fractured - were exacerbated by the results of the Election of 1824: Andrew Jackson won both the popular and electoral vote, but not the majority electoral vote required by the constitution. Under the 12th Amendment, in such a situation, the election then goes to the House of Representatives who selects the President from among the top three. Adams was elected in what has become known as the "Corrupt Bargain. "This election marked the seventh consecutive presidential victory for the federalist, Democratic-Republican Party, which, to this day, is still the longest presidential winning streak in American history. Jackson was furious with the decision. Thus, he immediately began campaigning for the 1828 presidential election - an election that was characterized by a highly politicized approach. In the Election of 1828, Jackson was finally victorious. Discussion Goal #5: To explore the presidency of Andrew Jackson (1828-1836) and understand how it changed American politics With Jackson's eight-year term, the nation's political climate and the presidency gradually changed in at least 5 ways: The powers of the presidency greatly expanded under the first activist president. The powers of the president were increased while those of congress decreased. More Americans were involved in Jackson's election than ever before. More "common men" voted then in any other national election. More people voted because the franchise had been gradually extended; and more people choose to vote - 56% of the eligible electorate cast a vote. Jackson's presidency ushered in a series of "firsts." Jackson became the first president To elevate negative campaigning into the national limelight. According to historian Daniel Walker Howe, this election was "probably the dirtiest in American history. "To determine that the office of the president was the direct gift of the people and that no institution - not Congress or the courts - should stand between the people and the presidency. To convert the veto into an effective executive weapon by vetoing 12 bills. There were only 9 others for all previous six presidents combined. To argue that previous treaties with Indian nations were irrelevant and that they had to be removed for the security of the nation and to guarantee westward expansion. To create his own newspaper, the Globe, over which he had absolute power in what was printed about his administration and what was not. To demand that all diplomatic correspondence should be made directly to the President and not to the House and Senate. To be censured by the Senate. On March 28, 1834, in response to Jackson’s ability to get Congress to deny the re-chartering of the U. S. Bank, and in a 26 to 20 vote, the Senate voted "That the President ... has assumed upon himself authority and power not conferred by the Constitution and laws, but in derogation of both." The censure was expunged shortly before he left office. This election marked the beginning of patronage in national politics. For the first time in our history, advisors were not selected because they were qualified for the job, but rather because they supported Jackson for President and because they would unquestioningly follow his orders. Jackson used the patronage system once he was installed in the White House. He made it clear that he would purge all federal personnel who had not endorsed him for president. Jackson appointed a Kitchen Cabinet of informal advisors who were not part of his official cabinet and who owed their power base absolutely to the president. Thus he began an institution that today would be the equivalent to the presidential White House staff - the so-called "West Wing. "This is not to say that some sort of patronage had not existed before. It just was not as institutionalized. Former presidents had appointed supporters to their cabinets, but none had either a kitchen cabinet or had removed so many federal officials. During his first year, he removed 10 percent of all government employees. The first time that all regions of the country united to creat national political party. With Jackson's election, the Democrats brought together people from all three regions of the nation - north, south, and west. People joined because of the issues and their belief in democratic leadership as espoused by Jackson - that the "people" should run the country, not the wealthy "aristocrats. "Jackson's two terms as president ended in 1836 with the election of Democrat, Martin Van Buren. Van Buren, a Democrat, was only in office a few months before an oversupply of cotton brought the price of cotton down on the international markets; in response, nervous investors rushed to banks to redeem their paper money for hard cash. After a brief recovery, a full-on depression hit in early 1839 which lasted until 1843. The public identified the depression with the Democrats and Van Buren who opposed a new national bank, refused to allow the new Treasury department to accept paper money for payment, and forbade the issue of federal money to state banks for loans that might stimulate the economy. Thus, the Election of 1840 brought in a Whig (the newest Federalist party) - William Henry Harrison - who was president only for a month. Harrison died and vice-president Tyler, a Democrat who was a lawyer and a strict constructionist of the Constitution, gained control. Thus, the Democrats entered the 1840s in control of the White House. Discussion Goal #5: To understand the controversies over tariffs that arose during Jackson's presidency and how this moved us closer to war Protective Tariffs and Internal Improvements What is a tariff? A tax on imports and exports of raw materials and manufactured goods. In the 1800s, a tariff was one of the major sources of federal revenue. What is a protective tariff? A tax that protects one sector of the economy or one geographical region over another sector or geographical region. What is an internal improvement? An investment of governmental money into improvements that would benefit the growth of the economy - especially transportation and communication that would link regional economies and markets. What was the political conflict? The Federalists/National Republicans believed in protective tariffs levied by the federal government that would promote both American manufacturing and agricultural enterprises. They supported the federalist vision of the industrial march throughout the west – a vision that was aided by favorable geography and waterways that could fuel industrial growth. They argued that by making foreign commodities more expensive and less available to American markets, American industry would grow and create new internal markets for manufactured and agricultural goods that would benefit the nation as a whole. They believed the federal government should make substantial investments for internal improvements that would benefit the entire nation. The Democratic Republicans/Democrats believed in free trade that allowed southern planters to buy and sell from competitors around the world. They supported the anti-federalist vision of an agricultural march throughout the west – a vision that shunned industry because their geography was more favorable to agriculture, but also because they believed mono-crop agriculture and slave labor was more profitable. They argued that protective tariffs protected just one economic enterprise – industrial manufacturing – and one region of the nation – the North – at the expense of Southern agriculture. They believed that state and local governments should make substantial investments in internal improvements and that a strong federal hand in such improvements would give the federal government so much power that it could eventually prohibit slavery. The Tariff Crisis: By the 1820s, South Carolinians had become the most vocal state in its opposition to federalism. They especially feared that a strong federal government would look to the abolition of slavery. Britain had just abolished slavery in the West Indies and Haiti - the former French slave colony - had become an independent black republic. To try to limit the powers of the federal government, they chose to target the tariff. They were especially angry about three protective tariffs passed during the Adams and Jackson presidencies. Tariff of 1824 ( John Quincy Adams - Democratic Republicans) - A protective tariff of 35% was levied on imported manufactures - especially iron goods, woolen and cotton cloth. Adams sought to protect eastern manufacturers. Tariff of 1828 (Jackson - Democrats) - A protective tariff was levied on raw materials, agricultural imports, and some manufactures - including a 50% duty on cotton cloth. Jackson wanted to protect small farmers, especially in the west. Problem: Southern planters were hurt by the tariff. South was the world's largest and cheapest producer of raw cotton; however, with the tax, southerners had to buy either the high-cost American cloth which enriched northern businesses and workers, or highly-taxed British goods which helped pay the costs of a growing federal government. It is estimated that the tariff - which the southerners called the "Tariff of Abominations" - cost southern planters about $100 million annually. Tariff of 1832 (Jackson - Democrats). Further duties were placed on cotton and iron. South Carolinians, like many other Southerners, felt the tariffs were not truly national measures, but rather was a sectional tax that helped only some regions of the country while harming others. So, in November 1832, South Carolina’s Nullification Congress declared the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 "null, void, and no law, nor binding upon this state, its officers or citizens after Feb. 1, 1833. "Any state or federal officer who attempted to collect tariff duties would be legally penalized and would be denied appeal to a federal court. They threatened to seceed if the federal government tried to collect taxes. The state law was based upon the theory of nullification created by Vice-President John C. Calhoun Jackson responded with his Proclamation of Nullification which had been largely borrowed from Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts Theory of Nullification - As Conceived by Vice President, John C. Calhoun. The Union was a compact between sovereign states. Thus, the people of each state had the right - through special conventions - to nullify any federal law that exceeded the powers which the Constitution had given to Congress. If a popular convention declared a law unconstitutional, it would become null and void in that state. Congress could either: yield to the state and repeal the law, or propose a constitutional amendment expressly giving the federal government the power in question. If the amendment was ratified and added to the Constitution, the nullifying state could then either accept the decision, or exercise its right as a sovereign state by seceding from the Union. In short, nullification protected the rights of the minority - the South. The Proclamation of Nullification - As conceived by Senator Daniel Webster and formally presented as a response to South Carolina by President Jackson The Union was not a compact of sovereign states; the people, not the states, had created the Constitution. Thus, the government was made by and for the people and was answerable to the people. The Federal government had sovereign powers in areas where it had been delegated responsibility. The Supreme Court, not the states, had the final authority to determine the meaning of the Constitution. Jackson believed that the Union was perpetual and that under the Constitution, no state had the right of secession. While he was a strong supporter of the rights of states over their own affairs, Jackson would not tolerate a state veto on matters of national policy such as a tariff. Nulli-fication, then, was treasonous? He warned South Carolina that the tariff laws would be rigidly enforced, and that the army and navy would be used to quell any insurrection. A compromise was signed by Jackson on March 1, 1833 which called for gradual lowering of duties over next decade. Discussion Goal #6: To examine the early reform movements designed to deal with the political, economic, and social consequences of Manifest Destiny During the 1820s and 1830s, unprecedented numbers of men and women joined organizations that sought to improve or reform society. Reform efforts were especially strong in several areas: religion, alcohol consumption, education, criminal justice, social justice, labor, and slavery. Religious Reform. Like many other aspects of American life, religion was democratized during this period. Americans began to expect that ministers would preach doctrines that appealed to ordinary men and women - not just the elite and the intellectual. More and more, Americans discarded Calvinism and began to believe that anyone could get to heaven if they behaved appropriately while on earth. Revivalism became especially popular in the West and East. In the West, men and women were moved to a frenzy at many revivalist meetings where preachers emphasized that religion was a matter of the heart rather than the intellect, and that its practice should promote law, order, and morality on the frontier. In the East, "evangelical Protestantism" evolved, primarily at the hands of a lawyer-turned-Protestant minister - Charles Grandison Finney. Between 1830-31, Finney preached that sin was a voluntary act and those who willed themselves to sin could just as easily will themselves not to sin. Finney’s followers experienced an emotional religious conversion in which they were "born again." These people knew that their destinies were not preordained, but that they were in charge of their own destinies. Three other popular but very controversial organized religions also grew during their period: Unitarianism - those who believed Jesus Christ was less than fully divine and who argued that character building was far more important and long-lasting than a sudden emotional conversion. Mormonism - discussed in previous lecture. The Shakers - Founded by the English immigrant Ann Lee, the Shakers established several tight-knit agricultural-artisan communities. Lee insisted that her followers abstain from sexual intercourse, taught that when Jesus returned to earth he would take the form of a woman, and used a convulsive religious dance as part of their ceremony. Alcohol Consumption Reform - Temperance. Alcohol abuse was a growing American problem: per capita consumption of hard alcohol exceeded seven gallons per year by 1830 - nearly triple the current rate. Reformers saw alcohol excess as a male indulgence that had bitter social consequences for the men, their families, and society in general. The American Temperance Society was founded in 1826 and its members flooded the country with information denouncing the evils of alcohol. The laboring classes were their chief targets. By the 1840s, they could claim some success - the rate of consumption was less than that of 20 years earlier. C. Educational Reform. Public and private schools had existed in colonial America - but they were not mandatory, universally-attended, or systematized in terms of methods and curriculum. In general, schools reflected the prevailing attitudes of the community that sponsored it - and as such, was primarily secular in nature. By the 1830s, schooling of some sort was widely available to young people who lived in the more settled areas of America. However, education remained widely diverse in terms of its methods, teaching styles, and substance. Massachussetts led the nation in the reform effort. Horace Mann became the state’s first secretary of the newly-created board of education. Under his leadership, the financial support of schools were shifted from parents to the state, the school year was extended, standardized texts introduced, students were classified by age and level of educational attainment, attendance became mandatory, and uniform cultural values reflecting those of middle-class American society were taught. Criminal Justice Reform. At the same time the nation was growing, so were the instances of crime and poverty. Beginning in the 1820s, reformers tried to fight these "evils" by establishing correctional institutions. The reformers discarded colonial attitudes about such criminal behavior - that criminal behavior was a sinful defect in a person’s character - and instead believed that the failure of parental guidance, love, and discipline lay at the root of the problem. Thus, they turned to moral influences to improve human nature. Criminals were not merely to be incarcerated in new, highly regimented penitentiaries; they were to be reformed in an atmosphere that served as a substitute for parental discipline. Either solitary conditions that forbade prisoners to look or converse with one another or solitary confinement was believed to be the best method for purging offenders of their violent habits. The poor were taken from their demoralizing surroundings and put into highly regimented institutions that reformers believed would change them into virtuous, productive citizens. Social Justice Reform. Many intellectuals were convinced that the problems occurring during the early years of urbanization and industrialization were social in nature. If social living conditions were perfected, many believed, vice, misery, and poverty would disappear. To that end, many small, planned communities arose. New Harmony was founded in 1825 in Indiana by Robert Owen who had a vision for "a New Moral World" of happiness, enlightenment, and prosperity through education, science, technology, and communal living. Owen's utopian community would create a "superior social, intellectual and physical environment" as invisioned in the community's constitution, "The New Harmony Community of Equality" whose objective was to achieve happiness based on principles of equal rights and equality of duties. Cooperation, common property, economic benefit, freedom of speech and action, kindness and courtesy, order, preservation of health, acquisition of knowledge, and obedience to the country's laws were included as part of the constitution. New Harmony was dissolved in 1829 due to constant quarrels as parcels of land and property were returned to private use. Other experimental communities followed in the 1830s and 1840s - especially those of a group of religious philosophers called transcendentalists - intellectuals including Ralph Waldo Emerson who believed that Christianity could be revitalized by proclaiming that individual men and women had infinite spiritual capacities. The Oneida community in NY was the most controversial. Established in 1848, its members challenged conventional notions of religion, gender roles, marriage, sex, dress, and motherhood. Labor Reform. Some workers began to organize to protect their rights as factory workers and traditional ways of life. In 1834, some individual "unions" came together to form the National Trades' Union which gained steady strength until the depression of 1839 - few workers would organize during hard times. Labor leaders argued that workers were degraded by factory conditions - long hours, low pay, low status. Individuals were not rewarded by the value of their labor, but rather, the idle rich enslaved the industrious poor. Some leaders claimed workers had become "slaves to a monied aristocracy" or "wage slaves." They argued that Americans had fought the Revolution to destroy the aristocracy of birth. But they had not been able to stop the growth of an aristocracy of capital whereby the prices of products were not reflective of the labor required to make it and the profits went to the employers rather than the producers. Union leaders and members agitated for higher wages, abolition of imprisonment for debt, political action by workers, and effective unions as the means to guarantee social equality and to restore labor to its former honored position. Slavery Reform or Abolition (to be discussed several lectures from now. )Conclusions: Political and Economic Change, 1800 - 1840A national economic market developed concurrently with a national political system. Indeed, one was dependent upon the other. The transition from a local market economy to a national market economy was facilitated by three factors: The work force changed from manufacturing by hand to industrial manufacturing - a change fueled by new industrial technologies. The invention of the cotton gin allowed cotton production to dominate the economy and made it exportation a vital force for the entire American economy. A national transportation and communication network was created to link people and goods between regions. This economic transition affected American society in many ways: American farming experienced modernity; society made its first large shift from rural to urban; labor became more specialized; women's roles in society were redefined and family structure was reorganized; wealth became a sign of American status and a symbol of respect and recognition; traditional labor values and control systems disappeared; and such social changes encouraged the grown of reform efforts. The gradual urbanization of American society democratized and improved lifestyles for many and stratified and hindered lifestyles for others. The electoral process became more democratic and the direct vote became more widely used. The powers of the Presidency were greatly increased under Jackson. Americans acquired new expectations of politicians who were supposed to represent "the common man" and were required to carry out the will of the people. Political parties became crucial to the election process. Because not all members of the public had the same goals for their "public servants," the need arose for competing parties that would meet the needs of all the people and that would check and balance any political abuses. The basic pattern for successful national politics was established: two political parties, the need to appeal to voters in all sections of the country, and the need to appeal to a range of social classes. An evolutionary chapter in national American politics began. Very little was surprisingly new or revolutionary in national politics during the first 40 years of the nineteenth century. The political and economic conflicts at the national level all related to questions of appropriate federal and state authority. Regional differences continued and grew, especially with the addition of new regions to the United States. The vast majority of Americans were disenfranchised and unempowered. The gap between the rich and poor widened. A significant portion of the American population were afraid of social, economic, political, and/or spiritual changes, as well as persons who were different from, or whose behavior differed, from the status quo. Back to Unit III Index  Manhattan Project From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedianavigation search This article is about the atomic bomb project. For other uses, see Manhattan Project (disambiguation). Manhattan District The Trinity test of the Manhattan Project was the first detonation of a nuclear weapon. Active 1942–1946Disbanded 15 August 1947Country United States United Kingdom Canada Branch U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Garrison/HQ Oak Ridge, Tennessee, U. S. Anniversaries 13 August 1942Engagements Allied invasion of Italy Allied invasion of France Allied invasion of Germany Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Allied occupation of Japan Commanders Notable commanders James C. Marshall Kenneth Nichols Insignia Shoulder patch that was adopted in 1945 for the Manhattan District Manhattan Project emblem (unofficial)The Manhattan Project was a research and development undertaking during World War II that produced the first nuclear weapons. It was led by the United States with the support of the United Kingdom and Canada. From 1942 to 1946, the project was under the direction of Major General Leslie Groves of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. Nuclear physicist Robert Oppenheimer was the director of the Los Alamos Laboratory that designed the actual bombs. The Army component of the project was designated the Manhattan District; "Manhattan" gradually superseded the official codename, Development of Substitute Materials, for the entire project. Along the way, the project absorbed its earlier British counterpart, Tube Alloys. The Manhattan Project began modestly in 1939, but grew to employ more than 130,000 people and cost nearly US $2 billion (about $22 billion in 2016 [1] dollars). Over 90% of the cost was for building factories and to produce fissile material, with less than 10% for development and production of the weapons. Research and production took place at more than 30 sites across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Two types of atomic bombs were developed concurrently during the war: a relatively simple gun-type fission weapon and a more complex implosion-type nuclear weapon. The Thin Man gun-type design proved impractical to use with plutonium, and therefore a simpler gun-type called Little Boy was developed that used uranium-235, an isotope that makes up only 0.7 percent of natural uranium. Chemically identical to the most common isotope, uranium-238, and with almost the same mass, it proved difficult to separate the two. Three methods were employed for uranium enrichment: electromagnetic, gaseous and thermal. Most of this work was performed at the Clinton Engineer Works at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In parallel with the work on uranium was an effort to produce plutonium. After the feasibility of the world's first artificial nuclear reactor was demonstrated in Chicago at the Metallurgical Laboratory, it designed the X-10 Graphite Reactor at Oak Ridge and the production reactors in Hanford, Washington, in which uranium was irradiated and transmuted into plutonium. The plutonium was then chemically separated from the uranium. The Fat Man implosion-type weapon was developed in a concerted design and development effort by the Los Alamos Laboratory. The project was also charged with gathering intelligence on the German nuclear weapon project. Through Operation Alsos, Manhattan Project personnel served in Europe, sometimes behind enemy lines, where they gathered nuclear materials and documents, and rounded up German scientists. Despite the Manhattan Project's tight security, Soviet atomic spies successfully penetrated the program. The first nuclear device ever detonated was an implosion-type bomb at the Trinity test, conducted at New Mexico's Alamogordo Bombing and Gunnery Range on 16 July 1945. Little Boy and Fat Man bombs were used a month later in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively. In the immediate postwar years, the Manhattan Project conducted weapons testing at Bikini Atoll as part of Operation Crossroads, developed new weapons, promoted the development of the network of national laboratories, supported medical research into radiology and laid the foundations for the nuclear navy. It maintained control over American atomic weapons research and production until the formation of the United States Atomic Energy Commission in January 1947. Contents1 Origins2 Feasibility2.1 Proposals2.2 Bomb design concepts3 Organization3.1 Manhattan District3.2 Military Policy Committee3.3 Collaboration with the United Kingdom4 Project sites4.1 Oak Ridge4.2 Los Alamos4.3 Chicago4.4 Hanford4.5 Canadian sites4.5.1 British Columbia4.5.2 Ontario4.5.3 Northwest Territories4.6 Heavy water sites5 Uranium5.1 Ore5.2 Isotope separation5.2.1 Centrifuges5.2.2 Electromagnetic separation5.2.3 Gaseous diffusion5.2.4 Thermal diffusion5.3 Aggregate U-235 production6 Plutonium6.1 X-10 Graphite Reactor6.2 Hanford reactors6.3 Separation process6.4 Weapon design6.5 Trinity7 Personnel8 Secrecy8.1 Censorship8.2 Soviet spies9 Foreign intelligence10 Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki10.1 Preparations10.2 Bombings11 After the war12 Cost13 Legacy14 Notes15 References15.1 General, administrative, and diplomatic histories15.2 Technical histories15.3 Participant accounts16 External links Origins The discovery of nuclear fission by German chemists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann in 1938, and its theoretical explanation by Lise Meitner and Otto Frisch, made the development of an atomic bomb a theoretical possibility. There were fears that a German atomic bomb project would develop one first, especially among scientists who were refugees from Nazi Germany and other fascist countries. [2] In August 1939, Hungarian-born physicists Leó Szilárd and Eugene Wigner drafted the Einstein–Szilárd letter, which warned of the potential development of "extremely powerful bombs of a new type". It urged the United States to take steps to acquire stockpiles of uranium ore and accelerate the research of Enrico Fermi and others into nuclear chain reactions. They had it signed by Albert Einstein and delivered to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt called on Lyman Briggs of the National Bureau of Standards to head the Advisory Committee on Uranium to investigate the issues raised by the letter. Briggs held a meeting on 21 October 1939, which was attended by Szilárd, Wigner and Edward Teller. The committee reported back to Roosevelt in November that uranium "would provide a possible source of bombs with a destructiveness vastly greater than anything now known." [3]The Advisory Committee on Uranium became the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) Committee on Uranium when that organization was formed on 27 June 1940. [4] Briggs proposed spending $167,000 on research into uranium, particularly the uranium-235 isotope, and the recently discovered plutonium. [5] On 28 June 1941, Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8807, which created the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), [6] with Vannevar Bush as its director. The office was empowered to engage in large engineering projects in addition to research. [5] The NDRC Committee on Uranium became the S-1 Section of the OSRD; the word "uranium" was dropped for security reasons. [7]In Britain, Frisch and Rudolf Peierls at the University of Birmingham had made a breakthrough investigating the critical mass of uranium-235 in June 1939. [8] Their calculations indicated that it was within an order of magnitude of 10 kilograms (22 lb), which was small enough to be carried by a bomber of the day. [9] Their March 1940 Frisch–Peierls memorandum initiated the British atomic bomb project and its Maud Committee, [10] which unanimously recommended pursuing the development of an atomic bomb. [9] In July 1940, Britain had offered to give the United States access to its scientific research, [11] and the Tizard Mission 's John Cockcroft briefed American scientists on British developments. He discovered that the American project was smaller than the British, and not as far advanced. [12]As part of the scientific exchange, the Maud Committee's findings were conveyed to the United States. One of its members, the Australian physicist Mark Oliphant, flew to the United States in late August 1941 and discovered that data provided by the Maud Committee had not reached key American physicists. Oliphant then set out to find out why the committee's findings were apparently being ignored. He met with the Uranium Committee and visited Berkeley, California, where he spoke persuasively to Ernest O. Lawrence. Lawrence was sufficiently impressed to commence his own research into uranium. He in turn spoke to James B. Conant, Arthur H. Compton and George B. Pegram. Oliphant's mission was therefore a success; key American physicists were now aware of the potential power of an atomic bomb. [13] [14]On 9 October 1941, President Roosevelt approved the atomic program after he convened a meeting with Vannevar Bush and Vice President Henry A. Wallace. To control the program, he created a Top Policy Group consisting of himself—although he never attended a meeting—Wallace, Bush, Conant, Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, and the Chief of Staff of the Army, General George C. Marshall. Roosevelt chose the Army to run the project rather than the Navy, because the Army had more experience with management of large-scale construction projects. He also agreed to coordinate the effort with that of the British, and on 11 October he sent a message to Prime Minister Winston Churchill, suggesting that they correspond on atomic matters. [15]Feasibility Proposals A 1940 meeting at Berkeley: Ernest O. Lawrence, Arthur H. Compton, Vannevar Bush, James B. Conant, Karl T. Compton, and Alfred L. Loomis The S-1 Committee held its meeting on 18 December 1941 "pervaded by an atmosphere of enthusiasm and urgency" [16] in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor and the subsequent United States declaration of war upon Japan and then on Germany. [17] Work was proceeding on three different techniques for isotope separation to separate uranium-235 from the more abundant uranium-238. Lawrence and his team at the University of California, Berkeley, investigated electromagnetic separation, while Eger Murphree and Jesse Wakefield Beams 's team looked into gaseous diffusion at Columbia University, and Philip Abelson directed research into thermal diffusion at the Carnegie Institution of Washington and later the Naval Research Laboratory. [18] Murphree was also the head of an unsuccessful separation project using gas centrifuges. [19]Meanwhile, there were two lines of research into nuclear reactor technology, with Harold Urey continuing research into heavy water at Columbia, while Arthur Compton brought the scientists working under his supervision from Columbia, California and Princeton University to join his team at the University of Chicago, where he organized the Metallurgical Laboratory in early 1942 to study plutonium and reactors using graphite as a neutron moderator. [20] Briggs, Compton, Lawrence, Murphree, and Urey met on 23 May 1942 to finalize the S-1 Committee recommendations, which called for all five technologies to be pursued. This was approved by Bush, Conant, and Brigadier General Wilhelm D. Styer, the chief of staff of Major General Brehon B. Somervell 's Services of Supply, who had been designated the Army's representative on nuclear matters. [18] Bush and Conant then took the recommendation to the Top Policy Group with a budget proposal for $54 million for construction by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, $31 million for research and development by OSRD and $5 million for contingencies in fiscal year 1943. The Top Policy Group in turn sent it to the President on 17 June 1942 and he approved it by writing "OK FDR" on the document. [18]Bomb design concepts Different fission bomb assembly methods explored during the July 1942 conference Compton asked theoretical physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer of the University of California, Berkeley, to take over research into fast neutron calculations —the key to calculations of critical mass and weapon detonation—from Gregory Breit, who had quit on 18 May 1942 because of concerns over lax operational security. [21]John H. Manley, a physicist at the Metallurgical Laboratory, was assigned to assist Oppenheimer by contacting and coordinating experimental physics groups scattered across the country. [22] Oppenheimer and Robert Serber of the University of Illinois examined the problems of neutron diffusion—how neutrons moved in a nuclear chain reaction—and hydrodynamics —how the explosion produced by a chain reaction might behave. To review this work and the general theory of fission reactions, Oppenheimer and Fermi convened meetings at the University of Chicago in June and at the University of California, Berkeley, in July 1942 with theoretical physicists Hans Bethe, John Van Vleck, Edward Teller, Emil Konopinski, Robert Serber, Stan Frankel, and Eldred C. Nelson, the latter three former students of Oppenheimer, and experimental physicists Emilio Segrè, Felix Bloch, Franco Rasetti, John Henry Manley, and Edwin Mc Millan. They tentatively confirmed that a fission bomb was theoretically possible. [23]There were still many unknown factors. The properties of pure uranium-235 were relatively unknown, as were those of plutonium, an element that had only been discovered in February 1941 by Glenn Seaborg and his team. The scientists at the Berkeley conference envisioned creating plutonium in nuclear reactors where uranium-238 atoms absorbed neutrons that had been emitted from fissioning uranium-235 atoms. At this point no reactor had been built, and only tiny quantities of plutonium were available from cyclotrons. [24] Even by December 1943, only two milligrams had been produced. [25] There were many ways of arranging the fissile material into a critical mass. The simplest was shooting a "cylindrical plug" into a sphere of "active material" with a "tamper"—dense material that would focus neutrons inward and keep the reacting mass together to increase its efficiency. [26] They also explored designs involving spheroids, a primitive form of " implosion " suggested by Richard C. Tolman, and the possibility of autocatalytic methods, which would increase the efficiency of the bomb as it exploded. [27]Considering the idea of the fission bomb theoretically settled—at least until more experimental data was available—the Berkeley conference then turned in a different direction. Edward Teller pushed for discussion of a more powerful bomb: the "super", now usually referred to as a " hydrogen bomb ", which would use the explosive force of a detonating fission bomb to ignite a nuclear fusion reaction in deuterium and tritium. [28] Teller proposed scheme after scheme, but Bethe refused each one. The fusion idea was put aside to concentrate on producing fission bombs. [29] Teller also raised the speculative possibility that an atomic bomb might "ignite" the atmosphere because of a hypothetical fusion reaction of nitrogen nuclei. [note 1] Bethe calculated that it could not happen, [31] and a report co-authored by Teller showed that "no self-propagating chain of nuclear reactions is likely to be started." [32] In Serber's account, Oppenheimer mentioned it to Arthur Compton, who "didn't have enough sense to shut up about it. It somehow got into a document that went to Washington" and was "never laid to rest". [note 2]Organization Manhattan District The Chief of Engineers, Major General Eugene Reybold, selected Colonel James C. Marshall to head the Army's part of the project in June 1942. Marshall created a liaison office in Washington, D. C., but established his temporary headquarters on the 18th floor of 270 Broadway in New York, where he could draw on administrative support from the Corps of Engineers' North Atlantic Division. It was close to the Manhattan office of Stone & Webster, the principal project contractor, and to Columbia University. He had permission to draw on his former command, the Syracuse District, for staff, and he started with Lieutenant Colonel Kenneth Nichols, who became his deputy. [34] [35]Manhattan Project Organization Chart, 1 May 1946Because most of his task involved construction, Marshall worked in cooperation with the head of the Corps of Engineers Construction Division, Major General Thomas M. Robbins, and his deputy, Colonel Leslie Groves. Reybold, Somervell, and Styer decided to call the project "Development of Substitute Materials", but Groves felt that this would draw attention. Since engineer districts normally carried the name of the city where they were located, Marshall and Groves agreed to name the Army's component of the project the Manhattan District. This became official on 13 August, when Reybold issued the order creating the new district. Informally, it was known as the Manhattan Engineer District, or MED. Unlike other districts, it had no geographic boundaries, and Marshall had the authority of a division engineer. Development of Substitute Materials remained as the official codename of the project as a whole, but was supplanted over time by "Manhattan". [35]Marshall later conceded that, "I had never heard of atomic fission but I did know that you could not build much of a plant, much less four of them for $90 million." [36] A single TNT plant that Nichols had recently built in Pennsylvania had cost $128 million. [37] Nor were they impressed with estimates to the nearest order of magnitude, which Groves compared with telling a caterer to prepare for between ten and a thousand guests. [38] A survey team from Stone & Webster had already scouted a site for the production plants. The War Production Board recommended sites around Knoxville, Tennessee, an isolated area where the Tennessee Valley Authority could supply ample electric power and the rivers could provide cooling water for the reactors. After examining several sites, the survey team selected one near Elza, Tennessee. Conant advised that it be acquired at once and Styer agreed but Marshall temporized, awaiting the results of Conant's reactor experiments before taking action. [39] Of the prospective processes, only Lawrence's electromagnetic separation appeared sufficiently advanced for construction to commence. [40]Marshall and Nichols began assembling the resources they would need. The first step was to obtain a high priority rating for the project. The top ratings were AA-1 through AA-4 in descending order, although there was also a special AAA rating reserved for emergencies. Ratings AA-1 and AA-2 were for essential weapons and equipment, so Colonel Lucius D. Clay, the deputy chief of staff at Services and Supply for requirements and resources, felt that the highest rating he could assign was AA-3, although he was willing to provide a AAA rating on request for critical materials if the need arose. [41] Nichols and Marshall were disappointed; AA-3 was the same priority as Nichols' TNT plant in Pennsylvania. [42]Military Policy Committee Oppenheimer and Groves at the remains of the Trinity test in September 1945, two months after the test blast and just after the end of World War II. The white overshoes prevented fallout from sticking to the soles of their shoes. [43]Bush became dissatisfied with Colonel Marshall's failure to get the project moving forward expeditiously, specifically the failure to acquire the Tennessee site, the low priority allocated to the project by the Army and the location of his headquarters in New York City. [44] Bush felt that more aggressive leadership was required, and spoke to Harvey Bundy and Generals Marshall, Somervell, and Styer about his concerns. He wanted the project placed under a senior policy committee, with a prestigious officer, preferably Styer, as overall director. [42]Somervell and Styer selected Groves for the post, informing him on 17 September of this decision, and that General Marshall ordered that he be promoted to brigadier general, [45] as it was felt that the title "general" would hold more sway with the academic scientists working on the Manhattan Project. [46] Groves' orders placed him directly under Somervell rather than Reybold, with Colonel Marshall now answerable to Groves. [47] Groves established his headquarters in Washington, D. C., on the fifth floor of the New War Department Building, where Colonel Marshall had his liaison office. [48] He assumed command of the Manhattan Project on 23 September. Later that day, he attended a meeting called by Stimson, which established a Military Policy Committee, responsible to the Top Policy Group, consisting of Bush (with Conant as an alternate), Styer and Rear Admiral William R. Purnell. [45] Tolman and Conant were later appointed as Groves' scientific advisers. [49]On 19 September, Groves went to Donald Nelson, the chairman of the War Production Board, and asked for broad authority to issue a AAA rating whenever it was required. Nelson initially balked but quickly caved in when Groves threatened to go to the President. [50] Groves promised not to use the AAA rating unless it was necessary. It soon transpired that for the routine requirements of the project the AAA rating was too high but the AA-3 rating was too low. After a long campaign, Groves finally received AA-1 authority on 1 July 1944. [51] According to Groves, "In Washington you became aware of the importance of top priority. Most everything proposed in the Roosevelt administration would have top priority. That would last for about a week or two and then something else would get top priority". [52]One of Groves' early problems was to find a director for Project Y, the group that would design and build the bomb. The obvious choice was one of the three laboratory heads, Urey, Lawrence, or Compton, but they could not be spared. Compton recommended Oppenheimer, who was already intimately familiar with the bomb design concepts. However, Oppenheimer had little administrative experience, and, unlike Urey, Lawrence, and Compton, had not won a Nobel Prize, which many scientists felt that the head of such an important laboratory should have. There were also concerns about Oppenheimer's security status, as many of his associates were Communists, including his brother, Frank Oppenheimer; his wife, Kitty; and his girlfriend, Jean Tatlock. A long conversation on a train in October 1942 convinced Groves and Nichols that Oppenheimer thoroughly understood the issues involved in setting up a laboratory in a remote area and should be appointed as its director. Groves personally waived the security requirements and issued Oppenheimer a clearance on 20 July 1943. [53] [54]Collaboration with the United Kingdom Main article: British contribution to the Manhattan Project The British and Americans exchanged nuclear information but did not initially combine their efforts. Britain rebuffed attempts by Bush and Conant in 1941 to strengthen cooperation with its own project, codenamed Tube Alloys, because it was reluctant to share its technological lead and help the United States develop its own atomic bomb. [55] An American scientist who brought a personal letter from Roosevelt to Churchill offering to pay for all research and development in an Anglo-American project was poorly treated, and Churchill did not reply to the letter. The United States as a result decided as early as April 1942 that if its offer was rejected, they should proceed alone. [56] The British, who had made significant contributions early in the war, did not have the resources to carry through such a research program while fighting for their survival. As a result, Tube Alloys soon fell behind its American counterpart. [57] and on 30 July 1942, Sir John Anderson, the minister responsible for Tube Alloys, advised Churchill that: "We must face the fact that ... [our] pioneering work ... is a dwindling asset and that, unless we capitalise it quickly, we shall be outstripped. We now have a real contribution to make to a 'merger.' Soon we shall have little or none." [58] That month Churchill and Roosevelt made an informal, unwritten agreement for atomic collaboration. [59]Groves confers with James Chadwick, the head of the British Mission The opportunity for an equal partnership no longer existed, however, as shown in August 1942 when the British unsuccessfully demanded substantial control over the project while paying none of the costs. By 1943 the roles of the two countries had reversed from late 1941; [56] in January Conant notified the British that they would no longer receive atomic information except in certain areas. While the British were shocked by the abrogation of the Churchill-Roosevelt agreement, head of the Canadian National Research Council C. J. Mackenzie was less surprised, writing "I can't help feeling that the United Kingdom group [over] emphasizes the importance of their contribution as compared with the Americans." [59] As Conant and Bush told the British, the order came "from the top". [60]The British bargaining position had worsened; the American scientists had decided that the United States no longer needed outside help, and they wanted to prevent Britain exploiting post-war commercial applications of atomic energy. The committee supported, and Roosevelt agreed to, restricting the flow of information to what Britain could use during the war—especially not bomb design—even if doing so slowed down the American project. By early 1943 the British stopped sending research and scientists to America, and as a result the Americans stopped all information sharing. The British considered ending the supply of Canadian uranium and heavy water to force the Americans to again share, but Canada needed American supplies to produce them. [61] They investigated the possibility of an independent nuclear program, but determined that it could not be ready in time to affect the outcome of the war in Europe. [62]By March 1943 Conant decided that British help would benefit some areas of the project. James Chadwick and one or two other British scientists were important enough that the bomb design team at Los Alamos needed them, despite the risk of revealing weapon design secrets. [63] In August 1943 Churchill and Roosevelt negotiated the Quebec Agreement, which resulted in a resumption of cooperation [64] between scientists working on the same problem. Britain, however, agreed to restrictions on data on the building of large-scale production plants necessary for the bomb. [65] The subsequent Hyde Park Agreement in September 1944 extended this cooperation to the postwar period. [66] The Quebec Agreement established the Combined Policy Committee to coordinate the efforts of the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Stimson, Bush and Conant served as the American members of the Combined Policy Committee, Field Marshal Sir John Dill and Colonel J. J. Llewellin were the British members, and C. D. Howe was the Canadian member. [67] Llewellin returned to the United Kingdom at the end of 1943 and was replaced on the committee by Sir Ronald Ian Campbell, who in turn was replaced by the British Ambassador to the United States, Lord Halifax, in early 1945. Sir John Dill died in Washington, D. C., in November 1944 and was replaced both as Chief of the British Joint Staff Mission and as a member of the Combined Policy Committee by Field Marshal Sir Henry Maitland Wilson. [68]When cooperation resumed after the Quebec agreement, the Americans' progress and expenditures amazed the British. The United States had already spent more than $1 billion ($11,400,000,000 today [1] ), while in 1943, the United Kingdom had spent about £0.5 million. Chadwick thus pressed for British involvement in the Manhattan Project to the fullest extent and abandon any hopes of a British project during the war. [62] With Churchill's backing, he attempted to ensure that every request from Groves for assistance was honored. [69] The British Mission that arrived in the United States in December 1943 included Niels Bohr, Otto Frisch, Klaus Fuchs, Rudolf Peierls, and Ernest Titterton. [70] More scientists arrived in early 1944. While those assigned to gaseous diffusion left by the fall of 1944, the 35 working with Lawrence at Berkeley were assigned to existing laboratory groups and stayed until the end of the war. The 19 sent to Los Alamos also joined existing groups, primarily related to implosion and bomb assembly, but not the plutonium-related ones. [62] Part of the Quebec Agreement specified that nuclear weapons would not be used against another country without mutual consent. In June 1945, Wilson agreed that the use of nuclear weapons against Japan would be recorded as a decision of the Combined Policy Committee. [71]The Combined Policy Committee created the Combined Development Trust in June 1944, with Groves as its chairman, to procure uranium and thorium ores on international markets. The Belgian Congo and Canada held much of the world's uranium outside Eastern Europe, and the Belgian government in exile was in London. Britain agreed to give the United States most of the Belgian ore, as it could not use most of the supply without restricted American research. [72] In 1944, the Trust purchased 3,440,000 pounds (1,560,000 kg) of uranium oxide ore from companies operating mines in the Belgian Congo. In order to avoid briefing US Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau Jr. on the project, a special account not subject to the usual auditing and controls was used to hold Trust monies. Between 1944 and the time he resigned from the Trust in 1947, Groves deposited a total of $37.5 million into the Trust's account. [73]Groves appreciated the early British atomic research and the British scientists' contributions to the Manhattan Project, but stated that the United States would have succeeded without them. [62] He also said that Churchill was "the best friend the atomic bomb project had [as] he kept Roosevelt's interest up ... He just stirred him up all the time by telling him how important he thought the project was." [52]The British wartime participation was crucial to the success of the United Kingdom's independent nuclear weapons program after the war when the Mc Mahon Act of 1946 temporarily ended American nuclear cooperation. [62]Project sites A selection of US and Canadian sites important to the Manhattan Project. Click on the location for more information. Oak Ridge Main article: Clinton Engineer Works Shift change at the Y-12 uranium enrichment facility at the Clinton Engineer Works in Oak Ridge, Tennessee on 11 August 1945. By May 1945, 82,000 people were employed at the Clinton Engineer Works. [74] Photograph by the Manhattan District photographer Ed Westcott. The day after he took over the project, Groves took a train to Tennessee with Colonel Marshall to inspect the proposed site there, and Groves was impressed. [75] [76] On 29 September 1942, United States Under Secretary of War Robert P. Patterson authorized the Corps of Engineers to acquire 56,000 acres (23,000 ha) of land by eminent domain at a cost of $3.5 million. An additional 3,000 acres (1,200 ha) was subsequently acquired. About 1,000 families were affected by the condemnation order, which came into effect on 7 October. [77] Protests, legal appeals, and a 1943 Congressional inquiry were to no avail. [78] By mid-November U. S. Marshals were tacking notices to vacate on farmhouse doors, and construction contractors were moving in. [79] Some families were given two weeks' notice to vacate farms that had been their homes for generations; [80] others had settled there after being evicted to make way for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park in the 1920s or the Norris Dam in the 1930s. [78] The ultimate cost of land acquisition in the area, which was not completed until March 1945, was only about $2.6 million, which worked out to around $47 an acre. [81] When presented with Public Proclamation Number Two, which declared Oak Ridge a total exclusion area that no one could enter without military permission, the Governor of Tennessee, Prentice Cooper, angrily tore it up. [82]Initially known as the Kingston Demolition Range, the site was officially renamed the Clinton Engineer Works (CEW) in early 1943. [83] While Stone & Webster concentrated on the production facilities, the architectural and engineering firm Skidmore, Owings & Merrill designed and built a residential community for 13,000. The community was located on the slopes of Black Oak Ridge, from which the new town of Oak Ridge got its name. [84] The Army presence at Oak Ridge increased in August 1943 when Nichols replaced Marshall as head of the Manhattan Engineer District. One of his first tasks was to move the district headquarters to Oak Ridge although the name of the district did not change. [85] In September 1943 the administration of community facilities was outsourced to Turner Construction Company through a subsidiary, the Roane-Anderson Company (for Roane and Anderson Counties, in which Oak Ridge was located). [86] Chemical engineers, including William J. Wilcox Jr. and Warren Fuchs, were part of "frantic efforts" to make 10% to 12% enriched uranium 235, known as the code name "tuballoy tetroxide", with tight security and fast approvals for supplies and materials. [87] The population of Oak Ridge soon expanded well beyond the initial plans, and peaked at 75,000 in May 1945, by which time 82,000 people were employed at the Clinton Engineer Works, [74] and 10,000 by Roane-Anderson. [86]Fine-arts photographer, Josephine Herrick, and her colleague, Mary Steers, helped document the work at Oak Ridge. [88]Los Alamos Main article: Project YWikisource has original text related to this article: Los Alamos Ranch School Seizure Letter The idea of locating Project Y at Oak Ridge was considered, but in the end it was decided that it should be in a remote location. On Oppenheimer's recommendation, the search for a suitable site was narrowed to the vicinity of Albuquerque, New Mexico, where Oppenheimer owned a ranch. In October 1942, Major John H. Dudley of the Manhattan Project was sent to survey the area, and he recommended a site near Jemez Springs, New Mexico. [89] On 16 November, Oppenheimer, Groves, Dudley and others toured the site. Oppenheimer feared that the high cliffs surrounding the site would make his people feel claustrophobic, while the engineers were concerned with the possibility of flooding. The party then moved on to the vicinity of the Los Alamos Ranch School. Oppenheimer was impressed and expressed a strong preference for the site, citing its natural beauty and views of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, which, it was hoped, would inspire those who would work on the project. [90] [91] The engineers were concerned about the poor access road, and whether the water supply would be adequate, but otherwise felt that it was ideal. [92]Physicists at a Manhattan District-sponsored colloquium at the Los Alamos Laboratory on the Super in April 1946. In the front row are Norris Bradbury, John Manley, Enrico Fermi and J. M. B. Kellogg. Robert Oppenheimer, in dark coat, is behind Manley; to Oppenheimer's left is Richard Feynman. The Army officer on the left is Colonel Oliver Haywood. Patterson approved the acquisition of the site on 25 November 1942, authorizing $440,000 for the purchase of the site of 54,000 acres (22,000 ha), all but 8,900 acres (3,600 ha) of which were already owned by the Federal Government. [93] Secretary of Agriculture Claude R. Wickard granted use of some 45,100 acres (18,300 ha) of United States Forest Service land to the War Department "for so long as the military necessity continues". [94] The need for land, for a new road, and later for a right of way for a 25-mile (40 km) power line, eventually brought wartime land purchases to 45,737 acres (18,509.1 ha), but only $414,971 was spent. [93] Construction was contracted to the M. M. Sundt Company of Tucson, Arizona, with Willard C. Kruger and Associates of Santa Fe, New Mexico, as architect and engineer. Work commenced in December 1942. Groves initially allocated $300,000 for construction, three times Oppenheimer's estimate, with a planned completion date of 15 March 1943. It soon became clear that the scope of Project Y was greater than expected, and by the time Sundt finished on 30 November 1943, over $7 million had been spent. [95]Map of Los Alamos site, New Mexico, 1943–45Because it was secret, Los Alamos was referred to as "Site Y" or "the Hill". [96] Birth certificates of babies born in Los Alamos during the war listed their place of birth as PO Box 1663 in Santa Fe. [97] Initially Los Alamos was to have been a military laboratory with Oppenheimer and other researchers commissioned into the Army. Oppenheimer went so far as to order himself a lieutenant colonel's uniform, but two key physicists, Robert Bacher and Isidor Rabi, balked at the idea. Conant, Groves and Oppenheimer then devised a compromise whereby the laboratory was operated by the University of California under contract to the War Department. [98]Chicago Main article: Metallurgical Laboratory An Army-OSRD council on 25 June 1942 decided to build a pilot plant for plutonium production in Red Gate Woods southwest of Chicago. In July, Nichols arranged for a lease of 1,025 acres (415 ha) from the Cook County Forest Preserve District, and Captain James F. Grafton was appointed Chicago area engineer. It soon became apparent that the scale of operations was too great for the area, and it was decided to build the plant at Oak Ridge, and keep a research and testing facility in Chicago. [99] [100]Delays in establishing the plant in Red Gate Woods led Compton to authorize the Metallurgical Laboratory to construct the first nuclear reactor beneath the bleachers of Stagg Field at the University of Chicago. The reactor required an enormous amount of graphite blocks and uranium pellets. At the time, there was a limited source of pure uranium. Frank Spedding of Iowa State University were able to produce only two short tons of pure uranium. Additional three short tons of uranium metal was supplied by Westinghouse Lamp Plant which was produced in a rush with makeshift process. A large square balloon was constructed by Goodyear Tire to encase the reactor. [101] [102] On 2 December 1942, a team led by Enrico Fermi initiated the first artificial [note 3] self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction in an experimental reactor known as Chicago Pile-1. [104] The point at which a reaction becomes self-sustaining became known as "going critical". Compton reported the success to Conant in Washington, D. C., by a coded phone call, saying, "The Italian navigator [Fermi] has just landed in the new world." [105] [note 4]In January 1943, Grafton's successor, Major Arthur V. Peterson, ordered Chicago Pile-1 dismantled and reassembled at Red Gate Woods, as he regarded the operation of a reactor as too hazardous for a densely populated area. [106] At the Argonne site, Chicago Pile-3, the first heavy water reactor, went critical on 15 May 1944. [107] [108] After the war, the operations that remained at Red Gate moved to the new site of the Argonne National Laboratory about 6 miles (9.7 km) away. [100]Hanford Main article: Hanford Site By December 1942 there were concerns that even Oak Ridge was too close to a major population center (Knoxville) in the unlikely event of a major nuclear accident. Groves recruited Du Pont in November 1942 to be the prime contractor for the construction of the plutonium production complex. Du Pont was offered a standard cost plus fixed-fee contract, but the President of the company, Walter S. Carpenter, Jr., wanted no profit of any kind, and asked for the proposed contract to be amended to explicitly exclude the company from acquiring any patent rights. This was accepted, but for legal reasons a nominal fee of one dollar was agreed upon. After the war, Du Pont asked to be released from the contract early, and had to return 33 cents. [109]Hanford workers collect their paychecks at the Western Union office. Du Pont recommended that the site be located far from the existing uranium production facility at Oak Ridge. [110] In December 1942, Groves dispatched Colonel Franklin Matthias and Du Pont engineers to scout potential sites. Matthias reported that Hanford Site near Richland, Washington, was "ideal in virtually all respects". It was isolated and near the Columbia River, which could supply sufficient water to cool the reactors that would produce the plutonium. Groves visited the site in January and established the Hanford Engineer Works (HEW), codenamed "Site W". [111]Under Secretary Patterson gave his approval on 9 February, allocating $5 million for the acquisition of 40,000 acres (16,000 ha) of land in the area. The federal government relocated some 1,500 residents of White Bluffs and Hanford, and nearby settlements, as well as the Wanapum and other tribes using the area. A dispute arose with farmers over compensation for crops, which had already been planted before the land was acquired. Where schedules allowed, the Army allowed the crops to be harvested, but this was not always possible. [111] The land acquisition process dragged on and was not completed before the end of the Manhattan Project in December 1946. [112]The dispute did not delay work. Although progress on the reactor design at Metallurgical Laboratory and Du Pont was not sufficiently advanced to accurately predict the scope of the project, a start was made in April 1943 on facilities for an estimated 25,000 workers, half of whom were expected to live on-site. By July 1944, some 1,200 buildings had been erected and nearly 51,000 people were living in the construction camp. As area engineer, Matthias exercised overall control of the site. [113] At its peak, the construction camp was the third most populous town in Washington state. [114] Hanford operated a fleet of over 900 buses, more than the city of Chicago. [115] Like Los Alamos and Oak Ridge, Richland was a gated community with restricted access, but it looked more like a typical wartime American boomtown: the military profile was lower, and physical security elements like high fences, towers, and guard dogs were less evident. [116]Canadian sites Main article: Montreal Laboratory British Columbia Cominco had produced electrolytic hydrogen at Trail, British Columbia, since 1930. Urey suggested in 1941 that it could produce heavy water. To the existing $10 million plant consisting of 3,215 cells consuming 75 MW of hydroelectric power, secondary electrolysis cells were added to increase the deuterium concentration in the water from 2.3% to 99.8%. For this process, Hugh Taylor of Princeton developed a platinum-on-carbon catalyst for the first three stages while Urey developed a nickel- chromia one for the fourth stage tower. The final cost was $2.8 million. The Canadian Government did not officially learn of the project until August 1942. Trail's heavy water production started in January 1944 and continued until 1956. Heavy water from Trail was used for Chicago Pile 3, the first reactor using heavy water and natural uranium, which went critical on 15 May 1944. [117]Ontario The Chalk River, Ontario, site was established to rehouse the Allied effort at the Montreal Laboratory away from an urban area. A new community was built at Deep River, Ontario, to provide residences and facilities for the team members. The site was chosen for its proximity to the industrial manufacturing area of Ontario and Quebec, and proximity to a rail head adjacent to a large military base, Camp Petawawa. Located on the Ottawa River, it had access to abundant water. The first director of the new laboratory was Hans von Halban. He was replaced by John Cockcroft in May 1944, who in turn was succeeded by Bennett Lewis in September 1946. A pilot reactor known as ZEEP (zero-energy experimental pile) became the first Canadian reactor, and the first to be completed outside the United States, when it went critical in September 1945, ZEEP remained in use by researchers until 1970. [118] A larger 10 MW NRX reactor, which was designed during the war, was completed and went critical in July 1947. [117]Northwest Territories The Eldorado Mine at Port Radium was a source of uranium ore. [119]Heavy water sites Main article: P-9 Project Although Du Pont's preferred designs for the nuclear reactors were helium cooled and used graphite as a moderator, Du Pont still expressed an interest in using heavy water as a backup, in case the graphite reactor design proved infeasible for some reason. For this purpose, it was estimated that 3 long tons (3.0 t) of heavy water would be required per month. The P-9 Project was the government's code name for the heavy water production program. As the plant at Trail, which was then under construction, could produce 0.5 long tons (0.51 t) per month, additional capacity was required. Groves therefore authorized Du Pont to establish heavy water facilities at the Morgantown Ordnance Works, near Morgantown, West Virginia; at the Wabash River Ordnance Works, near Dana and Newport, Indiana; and at the Alabama Ordnance Works, near Childersburg and Sylacauga, Alabama. Although known as Ordnance Works and paid for under Ordnance Department contracts, they were built and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers. The American plants used a process different from Trail's; heavy water was extracted by distillation, taking advantage of the slightly higher boiling point of heavy water. [120] [121]Uranium Ore The key raw material for the project was uranium, which was used as fuel for the reactors, as feed that was transformed into plutonium, and, in its enriched form, in the atomic bomb itself. There were four known major deposits of uranium in 1940: in Colorado, in northern Canada, in Joachimsthal in Czechoslovakia, and in the Belgian Congo. [122] All but Joachimstal were in allied hands. A November 1942 survey determined that sufficient quantities of uranium were available to satisfy the project's requirements. [123] Nichols arranged with the State Department for export controls to be placed on uranium oxide and negotiated for the purchase of 1,200 long tons (1,200 t) of uranium ore from the Belgian Congo that was being stored in a warehouse on Staten Island and the remaining stocks of mined ore stored in the Congo. He negotiated with Eldorado Gold Mines for the purchase of ore from its refinery in Port Hope, Ontario, and its shipment in 100-ton lots. The Canadian government subsequently bought up the company's stock until it acquired a controlling interest. [124]While these purchases assured a sufficient supply to meet wartime needs, the American and British leaders concluded that it was in their countries' interest to gain control of as much of the world's uranium deposits as possible. The richest source of ore was the Shinkolobwe mine in the Belgian Congo, but it was flooded and closed. Nichols unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate its reopening and the sale of the entire future output to the United States with Edgar Sengier, the director of the company that owned the mine, Union Minière du Haut Katanga. [125] The matter was then taken up by the Combined Policy Committee. As 30 percent of Union Minière's stock was controlled by British interests, the British took the lead in negotiations. Sir John Anderson and Ambassador John Winant hammered out a deal with Sengier and the Belgian government in May 1944 for the mine to be reopened and 1,720 long tons (1,750 t) of ore to be purchased at $1.45 a pound. [126] To avoid dependence on the British and Canadians for ore, Groves also arranged for the purchase of US Vanadium Corporation's stockpile in Uravan, Colorado. Uranium mining in Colorado yielded about 800 long tons (810 t) of ore. [127]Mallinckrodt Incorporated in St. Louis, Missouri, took the raw ore and dissolved it in nitric acid to produce uranyl nitrate. Ether was then added in a liquid–liquid extraction process to separate the impurities from the uranyl nitrate. This was then heated to form uranium trioxide, which was reduced to highly pure uranium dioxide. [128] By July 1942, Mallinckrodt was producing a ton of highly pure oxide a day, but turning this into uranium metal initially proved more difficult for contractors Westinghouse and Metal Hydrides. [129] Production was too slow and quality was unacceptably low. A special branch of the Metallurgical Laboratory was established at Iowa State College in Ames, Iowa, under Frank Spedding to investigate alternatives. This became known as the Ames Project, and its Ames process became available in 1943. [130]Uranium refining at Ames A "bomb" ( pressure vessel) containing uranium halide and sacrificial metal, probably magnesium, being lowered into a furnace After the reaction, the interior of a bomb coated with remnant slag A uranium metal "biscuit" from the reduction reaction Isotope separation Natural uranium consists of 99.3% uranium-238 and 0.7% uranium-235, but only the latter is fissile. The chemically identical uranium-235 has to be physically separated from the more plentiful isotope. Various methods were considered for uranium enrichment, most of which was carried out at Oak Ridge. [131]The most obvious technology, the centrifuge, failed, but electromagnetic separation, gaseous diffusion, and thermal diffusion technologies were all successful and contributed to the project. In February 1943, Groves came up with the idea of using the output of some plants as the input for others. [132]Oak Ridge hosted several uranium separation technologies. The Y-12 electromagnetic separation plant is in the upper right. The K-25 and K-27 gaseous diffusion plants are in the lower left, near the S-50 thermal diffusion plant. (The X-10 was for plutonium production. )Centrifuges The centrifuge process was regarded as the only promising separation method in April 1942. [133] Jesse Beams had developed such a process at the University of Virginia during the 1930s, but had encountered technical difficulties. The process required high rotational speeds, but at certain speeds harmonic vibrations developed that threatened to tear the machinery apart. It was therefore necessary to accelerate quickly through these speeds. In 1941 he began working with uranium hexafluoride, the only known gaseous compound of uranium, and was able to separate uranium-235. At Columbia, Urey had Karl Cohen investigate the process, and he produced a body of mathematical theory making it possible to design a centrifugal separation unit, which Westinghouse undertook to construct. [134]Scaling this up to a production plant presented a formidable technical challenge. Urey and Cohen estimated that producing a kilogram (2.2 lb) of uranium-235 per day would require up to 50,000 centrifuges with 1-meter (3 ft 3 in) rotors, or 10,000 centrifuges with 4-meter (13 ft) rotors, assuming that 4-meter rotors could be built. The prospect of keeping so many rotors operating continuously at high speed appeared daunting, [135] and when Beams ran his experimental apparatus, he obtained only 60% of the predicted yield, indicating that more centrifuges would be required. Beams, Urey and Cohen then began work on a series of improvements which promised to increase the efficiency of the process. However, frequent failures of motors, shafts and bearings at high speeds delayed work on the pilot plant. [136] In November 1942 the centrifuge process was abandoned by the Military Policy Committee following a recommendation by Conant, Nichols and August C. Klein of Stone & Webster. [137]Electromagnetic separation Main article: Y-12 Project Electromagnetic isotope separation was developed by Lawrence at the University of California Radiation Laboratory. This method employed devices known as calutrons, a hybrid of the standard laboratory mass spectrometer and cyclotron. The name was derived from the words California, university and cyclotron. [138] In the electromagnetic process, a magnetic field deflected charged particles according to mass. [139] The process was neither scientifically elegant nor industrially efficient. [140] Compared with a gaseous diffusion plant or a nuclear reactor, an electromagnetic separation plant would consume more scarce materials, require more manpower to operate, and cost more to build. Nonetheless, the process was approved because it was based on proven technology and therefore represented less risk. Moreover, it could be built in stages, and rapidly reach industrial capacity. [138]Giant Alpha I racetrack at Y-12Marshall and Nichols discovered that the electromagnetic isotope separation process would require 5,000 short tons (4,500 tonnes) of copper, which was in desperately short supply. However, silver could be substituted, in an 11:10 ratio. On 3 August 1942, Nichols met with Under Secretary of the Treasury Daniel W. Bell and asked for the transfer of 6,000 tons of silver bullion from the West Point Bullion Depository. "Young man," Bell told him, "you may think of silver in tons but the Treasury will always think of silver in troy ounces !" [141] Eventually, 14,700 short tons (13,300 tonnes; 430,000,000 troy ounces) were used. [142]The 1,000-troy-ounce (31 kg) silver bars were cast into cylindrical billets and taken to Phelps Dodge in Bayway, New Jersey, where they were extruded into strips 0.625 inches (15.9 mm) thick, 3 inches (76 mm) wide and 40 feet (12 m) long. These were wound onto magnetic coils by Allis-Chalmers in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. After the war, all the machinery was dismantled and cleaned and the floorboards beneath the machinery were ripped up and burned to recover minute amounts of silver. In the end, only 1/3,600,000th was lost. [142] [143] The last silver was returned in May 1970. [144]Responsibility for the design and construction of the electromagnetic separation plant, which came to be called Y-12, was assigned to Stone & Webster by the S-1 Committee in June 1942. The design called for five first-stage processing units, known as Alpha racetracks, and two units for final processing, known as Beta racetracks. In September 1943 Groves authorized construction of four more racetracks, known as Alpha II. Construction began in February 1943. [145]When the plant was started up for testing on schedule in October, the 14-ton vacuum tanks crept out of alignment because of the power of the magnets, and had to be fastened more securely. A more serious problem arose when the magnetic coils started shorting out. In December Groves ordered a magnet to be broken open, and handfuls of rust were found inside. Groves then ordered the racetracks to be torn down and the magnets sent back to the factory to be cleaned. A pickling plant was established on-site to clean the pipes and fittings. [140] The second Alpha I was not operational until the end of January 1944, the first Beta and first and third Alpha I's came online in March, and the fourth Alpha I was operational in April. The four Alpha II racetracks were completed between July and October 1944. [146]Operators, so-called Calutron Girls, photographed by Ed Westcott, at their calutron control panels at Y-12. Gladys Owens, the woman seated in the foreground, did not know what she had been involved with until seeing this photo in a public tour of the facility fifty years later. [147]Tennessee Eastman was contracted to manage Y-12 on the usual cost plus fixed-fee basis, with a fee of $22,500 per month plus $7,500 per racetrack for the first seven racetracks and $4,000 per additional racetrack. [148] The calutrons were initially operated by scientists from Berkeley to remove bugs and achieve a reasonable operating rate. They were then turned over to trained Tennessee Eastman operators who had only a high school education. Nichols compared unit production data, and pointed out to Lawrence that the young " hillbilly " girl operators were outperforming his Ph Ds. They agreed to a production race and Lawrence lost, a morale boost for the Tennessee Eastman workers and supervisors. The girls were "trained like soldiers not to reason why", while "the scientists could not refrain from time-consuming investigation of the cause of even minor fluctuations of the dials." [149]Y-12 initially enriched the uranium-235 content to between 13% and 15%, and shipped the first few hundred grams of this to Los Alamos in March 1944. Only 1 part in 5,825 of the uranium feed emerged as final product. Much of the rest was splattered over equipment in the process. Strenuous recovery efforts helped raise production to 10% of the uranium-235 feed by January 1945. In February the Alpha racetracks began receiving slightly enriched (1.4%) feed from the new S-50 thermal diffusion plant. The next month it received enhanced (5%) feed from the K-25 gaseous diffusion plant. By August K-25 was producing uranium sufficiently enriched to feed directly into the Beta tracks. [150]Gaseous diffusion Main article: K-25The most promising but also the most challenging method of isotope separation was gaseous diffusion. Graham's law states that the rate of effusion of a gas is inversely proportional to the square root of its molecular mass, so in a box containing a semi-permeable membrane and a mixture of two gases, the lighter molecules will pass out of the container more rapidly than the heavier molecules. The gas leaving the container is somewhat enriched in the lighter molecules, while the residual gas is somewhat depleted. The idea was that such boxes could be formed into a cascade of pumps and membranes, with each successive stage containing a slightly more enriched mixture. Research into the process was carried out at Columbia University by a group that included Harold Urey, Karl P. Cohen, and John R. Dunning. [151]Oak Ridge K-25 plant In November 1942 the Military Policy Committee approved the construction of a 600-stage gaseous diffusion plant. [152] On 14 December, M. W. Kellogg accepted an offer to construct the plant, which was codenamed K-25. A cost plus fixed-fee contract was negotiated, eventually totaling $2.5 million. A separate corporate entity called Kellex was created for the project, headed by Percival C. Keith, one of Kellogg's vice presidents. [153] The process faced formidable technical difficulties. The highly corrosive gas uranium hexafluoride would have to be used, as no substitute could be found, and the motors and pumps would have to be vacuum tight and enclosed in inert gas. The biggest problem was the design of the barrier, which would have to be strong, porous and resistant to corrosion by uranium hexafluoride. The best choice for this seemed to be nickel. Edward Adler and Edward Norris created a mesh barrier from electroplated nickel. A six-stage pilot plant was built at Columbia to test the process, but the Norris-Adler prototype proved to be too brittle. A rival barrier was developed from powdered nickel by Kellex, the Bell Telephone Laboratories and the Bakelite Corporation. In January 1944, Groves ordered the Kellex barrier into production. [154] [155]Kellex's design for K-25 called for a four-story 0.5-mile (0.80 km) long U-shaped structure containing 54 contiguous buildings. These were divided into nine sections. Within these were cells of six stages. The cells could be operated independently, or consecutively within a section. Similarly, the sections could be operated separately or as part of a single cascade. A survey party began construction by marking out the 500-acre (2.0 km 2) site in May 1943. Work on the main building began in October 1943, and the six-stage pilot plant was ready for operation on 17 April 1944. In 1945 Groves canceled the upper stages of the plant, directing Kellex to instead design and build a 540-stage side feed unit, which became known as K-27. Kellex transferred the last unit to the operating contractor, Union Carbide and Carbon, on 11 September 1945. The total cost, including the K-27 plant completed after the war, came to $480 million. [156]The production plant commenced operation in February 1945, and as cascade after cascade came online, the quality of the product increased. By April 1945, K-25 had attained a 1.1% enrichment and the output of the S-50 thermal diffusion plant began being used as feed. Some product produced the next month reached nearly 7% enrichment. In August, the last of the 2,892 stages commenced operation. K-25 and K-27 achieved their full potential in the early postwar period, when they eclipsed the other production plants and became the prototypes for a new generation of plants. [157]Thermal diffusion Main article: S-50 Project The thermal diffusion process was based on Sydney Chapman and David Enskog 's theory, which explained that when a mixed gas passes through a temperature gradient, the heavier one tends to concentrate at the cold end and the lighter one at the warm end. Since hot gases tend to rise and cool ones tend to fall, this can be used as a means of isotope separation. This process was first demonstrated by Klaus Clusius and Gerhard Dickel in Germany in 1938. [158] It was developed by US Navy scientists, but was not one of the enrichment technologies initially selected for use in the Manhattan Project. This was primarily due to doubts about its technical feasibility, but the inter-service rivalry between the Army and Navy also played a part. [159]The S-50 plant is the dark building to the upper left behind the Oak Ridge powerhouse (with smoke stacks). The Naval Research Laboratory continued the research under Philip Abelson's direction, but there was little contact with the Manhattan Project until April 1944, when Captain William S. Parsons, the naval officer in charge of ordnance development at Los Alamos, brought Oppenheimer news of encouraging progress in the Navy's experiments on thermal diffusion. Oppenheimer wrote to Groves suggesting that the output of a thermal diffusion plant could be fed into Y-12. Groves set up a committee consisting of Warren K. Lewis, Eger Murphree and Richard Tolman to investigate the idea, and they estimated that a thermal diffusion plant costing $3.5 million could enrich 50 kilograms (110 lb) of uranium per week to nearly 0.9% uranium-235. Groves approved its construction on 24 June 1944. [160]Groves contracted with the H. K. Ferguson Company of Cleveland, Ohio, to build the thermal diffusion plant, which was designated S-50. Groves's advisers, Karl Cohen and W. I. Thompson from Standard Oil, [161] estimated that it would take six months to build. Groves gave Ferguson just four. Plans called for the installation of 2,142 48-foot-tall (15 m) diffusion columns arranged in 21 racks. Inside each column were three concentric tubes. Steam, obtained from the nearby K-25 powerhouse at a pressure of 1,000 pounds per square inch (6,900 k Pa) and temperature of 545 °F (285 °C), flowed downward through the innermost 1.25-inch (32 mm) nickel pipe, while water at 155 °F (68 °C) flowed upward through the outermost iron pipe. Isotope separation occurred in the uranium hexafluoride gas between the nickel and copper pipes. [162]Work commenced on 9 July 1944, and S-50 began partial operation in September. Ferguson operated the plant through a subsidiary known as Fercleve. The plant produced just 10.5 pounds (4.8 kg) of 0.852% uranium-235 in October. Leaks limited production and forced shutdowns over the next few months, but in June 1945 it produced 12,730 pounds (5,770 kg). [163] By March 1945, all 21 production racks were operating. Initially the output of S-50 was fed into Y-12, but starting in March 1945 all three enrichment processes were run in series. S-50 became the first stage, enriching from 0.71% to 0.89%. This material was fed into the gaseous diffusion process in the K-25 plant, which produced a product enriched to about 23%. This was, in turn, fed into Y-12, [164] which boosted it to about 89%, sufficient for nuclear weapons. [165]Aggregate U-235 production About 50 kilograms (110 lb) of uranium enriched to 89% uranium-235 was delivered to Los Alamos by July 1945. [165] The entire 50 kg, along with some 50%-enriched, averaging out to about 85% enriched, were used in Little Boy. [165]Plutonium The second line of development pursued by the Manhattan Project used the fissile element plutonium. Although small amounts of plutonium exist in nature, the best way to obtain large quantities of the element is in a nuclear reactor, in which natural uranium is bombarded by neutrons. The uranium-238 is transmuted into uranium-239, which rapidly decays, first into neptunium-239 and then into plutonium-239. [166] Only a small amount of the uranium-238 will be transformed, so the plutonium must be chemically separated from the remaining uranium, from any initial impurities, and from fission products. [166]X-10 Graphite Reactor Main article: X-10 Graphite Reactor Workers load uranium slugs into the X-10 Graphite Reactor. In March 1943, Du Pont began construction of a plutonium plant on a 112-acre (0.5 km 2) site at Oak Ridge. Intended as a pilot plant for the larger production facilities at Hanford, it included the air-cooled X-10 Graphite Reactor, a chemical separation plant, and support facilities. Because of the subsequent decision to construct water-cooled reactors at Hanford, only the chemical separation plant operated as a true pilot. [167] The X-10 Graphite Reactor consisted of a huge block of graphite, 24 feet (7.3 m) long on each side, weighing around 1,500 long tons (1,500 t), surrounded by 7 feet (2.1 m) of high-density concrete as a radiation shield. [167]The greatest difficulty was encountered with the uranium slugs produced by Mallinckrodt and Metal Hydrides. These somehow had to be coated in aluminum to avoid corrosion and the escape of fission products into the cooling system. The Grasselli Chemical Company attempted to develop a hot dipping process without success. Meanwhile, Alcoa tried canning. A new process for flux-less welding was developed, and 97% of the cans passed a standard vacuum test, but high temperature tests indicated a failure rate of more than 50%. Nonetheless, production began in June 1943. The Metallurgical Laboratory eventually developed an improved welding technique with the help of General Electric, which was incorporated into the production process in October 1943. [168]Watched by Fermi and Compton, the X-10 Graphite Reactor went critical on 4 November 1943 with about 30 long tons (30 t) of uranium. A week later the load was increased to 36 long tons (37 t), raising its power generation to 500 k W, and by the end of the month the first 500 milligrams (0.018 oz) of plutonium was created. [169] Modifications over time raised the power to 4,000 k W in July 1944. X-10 operated as a production plant until January 1945, when it was turned over to research activities. [170]Hanford reactors Main article: Hanford Site Although an air-cooled design was chosen for the reactor at Oak Ridge to facilitate rapid construction, it was recognized that this would be impractical for the much larger production reactors. Initial designs by the Metallurgical Laboratory and Du Pont used helium for cooling, before they determined that a water-cooled reactor would be simpler, cheaper and quicker to build. [171] The design did not become available until 4 October 1943; in the meantime, Matthias concentrated on improving the Hanford Site by erecting accommodations, improving the roads, building a railway switch line, and upgrading the electricity, water and telephone lines. [172]Aerial view of Hanford B-Reactor site, June 1944As at Oak Ridge, the most difficulty was encountered while canning the uranium slugs, which commenced at Hanford in March 1944. They were pickled to remove dirt and impurities, dipped in molten bronze, tin, and aluminum-silicon alloy, canned using hydraulic presses, and then capped using arc welding under an argon atmosphere. Finally, they were subjected to a series of tests to detect holes or faulty welds. Disappointingly, most canned slugs initially failed the tests, resulting in an output of only a handful of canned slugs per day. But steady progress was made and by June 1944 production increased to the point where it appeared that enough canned slugs would be available to start Reactor B on schedule in August 1944. [173]Work began on Reactor B, the first of six planned 250 MW reactors, on 10 October 1943. [174] The reactor complexes were given letter designations A through F, with B, D and F sites chosen to be developed first, as this maximised the distance between the reactors. They would be the only ones constructed during the Manhattan Project. [175] Some 390 long tons (400 t) of steel, 17,400 cubic yards (13,300 m 3) of concrete, 50,000 concrete blocks and 71,000 concrete bricks were used to construct the 120-foot (37 m) high building. Construction of the reactor itself commenced in February 1944. [176] Watched by Compton, Matthias, Du Pont's Crawford Greenewalt, Leona Woods and Fermi, who inserted the first slug, the reactor was powered up beginning on 13 September 1944. Over the next few days, 838 tubes were loaded and the reactor went critical. Shortly after midnight on 27 September, the operators began to withdraw the control rods to initiate production. At first all appeared well but around 03:00 the power level started to drop and by 06:30 the reactor had shut down completely. The cooling water was investigated to see if there was a leak or contamination. The next day the reactor started up again, only to shut down once more. [177] [178]Fermi contacted Chien-Shiung Wu, who identified the cause of the problem as neutron poisoning from xenon-135, which has a half-life of 9.2 hours. [179] Fermi, Woods, Donald J. Hughes and John Archibald Wheeler then calculated the nuclear cross section of xenon-135, which turned out to be 30,000 times that of uranium. [180] Fortunately, Du Pont engineer George Graves had deviated from the Metallurgical Laboratory's original design in which the reactor had 1,500 tubes arranged in a circle, and had added an additional 504 tubes to fill in the corners. The scientists had originally considered this overengineering a waste of time and money, but Fermi realized that by loading all 2,004 tubes, the reactor could reach the required power level and efficiently produce plutonium. [181] Reactor D was started on 17 December 1944 and Reactor F on 25 February 1945. [182]Separation process Map of the Hanford Site. Railroads flank the plants to the north and south. Reactors are the three northernmost red squares, along the Columbia River. The separation plants are the lower two red squares from the grouping south of the reactors. The bottom red square is the 300 area. Meanwhile, the chemists considered the problem of how plutonium could be separated from uranium when its chemical properties were not known. Working with the minute quantities of plutonium available at the Metallurgical Laboratory in 1942, a team under Charles M. Cooper developed a lanthanum fluoride process for separating uranium and plutonium, which was chosen for the pilot separation plant. A second separation process, the bismuth phosphate process, was subsequently developed by Seaborg and Stanly G. Thomson. [183] This process worked by toggling plutonium between its +4 and +6 oxidation states in solutions of bismuth phosphate. In the former state, the plutonium was precipitated; in the latter, it stayed in solution and the other products were precipitated. [184]Greenewalt favored the bismuth phosphate process due to the corrosive nature of lanthanum fluoride, and it was selected for the Hanford separation plants. [185] Once X-10 began producing plutonium, the pilot separation plant was put to the test. The first batch was processed at 40% efficiency but over the next few months this was raised to 90%. [170]At Hanford, top priority was initially given to the installations in the 300 area. This contained buildings for testing materials, preparing uranium, and assembling and calibrating instrumentation. One of the buildings housed the canning equipment for the uranium slugs, while another contained a small test reactor. Notwithstanding the high priority allocated to it, work on the 300 area fell behind schedule due to the unique and complex nature of the 300 area facilities, and wartime shortages of labor and materials. [186]Early plans called for the construction of two separation plants in each of the areas known as 200-West and 200-East. This was subsequently reduced to two, the T and U plants, in 200-West and one, the B plant, at 200-East. [187] Each separation plant consisted of four buildings: a process cell building or "canyon" (known as 221), a concentration building (224), a purification building (231) and a magazine store (213). The canyons were each 800 feet (240 m) long and 65 feet (20 m) wide. Each consisted of forty 17.7-by-13-by-20-foot (5.4 by 4.0 by 6.1 m) cells. [188]Work began on 221-T and 221-U in January 1944, with the former completed in September and the latter in December. The 221-B building followed in March 1945. Because of the high levels of radioactivity involved, all work in the separation plants had to be conducted by remote control using closed-circuit television, something unheard of in 1943. Maintenance was carried out with the aid of an overhead crane and specially designed tools. The 224 buildings were smaller because they had less material to process, and it was less radioactive. The 224-T and 224-U buildings were completed on 8 October 1944, and 224-B followed on 10 February 1945. The purification methods that were eventually used in 231-W were still unknown when construction commenced on 8 April 1944, but the plant was complete and the methods were selected by the end of the year. [189] On 5 February 1945, Matthias hand-delivered the first shipment of 80 grams (2.6 ozt) of 95%-pure plutonium nitrate to a Los Alamos courier in Los Angeles. [182]Weapon design Main article: Project YA row of Thin Man casings. Fat Man casings are visible in the background. In 1943, development efforts were directed to a gun-type fission weapon with plutonium called Thin Man. Initial research on the properties of plutonium was done using cyclotron-generated plutonium-239, which was extremely pure, but could only be created in very small amounts. Los Alamos received the first sample of plutonium from the Clinton X-10 reactor in April 1944 and within days Emilio Segrè discovered a problem: the reactor-bred plutonium had a higher concentration of plutonium-240, resulting in up to five times the spontaneous fission rate of cyclotron plutonium. [190] Seaborg had correctly predicted in March 1943 that some of the plutonium-239 would absorb a neutron and become plutonium-240. [191]This made reactor plutonium unsuitable for use in a gun-type weapon. The plutonium-240 would start the chain reaction too quickly, causing a predetonation that would release enough energy to disperse the critical mass with a minimal amount of plutonium reacted (a fizzle ). A faster gun was suggested but found to be impractical. The possibility of separating the isotopes was considered and rejected, as plutonium-240 is even harder to separate from plutonium-239 than uranium-235 from uranium-238. [192]Work on an alternative method of bomb design, known as implosion, had begun earlier under the direction of the physicist Seth Neddermeyer. Implosion used explosives to crush a subcritical sphere of fissile material into a smaller and denser form. When the fissile atoms are packed closer together, the rate of neutron capture increases, and the mass becomes a critical mass. The metal needs to travel only a very short distance, so the critical mass is assembled in much less time than it would take with the gun method. [193] Neddermeyer's 1943 and early 1944 investigations into implosion showed promise, but also made it clear that the problem would be much more difficult from a theoretical and engineering perspective than the gun design. [194] In September 1943, John von Neumann, who had experience with shaped charges used in armor-piercing shells, argued that not only would implosion reduce the danger of predetonation and fizzle, but would make more efficient use of the fissionable material. [195] He proposed using a spherical configuration instead of the cylindrical one that Neddermeyer was working on. [196]An implosion-type nuclear bomb By July 1944, Oppenheimer had concluded plutonium could not be used in a gun design, and opted for implosion. The accelerated effort on an implosion design, codenamed Fat Man, began in August 1944 when Oppenheimer implemented a sweeping reorganization of the Los Alamos laboratory to focus on implosion. [197] Two new groups were created at Los Alamos to develop the implosion weapon, X (for explosives) Division headed by explosives expert George Kistiakowsky and G (for gadget) Division under Robert Bacher. [198] [199] The new design that von Neumann and T (for theoretical) Division, most notably Rudolf Peierls, had devised used explosive lenses to focus the explosion onto a spherical shape using a combination of both slow and fast high explosives. [200]The design of lenses that detonated with the proper shape and velocity turned out to be slow, difficult and frustrating. [200] Various explosives were tested before settling on composition B as the fast explosive and baratol as the slow explosive. [201] The final design resembled a soccer ball, with 20 hexagonal and 12 pentagonal lenses, each weighing about 80 pounds (36 kg). Getting the detonation just right required fast, reliable and safe electrical detonators, of which there were two for each lens for reliability. [202] It was therefore decided to use exploding-bridgewire detonators, a new invention developed at Los Alamos by a group led by Luis Alvarez. A contract for their manufacture was given to Raytheon. [203]To study the behavior of converging shock waves, Robert Serber devised the Ra La Experiment, which used the short-lived radioisotope lanthanum-140, a potent source of gamma radiation. The gamma ray source was placed in the center of a metal sphere surrounded by the explosive lenses, which in turn were inside in an ionization chamber. This allowed the taking of an X-ray movie of the implosion. The lenses were designed primarily using this series of tests. [204] In his history of the Los Alamos project, David Hawkins wrote: "Ra La became the most important single experiment affecting the final bomb design". [205]Within the explosives was the 4.5-inch (110 mm) thick aluminum pusher, which provided a smooth transition from the relatively low density explosive to the next layer, the 3-inch (76 mm) thick tamper of natural uranium. Its main job was to hold the critical mass together as long as possible, but it would also reflect neutrons back into the core. Some part of it might fission as well. To prevent predetonation by an external neutron, the tamper was coated in a thin layer of boron. [202] A polonium-beryllium modulated neutron initiator, known as an "urchin" because its shape resembled a sea urchin, [206] was developed to start the chain reaction at precisely the right moment. [207] This work with the chemistry and metallurgy of radioactive polonium was directed by Charles Allen Thomas of the Monsanto Company and became known as the Dayton Project. [208] Testing required up to 500 curies per month of polonium, which Monsanto was able to deliver. [209] The whole assembly was encased in a duralumin bomb casing to protect it from bullets and flak. [202]Remote handling of a kilocurie source of radiolanthanum for a Ra La Experiment at Los Alamos The ultimate task of the metallurgists was to determine how to cast plutonium into a sphere. The difficulties became apparent when attempts to measure the density of plutonium gave inconsistent results. At first contamination was believed to be the cause, but it was soon determined that there were multiple allotropes of plutonium. [210] The brittle α phase that exists at room temperature changes to the plastic β phase at higher temperatures. Attention then shifted to the even more malleable δ phase that normally exists in the 300 °C to 450 °C range. It was found that this was stable at room temperature when alloyed with aluminum, but aluminum emits neutrons when bombarded with alpha particles, which would exacerbate the pre-ignition problem. The metallurgists then hit upon a plutonium-gallium alloy, which stabilized the δ phase and could be hot pressed into the desired spherical shape. As plutonium was found to corrode readily, the sphere was coated with nickel. [211]The work proved dangerous. By the end of the war, half the experienced chemists and metallurgists had to be removed from work with plutonium when unacceptably high levels of the element appeared in their urine. [212] A minor fire at Los Alamos in January 1945 led to a fear that a fire in the plutonium laboratory might contaminate the whole town, and Groves authorized the construction of a new facility for plutonium chemistry and metallurgy, which became known as the DP-site. [213] The hemispheres for the first plutonium pit (or core) were produced and delivered on 2 July 1945. Three more hemispheres followed on 23 July and were delivered three days later. [214]Trinity Main article: Trinity (nuclear test)Because of the complexity of an implosion-style weapon, it was decided that, despite the waste of fissile material, an initial test would be required. Groves approved the test, subject to the active material being recovered. Consideration was therefore given to a controlled fizzle, but Oppenheimer opted instead for a full-scale nuclear test, codenamed "Trinity". [215]The explosives of "the gadget" were raised to the top of the tower for the final assembly. In March 1944, planning for the test was assigned to Kenneth Bainbridge, a professor of physics at Harvard, working under Kistiakowsky. Bainbridge selected the bombing range near Alamogordo Army Airfield as the site for the test. [216] Bainbridge worked with Captain Samuel P. Davalos on the construction of the Trinity Base Camp and its facilities, which included barracks, warehouses, workshops, an explosive magazine and a commissary. [217]Groves did not relish the prospect of explaining the loss of a billion dollars worth of plutonium to a Senate committee, so a cylindrical containment vessel codenamed "Jumbo" was constructed to recover the active material in the event of a failure. Measuring 25 feet (7.6 m) long and 12 feet (3.7 m) wide, it was fabricated at great expense from 214 long tons (217 t) of iron and steel by Babcock & Wilcox in Barberton, Ohio. Brought in a special railroad car to a siding in Pope, New Mexico, it was transported the last 25 miles (40 km) to the test site on a trailer pulled by two tractors. [218] By the time it arrived, however, confidence in the implosion method was high enough, and the availability of plutonium was sufficient, that Oppenheimer decided not to use it. Instead, it was placed atop a steel tower 800 yards (730 m) from the weapon as a rough measure of how powerful the explosion would be. In the end, Jumbo survived, although its tower did not, adding credence to the belief that Jumbo would have successfully contained a fizzled explosion. [219] [220]A pre-test explosion was conducted on 7 May 1945 to calibrate the instruments. A wooden test platform was erected 800 yards (730 m) from Ground Zero and piled with 100 long tons (100 t) of TNT spiked with nuclear fission products in the form of an irradiated uranium slug from Hanford, which was dissolved and poured into tubing inside the explosive. This explosion was observed by Oppenheimer and Groves's new deputy commander, Brigadier General Thomas Farrell. The pre-test produced data that proved vital for the Trinity test. [220] [221]For the actual test, the weapon, nicknamed "the gadget", was hoisted to the top of a 100-foot (30 m) steel tower, as detonation at that height would give a better indication of how the weapon would behave when dropped from a bomber. Detonation in the air maximized the energy applied directly to the target, and generated less nuclear fallout. The gadget was assembled under the supervision of Norris Bradbury at the nearby Mc Donald Ranch House on 13 July, and precariously winched up the tower the following day. [222] Observers included Bush, Chadwick, Conant, Farrell, Fermi, Groves, Lawrence, Oppenheimer and Tolman. At 05:30 on 16 July 1945 the gadget exploded with an energy equivalent of around 20 kilotons of TNT, leaving a crater of Trinitite (radioactive glass) in the desert 250 feet (76 m) wide. The shock wave was felt over 100 miles (160 km) away, and the mushroom cloud reached 7.5 miles (12.1 km) in height. It was heard as far away as El Paso, Texas, so Groves issued a cover story about an ammunition magazine explosion at Alamogordo Field. [223] [224]Personnel In June 1944, the Manhattan Project employed some 129,000 workers, of whom 84,500 were construction workers, 40,500 were plant operators and 1,800 were military personnel. As construction activity fell off, the workforce declined to 100,000 a year later, but the number of military personnel increased to 5,600. Procuring the required numbers of workers, especially highly skilled workers, in competition with other vital wartime programs proved very difficult. [225] In 1943, Groves obtained a special temporary priority for labor from the War Manpower Commission. In March 1944, both the War Production Board and the War Manpower Commission gave the project their highest priority. [226]Major General Leslie R. Groves, Jr., speaks to service personnel Oak Ridge Tennessee in August 1945Tolman and Conant, in their role as the project's scientific advisers, drew up a list of candidate scientists and had them rated by scientists already working on the project. Groves then sent a personal letter to the head of their university or company asking for them to be released for essential war work. [227] At the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Stanislaw Ulam gave one of his students, Joan Hinton, an exam early, so she could leave to do war work. A few weeks later, Ulam received a letter from Hans Bethe, inviting him to join the project. [228] Conant personally persuaded Kistiakowsky to join the project. [229]One source of skilled personnel was the Army itself, particularly the Army Specialized Training Program. In 1943, the MED created the Special Engineer Detachment (SED), with an authorized strength of 675. Technicians and skilled workers drafted into the Army were assigned to the SED. Another source was the Women's Army Corps (WAC). Initially intended for clerical tasks handling classified material, the WACs were soon tapped for technical and scientific tasks as well. [230] On 1 February 1945, all military personnel assigned to the MED, including all SED detachments, were assigned to the 9812th Technical Service Unit, except at Los Alamos, where military personnel other than SED, including the WACs and Military Police, were assigned to the 4817th Service Command Unit. [231]An Associate Professor of Radiology at the University of Rochester School of Medicine, Stafford L. Warren, was commissioned as a colonel in the United States Army Medical Corps, and appointed as chief of the MED's Medical Section and Groves' medical advisor. Warren's initial task was to staff hospitals at Oak Ridge, Richland and Los Alamos. [232] The Medical Section was responsible for medical research, but also for the MED's health and safety programs. This presented an enormous challenge, because workers were handling a variety of toxic chemicals, using hazardous liquids and gases under high pressures, working with high voltages, and performing experiments involving explosives, not to mention the largely unknown dangers presented by radioactivity and handling fissile materials. [233] Yet in December 1945, the National Safety Council presented the Manhattan Project with the Award of Honor for Distinguished Service to Safety in recognition of its safety record. Between January 1943 and June 1945, there were 62 fatalities and 3,879 disabling injuries, which was about 62 percent below the rate of private industry. [234]Secrecy A 1945 Life article estimated that before the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings "probably no more than a few dozen men in the entire country knew the full meaning of the Manhattan Project, and perhaps only a thousand others even were aware that work on atoms was involved." The magazine wrote that the more than 100,000 others employed with the project "worked like moles in the dark". Warned that disclosing the project's secrets was punishable by 10 years in prison or a $10,000 ($108,000 today [1]) fine, they saw enormous quantities of raw materials enter factories with nothing coming out, and monitored "dials and switches while behind thick concrete walls mysterious reactions took place" without knowing the purpose of their jobs. [235] [236] [237] [238] [239]A billboard encouraging secrecy among Oak Ridge workers Oak Ridge security personnel considered any private party with more than seven people as suspicious, and residents—who believed that US government agents were secretly among them—avoided repeatedly inviting the same guests. Although original residents of the area could be buried in existing cemeteries, every coffin was reportedly opened for inspection. [239] Everyone, including top military officials, and their automobiles were searched when entering and exiting project facilities. One Oak Ridge worker stated that "if you got inquisitive, you were called on the carpet within two hours by government secret agents. Usually those summoned to explain were then escorted bag and baggage to the gate and ordered to keep going." Nonetheless, despite being told that their work would help end the war and perhaps all future wars, [240] not seeing or understanding the results of their often tedious duties—or even typical side effects of factory work such as smoke from smokestacks—and the war in Europe ending without the use of their work, caused serious morale problems among workers and caused many rumors to spread. One manager stated after the war: Well it wasn't that the job was tough ... it was confusing. You see, no one knew what was being made in Oak Ridge, not even me, and a lot of the people thought they were wasting their time here. It was up to me to explain to the dissatisfied workers that they were doing a very important job. When they asked me what, I'd have to tell them it was a secret. But I almost went crazy myself trying to figure out what was going on. [238]Another worker told of how, working in a laundry, she every day held "a special instrument" to uniforms and listened for "a clicking noise". She learned only after the war that she had been performing the important task of checking for radiation with a geiger counter. To improve morale among such workers Oak Ridge created an extensive system of intramural sports leagues, including 10 baseball teams, 81 softball teams, and 26 football teams. [238]Censorship Security poster, warning office workers to close drawers and put documents in safes when not being used Voluntary censorship of atomic information began before the Manhattan Project. After the start of the European war in 1939 American scientists began avoiding publishing military-related research, and in 1940 scientific journals began asking the National Academy of Sciences to clear articles. William L. Laurence of The New York Times, who wrote an article on atomic fission in The Saturday Evening Post of 7 September 1940, later learned that government officials asked librarians nationwide in 1943 to withdraw the issue. [241] The Soviets noticed the silence, however. In April 1942 nuclear physicist Georgy Flyorov wrote to Josef Stalin on the absence of articles on nuclear fission in American journals; this resulted in the Soviet Union establishing its own atomic bomb project. [242]The Manhattan Project operated under tight security lest its discovery induce Axis powers, especially Germany, to accelerate their own nuclear projects or undertake covert operations against the project. [243] The government's Office of Censorship, by contrast, relied on the press to comply with a voluntary code of conduct it published, and the project at first avoided notifying the office. By early 1943 newspapers began publishing reports of large construction in Tennessee and Washington based on public records, and the office began discussing with the project how to maintain secrecy. In June the Office of Censorship asked newspapers and broadcasters to avoid discussing "atom smashing, atomic energy, atomic fission, atomic splitting, or any of their equivalents. The use for military purposes of radium or radioactive materials, heavy water, high voltage discharge equipment, cyclotrons." The office also asked to avoid discussion of "polonium, uranium, ytterbium, hafnium, protactinium, radium, rhenium, thorium, deuterium"; only uranium was sensitive, but was listed with other elements to hide its importance. [244] [245]Soviet spies Main article: Atomic spies The prospect of sabotage was always present, and sometimes suspected when there were equipment failures. While there were some problems believed to be the result of careless or disgruntled employees, there were no confirmed instances of Axis-instigated sabotage. [246] However, on 10 March 1945, a Japanese fire balloon struck a power line, and the resulting power surge caused the three reactors at Hanford to be temporarily shut down. [247] With so many people involved, security was a difficult task. A special Counter Intelligence Corps detachment was formed to handle the project's security issues. [248] By 1943, it was clear that the Soviet Union was attempting to penetrate the project. Lieutenant Colonel Boris T. Pash, the head of the Counter Intelligence Branch of the Western Defense Command, investigated suspected Soviet espionage at the Radiation Laboratory in Berkeley. Oppenheimer informed Pash that he had been approached by a fellow professor at Berkeley, Haakon Chevalier, about passing information to the Soviet Union. [249]The most successful Soviet spy was Klaus Fuchs, a member of the British Mission who played an important part at Los Alamos. [250] The 1950 revelation of his espionage activities damaged the United States' nuclear cooperation with Britain and Canada. [251] Subsequently, other instances of espionage were uncovered, leading to the arrest of Harry Gold, David Greenglass, and Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. [252] Other spies like George Koval and Theodore Hall remained unknown for decades. [253] The value of the espionage is difficult to quantify, as the principal constraint on the Soviet atomic bomb project was a shortage of uranium ore. The consensus is that espionage saved the Soviets one or two years of effort. [254]Foreign intelligence Main article: Alsos Mission In addition to developing the atomic bomb, the Manhattan Project was charged with gathering intelligence on the German nuclear energy project. It was believed that the Japanese nuclear weapons program was not far advanced because Japan had little access to uranium ore, but it was initially feared that Germany was very close to developing its own weapons. At the instigation of the Manhattan Project, a bombing and sabotage campaign was carried out against heavy water plants in German-occupied Norway. [255] A small mission was created, jointly staffed by the Office of Naval Intelligence, OSRD, the Manhattan Project, and Army Intelligence (G-2), to investigate enemy scientific developments. It was not restricted to those involving nuclear weapons. [256] The Chief of Army Intelligence, Major General George V. Strong, appointed Boris Pash to command the unit, [257] which was codenamed "Alsos", a Greek word meaning "grove". [258]Allied soldiers dismantle the German experimental nuclear reactor at Haigerloch. The Alsos Mission to Italy questioned staff of the physics laboratory at the University of Rome following the capture of the city in June 1944. [259] Meanwhile, Pash formed a combined British and American Alsos mission in London under the command of Captain Horace K. Calvert to participate in Operation Overlord. [260] Groves considered the risk that the Germans might attempt to disrupt the Normandy landings with radioactive poisons was sufficient to warn General Dwight D. Eisenhower and send an officer to brief his chief of staff, Lieutenant General Walter Bedell Smith. [261] Under the codename Operation Peppermint, special equipment was prepared and Chemical Warfare Service teams were trained in its use. [262]Following in the wake of the advancing Allied armies, Pash and Calvert interviewed Frédéric Joliot-Curie about the activities of German scientists. They spoke to officials at Union Minière du Haut Katanga about uranium shipments to Germany. They tracked down 68 tons of ore in Belgium and 30 tons in France. The interrogation of German prisoners indicated that uranium and thorium were being processed in Oranienburg, 20 miles north of Berlin, so Groves arranged for it to be bombed on 15 March 1945. [263]An Alsos team went to Stassfurt in the Soviet Occupation Zone and retrieved 11 tons of ore from WIFO. [264] In April 1945, Pash, in command of a composite force known as T-Force, conducted Operation Harborage, a sweep behind enemy lines of the cities of Hechingen, Bisingen, and Haigerloch that were the heart of the German nuclear effort. T-Force captured the nuclear laboratories, documents, equipment and supplies, including heavy water and 1.5 tons of metallic uranium. [265] [266]Alsos teams rounded up German scientists including Kurt Diebner, Otto Hahn, Walther Gerlach, Werner Heisenberg, and Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, who were taken to England where they were interned at Farm Hall, a bugged house in Godmanchester. After the bombs were detonated in Japan, the Germans were forced to confront the fact that the Allies had done what they could not. [267]Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Main article: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Preparations Starting in November 1943, the Army Air Forces Materiel Command at Wright Field, Ohio, began Silverplate, the codename modification of B-29s to carry the bombs. Test drops were carried out at Muroc Army Air Field, California, and the Naval Ordnance Test Station at Inyokern, California. [268] Groves met with the Chief of United States Army Air Forces (USAAF), General Henry H. Arnold, in March 1944 to discuss the delivery of the finished bombs to their targets. [269] The only Allied aircraft capable of carrying the 17-foot (5.2 m) long Thin Man or the 59-inch (150 cm) wide Fat Man was the British Avro Lancaster, but using a British aircraft would have caused difficulties with maintenance. Groves hoped that the American Boeing B-29 Superfortress could be modified to carry Thin Man by joining its two bomb bays together. [270] Arnold promised that no effort would be spared to modify B-29s to do the job, and designated Major General Oliver P. Echols as the USAAF liaison to the Manhattan Project. In turn, Echols named Colonel Roscoe C. Wilson as his alternate, and Wilson became Manhattan Project's main USAAF contact. [269] President Roosevelt instructed Groves that if the atomic bombs were ready before the war with Germany ended, he should be ready to drop them on Germany. [271]Silverplate B-29 Straight Flush. The tail code of the 444th Bombardment Group is painted on for security reasons. The 509th Composite Group was activated on 17 December 1944 at Wendover Army Air Field, Utah, under the command of Colonel Paul W. Tibbets. This base, close to the border with Nevada, was codenamed "Kingman" or "W-47". Training was conducted at Wendover and at Batista Army Airfield, Cuba, where the 393d Bombardment Squadron practiced long-distance flights over water, and dropping dummy pumpkin bombs. A special unit known as Project Alberta was formed at Los Alamos under Navy Captain William S. Parsons from Project Y as part of the Manhattan Project to assist in preparing and delivering the bombs. [272] Commander Frederick L. Ashworth from Alberta met with Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz on Guam in February 1945 to inform him of the project. While he was there, Ashworth selected North Field on the Pacific Island Tinian as a base for the 509th Composite Group, and reserved space for the group and its buildings. The group deployed there in July 1945. [273] Farrell arrived at Tinian on 30 July as the Manhattan Project representative. [274]Most of the components for Little Boy left San Francisco on the cruiser USS Indianapolis on 16 July and arrived on Tinian on 26 July. Four days later the ship was sunk by a Japanese submarine. The remaining components, which included six uranium-235 rings, were delivered by three C-54 Skymasters of the 509th Group's 320th Troop Carrier Squadron. [275] Two Fat Man assemblies travelled to Tinian in specially modified 509th Composite Group B-29s. The first plutonium core went in a special C-54. [276] A joint targeting committee of the Manhattan District and USAAF was established to determine which cities in Japan should be targets, and recommended Kokura, Hiroshima, Niigata, and Kyoto. At this point, Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson intervened, announcing that he would be making the targeting decision, and that he would not authorize the bombing of Kyoto on the grounds of its historical and religious significance. Groves therefore asked Arnold to remove Kyoto not just from the list of nuclear targets, but from targets for conventional bombing as well. [277] One of Kyoto's substitutes was Nagasaki. [278]Bombings In May 1945, the Interim Committee was created to advise on wartime and postwar use of nuclear energy. The committee was chaired by Stimson, with James F. Byrnes, a former US Senator soon to be Secretary of State, as President Harry S. Truman 's personal representative; Ralph A. Bard, the Under Secretary of the Navy; William L. Clayton, the Assistant Secretary of State; Vannevar Bush; Karl T. Compton; James B. Conant; and George L. Harrison, an assistant to Stimson and president of New York Life Insurance Company. The Interim Committee in turn established a scientific panel consisting of Arthur Compton, Fermi, Lawrence and Oppenheimer to advise it on scientific issues. In its presentation to the Interim Committee, the scientific panel offered its opinion not just on the likely physical effects of an atomic bomb, but on its probable military and political impact. [279]At the Potsdam Conference in Germany, Truman was informed that the Trinity test had been successful. He told Stalin, the leader of the Soviet Union, that the US had a new superweapon, without giving any details. This was the first official communication to the Soviet Union about the bomb, but Stalin already knew about it from spies. [280] With the authorization to use the bomb against Japan already given, no alternatives were considered after the Japanese rejection of the Potsdam Declaration. [281]Little Boy explodes over Hiroshima, Japan, 6 August 1945 (left); Fat Man explodes over Nagasaki, Japan, 9 August 1945 (right). On 6 August 1945, a Boeing B-29 Superfortress ( Enola Gay) of the 393d Bombardment Squadron, piloted by Tibbets, lifted off from North Field, and Little Boy in its bomb bay. Hiroshima, the headquarters of the 2nd General Army and Fifth Division and a port of embarkation, was the primary target of the mission, with Kokura and Nagasaki as alternatives. With Farrell's permission, Parsons, the weaponeer in charge of the mission, completed the bomb assembly in the air to minimize the risks during takeoff. [282] The bomb detonated at an altitude of 1,750 feet (530 m) with a blast that was later estimated to be the equivalent of 13 kilotons of TNT. [283] An area of approximately 4.7 square miles (12 km 2) was destroyed. Japanese officials determined that 69% of Hiroshima's buildings were destroyed and another 6–7% damaged. About 70,000 to 80,000 people, of whom 20,000 were Japanese combatants and 20,000 were Korean slave laborers, or some 30% of the population of Hiroshima, were killed immediately, and another 70,000 injured. [284] [285] [286]On the morning of 9 August 1945, a second B-29 ( Bockscar ), piloted by the 393d Bombardment Squadron's commander, Major Charles W. Sweeney, lifted off with Fat Man on board. This time, Ashworth served as weaponeer and Kokura was the primary target. Sweeney took off with the weapon already armed but with the electrical safety plugs still engaged. When they reached Kokura, they found cloud cover had obscured the city, prohibiting the visual attack required by orders. After three runs over the city, and with fuel running low, they headed for the secondary target, Nagasaki. Ashworth decided that a radar approach would be used if the target was obscured, but a last-minute break in the clouds over Nagasaki allowed a visual approach as ordered. The Fat Man was dropped over the city's industrial valley midway between the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works in the south and the Mitsubishi-Urakami Ordnance Works in the north. The resulting explosion had a blast yield equivalent to 21 kilotons of TNT, roughly the same as the Trinity blast, but was confined to the Urakami Valley, and a major portion of the city was protected by the intervening hills, resulting in the destruction of about 44% of the city. The bombing also crippled the city's industrial production extensively and killed 23,200–28,200 Japanese industrial workers and 150 Japanese soldiers. [287] Overall, an estimated 35,000–40,000 people were killed and 60,000 injured. [288] [289]Groves expected to have another atomic bomb ready for use on 19 August, with three more in September and a further three in October. [290] Two more Fat Man assemblies were readied, and scheduled to leave Kirtland Field for Tinian on 11 and 14 August. [289] At Los Alamos, technicians worked 24 hours straight to cast another plutonium core. [291] Although cast, it still needed to be pressed and coated, which would take until 16 August. [292] It could therefore have been ready for use on 19 August. On 10 August, Truman secretly requested that additional atomic bombs not be dropped on Japan without his express authority. [293] Groves suspended the third core's shipment on his own authority on 13 August. [293]On 11 August, Groves phoned Warren with orders to organize a survey team to report on the damage and radioactivity at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A party equipped with portable Geiger counters arrived in Hiroshima on 8 September headed by Farrell and Warren, with Japanese Rear Admiral Masao Tsuzuki, who acted as a translator. They remained in Hiroshima until 14 September and then surveyed Nagasaki from 19 September to 8 October. [294] This and other scientific missions to Japan would provide valuable scientific and historical data. [295]The necessity of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki became a subject of controversy among historians. Some questioned whether an "atomic diplomacy" would not have attained the same goals and disputed whether the bombings or the Soviet declaration of war on Japan was decisive. [290] The Franck Report was the most notable effort pushing for a demonstration but was turned down by the Interim Committee's scientific panel. [296] The Szilárd petition, drafted in July 1945 and signed by dozens of scientists working on the Manhattan Project, was a late attempt at warning President Harry S. Truman about his responsibility in using such weapons. [297] [298]After the war Presentation of the Army–Navy "E" Award at Los Alamos on 16 October 1945. Standing, left to right: J. Robert Oppenheimer, unidentified, unidentified, Kenneth Nichols, Leslie Groves, Robert Gordon Sproul, William Sterling Parsons. Seeing the work they had not understood produce the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs amazed the workers of the Manhattan Project as much as the rest of the world; newspapers in Oak Ridge announcing the Hiroshima bomb sold for $1 ($11 today [1] ). [236] [245] Although the bombs' existence was public, secrecy continued, and many workers remained ignorant of their jobs; one stated in 1946, "I don't know what the hell I'm doing besides looking into a ——— and turning a ——— alongside a ———. I don't know anything about it, and there's nothing to say". Many residents continued to avoid discussion of "the stuff" in ordinary conversation despite it being the reason for their town's existence. [239]In anticipation of the bombings, Groves had Henry De Wolf Smyth prepare a history for public consumption. Atomic Energy for Military Purposes, better known as the "Smyth Report", was released to the public on 12 August 1945. [299] Groves and Nichols presented Army–Navy "E" Awards to key contractors, whose involvement had hitherto been secret. Over 20 awards of the Presidential Medal for Merit were made to key contractors and scientists, including Bush and Oppenheimer. Military personnel received the Legion of Merit, including the commander of the Women's Army Corps detachment, Captain Arlene G. Scheidenhelm. [300]At Hanford, plutonium production fell off as Reactors B, D and F wore out, poisoned by fission products and swelling of the graphite moderator known as the Wigner effect. The swelling damaged the charging tubes where the uranium was irradiated to produce plutonium, rendering them unusable. In order to maintain the supply of polonium for the urchin initiators, production was curtailed and the oldest unit, B pile, was closed down so at least one reactor would be available in the future. Research continued, with Du Pont and the Metallurgical Laboratory developing a redox solvent extraction process as an alternative plutonium extraction technique to the bismuth phosphate process, which left unspent uranium in a state from which it could not easily be recovered. [301]Bomb engineering was carried out by the Z Division, named for its director, Dr. Jerrold R. Zacharias from Los Alamos. Z Division was initially located at Wendover Field but moved to Oxnard Field, New Mexico, in September 1945 to be closer to Los Alamos. This marked the beginning of Sandia Base. Nearby Kirtland Field was used as a B-29 base for aircraft compatibility and drop tests. [302] By October, all the staff and facilities at Wendover had been transferred to Sandia. [303] As reservist officers were demobilized, they were replaced by about fifty hand-picked regular officers. [304]Nichols recommended that S-50 and the Alpha tracks at Y-12 be closed down. This was done in September. [305] Although performing better than ever, [306] the Alpha tracks could not compete with K-25 and the new K-27, which had commenced operation in January 1946. In December, the Y-12 plant was closed, thereby cutting the Tennessee Eastman payroll from 8,600 to 1,500 and saving $2 million a month. [307]President Harry S. Truman signs the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, establishing the United States Atomic Energy Commission. Nowhere was demobilization more of a problem than at Los Alamos, where there was an exodus of talent. Much remained to be done. The bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were like laboratory pieces; work would be required to make them simpler, safer and more reliable. Implosion methods needed to be developed for uranium in place of the wasteful gun method, and composite uranium-plutonium cores were needed now that plutonium was in short supply because of the problems with the reactors. However, uncertainty about the future of the laboratory made it hard to induce people to stay. Oppenheimer returned to his job at the University of California and Groves appointed Norris Bradbury as an interim replacement. In fact, Bradbury would remain in the post for the next 25 years. [303] Groves attempted to combat the dissatisfaction caused by the lack of amenities with a construction program that included an improved water supply, three hundred houses, and recreation facilities. [301]Two Fat Man–type detonations were conducted at Bikini Atoll in July 1946 as part of Operation Crossroads to investigate the effect of nuclear weapons on warships. [308] Able was detonated on 1 July 1946. The more spectacular Baker was detonated underwater on 25 July 1946. [309]After the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a number of Manhattan Project physicists founded the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which began as an emergency action undertaken by scientists who saw urgent need for an immediate educational program about atomic weapons. [310] In the face of the destructiveness of the new weapons and in anticipation of the nuclear arms race several project members including Bohr, Bush and Conant expressed the view that it was necessary to reach agreement on international control of nuclear research and atomic weapons. The Baruch Plan, unveiled in a speech to the newly formed United Nations Atomic Energy Commission (UNAEC) in June 1946, proposed the establishment of an international atomic development authority, but was not adopted. [311]Following a domestic debate over the permanent management of the nuclear program, the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was created by the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 to take over the functions and assets of the Manhattan Project. It established civilian control over atomic development, and separated the development, production and control of atomic weapons from the military. Military aspects were taken over by the Armed Forces Special Weapons Project (AFSWP). [312] Although the Manhattan Project ceased to exist on 31 December 1946, the Manhattan District was not abolished until 15 August 1947. [313]Cost Manhattan Project costs through 31 December 1945 [314]Site Cost (1945 USD) Cost (2017 USD) % of total Oak Ridge $1.19 billion $12.9 billion 62.9%Hanford $390 million $4.22 billion 20.6%Special operating materials $103 million $1.12 billion 5.5%Los Alamos $74.1 million $802 million 3.9%Research and development $69.7 million $755 million 3.7%Government overhead $37.3 million $403 million 2.0%Heavy water plants $26.8 million $290 million 1.4%Total $1.89 billion $20.5 billion The project expenditure through 1 October 1945 was $1.845 billion, equivalent to less than nine days of wartime spending, and was $2.191 billion when the AEC assumed control on 1 January 1947. Total allocation was $2.4 billion. Over 90% of the cost was for building plants and producing the fissionable materials, and less than 10% for development and production of the weapons. [315] [316]A total of four weapons (the Trinity gadget, Little Boy, Fat Man, and an unused bomb) were produced by the end of 1945, making the average cost per bomb around $500 million in 1945 dollars. By comparison, the project's total cost by the end of 1945 was about 90% of the total spent on the production of US small arms (not including ammunition) and 34% of the total spent on US tanks during the same period. [314] Overall, it was the second most expensive weapons project undertaken by the United States in World War II, behind only the design and production of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress. [317]Legacy See also: Nuclear weapons in popular culture The political and cultural impacts of the development of nuclear weapons were profound and far-reaching. William Laurence of the New York Times, the first to use the phrase " Atomic Age ", [318] became the official correspondent for the Manhattan Project in spring 1945. In 1943 and 1944 he unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the Office of Censorship to permit writing about the explosive potential of uranium, and government officials felt that he had earned the right to report on the biggest secret of the war. Laurence witnessed both the Trinity test [319] and the bombing of Nagasaki and wrote the official press releases prepared for them. He went on to write a series of articles extolling the virtues of the new weapon. His reporting before and after the bombings helped to spur public awareness of the potential of nuclear technology and motivated its development in the United States and the Soviet Union. [320]The Lake Ontario Ordnance Works (LOOW) near Niagara Falls became a principal repository for Manhattan Project waste for the Eastern United States. [321] All of the radioactive materials stored at the LOOW site—including thorium, uranium, and the world's largest concentration of radium -226—were buried in an "Interim Waste Containment Structure" (in the foreground) in 1991. [322] [323] [324]The wartime Manhattan Project left a legacy in the form of the network of national laboratories: the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory, and Ames Laboratory. Two more were established by Groves soon after the war, the Brookhaven National Laboratory at Upton, New York, and the Sandia National Laboratories at Albuquerque, New Mexico. Groves allocated $72 million to them for research activities in fiscal year 1946–1947. [325] They would be in the vanguard of the kind of large-scale research that Alvin Weinberg, the director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, would call Big Science. [326]The Naval Research Laboratory had long been interested in the prospect of using nuclear power for warship propulsion, and sought to create its own nuclear project. In May 1946, Nimitz, now Chief of Naval Operations, decided that the Navy should instead work with the Manhattan Project. A group of naval officers were assigned to Oak Ridge, the most senior of whom was Captain Hyman G. Rickover, who became assistant director there. They immersed themselves in the study of nuclear energy, laying the foundations for a nuclear-powered navy. [327] A similar group of Air Force personnel arrived at Oak Ridge in September 1946 with the aim of developing nuclear aircraft. [328] Their Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft (NEPA) project ran into formidable technical difficulties, and was ultimately cancelled. [329]The ability of the new reactors to create radioactive isotopes in previously unheard-of quantities sparked a revolution in nuclear medicine in the immediate postwar years. Starting in mid-1946, Oak Ridge began distributing radioisotopes to hospitals and universities. Most of the orders were for iodine-131 and phosphorus-32, which were used in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. In addition to medicine, isotopes were also used in biological, industrial and agricultural research. [330]On handing over control to the Atomic Energy Commission, Groves bid farewell to the people who had worked on the Manhattan Project: Five years ago, the idea of Atomic Power was only a dream. You have made that dream a reality. You have seized upon the most nebulous of ideas and translated them into actualities. You have built cities where none were known before. You have constructed industrial plants of a magnitude and to a precision heretofore deemed impossible. You built the weapon which ended the War and thereby saved countless American lives. With regard to peacetime applications, you have raised the curtain on vistas of a new world. [331]In 2014, the United States Congress passed a law providing for a national park dedicated to the history of the Manhattan Project. [332] The Manhattan Project National Historical Park was established on 10 November 2015. [333]Notes Footnotes^ The reaction Teller was most concerned with was: 147N + 147N → 2412Mg + 42He (alpha particle) + 17.7 Me V. [30]^ In Bethe's account, the possibility of this ultimate catastrophe came up again in 1975 when it appeared in a magazine article by H. C. Dudley, who got the idea from a report by Pearl Buck of an interview she had with Arthur Compton in 1959. The worry was not entirely extinguished in some people's minds until the Trinity test. [33]^ Natural self-sustaining nuclear reactions have occurred in the distant past. [103]^ The allusion here is to the Italian navigator Christopher Columbus, who reached the Caribbean in 1492. Citations^ a b c d Thomas, Ryland; Williamson, Samuel H. (2018). "What Was the U. S. GDP Then?". Measuring Worth. Retrieved 5 January 2018. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the Measuring Worth series.^ Jones 1985, p. 12.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 16–20.^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 337–338.^ a b Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 40–41.^ "Executive Order 8807 Establishing the Office of Scientific Research and Development". 28 June 1941. Retrieved 28 June 2011.^ Jones 1985, p. 33.^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 322–325.^ a b Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 42.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 39–40.^ Phelps 2010, pp. 126–128.^ Phelps 2010, pp. 282–283.^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 372–374.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 43–44.^ Jones 1985, pp. 30–32.^ Jones 1985, p. 35.^ Williams 1960, pp. 3–4.^ a b c Jones 1985, pp. 37–39.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 32.^ Jones 1985, pp. 35–36.^ Rhodes 1986, p. 416.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 103.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 42–44^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 33–35.^ Groves 1962, p. 41.^ Serber & Rhodes 1992, p. 21.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 54–56^ Rhodes 1986, p. 417.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 44–45^ Bethe 1991, p. 30.^ Rhodes 1986, p. 419.^ Konopinski, E. J; Marvin, C.; Teller, Edward (1946). "Ignition of the Atmosphere with Nuclear Bombs" (PDF). Los Alamos National Laboratory. Retrieved 23 November 2008.^ Bethe 1991, pp. xi, 30.^ Broad, William J. (30 October 2007). "Why They Called It the Manhattan Project". The New York Times. Retrieved 27 October 2010.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 41–44.^ Fine & Remington 1972, p. 652.^ Nichols 1987, p. 174.^ Groves 1962, p. 40.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 76–78.^ Fine & Remington 1972, p. 654.^ Jones 1985, pp. 57–61.^ a b Fine & Remington 1972, p. 657.^ "Science: Atomic Footprint". Time. 17 September 1945. Retrieved 16 March 2011.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 81.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 74–77.^ Groves 1962, pp. 4–5.^ Fine & Remington 1972, pp. 659–661.^ Groves 1962, pp. 27–28.^ Groves 1962, pp. 44–45.^ Groves 1962, pp. 22–23.^ Jones 1985, pp. 80–82.^ a b Ermenc 1989, p. 238.^ Groves 1962, pp. 61–63.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 72–73.^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 206–207.^ a b Villa 1981, pp. 144–145^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 206–208.^ Bernstein 1976, p. 208.^ a b Stacey 1970, p. 517^ Bernstein 1976, p. 211.^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 209–212.^ a b c d e Fakley, Dennis C. (Winter–Spring 1983). "The British Mission". Los Alamos Science (7): 186–189.^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 213.^ Gowing 1964, pp. 168–173.^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 216–217.^ Gowing 1964, pp. 340–342.^ Jones 1985, p. 296.^ Gowing 1964, p. 234.^ Gowing 1964, pp. 242–244.^ Hunner 2004, p. 26.^ Gowing 1964, p. 372.^ Bernstein 1976, pp. 223–224.^ Jones 1985, pp. 90, 299–306.^ a b Johnson & Jackson 1981, pp. 168–169.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 116–117.^ Groves 1962, pp. 25–26.^ Jones 1985, p. 78.^ a b Johnson & Jackson 1981, pp. 39–43.^ Fine & Remington 1972, pp. 663–664.^ "Oak Ridge National Laboratory Review, Vol. 25, Nos. 3 and 4, 2002". ornl.gov. Archived from the original on 25 August 2009. Retrieved 9 March 2010.^ Jones 1985, pp. 327–328.^ Johnson & Jackson 1981, p. 49.^ Johnson & Jackson 1981, p. 8.^ Johnson & Jackson 1981, pp. 14–17.^ Jones 1985, p. 88.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 443–446.^ William J. (Bill) Wilcox Jr., Oak Ridge City Historian, Retired Technical Director for the Oak Ridge Y-12 & K-25 Plants, 11 November 2007, Early Days of Oak Ridge and Wartime Y-12, Retrieved 22 November 2014^ "Josephine Herrick's Photo Legacy Comes Into View". Women's enews. Archived from the original on 6 September 2015. Retrieved 7 September 2015.^ Jones 1985, pp. 83–84.^ Fine & Remington 1972, pp. 664–665.^ "50th Anniversary Article: Oppenheimer's Better Idea: Ranch School Becomes Arsenal of Democracy". Los Alamos National Laboratory. Retrieved 6 April 2011.^ Groves 1962, pp. 66–67.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 328–331.^ "Secretary of Agriculture granting use of land for Demolition Range" (PDF). Los Alamos National Laboratory. 8 April 1943. Retrieved 6 April 2011.^ Hunner 2004, pp. 31–32.^ Hunner 2004, p. 29.^ Hunner 2004, p. 40.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 230–232.^ Jones 1985, pp. 67–71.^ a b "Site A/Plot M, Illinois, Decommissioned Reactor Site Fact Sheet" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 October 2014. Retrieved 3 December 2012.^ "FRONTIERS Research Highlights 1946–1996" (PDF). Officeof Public Affairs, Argonne National Laboratory. p. 11. Retrieved 23 March 2013.^ Walsh, John (19 June 1981). "A Manhattan Project Postscript" (PDF). Science. AAAS. 212 (4501): 1369–1371. Bibcode: 1981Sci...212.1369W. doi: 10.1126/science.212.4501.1369. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17746246. Retrieved 23 March 2013.^ Libby 1979, pp. 214–216.^ "CP-1 (Chicago Pile 1 Reactor)". Argonne National Laboratory. U. S. Department of Energy. Retrieved 12 April 2013.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 108–112.^ Jones 1985, pp. 195–196.^ Holl, Hewlett & Harris 1997, p. 428.^ Fermi, Enrico (1946). "The Development of the first chain reaction pile". Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 90: 20–24. JSTOR 3301034.^ Groves 1962, pp. 58–59.^ Groves 1962, pp. 68–69.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 108–111.^ Jones 1985, p. 342.^ Jones 1985, pp. 452–457.^ Thayer 1996, p. 16.^ Jones 1985, p. 401.^ Jones 1985, pp. 463–464.^ a b Waltham 2002, pp. 8–9.^ "ZEEP – Canada's First Nuclear Reactor". Canada Science and Technology Museum. Archived from the original on 6 March 2014.^ Jones 1985, pp. 8, 62.^ Jones 1985, pp. 107–108.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 201–202.^ Smyth 1945, p. 39.^ Smyth 1945, p. 92.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 85–86.^ Jones 1985, p. 295.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 285–288.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 291–292.^ Ruhoff & Fain 1962, pp. 3–9.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 31^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 87–88.^ Smyth 1945, pp. 154–156.^ Jones 1985, p. 157.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 22–23.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 30.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 64.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 96–97.^ Nichols 1987, p. 64.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 117–119.^ Smyth 1945, pp. 164–165.^ a b Fine & Remington 1972, p. 684.^ Nichols 1987, p. 42.^ a b Jones 1985, p. 133.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 153.^ Jones 1985, p. 67.^ Jones 1985, pp. 126–132.^ Jones 1985, pp. 138–139.^ "The Calutron Girls". Smith DRay. Retrieved 22 June 2011.^ Jones 1985, p. 140.^ Nichols 1987, p. 131.^ Jones 1985, pp. 143–148.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 30–32, 96–98^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 108.^ Jones 1985, pp. 150–151.^ Jones 1985, pp. 154–157.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 126–127.^ Jones 1985, pp. 158–165.^ Jones 1985, pp. 167–171.^ Smyth 1945, pp. 161–162.^ Jones 1985, p. 172.^ Jones 1985, pp. 175–177.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 170–172.^ Jones 1985, pp. 178–179.^ Jones 1985, pp. 180–183.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 300–302.^ a b c Hansen 1995b, p. V-112.^ a b Smyth 1945, pp. 130–132.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 204–206.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 208–210.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 211.^ a b Jones 1985, p. 209.^ Groves 1962, pp. 78–82.^ Jones 1985, p. 210.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 222–226.^ Thayer 1996, p. 139.^ Hanford Cultural and Historic Resources Program 2002, p. 1.16^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 216–217.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 304–307.^ Jones 1985, pp. 220–223.^ Howes & Herzenberg 1999, p. 45.^ Libby 1979, pp. 182–183.^ Thayer 1996, p. 10.^ a b Thayer 1996, p. 141.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 184–185.^ Hanford Cultural and Historic Resources Program 2002, pp. 2–4.15-2-4.18^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 204–205.^ Jones 1985, pp. 214–216.^ Jones 1985, p. 212.^ Thayer 1996, p. 11.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 219–222.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 226–229^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 250–252.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 242–244^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 312–313.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 129–130^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 246.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 130–131^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 245–248^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 311.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 245^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 294–296^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 299^ a b c Hansen 1995b, p. V-123.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 301–307^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 148–154^ Hawkins, Truslow & Smith 1961, p. 203.^ Hansen 1995a, p. I-298.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 235.^ Gilbert 1969, pp. 3–4.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 308–310^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 244–245.^ Baker, Hecker & Harbur 1983, pp. 144–145^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 288^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 290^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 330–331^ Jones 1985, p. 465.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 318–319.^ Jones 1985, pp. 478–481.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 174–175^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 365–367^ a b Jones 1985, p. 512.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 360–362^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 367–370^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 372–374^ Jones 1985, pp. 514–517.^ Jones 1985, p. 344.^ Jones 1985, p. 353.^ Jones 1985, pp. 349–350.^ Ulam 1976, pp. 143–144.^ Jones 1985, p. 350.^ Jones 1985, p. 358.^ Jones 1985, p. 361.^ Nichols 1987, p. 123.^ Jones 1985, p. 410.^ Jones 1985, p. 430.^ Wickware, Francis Sill (20 August 1945). "Manhattan Project: Its Scientists Have Harnessed Nature's Basic Force". Life. p. 91. Retrieved 25 November 2011.^ a b "Mystery Town Cradled Bomb: 75,000 in Oak Ridge, Tenn. Worked Hard and Wondered Long about Their Secret Job". Life. 20 August 1945. p. 94. Retrieved 25 November 2011.^ "The Secret City/ Calutron operators at their panels, in the Y-12 plant at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, during World War II". The Atlantic. 25 June 2012. Retrieved 25 June 2012.^ a b c Wellerstein, Alex (16 April 2012). "Oak Ridge Confidential, or Baseball for Bombs". Restricted Data. Retrieved 7 April 2013.^ a b c Wickware, Francis Sill (9 September 1946). "Oak Ridge". Life. p. 2. Retrieved 17 December 2014.^ Warren, Cecil (7 August 1945). "Atomic Bomb Secrecy Related By Ex-Worker". The Miami News. pp. 1–A.^ Sweeney 2001, pp. 196–198.^ Holloway 1994, pp. 76–79.^ Jones 1985, pp. 253–255.^ Sweeney 2001, pp. 198–200.^ a b "No News Leaked Out About Bomb". Lawrence Journal-World. Associated Press. 8 August 1945. p. 5. Retrieved 15 April 2012.^ Jones 1985, pp. 263–264.^ Jones 1985, p. 267.^ Jones 1985, pp. 258–260.^ Jones 1985, pp. 261–265.^ Groves 1962, pp. 142–145.^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, pp. 312–314.^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, p. 472.^ Broad, William J. (12 November 2007). "A Spy's Path: Iowa to A-Bomb to Kremlin Honor". The New York Times. pp. 1–2. Retrieved 2 July 2011.^ Holloway 1994, pp. 222–223.^ Groves 1962, pp. 191–192.^ Groves 1962, pp. 187–190.^ Jones 1985, p. 281.^ Groves 1962, p. 191.^ Jones 1985, p. 282.^ Groves 1962, pp. 194–196.^ Groves 1962, pp. 200–206.^ Jones 1985, pp. 283–285.^ Jones 1985, pp. 286–288.^ Groves 1962, p. 237.^ Jones 1985, pp. 289–290.^ Goudsmit 1947, pp. 174–176.^ Groves 1962, pp. 333–340.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 380–381^ a b Groves 1962, pp. 253–255.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 379–380^ Groves 1962, p. 184.^ Groves 1962, pp. 259–262.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 386–388^ Groves 1962, p. 311.^ Campbell 2005, pp. 39–40.^ Groves 1962, p. 341.^ Groves 1962, pp. 268–276.^ Groves 1962, p. 308.^ Jones 1985, pp. 530–532.^ Holloway 1994, pp. 116–117.^ "Potsdam and the Final Decision to Use the Bomb". The Manhattan Project: An Interactive History. US Department of Energy, Office of History and Heritage Resources. Archived from the original on 22 November 2010. Retrieved 19 December 2010.^ Groves 1962, pp. 315–319.^ Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 392–393^ "U. S. Strategic Bombing Survey: The Effects of the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki" (PDF). Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum. 19 June 1946: 9, 36. Retrieved 15 March 2009.^ Buttry, Daniel. "Life Arises from Hiroshima: Legacy of slavery still haunts Japan". Our Values. Retrieved 15 June 2016.^ "Hiroshima and Nagasaki Bombing – Facts about the Atomic Bomb". Hiroshimacommittee.org. Retrieved August 11, 2013.^ Nuke-Rebuke: Writers & Artists Against Nuclear Energy & Weapons (The Contemporary anthology series). The Spirit That Moves Us Press. 1 May 1984. pp. 22–29.^ Groves 1962, pp. 343–346.^ a b Hoddeson et al. 1993, pp. 396–397^ a b "The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II, A Collection of Primary Sources" (PDF). National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 162. George Washington University. 13 August 1945.^ "Lawrence Litz's Interview (2012)". Manhattan Project Voices. Retrieved 27 February 2015.^ Wellerstein, Alex (16 August 2013). "The Third Core's Revenge". Restricted Data. Retrieved 27 February 2015.^ a b Bernstein, Barton J. (Spring 1991). "Eclipsed by Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Early Thinking about Tactical Nuclear Weapons". International Security. 15 (4): 149–173. ISSN 0162-2889. JSTOR 2539014.^ Ahnfeldt 1966, pp. 886–889.^ Home & Low 1993, p. 537.^ Frisch 1970, pp. 107–115.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 399–400.^ "Petition to the President of the United States, 17 July 1945. Miscellaneous Historical Documents Collection". Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum. Retrieved 20 October 2012.^ Groves 1962, pp. 348–362.^ Nichols 1987, p. 226.^ a b Jones 1985, pp. 592–593.^ Hansen 1995b, p. V-152.^ a b Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 625.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 225–226.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 216–217.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 624.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 630, 646^ Nichols 1987, p. 234.^ Jones 1985, p. 594.^ Grodzins & Rabinowitch 1963, p. vii.^ Gosling 1994, pp. 55–57.^ Groves 1962, pp. 394–398.^ Jones 1985, p. 600.^ a b Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 723–724.^ Nichols 1987, pp. 34–35.^ "Atomic Bomb Seen as Cheap at Price". Edmonton Journal. 7 August 1945. p. 1. Retrieved 1 January 2012.^ O'Brien 2015, pp. 47–48.^ Laurence, William L. (26 September 1945). "Drama of the Atomic Bomb Found Climax in July 16 Test". The New York Times. Retrieved 1 October 2012.^ Sweeney 2001, pp. 204–205.^ Holloway 1994, pp. 59–60.^ "The Community LOOW Project: A Review of Environmental Investigations and Remediation at the Former Lake Ontario Ordnance Works" (PDF). King Groundwater Science, Inc. September 2008.^ "Niagara Falls Storage Site, New York" (PDF). U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 31 August 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 February 2017.^ Jenks, Andrew (July 2002). "Model City USA: The Environmental Cost of Victory in World War II and the Cold War". Environmental History. 12 (77): 552.^ De Palma, Anthony (10 March 2004). "A Toxic Waste Capital Looks to Spread it Around; Upstate Dump is the Last in the Northeast". New York Times.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 633–637.^ Weinberg 1961, p. 161.^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, pp. 74–76.^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, pp. 72–74.^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, pp. 490–493, 514–515^ Hewlett & Duncan 1969, pp. 252–253.^ Hewlett & Anderson 1962, p. 655.^ "Manhattan Project National Historical Park". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved 2 August 2015.^ "Manhattan Project National Historical Park". Department of Energy. Retrieved 10 November 2015. References General, administrative, and diplomatic histories Bernstein, Barton J. (June 1976). "The Uneasy Alliance: Roosevelt, Churchill, and the Atomic Bomb, 1940–1945". The Western Political Quarterly. University of Utah. 29 (2): 202–230. doi: 10.2307/448105. JSTOR 448105. Campbell, Richard H. (2005). The Silverplate Bombers: A History and Registry of the Enola Gay and Other B-29s Configured to Carry Atomic Bombs. Jefferson, North Carolina: Mc Farland & Company. ISBN 0-7864-2139-8. OCLC 58554961. Fine, Lenore; Remington, Jesse A. (1972). The Corps of Engineers: Construction in the United States (PDF). Washington, D. C.: United States Army Center of Military History. OCLC 834187. Retrieved 25 August 2013. Freeman Lindsey A. (2015). Longing for the Bomb: Oak Ridge and Atomic Nostalgia. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Frisch, David H. (June 1970). "Scientists and the Decision to Bomb Japan". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science. 26 (6): 107–115. ISSN 0096-3402. Gilbert, Keith V. (1969). History of the Dayton Project (PDF). Miamisburg, Ohio: Mound Laboratory, Atomic Energy Commission. OCLC 650540359. Retrieved 31 October 2014. Gosling, Francis George (1994). The Manhattan Project: Making the Atomic Bomb. Washington, DC: United States Department of Energy, History Division. OCLC 637052193. Gowing, Margaret (1964). Britain and Atomic Energy, 1935–1945. London: Macmillan Publishing. OCLC 3195209. Grodzins, Morton; Rabinowitch, Eugene, eds. (1963). The Atomic Age: Scientists in National and World Affairs. New York: Basic Book Publishing. OCLC 15058256. Hewlett, Richard G.; Anderson, Oscar E. (1962). The New World, 1939–1946 (PDF). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-520-07186-7. OCLC 637004643. Retrieved 26 March 2013. Hewlett, Richard G.; Duncan, Francis (1969). Atomic Shield, 1947–1952. A History of the United States Atomic Energy Commission. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-520-07187-5. OCLC 3717478. Holl, Jack M.; Hewlett, Richard G.; Harris, Ruth R. (1997). Argonne National Laboratory, 1946–96. University of Illinois Press. ISBN 978-0-252-02341-5. Holloway, David (1994). Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy, 1939–1956. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-06056-4. OCLC 29911222. Howes, Ruth H.; Herzenberg, Caroline L. (1999). Their Day in the Sun: Women of the Manhattan Project. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 1-56639-719-7. OCLC 49569088. Hunner, Jon (2004). Inventing Los Alamos: The Growth of an Atomic Community. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 978-0-8061-3891-6. OCLC 154690200. Johnson, Charles; Jackson, Charles (1981). City Behind a Fence: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1942–1946. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. ISBN 0-87049-303-5. OCLC 6331350. Jones, Vincent (1985). Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb (PDF). Washington, D. C.: United States Army Center of Military History. OCLC 10913875. Retrieved 25 August 2013. O'Brien, Phillips Payson (2015). How the War was Won. Cambridge publisher=Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-01475-6. OCLC 907550561. Phelps, Stephen (2010). The Tizard Mission: the Top-Secret Operation that Changed the Course of World War II. Yardley, Pennsylvania: Westholme. ISBN 978-1-59416-116-2. OCLC 642846903. Rhodes, Richard (1986). The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-671-44133-7. OCLC 13793436. Stacey, C. P. (1970). Arms, Men and Government: The War Policies of Canada, 1939 – 1945 (PDF). The Queen's Printer by authority of the Minister of National Defence. OCLC 610317261. Sweeney, Michael S. (2001). Secrets of Victory: The Office of Censorship and the American Press and Radio in World War II. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 0-8078-2598-0. Villa, Brian L. (1981). "Chapter 11: Alliance Politics and Atomic Collaboration, 1941–1943". In Sidney, Aster. The Second World War as a National Experience: Canada. The Canadian Committee for the History of the Second World War, Department of National Defence. OCLC 11646807. Retrieved 8 December 2014. Williams, Mary H. (1960). Chronology 1941–1945. Washington, D. C.: Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army. OCLC 1358166. Technical histories Ahnfeldt, Arnold Lorentz, ed. (1966). Radiology in World War II. Washington, D. C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army. OCLC 630225. Baker, Richard D.; Hecker, Siegfried S.; Harbur, Delbert R. (1983). Plutonium: A Wartime Nightmare but a Metallurgist's Dream (PDF). Los Alamos Science. Los Alamos National Laboratory. pp. 142–151. Retrieved 22 November 2010. Ermenc, Joseph J., ed. (1989). Atomic Bomb Scientists: Memoirs, 1939–1945. Westport, Connecticut and London: Meckler. ISBN 0-88736-267-2. (1967 interview with Groves)Hanford Cultural and Historic Resources Program, U. S. Department of Energy (2002). History of the Plutonium Production Facilities, 1943–1990. Richland, Washington: Hanford Site Historic District. OCLC 52282810. Hansen, Chuck (1995a). Volume I: The Development of US Nuclear Weapons. Swords of Armageddon: US Nuclear Weapons Development since 1945. Sunnyvale, California: Chukelea Publications. ISBN 978-0-9791915-1-0. OCLC 231585284. Hansen, Chuck (1995b). Volume V: US Nuclear Weapons Histories. Swords of Armageddon: US Nuclear Weapons Development since 1945. Sunnyvale, California: Chukelea Publications. ISBN 978-0-9791915-0-3. OCLC 231585284. Hawkins, David; Truslow, Edith C.; Smith, Ralph Carlisle (1961). Manhattan District history, Project Y, the Los Alamos story (PDF). Los Angeles: Tomash Publishers. ISBN 978-0-938228-08-0. Retrieved 20 February 2014. Originally published as Los Alamos Report LAMS-2532Hoddeson, Lillian; Henriksen, Paul W.; Meade, Roger A.; Westfall, Catherine L. (1993). Critical Assembly: A Technical History of Los Alamos During the Oppenheimer Years, 1943–1945. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-44132-3. OCLC 26764320. Home, R. W.; Low, Morris F. (September 1993). "Postwar Scientific Intelligence Missions to Japan". Isis. University of Chicago Press on behalf of History of Science Society. 84 (3): 527–537. doi: 10.1086/356550. JSTOR 235645. Ruhoff, John; Fain, Pat (June 1962). The First Fifty Critical days. Mallinckrodt Uranium Division News. Vol. 7. St. Louis: Mallinckrodt Incorporated. Archived from the original on 30 March 2015. Retrieved 30 October 2010. Serber, Robert; Rhodes, Richard (1992). The Los Alamos Primer: The First Lectures on How to Build an Atomic Bomb. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-07576-5. OCLC 23693470. (Available on Wikimedia Commons)Smyth, Henry De Wolf (1945). Atomic Energy for Military Purposes: the Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb under the Auspices of the United States Government, 1940–1945. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. OCLC 770285. Thayer, Harry (1996). Management of the Hanford Engineer Works In World War II: How the Corps, Du Pont and the Metallurgical Laboratory Fast Tracked the Original Plutonium Works. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers Press. ISBN 0-7844-0160-8. OCLC 34323402. Waltham, Chris (20 June 2002). An Early History of Heavy Water (PDF). Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia. ar Xiv: physics/0206076. Bibcode: 2002physics...6076W. Retrieved 30 October 2010. Weinberg, Alvin M. (21 July 1961). "Impact of Large-Scale Science on the United States". Science, New Series. American Association for the Advancement of Science. 134 (3473): 161–164. Bibcode: 1961Sci...134..161W. doi: 10.1126/science.134.3473.161. JSTOR 1708292. Participant accounts Bethe, Hans A. (1991). The Road from Los Alamos. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-671-74012-1. OCLC 22661282. Compton, Arthur (1956). Atomic Quest. New York: Oxford University Press. OCLC 173307. Goudsmit, Samuel A. (1947). Alsos. New York: Henry Schuman. ISBN 0-938228-09-9. OCLC 8805725. Groves, Leslie (1962). Now it Can be Told: The Story of the Manhattan Project. New York: Harper & Row. ISBN 0-306-70738-1. OCLC 537684. Libby, Leona Marshall (1979). Uranium People. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. ISBN 0-684-16242-3. OCLC 4665032. Nichols, Kenneth David (1987). The Road to Trinity: A Personal Account of How America's Nuclear Policies Were Made. New York: William Morrow and Company. ISBN 0-688-06910-X. OCLC 15223648. Ulam, Stanislaw (1976). Adventures of a Mathematician. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. ISBN 0-520-07154-9. OCLC 1528346. External links"U. S. Department of Energy, OSTI, R&D Accomplishments: The Manhattan Project". Retrieved 8 May 2013."U. S. Department of Energy, OSTI, R&D Accomplishments: The Manhattan Project—Its Story: Background, Establishment, Operations, Immediate Influences, and Long-term Influences". Retrieved 8 May 2013. "Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues". Washington and Lee University. Retrieved 10 August 2011. "The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II, A Collection of Primary Sources". George Washington University. Retrieved 27 July 2011. "Atomic Heritage Foundation". Atomic Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 27 July 2011. "Voices of the Manhattan Project". Atomic Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 10 February 2015. Features hundreds of audio/visual interviews with Manhattan Project veterans. "History Center: Los Alamos National Laboratory". Los Alamos National Laboratory. Retrieved 27 July 2011. "ORNL: The first 50 Years: History of ORNL". ORNL Review. 25 (3). Archived from the original on 2 June 2016. Retrieved 13 October 2015.v t e Manhattan Project Timeline Sites Ames Berkeley Chicago Dayton Hanford Inyokern Los Alamos Montreal New York Oak Ridge Trinity Wendover Heavy water sites Administrators Vannevar Bush Arthur Compton James Conant Priscilla Duffield Thomas Farrell Leslie Groves John Lansdale Ernest Lawrence James Marshall Franklin Matthias Dorothy Mc Kibbin Kenneth Nichols Robert Oppenheimer Deak Parsons William Purnell Frank Spedding Charles Thomas Paul Tibbets Bud Uanna Harold Urey Stafford Warren Ed Westcott Roscoe Wilson Scientists Luis Alvarez Robert Bacher Hans Bethe Aage Bohr Niels Bohr Norris Bradbury James Chadwick John Cockcroft Harry Daghlian Enrico Fermi Richard Feynman Val Fitch James Franck Klaus Fuchs Maria Goeppert-Mayer George Kistiakowsky George Koval Willard Libby Edwin Mc Millan Mark Oliphant Norman Ramsey Isidor Isaac Rabi James Rainwater Bruno Rossi Glenn Seaborg Emilio Segrè Louis Slotin Henry De Wolf Smyth Leo Szilard Edward Teller Stanisław Ulam John von Neumann John Wheeler Eugene Wigner Robert Wilson Leona Woods Operations Alsos Mission Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Operation Crossroads Operation Peppermint Project Alberta Silverplate 509th Composite Group Enola Gay Bockscar The Great Artiste Weapons Fat Man Little Boy Pumpkin bomb Thin Man Related topics Atomic Energy Act of 1946 British contribution Chicago Pile-1 Demon core Einstein–Szilárd letter Interim Committee Oppenheimer security hearing Plutonium Quebec Agreement Ra La Experiment S-1 Executive Committee S-50 Project Smyth Report Uranium X-10 Graphite Reactor Manhattan Projectv t e World War IIv t e New Mexico during World War IIPortals Access related topics World War II portal Nuclear technology portal Chemistry portal Physics portal History of science portal Intelligence portal International relations portal United States Army portal Weapons of mass destruction portal Canada portal New Mexico portal Tennessee portal Washington portal United Kingdom portal Find out more on Wikipedia's Sister projects Media from Commons Textbooks from Wikibooks Quotations from Wikiquote Authority control World Cat Identities VIAF: 124438256 LCCN: n88074979 ISNI: 0000 0001 2242 7230 GND: 4278070-6NLA: 35354474Categories: Manhattan Project Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Code names Explosives engineering History of the Manhattan Project Military history of Canada during World War IIMilitary history of the United Kingdom during World War II Military history of the United States during World War IIMilitary projects Nuclear history of the United States Nuclear weapons of the United States Nuclear weapons program of the United States Secret military programs 1942 establishments in the United States1946 disestablishments in the United States Projects established in 1942  New Deal Test 39 terms megan334New Deal Test Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Sort Emergency Banking Relief Act (EBRA)- Immediate purpose Authorized the Treasury Department to inspect and close banks that weren't strong enough Emergency Banking Relief Act- long term goal to restore public confidence in banks Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933- immediate purpose Established FDIC, insured up to $5,000Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933- long term goal to restore public confidence in banks Federal Securities Act- immediate purpose required corporations to provide complete info on all stock offerings Federal Securities act- long term goal restore confidence in the stock market National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA)-immediate purpose provided money to states to create jobs with the construction of schools and community buildings National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA)- long term goal promote industrial growth Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA)- immediate purpose provided money to families to offset prices, paid farmers to stop farming, lowered supply and brought demand up to increase price Agricultural AAdjustment Act (AAA)- long term goal raise crop prices and increase farmers' income Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)- immediate purpose built dams to provide cheap electricity to the Tennessee Valley region Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)- long term goal create prosperity in a poverty stricken area Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)- immediate purpose put people to work outside, young men ages 18 to 23Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)- long term goal reduce unemployment and create jobs Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA)- immediate purpose provided direct relief and basic needs Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA)- long term goal raised self confidence because people felt like they earned the money Public Works Administration (PWA)- immediate purpose provided money to states to create jobs by building schools and community buildings Public Works Administration (PWA)- long term goal reduce unemployment and create jobs Civil Works Administration (CWA)- immediate purpose provided 4 million immediate jobs by building schools and roads and paying teachers Civil Works Administration (CWA)- long term goal reuce unemployment and create jobs Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC)- immediate purpose helped American refinace their homes to avoid foreclosure Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC)- long term goal kept families in their homesproblems faced by farmers, migrant workers, and others living in rural areas soil depletion lead to the dust storms, lived in poverty Laws passed to help farmers, migrant workers, and others living in rural areas 2nd Agricultural Adjustment Act, resettlement administration, rural electrification administrationproblems faced by students and other young people unemployment, poverty, helplessness, loss of dignitylaws passed to help students and other young people National Youth Administration (NYA)problems faced by teachers, writers, artists, and other professionals unemployment, poverty, helplessness, loss of dignitylaws passed to help teachers, writers, artists, and other professionals W. P. A.problems faced by all workers, including the unemployed unemployment, poverty, helplessness, loss of dignitylaws passed to help all workers, including the unemployed Works Progress administration, Fair Labor Standards act, Wagnor act, National Labor Relations boardproblems faced by retired workers poverty, helplessness, loss of dignitylaws passed to help retired workers Social Security actproblems faced by the disabled, needy elderly, and dependent mothers and children poverty, helplessness, loss of dignity Wagnor act established minimum wage Agricultural Adjustment act assistance to farmers Rural Electrification Administration electricity to rural areas Resetlement administration helped tentant farmers buy land Tennessee Valley Authority brought cheap electricty to the Tennessee Valley Securities and Exchange commissions monitor the stock market Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Features Quizlet Live Quizlet Learn Diagrams Flashcards Mobile Help Sign up Help Center Honor Code Community Guidelines Students Teachers About Company Press Jobs Privacy Terms Follow us Language© 2018 Quizlet Inc.  Nuclear Proliferation Today History Page Type: Nuclear Issues Today Date: Thursday, July 3, 2014Although the use of Little Boy and Fat Man brought World War II to a decisive halt, the unprecedented use of nuclear weapons served as the starting point for an ongoing era of nuclear proliferation. Stockpiles rapidly grew as the United States and Soviet Union became embroiled in the Cold War, and rapid scientific advancement led to the creation of far more powerful weapons. Today, nuclear nonproliferation stands among the most pressing issues facing the international community. Manhattan Project Even prior to the United States' use of atomic weapons, the Soviet Union's atomic project was already underway. Using spies recruited at Manhattan Project sites - famous among which are Klaus Fuchs, George Koval, and Ted Hall, among others - the Soviets were able to accelerate their nuclear program by several years. Cold War Vertical Proliferation Following the war, the countries of the newly-founded United Nations needed to address the future of nuclear weapons. The United States proposed the Baruch Plan, calling for disarmament, a ban on production of nuclear weapons, the open exchange of scientific information required to use nuclear energy to achieve peaceful ends, and the use of nuclear power for peaceful purposes. The Soviet Union, citing issues of trust should they consent to such a plan under the western-dominated United Nations, rejected the idea. As no firm agreement could be reached, the US and USSR plunged into a decades-long nuclear arms race. Partially as a result of successful espionage, the Soviets were quick to develop their first atom bomb. Access to uranium, which was much more common than previously thought, was initially achieved through mining in Eastern Bloc satellite states. Defying all expectations, the Soviet Union was able to detonate its first atomic bomb on August 29, 1949. As neither country intended to cease nuclear development following the construction of the atom bomb, the United States and Soviet Union were in a race to create the world’s first hydrogen bomb – a weapon far more powerful than that dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Having had a head start, Edward Teller's team, sanctioned by the newly formed United States Department of Defense, tested their first thermonuclear weapon on November 1, 1952. The following August, the Soviets followed suit with their own H-bomb, RDS-6 (referred to as Joe 4 by the US). Despite the continuous technological developments surrounding nuclear armaments, the lack of a long-range delivery mechanism dampened the deterrent effect of said weapons. Originally, the only way to drop a nuclear bomb was through the use of strategic bombers. This changed with the production of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). To display advancement of ICBM technology, the US and USSR became intertwined in the Space Race. Although the official goal was to prove superiority in space exploration, the delivery mechanism for satellites was fundamentally the same as that for thermonuclear warheads. Thus, whichever state could successfully put a device in orbit would prove capable of reaching the other with a mounted warhead. The Soviet Union was the first to showcase the capability for long-range nuclear warfare when it launched the Sputnik satellite into orbit in 1957. The United States was slow to counter, taking two years to launch its first satellite. At this time, both states had the capacity to obliterate each other’s major population centers. Although the United States and Soviet Union continued to improve and expand their arsenals, a stalemate of sorts had been reached. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) ensured, theoretically, that neither state would conduct a nuclear strike on the other, as nuclear retaliation would prove inevitable. This concept, known as deterrence, did not guarantee peaceful interaction, as evidenced by the Cuban Missile Crisis. Even though both sides were armed with nuclear weapon-equipped ICBMs, the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba almost led to the breakout of nuclear war. Cold War Horizontal Proliferation During and after the Cold War, several countries developed nuclear weapons programs. Timeline of First Nuclear Tests16 July 1945, United States: Trinity Test, Alamogordo, NM, Plutonium Implosion Device (20 KT)29 August 1949 Soviet Union: “Joe-1” aka First Lightning, Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan, Plutonium Implosion Device (22 KT)3 October 1952 United Kingdom: Operation Hurricane, Montebello Islands, Western Australia, Plutonium Implosion Device (25 KT)13 February 1960 France: “Gerboise Bleue” or Blue Jerboa, Reggane, Algerian Sahara Desert, Plutonium Device (70KT)16 October 1964 People’s Republic of China: “596,” Lop Nur, Xinjiang Province in North Western China, Uranium Implosion Device (22 KT)18 May 1974 India: “Smiling Buddha” aka Pokhran I, Peaceful Nuclear Explosion (PNE), Pokhran in the Western Deserts of Rajasthan, Plutonium Implosion Device (8 KT)28 May 1998 Pakistan: Chagai I, Balochistan Province in Southwest Pakistan, series of 5 tests using uranium implosion devices (maximum yield 40 KT)9 October 2006 North Korea: Mt. Punggye-ri in the North Hamgyong Province, Plutonium Implosion Device (less than 1 KT)Other Nuclear Programs Israel: Israel maintains the position that it will not formally introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East by testing a device. However, its nuclear reactor in the Negev desert named Dimona, constructed in early 1958, is believed to have gone critical shortly after the US discovered the facility in the early 1960s. By the end of the decade Israel most likely had assembled a bomb. South Africa: South Africa pursued a nuclear weapons capability from the 1960s-1970s. In August 1977 the Soviet Union picked up intelligence that the country was preparing for a cold test of a nuclear device at Vastrap in the Kalahari Desert. The United States and its European allies successfully convinced the country to refrain from conducting the test. Subsequently, the country moved its nuclear program to an underground facility at Pelindaba. Later in September 1979, a United States Vela satellite detected a double flash, a common feature of a nuclear detonation, off of the country’s coast. While many officials and historians suspect that the incident was an actual test potentially involving Israel, evidence is inconclusive and the event remains controversial to this day. However, by the time Nelson Mandela became President in 1994, following the end of apartheid, South Africa had voluntarily dismantled its nuclear weapons. Proliferation Country-by-Country United Kingdom: Initially, the British were barred access to United States nuclear design data. The threat of espionage necessitated heightened security surrounding the American nuclear program. Regardless, the United Kingdom was able to detonate its first atom bomb on October 3, 1952, thanks to the expertise of British Manhattan Project scientists. When nuclear cooperation with the United States resumed in 1958, the British deployed submarine-based American Polaris missiles equipped with nuclear warheads. Having such weapons stationed off the coast of the small island guaranteed a deterrent effect. France: In the late 1940s, the French were successfully operating their own nuclear reactors. It was not until the late 1950s, however, that France decided to accelerate its nuclear program to achieve nuclear deterrence. On February 13, 1960, the French detonated their first atomic bomb in Algeria. People's Republic of China: In the 1950s, the Chinese gained the support of the Soviet Union in developing their nuclear program. Despite the ideological Sino-Soviet split in the latter part of that decade, the Chinese managed to detonate their first atomic device on October 16, 1964. Israel: Although Israel's nuclear program is shrouded in ambiguity, it is widely believed that Israel is in possession of nuclear weapons. Illegally obtained evidence provided by a former Israeli nuclear technician, Mordechai Vanunu, illustrates that the state has nuclear capabilities. Development of this program likely began shortly after World War II. At the time, the French were in collaboration with the Israelis and provided them with a research reactor in the 1950s. India: India became the next country to detonate its first nuclear device. Work on a nuclear weapon commenced in the 1960s, but was not considered a priority. Following the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971, however, the Indian government accelerated work on this project. In 1972, authorization was granted for the production and testing of a nuclear device. The "Smiling Buddha" was detonated on May 18, 1974. Pakistan: In response to the nuclear threat emanating from bordering India, Pakistan began work on its nuclear program in 1972. Twenty-six years later, Pakistan tested its first five nuclear weapons on May 28, 1998, as a reponse to India's Pokhran II test earlier that month, making it the eighth nuclear state. Other countries: Throughout the Cold War, several states had possession of nuclear weapons, but destroyed or surrendered their stockpiles. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine agreed to get rid of their nuclear weapons following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The South African apartheid-era government eliminated their stockpile, worried that the weapons could fall into the hands of militants. Non-Proliferation Many view the proliferation of nuclear weapons as a danger to the international community. North Korea and Iran are the current epicenters of concern regarding the issue of horizontal proliferation. There are similarly fears that non-state actors - especially terrorist groups - may acquire these weapons. India and Pakistan have been on the cusp of nuclear war, showing that the logic of mutually assured destruction may not be as sound as previously thought. Thus, a number of steps toward nonproliferation have been taken. The Pugwash Conference, organized by Joseph Rotblat, was the first major, non-governmental effort to curb the proliferation of nuclear weapons. This conference was the result of the Russell-Einstein Manifesto, and initially involved twenty-two scientists from countries on both sides of the Cold War divide. Over the years, Pugwash convened with the goal of reducing production and stockpiles of nuclear weapons. Rotblat, along with the Pugwash Conferences, was awarded the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize for these efforts. The most crucial treaty dealing with the issue of nuclear weapons proliferation, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), came into force on March 5, 1970. Noting that the trend of horizontal proliferation would inevitably continue, the United States and Soviet Union collaborated to prevent such an outcome. This treaty identified the United States, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, France, and China as nuclear weapons states. For more information about the treaty, visit our page on the NPT. More Historical Resources: Nobel Media AB 2013. Updated 2014. "The Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. "Asia Society. 2014. "A Brief History of Nuclear Weapon States."  The Manhattan Project The Manhattan Project Introduction The events surrounding the invention and use of two atomic weapons by the United States on Japan during WWII are among the most controversial and significant developments in modern American history. For this reason, the topic provides a superb lesson for exploring the role of technology in society. In response to developments in Germany, president Franklin Roosevelt ordered the creation of an atomic weapon. Dubbed the Manhattan Project, this secret endeavor brought together scientists and engineers in a $2 billion effort that led to the creation of two atomic weapons and ushered in the nuclear age. Objectives The objectives of this lesson include understanding:1. the technological and scientific requirements for making the atomic bomb2. the immediate military and political context of dropping the bomb, and3. the national and global implications of the bomb Part 1: Making the Bomb A good place to begin is with a discussion of the technology of the bomb. For a basic discussion of this see the Atomic Museum web site:http://www.atomicmuseum.com/tour/manhattanproject.cfm. A timeline of the political and scientific events associated with the development of nuclear energy and the bomb is available from the Energy Department at: http://www.energy.gov/about/timeline1939-1950.htm Some of the personnel involved in the project, such as J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Leo Szilard, and Albert Einstein, are highlighted at http://www.mbe.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/index.htm . A key piece in the history of the project's development is Einstein's letter to FDR, sited in the Leo Szilard Home Page, http://www.dannen.com/ae-fdr.html . Questions to consider include: What prompted Einstein to write FDR in 1939? Why did FDR decide to proceed? How did the Manhattan Project come together? How did scientists develop the first atomic weapons? What does the Manhattan Project tell us about the growing relationship between the government and the scientific community during WWII? Part 2: Immediate Effects Have your students explore the destruction of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Images and a discussion of this can be found on the Atomic Bomb Museum website and the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Musuem (warning: some are very graphic). As with all web sites, your students should first explore the web site according to the documents analysis sheets. Who are the authors and what is their purpose for this web site? Especially revealing are the accounts of survivors, found on the websites above, and the account of Colonel Paul Tibbets, commander of the Enola Gay, the plane that dropped the first atomic weapon on Hiroshima on 6 August 1945, FOUND HERE . While researching these accounts, have your students keep the following in mind:1. How did Tibbets and others on the Enola Gay feel when they witnessed the explosion?2. What did those whose survived report?3. What lessons from the bombing do these survivors wish to impart to us? Examine some of the images used and again evaluate their purpose: What message do they wish to send? With these two parts done, have students assess the decision to drop the bomb on Japan. The essential question is Was Truman justified in using two weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What were the military reasons for the decision? Were there moral issues at stake and what were they? The Truman Library has an excellent lesson plan for this on their web site, http://www.trumanlibrary.org/teacher/abomb.htm . The Truman site contains primary documents from President Truman, including elements from his diary and executive orders. Discovery has another good lesson plan. Another useful set of documents on the debate can be found at the Leo Szilard page, http://www.dannen.com/decision/index.html . Szilard fought against using the bomb and dedicated his career afterwards to fighting the spread of nuclear weapons. Have students read the pros and cons of the decision and conduct a debate in class. Teachers can also have students research the issue outside of class and bring their papers to class for discussion. One important factor is analyzing how Truman's justification for dropping the bomb changed. What were the military and political reasons for the decision? Did race and revenge play a role? Part 3: Legacy of the Bomb Debates on the post-WWII use of atomic energy began during the Manhattan Project. Begin discussion of these with primary documents on the Truman Library web site,http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/post_war.htm What did policymakers in the United States foresee about the use of atomic energy? What did they not discuss? What were the arguments for further creation of atomic weapons? What did scientists like Leo Szilard argue regarding the use of atomic energy? As with the decision to drop the bomb, teachers can organize their class into groups and have them debate the issue of atomic weapons and the effects of nuclear energy. Have students begin to outline some of the social and political changes that resulted from the Manhattan Project. This provides a good bridge to lectures on 1950s America. Topics to consider include the arms race and Cold War, nuclear power, and the growth of connections between government and the scientific community. Go to the Seattle Times web site to find an internet-based debate using two web sites, one pro and one con,http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/trinity/supplement/internet.html Further Reading: Rhodes, Richard, The Making of the Atomic Bomb Stoff, Michael B., Fanton, Jonathan F., and Williams, R. Hal, The Manhattan Project Whitfield, Stephen, The Culture of the Cold War  The End Game: the consequences of World War II 7 Ianuarie 6, 2010The End Game: the consequences of World War II 7by George Visan • Analysis, English content, George Visan, International Affairs, Posts by author, War and Politics • Tags: Bretton Woods, Cold War, consequences, Decolonization, End Game, Europe, European Great Power System, flank powers, France, Great Britain, Helsinki Accords, international politics, international system, Italy, Japan, market economy, nuclear monopoly, Polish-German border, United Nations, USA, USSR, World War II, Zhu Enlai Potsdam Conference (courtesy of Wikipedia and Bundesarchiv)It is said that when asked about what he thought of the French Revolution, the Chinese foreign minister Zhu Enlai replied that it is too early to say. This famous quip about the French Revolution can be applied also to the consequences of World War II. This article is the final installment in a series of articles which dealt with the greatest conflict ever to have been fought and provides a short-list of the far reaching consequences of this event. The list of consequences should not be viewed by the readers as being definitive and I strongly urge them to add more or comment on them. Political consequences: The end of World War II in September 1945 marked the end of an international system centered on the European Great Powers. At the end of World War II Germany, Italy and most of France lay in ruins while Great Britain was bankrupt. Now there were only two great powers left: the United States which at the end of the war had an intact economy, an intact army and a virtual monopoly on the manufacture and employment of nuclear weapons; the other great power left standing, but nevertheless scarred by the Nazi onslaught was the Soviet Union, which had a large and intact army and was in control of almost half the European continent. The final demise of the European Great Power system led to the development of a bipolar world dominated by the flank powers: the United States and the USSR. The bipolar configuration of the international system was marked for the next 50 years by the Cold War – a political and ideological rivalry on a global scale between the US and the Soviet Union. With the end of the war and the demise of the European Great Power System ( Kennedy, pp. 357-373) the process of decolonization occurred. The defeated powers which had overseas colonies or conquered overseas territories were forced by the allies to surrender them – this was the case of Italy and Japan. France and Great Britain, the great European colonizing nations were gradually forced to give up their empires due to the cost of maintaining colonies, the relative weakness of the metropolises in the international system, the development of violent and/or peaceful national liberation movements and foreign pressure coming from the US and USSR or from former colonies which supported the process of de-colonization. The demise of the European Great Power System and the destruction caused by the war led the Western European nation to explore and then embark on the process of European integration. Behind the protection provided by the armed forces of the United States deployed in Europe to curtail a possible Soviet invasion, the foundations of the European Union could be laid. A further consequence of the World War II was the redrawing and stabilization of the borders of Europe. Indeed most of today’s European borders are the result of World War II, the best example being the Polish-German border. The basic configuration of the Europe’s borders after World War II was confirmed by the signing of the Helsinki Accords in 1975. Despite post-Cold War evolutions in Europe, which saw the break-up of the Soviet Union, the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the peaceful dissolution of Czechoslovakia the vast majority of Europe’s current borders originated as a consequence of World War II. Another consequence of World War II was a renewed and somewhat misplaced trust in international institutions as a means to manage international politics. Despite the fact that it did not achieve its objectives of preventing conflict, the United Nations provided the necessary framework and the arena to discuss and debate some of the issues of the International System. Economic consequences: The only nation to emerge with its economy intact out of World War II was the United States. Europe and Asia had been devastated by the war and the Soviet Union did not fare better either in economic terms, despite being one of the winners. The economic order created at Bretton Woods has partially survived to this day, being overtaken however by new economic developments. It should also be understood that the circumstances that led to the creation of the Bretton Woods international economic regime were exceptional and unique. The Bretton Woods regime is responsible in many ways for the post-war economic development and prosperity. The advent of the Cold War divided the world economy in two camps: free market economies and soviet style planed economies. The former colonies that gained their independence after World War II tried to combine the best of both worlds in order to develop and created economies that were neither free market nor planned (although most tended to be planned). The economic results in this case were dubious at best, the poor economic record of planned economies forcing the non-aligned nations to move towards market economies in the late 1980s. George VIŞANAnunțuri Evaluează asta:4 Votes Citeşte şi dă mai departe: Dă clic pentru a partaja pe RSS (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Dă clic pentru a partaja pe Linked In (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Dă clic pentru a partaja pe Twitter (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Dă clic pentru a partaja pe Abonează-te pe Facebook (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Dă clic pentru a partaja pe Print & PDF (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Partajează pe Facebook (Se deschide în fereastră nouă)Mai multÎncarc... Similare World War II: Seventy years afterÎn "Analysis"AppeasementÎn "Analysis"Russia Asserts Itself as a Great Power Again After the debacle of the Soviet Union in 1991 and its dissolution, the loss of its sphere of influence in Central an Eastern Europe, the economic and political woes of the 1990’s as well as lowed failures in its foreign and security policies (the 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo and…În "Analysis"  History 185 terms englishrocks45History Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Maybe later Sort Labor sources changed because of increased demand. How did the escalation of World War II affect the industrial sector of the global economy? Germany Which nation was a member of the Axis powers during World War II? Neville Chamberlain Which world leader was not one of the "Big Three"? Resources for civilians were reserved for the military. Why was this request made of the American public? I hope every American who possibly can will grow a victory garden this year. We found out last year that even the small gardens helped. . . . Because of the greatly increased demands in 1944, we will need all the food we can grow. —President Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1944Kristallnacht Which term refers to the coordinated attack by Nazis against Jewish homes, businesses, and synagogues throughout Germany in 1938?neutrality What foreign policy stance did the U. S. adopt in response to Nazi aggression during the 1930s?isolationism Americans' disillusionment over World War I led the United States government to adopt a policy o Winston Churchill Who was the Prime Minister of Great Britain during World War II? It helped stimulate a financial market suffering from depression. How did World War II affect the U. S. economy? Nuremberg Leaders of Germany were prosecuted after World War II to decide if they had been guilty of crimes against humanity. These war crime trials were known by the name of which city where they were held?rationing Which government action is used to limit the amount of scarce goods citizens can buy during wartime?exclusion of Jewish people in Germany What was the goal of the Nazi leadership based on this excerpt? The Nazi leaders sought to drive the Jews out of Germany by systematically isolating them from German society and by eliminating them from the German economy, removing any opportunity for them to make a living in Germany. —United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Guaranteed low-interest mortgages for homes Which phrase accurately completes the diagram below? Service Readjustment Act (GI Bill)Franklin D. Roosevelt — Asking Congress to declare war on Japan WHO QUOTE WHAT? "a date that will live in infamy" ?lend-lease Which U. S. policy provided Great Britain with military supplies during World War II? The United States abandoned its policy of isolationism. How did U. S. foreign policy change immediately after Pearl Harbor? FDR Accomplishments of President ? • Longest serving U. S. president • Led the United States through the Great Depression • Pressed for a major expansion of federal authorityimplementation of the Final Solution How did Nazi leaders address the concern expressed by Goebbels? The Jewish question is again giving us a headache; this time, however, not because we have gone too far, but because we are not going far enough. Among large sections of the German people the idea is gaining headway that the Jewish question cannot be regarded as solved until all Jews have left the Reich. —Joseph Goebbels, 1942Jews Germany's Nuremberg Laws were enacted to deny citizenship to which group? Joseph Stalin Which person imposed totalitarian rule over the Soviet Union in the early twentieth century? Soviet Union Which nation was a member of the Allied powers during World War II? Vietnam War The United States adopted a strategic policy based on the "Domino Theory" at the beginning of which military conflict?to end the conflict in Vietnam What was the main reason for the student protests at Kent State in the early 1970s? Cold War Nuclear testing policies and the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution reflect the increase in the powers of the president during which era? The United States removed missiles from Turkey. What was one consequence of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Containment Which U. S. foreign policy term best completes this diagram? Truman Doctrine -> Marshall Plan -> Korean War Tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union increased. What was one effect of U. S. nuclear testing during the Cold War?increased college attendance What major change in American society occurred due to the G. I. Bill of Rights? It changed the minds of many war supporters in the United States. Why was the Tet Offensive a major turning point in the Vietnam War? Eisenhower The National Defense Education Act was an educational spending priority that began during the administration of which president?the increase of tensions in the Cold War Which event was a consequence of the Berlin Blockade?organization of NATO The Warsaw Pact was established to offset theto deter communist aggression Why was the North Atlantic Treaty Organization formed? Members of the movie industry were blacklisted. Which result was caused by the event described in this headline? Hollywood Performer's called before the House Committee on Un-American Activities Vietnam War Which of the following was the biggest contributing factor to President Johnson's decision not to seek re-election to a second term? Soviet Union Which nation took the lead in forming the Warsaw Pact? Government spending created jobs in scientific research and defense. How did the Cold War affect the economy of the United States? The Great Society What was the name of President Lyndon B. Johnson's domestic program?the Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba Which event involved the training of Cuban exiles by the Central Intelligence Agency? U. S. spy plane photos show secret Soviet missile buildup Fidel castro leads a successful communist revolution -> The Bay of Pigs invasion fails to start a popular uprising -> ?? -> Kennedy calls for a military blockadeestablished internment camps hich action did the U. S. government take during World War II in response to suspicion of foreign immigrants?whether to use the atomic bomb against Japan. Allied leaders discussed each of the following topics during the Teheran and Yalta conferences except?concentration camp After conquering Poland, Nazi Germany built a facility in Treblinka that was mainly used as ato raise the spirits of the British public What was Churchill's main purpose in delivering this speech? The gratitude of every home in our Island . . . goes out to the British airmen who, undaunted by odds, unwearied in their constant challenge and mortal danger, are turning the tide of the world war. . . . Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. —Winston Churchill, 1940Stalin Which person imposed totalitarian rule over the Soviet Union in the early twentieth century?to help European Jews escape the Holocaust Whereas it is the policy of this Government to take all measures within its power to rescue the victims of enemy oppression who are in imminent danger of death . . . —Franklin D. Roosevelt, Executive Order 9417, 1944 Why did President Roosevelt establish the War Refugee Board? Men and women received equal pay for the same work. Which one of the following statements about women in the workplace during World War II is not true?appeasement Which policy did Neville Chamberlain adopt in 1939 as a response to Nazi aggression?internment of Japanese Americans Which event was the focus of this Supreme Court case? A military order, however unconstitutional, is not apt to last longer than the military emergency. . . . But once a judicial opinion rationalizes such an order . . . [t]he principle then lies about like a loaded weapon ready for the hand of any authority that can bring forward a plausible claim of an urgent need. —Justice Robert H. Jackson, dissenting opinion, Korematsu v. United States, 1944concern over a decrease in the sovereignty of the United States Which reason best explains the event described in this headline? Senate refuses to ratify treaty establishing the league of nationscensorship During Josef Stalin's rule, Russians only had access to select information.isolationism Americans' disillusionment over World War I led the United States government to adopt a policy of They were employed in positions traditionally held by men. Which role did many women in the United States play during World War II?destroying U. S. naval strength What was Japan's main objective in attacking Pearl Harbor?increased production of food, resulting in lower prices The Bracero Program allowed temporary laborers into the country because of a labor shortage. What was one effect of this program?the Neutrality Acts Which congressional action in the mid-1930s was intended to prevent the sale of weapons to warring nations?large numbers of women working in defense industries What circumstance lead to the creation of this federal program: federal government creates Lanham act to meet child care needs? It enabled the U. S. military to launch air attacks on the Japanese mainland. Which statement best explains how the U. S. "island-hopping" strategy during World War II contributed to victory in the Pacific?to gain support for racial purity programs Why did the German government distribute this pamphlet? A philosophy that assumes human equality and teaches that all of humanity is part of a common, step-by-step process of development, is an error or else a conscious lie. —German pamphlet, 1943The Constitution assigns Congress the power to declare war. Why did President Roosevelt request specific action from Congress in this speech? Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked . . . I ask that the Congress declare that since the . . . attack by Japan . . . a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire. —Franklin D. Roosevelt, Address to Congress, December 8, 1941They were replaced in the workforce by returning veterans. Which statement describes the status of minorities in America after World War II? The Lend-Lease Act Which U. S. policy was a direct result of this speech? I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient . . . to be turned over to those nations which are now in actual war with aggressor nations. Our most useful and immediate role is to act as an arsenal for them as well as for ourselves. They do not need manpower, but they do need billions of dollars' worth of the weapons of defense. —President Franklin Roosevelt, 1941It was the basis for the development of the Final Solution How did this idea influence Nazi policy in the period leading up to World War II? All great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning. —Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampfwar-related industries "Rosie the Riveter" was a World War II symbol of women's contributions inlack of established daycare programs When women entered the workforce after World War II, what was one obstacle they faced? The United States abandoned its policy of isolationism. How did U. S. foreign policy change immediately after Pearl Harbor? Rationing of resources became important. Which statement best explains how World War II affected the U. S. home front?the creation of the state of Israel Which outcome is most closely related to the consequences of the Holocaust in World War II?to motivate the public to support the draft and wartime rationing World War II Poster Slogans • "United We Win" • "Save the Freedom of Worship: Buy War Bonds" • "We Can Do It!" What was the purpose of these slogans?the promotion of isolationist policies Which postwar attitude in the United States represented opposition to this proposal? XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike. —President Woodrow Wilson, Fourteen Points Speechgovernment regulation of big business Which one of the following did not contribute to the post-World War II economic boom in the United States? One country becoming communist would cause border nations to follow. What is the definition of "domino theory" as introduced by President Eisenhower? Marshall Plan Which proposal provided massive aid to rebuild Europe after World War II? China Into which country did General Douglas Mac Arther want to expand military operations during the Korean War?expanding role of the US Reasons for ? • Nuclear technology was developed by the Manhattan Project • National economy expanded due to wartime production. • Industrial infrastructure remained undamaged during World War II.testing the atomic bomb How did the Soviet Union work to achieve military equality with the United States in 1949? The Red Scare The House Un-American Activities Committee investigations of the early 1950s were most similar to which event in U. S. history?to ally in common defense The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was formed in 1949. What is the agreement among the nations that formed NATO?nuclear weapons In this excerpt, Dulles proposed a national security policy based on the use of We need allies and collective security. Our purpose is to make these relations more effective, less costly. This can be done by placing more reliance on deterrent power and less dependence on local defensive power. — Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, 1954economic data showing recovery from wartime devastation Which evidence would best demonstrate the effectiveness of the Marshall Plan? The United States emerged as the dominant global power. Great Britain After World War II • Lower industrial productivity • Infrastructure devastated by war • Loss of colonies How did the changes represented in this list influence world affairs?assist in rebuilding western Europe What was the U. S. government's goal in administering the Marshall Plan after World War II?advance the policy of containment In 1954 the United States, France, Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Pakistan formed the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization, or SEATO. What was the primary purpose of this organization? The U. S. provided West Berlin with aid after Soviet forces blockaded the city. Which statement regarding the Berlin Airlift is the most accurate?containment Which U. S. policy was designed to prevent the expansion of Soviet influence in Europe?communism What was the Truman Doctrine developed to contain? South Korea In which country did the United States policy of containment stop the spread of communism? To assist in the improvement and growth of under-developed nations Summary of Harry S. Truman's Point Four Program • To create new markets in developing countries • To help prevent the spread of communism • ?by providing military support to allied nations How was the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) meant to contain the spread of communism?limiting communist expansion by assisting reconstruction in Europe The truth of the matter is that Europe's requirements for the next 3 or 4 years of foreign food and other essential products—principally from America—are so much greater than her present ability to pay that she must have substantial additional help, or face economic, social, and political deterioration of a very grave character. —Speech to Harvard University, George Marshall, June 5, 1947 According to this excerpt, which statement best describes the primary goal of the Marshall Plan? NATO In 1949, the United States and eleven other countries agreed to form which alliance?containing the spread of communism Which phrase describes a goal of U. S. foreign policy after World War II?to form the Warsaw Pact On May 14, 1955, the Soviet Union institutionalized its East European alliance system . . . when it met with representatives from Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania . . . to sign the multilateral Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance . . . —"Country Studies," Federal Research Division, Library of Congress What was the purpose for assembling these representatives? Korea Which war involved troops organized under the United Nations' authority? NATO Which alliance was created after World War II as a defensive measure against aggressor nations?to discourage Egypt from improving relations with the Soviet Union What was one motivation for the United States offer to help finance the construction of the Aswan Dam in Egypt in 1956?entry into the Korean War Which U. S. action is the best example of the expansion of the Truman Doctrine?saturation bombing dropping large amounts of bombs to inflict maximum damage George S. Patton, Jr. general known as Blood and Gutsstrategic bombing dropping bombs that target key political and industrial centersunconditional surrender accepting defeat without any concessions Eisenhower led the Allied invasion of North africa Chester Nimitz US naval commander Germany posed > threat than Japan Allies pursued the Europe First Strategy because they believed Hitler's plan of dominating Europe ended following the battle of stalingradhelped pave the way for all-out offensive allied bombing of germany in 1942 changed the war because itjapan never threatened pacific domination result of battle of midway Executive Order ensured fair hiring practices in jobs funded with government money Office of War Information worked with the media to encourage support for the war effortbracero program plan to bing laborers from mexico to work on American farmers A. Philip Randolph African American labor leadermany women took nontraditional jobs how did wartime pressures create a break from the pastjoined organizations to fight segregation during WWII many African Americansdesignated war zones from which anyone could be removed Executive Order 9066 affected civil liberties in the US because it FDR who created the Office Price of Administration Truman became president after FDRManhattan Project program to develop atomic bomb Einstein signed letter to President Roosevelt, explaining the importance of atomic development D-Day Allies launched their invasion of Normandy Battle of the Bulge attempt to drive a wedge between American and British forces Allies took important step towards reaching Berlin effect of D-Day invasion Germany used its reserves & demoralized its troops in the battle effect of battle of the bulgefought almost to the last, preferring to kill themselves rather than surrender as American forces approached japan, the Japanese forcesbarring jews from working in civil services hitler's economic persecution of jews in germany involvedsome countries refused to accept them during the Great Depression many jews were prevented leaving Germany becauseeach group was assigned and wore different colored insignia what did nazi camp administrators do to identify people from different groups in the concentration campsmany people underestimated Hitler's plan following limited the initial US response to the Holocaust Universal Declaration of Human Rights drafted under the guidance of Eleanor Roosevelt Geneva Convention governs the treatment of wounded soldiers and prisoners of warsuperpowers dominant countries after WWIIGATT designed to expand world trade by reducing tariffs UN provided food and aid to much of the worldnew constitution enacted democratic reform how'd japan change politically after WWIISoviet Union & US 2 nations emerged as the strongest following WWIIencourage cooperation the UN was created torenewed their efforts to work for civil rights in the year following WWII, many African Americansaircraft carriers what kind of ships survived attack at Pearl Harborinterventionist type of senator who wants to get involvedisolationist type of senator that wants to stay out of itwanted to end WWII why Truman used the atomic bomb OPI control money and rents during WWIIChina what country did Nixon visit to improve trade relationsde facto segregation segregation by custom or traditionearl warren chief justice of the supreme court at the time of Brown v. board of educationmontgomery bus boycott held to protest the arrest of rosa parkscivil rights act of 1957 gave the US attorney general greater power to protect the voting rights of african americansrosa parks refused to relinquish a bus seat to a white passengerde jure segregation segregation imposed by lawjim crow laws laws that enforced the strict separation of the races CORE believed that direct, nonviolent methods could gain civil rights for African Americans See more  Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedianavigation search The Fat Man mushroom cloud resulting from the nuclear explosion over Nagasaki rises into the air from the hypocenter. The debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki concerns the ethical, legal, and military controversies surrounding the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 August and 9 August 1945 at the close of World War II (1939–45). The Soviet Union declared war on Japan an hour before 9 August [1] and invaded Manchuria at one minute past midnight; Japan surrendered on 15 August. On 26 July 1945, United States President Harry S. Truman, United Kingdom Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and Chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Government Chiang Kai-shek issued the Potsdam Declaration, which outlined the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan as agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference. This ultimatum stated if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction". [2] Some debaters focus on the presidential decision-making process, and others on whether or not the bombings were the proximate cause of Japanese surrender. Over the course of time, different arguments have gained and lost support as new evidence has become available and as new studies have been completed. A primary and continuing focus has been on the role of the bombings in Japan's surrender and the U. S.'s justification for them based upon the premise that the bombings precipitated the surrender. This remains the subject of both scholarly and popular debate. In 2005, in an overview of historiography about the matter, J. Samuel Walker wrote, "the controversy over the use of the bomb seems certain to continue". [3] Walker stated, "The fundamental issue that has divided scholars over a period of nearly four decades is whether the use of the bomb was necessary to achieve victory in the war in the Pacific on terms satisfactory to the United States." [3]Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan: Kyūshū was to be invaded in November 1945 and Honshū four months later. It was thought Japan would not surrender unless there was an overwhelming demonstration of destructive capability. Those who oppose the bombings argue it was militarily unnecessary, [4] inherently immoral, a war crime, or a form of state terrorism. [5] Critics believe a naval blockade and conventional bombings would have forced Japan to surrender unconditionally. [6] Some critics believe Japan was more motivated to surrender by the Soviet Union's invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese-held areas. [7] [8]Contents1 Support1.1 Would prevent many U. S. military casualties1.2 Speedy end of war saved lives1.3 Part of total war1.4 Japan's leaders refused to surrender1.5 Other2 Opposition2.1 Militarily unnecessary2.2 Bombings as war crimes2.3 State terrorism2.4 Fundamentally immoral2.4.1 Continuation of previous behavior2.5 Japanese nuclear weapon program2.6 Nagasaki bombing unnecessary2.7 Dehumanization3 International law4 Impact on surrender5 Atomic diplomacy6 See also7 References7.1 Notes7.2 Bibliography8 Further reading9 External links Support [ edit]Would prevent many U. S. military casualties [ edit]There are voices which assert that the bomb should never have been used at all. I cannot associate myself with such ideas. ... I am surprised that very worthy people—but people who in most cases had no intention of proceeding to the Japanese front themselves—should adopt the position that rather than throw this bomb, we should have sacrificed a million American and a quarter of a million British lives.— Winston Churchill, leader of the Opposition, in a speech to the British House of Commons, August 1945 [9]A map outlining the Japanese and U. S. (but not other Allied) ground forces scheduled to take part in the ground battle for Japan. Two landings were planned: (1) Olympic —the invasion of the southern island, Kyūshū, (2) Coronet —the invasion of the main island, Honshū. March 1946's Operation Coronet was planned to take Tokyo with a landing of 25 divisions, compared to D-Day's 12 divisions. Those who argue in favor of the decision to drop the atomic bombs on enemy targets believe massive casualties on both sides would have occurred in Operation Downfall, the planned Allied invasion of Japan. [10] The bulk of the force invading Japan would be American although the British Commonwealth would contribute three divisions of troops (one each from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia). [11] [12]The U. S. anticipated losing many combatants in Downfall, although the number of expected fatalities and wounded is subject to some debate. U. S. President Harry S. Truman stated in 1953 he had been advised U. S. casualties could range from 250,000 to one million combatants. [13] [14] Assistant Secretary of the Navy Ralph Bard, a member of the Interim Committee on atomic matters, stated that while meeting with Truman in the summer of 1945 they discussed the bomb's use in the context of massive combatant and non-combatant casualties from invasion, with Bard raising the possibility of a million Allied combatants being killed. As Bard opposed using the bomb without warning Japan first, he cannot be accused of exaggerating casualty expectations to justify the bomb's use, and his account is evidence that Truman was aware of, and government officials discussed, the possibility of one million casualties. [15]A quarter of a million casualties is roughly the level the Joint War Plans Committee estimated, in its paper (JWPC 369/1) prepared for Truman's 18 June meeting. A review of documents from the Truman Library shows Truman's initial draft response to the query describes Marshall only as saying "one quarter of a million would be the minimum". The "as much as a million" phrase was added to the final draft by Truman's staff, so as not to appear to contradict an earlier statement given in a published article by Stimson (former Secretary of War). [16] In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April 1945, the figures of 7.45 casualties per 1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities per 1,000 man-days were developed. This implied the two planned campaigns to conquer Japan would cost 1.6 million U. S. casualties, including 380,000 dead. [17] JWPC 369/1 (prepared June 15, 1945) [18] ), which provided planning information to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, estimated an invasion of Japan would result in 40,000 U. S. dead and 150,000 wounded. Delivered on June 15, 1945, after insight gained from the Battle of Okinawa, the study noted Japan's inadequate defenses resulting from a very effective sea blockade and the Allied firebombing campaign. Generals George C. Marshall and Douglas Mac Arthur signed documents agreeing with the Joint War Plans Committee estimate. [19]In addition, a large number of Japanese combatant and non-combatant casualties were expected as a result of such actions. Contemporary estimates of Japanese deaths from an invasion of the Home Islands range from several hundreds of thousands to as high as ten million. General Mac Arthur's staff provided an estimated range of American deaths depending on the duration of the invasion, and also estimated a 22:1 ratio of Japanese to American deaths. From this, a low figure of somewhat more than 200,000 Japanese deaths can be calculated for a short invasion of two weeks, and almost three million Japanese deaths if the fighting lasted four months. [20] A widely cited estimate of five to ten million Japanese deaths came from a study by William Shockley and Quincy Wright; the upper figure was used by Assistant Secretary of War John J. Mc Cloy, who characterized it as conservative. [21] Some 400,000 additional Japanese deaths might have occurred in the expected Soviet invasion of Hokkaido, the northernmost of Japan's main islands, [22] although the Soviets lacked the naval capability to invade the Japanese home islands, let alone to take Hokkaido. [23] An Air Force Association webpage states that "Millions of women, old men, and boys and girls had been trained to resist by such means as attacking with bamboo spears and strapping explosives to their bodies and throwing themselves under advancing tanks." [24] The AFA noted that " [t]he Japanese cabinet had approved a measure extending the draft to include men from ages fifteen to sixty and women from seventeen to forty-five (an additional 28 million people)". [25]The great loss of life during the battle of Iwo Jima and other Pacific islands gave U. S. leaders a clear picture of the casualties that would happen with a mainland invasion. Of the 22,060 Japanese combatants entrenched on Iwo Jima, 21,844 died either from fighting or by ritual suicide. Only 216 Japanese POWs were held at the hand of the Americans during the battle. According to the official Navy Department Library website, "The 36-day (Iwo Jima) assault resulted in more than 26,000 American casualties, including 6,800 dead" with 19,217 wounded. [26] [27] To put this into context, the 82-day Battle of Okinawa lasted from early April until mid-June 1945 and U. S. casualties (out of five Army and two Marine divisions) were above 62,000, of which more than 12,000 were killed or missing. [28]The U. S. military had nearly 500,000 Purple Heart medals manufactured in anticipation of potential casualties from the planned invasion of Japan. To date, all American military casualties of the 60 years following the end of World War II, including the Korean and Vietnam Wars, have not exceeded that number. In 2003, there were still 120,000 of these Purple Heart medals in stock. [29] Because of the number available, combat units in Iraq and Afghanistan were able to keep Purple Hearts on hand for immediate award to wounded soldiers on the field. [29]Speedy end of war saved lives [ edit]Supporters of the bombings argue waiting for the Japanese to surrender would also have cost lives. "For China alone, depending upon what number one chooses for overall Chinese casualties, in each of the ninety-seven months between July 1937 and August 1945, somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 persons perished, the vast majority of them noncombatants. For the other Asian states alone, the average probably ranged in the tens of thousands per month, but the actual numbers were almost certainly greater in 1945, notably due to the mass death in a famine in Vietnam. Historian Robert P. Newman concluded that each month that the war continued in 1945 would have produced the deaths of 'upwards of 250,000 people, mostly Asian but some Westerners.'" [30]The end of the war limited the expansion of the Japanese controlled Vietnamese famine of 1945, stopping it at 1-2 million deaths and also liberated millions of Allied prisoners of war and civilian laborers working in harsh conditions under a forced mobilization. In the Dutch East Indies, there was a "forced mobilization of some 4 million—although some estimates are as high as 10 million— romusha (manual laborers) ... About 270,000 romusha were sent to the Outer Islands and Japanese-held territories in Southeast Asia, where they joined other Asians in performing wartime construction projects. At the end of the war, only 52,000 were repatriated to Java ." [31] [ clarification needed]Supporters also point to an order given by the Japanese War Ministry on August 1, 1944, ordering the execution of Allied POWs, "when an uprising of large numbers cannot be suppressed without the use of firearms" or when the POW camp was in the combat zone, in fear that "escapees from the camp may turn into a hostile fighting force". [32]The firebombing of Tokyo alone killed 100,000 civilians on the night of March 9–10, 1945, causing more civilian death and destruction than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. [33] [34] [35] [36] A total of 350,000 civilians died in the incendiary raids on 67 Japanese cities. Because the United States Army Air Forces wanted to use its fission bombs on previously undamaged cities in order to have accurate data on nuclear-caused damage, Kokura, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Niigata were preserved from conventional bombing raids. Otherwise, they would all have been firebombed. [37] Intensive conventional bombing would have continued or increased prior to an invasion. The submarine blockade and the United States Army Air Forces's mining operation, Operation Starvation, had effectively cut off Japan's imports. A complementary operation against Japan's railways was about to begin, isolating the cities of southern Honshū from the food grown elsewhere in the Home Islands. "Immediately after the defeat, some estimated that 10 million people were likely to starve to death", noted historian Daikichi Irokawa. [38] Meanwhile, fighting continued in the Philippines, New Guinea and Borneo, and offensives were scheduled for September in southern China and Malaya. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria had, in the week before the surrender, caused over 80,000 deaths. [33]In September 1945, nuclear physicist Karl Taylor Compton, who himself took part in the Manhattan Project, visited Mac Arthur's headquarters in Tokyo, and following his visit wrote a defensive article, in which he summarized his conclusions as follows: If the atomic bomb had not been used, evidence like that I have cited points to the practical certainty that there would have been many more months of death and destruction on an enormous scale. [39]Philippine justice Delfin Jaranilla, member of the Tokyo tribunal, wrote in his judgment: If a means is justified by an end, the use of the atomic bomb was justified for it brought Japan to her knees and ended the horrible war. If the war had gone longer, without the use of the atomic bomb, how many thousands and thousands of helpless men, women and children would have needlessly died and suffered ...? [40]Lee Kuan Yew, the Former Prime Minister of Singapore concurred: But they also showed a meanness and viciousness towards their enemies equal to the Huns '. Genghis Khan and his hordes could not have been more merciless. I have no doubts about whether the two atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary. Without them, hundreds of thousands of civilians in Malaya and Singapore, and millions in Japan itself, would have perished. Lee witnessed his home city being invaded by the Japanese and was nearly executed in the Sook Ching Massacre. Part of total war [ edit]This Tokyo residential section was virtually destroyed following the Operation Meetinghouse fire- bombing of Tokyo on the night of 9/10 March 1945, which was the single deadliest air raid in human history; [41] with a greater loss of life than the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima or Nagasaki as single events or a greater civilian death toll and area of fire damage than both nuclear bombings combined. [42]Chinese civilians massacred during Japan's campaign of total war in Xuzhou Supporters of the bombings have argued the Japanese government had promulgated a National Mobilization Law and waged total war, ordering many civilians (including women, children, and old people) to work in factories and other infrastructure attached to the war effort and to fight against any invading force. Unlike the United States and Nazi Germany, over 90% of the Japanese war production were done in unmarked workshops and cottage industries which were widely dispersed within residential areas in cities and thus making them more extensively difficult to find and attack. In addition, the dropping of high explosives with precision bombing were unable to penetrate Japan's dispersed industry, making it entirely impossible to destroy them without causing widespread damage to surrounding areas. [43] [44] General Curtis Le May stated why he ordered the systematic carpet bombing of Japanese cities: We were going after military targets. No point in slaughtering civilians for the mere sake of slaughter. Of course there is a pretty thin veneer in Japan, but the veneer was there. It was their system of dispersal of industry. All you had to do was visit one of those targets after we'd roasted it, and see the ruins of a multitude of houses, with a drill press sticking up through the wreckage of every home. The entire population got into the act and worked to make those airplanes or munitions of war ... men, women, children. We knew we were going to kill a lot of women and kids when we burned [a] town. Had to be done. [45]For six months prior to the use of nuclear weapons in combat, the United States Army Air Forces under Le May's command undertook a major strategic bombing campaign against Japanese cities through the use of incendiary bombs, destroying 67 cities and killing an estimated 350,000 civilians. The Operation Meetinghouse raid on Tokyo on the night of 9/10 March 1945 stands as the deadliest air raid in human history, killing 100,000 civilians and destroying 16 square miles of the city that night, which caused more civilian deaths and damage to urbanized land than any other single air attack, including the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. [46]Colonel Harry F. Cunningham, an intelligence officer of the Fifth Air Force, noted that in addition to civilians producing weapons of war in cities, the Japanese government created a large civilian militia organization in order to train millions of civilians to be armed and to resist the American invaders. In his official intelligence review on July 21, 1945, he declared that: The entire population of Japan is a proper military target ... There are no civilians in Japan. We are making war and making it in the all-out fashion which saves American lives, shortens the agony which war is and seeks to bring about an enduring peace. We intend to seek out and destroy the enemy wherever he or she is, in the greatest possible numbers, in the shortest possible time. [47]Supporters of the bombings have emphasized the strategic significance of the targets. Hiroshima was used as headquarters of the Second General Army and Fifth Division, which commanded the defense of southern Japan with 40,000 combatants stationed in the city. The city was also a communication center, an assembly area for combatants, a storage point, and had major industrial factories and workshops as well, and its air defenses consisted of five batteries of 7-cm and 8-cm (2.8 and 3.1 inch) anti-aircraft guns. [48] [49] Nagasaki was of great wartime importance because of its wide-ranging industrial activity, including the production of ordnance, warships, military equipment, and other war material. The city's air defenses consisted of four batteries of 7 cm (2.8 in) anti-aircraft guns and two searchlight batteries. [50] An estimated 110,000 people were killed in the atomic bombings, including 20,000 Japanese combatants and 20,000 Korean slave laborers in Hiroshima and 23,145–28,113 Japanese factory workers, 2,000 Korean slave laborers, and 150 Japanese combatants in Nagasaki. [51] [52] [53]On 30 June 2007, Japan's defense minister Fumio Kyūma said the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan by the United States during World War II was an inevitable way to end the war. Kyūma said: "I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war, it could not be helped ( shikata ga nai) that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy." Kyūma, who is from Nagasaki, said the bombing caused great suffering in the city, but he does not resent the U. S. because it prevented the Soviet Union from entering the war with Japan. [54] Kyūma's comments were similar to those made by Emperor Hirohito when, in his first ever press conference given in Tokyo in 1975, he was asked what he thought of the bombing of Hiroshima, and answered: "It's very regrettable that nuclear bombs were dropped and I feel sorry for the citizens of Hiroshima but it couldn't be helped (shikata ga nai) because that happened in wartime." [55]In early July 1945, on his way to Potsdam, Truman had re-examined the decision to use the bomb. In the end, he made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on strategic cities. His stated intention in ordering the bombings was to save American lives, to bring about a quick resolution of the war by inflicting destruction, and instilling fear of further destruction, sufficient to cause Japan to surrender. [56] In his speech to the Japanese people presenting his reasons for surrender on August 15, the Emperor referred specifically to the atomic bombs, stating if they continued to fight it would not only result in "an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization". [57]Commenting on the use of the atomic bomb, then- U. S. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson stated, "The atomic bomb was more than a weapon of terrible destruction; it was a psychological weapon." [58]In 1959, Mitsuo Fuchida, the pilot who led the first wave in the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, met with General Paul Tibbets, who piloted the Enola Gay that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and told him that: You did the right thing. You know the Japanese attitude at that time, how fanatic they were, they'd die for the Emperor ... Every man, woman, and child would have resisted that invasion with sticks and stones if necessary ... Can you imagine what a slaughter it would be to invade Japan? It would have been terrible. The Japanese people know more about that than the American public will ever know. [59]Japan's leaders refused to surrender [ edit]Some historians see ancient Japanese warrior traditions as a major factor in the resistance in the Japanese military to the idea of surrender. According to one Air Force account,The Japanese code of bushido —'the way of the warrior'—was deeply ingrained. The concept of Yamato-damashii equipped each soldier with a strict code: never be captured, never break down, and never surrender. Surrender was dishonorable. Each soldier was trained to fight to the death and was expected to die before suffering dishonor. Defeated Japanese leaders preferred to take their own lives in the painful samurai ritual of seppuku (called hara kiri in the West). Warriors who surrendered were not deemed worthy of regard or respect. [25]Japanese militarism was aggravated by the Great Depression, and had resulted in countless assassinations of reformers attempting to check military power, among them Takahashi Korekiyo, Saitō Makoto, and Inukai Tsuyoshi. This created an environment in which opposition to war was a much riskier endeavor. [60]According to historian Richard B. Frank,The intercepts of Japanese Imperial Army and Navy messages disclosed without exception that Japan's armed forces were determined to fight a final Armageddon battle in the homeland against an Allied invasion. The Japanese called this strategy Ketsu Go (Operation Decisive). It was founded on the premise that American morale was brittle and could be shattered by heavy losses in the initial invasion. American politicians would then gladly negotiate an end to the war far more generous than unconditional surrender. [61]The United States Department of Energy 's history of the Manhattan Project lends some credence to these claims, saying that military leaders in Japanalso hoped that if they could hold out until the ground invasion of Japan began, they would be able to inflict so many casualties on the Allies that Japan still might win some sort of negotiated settlement. [62]While some members of the civilian leadership did use covert diplomatic channels to attempt peace negotiation, they could not negotiate surrender or even a cease-fire. Japan could legally enter into a peace agreement only with the unanimous support of the Japanese cabinet, and in the summer of 1945, the Japanese Supreme War Council, consisting of representatives of the Army, the Navy and the civilian government, could not reach a consensus on how to proceed. [60]A political stalemate developed between the military and civilian leaders of Japan, the military increasingly determined to fight despite all costs and odds and the civilian leadership seeking a way to negotiate an end to the war. Further complicating the decision was the fact no cabinet could exist without the representative of the Imperial Japanese Army. This meant the Army or Navy could veto any decision by having its Minister resign, thus making them the most powerful posts on the SWC. In early August 1945, the cabinet was equally split between those who advocated an end to the war on one condition, the preservation of the kokutai, and those who insisted on three other conditions: [63]Leave disarmament and demobilization to Imperial General Headquarters No occupation of the Japanese Home Islands, Korea, or Formosa Delegation to the Japanese government of the punishment of war criminals The "hawks" consisted of General Korechika Anami, General Yoshijirō Umezu, and Admiral Soemu Toyoda and were led by Anami. The "doves" consisted of Prime Minister Kantarō Suzuki, Naval Minister Mitsumasa Yonai, and Minister of Foreign Affairs Shigenori Tōgō and were led by Togo. [60] Under special permission of Hirohito, the president of the Privy council, Hiranuma Kiichirō, was also a member of the imperial conference. For him, the preservation of the kokutai implied not only the Imperial institution but also the Emperor's reign. [64]Japan had an example of unconditional surrender in the German Instrument of Surrender. On 26 July, Truman and other Allied leaders - except the Soviet Union - issued the Potsdam Declaration outlining terms of surrender for Japan. The declaration stated, "The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction." It was not accepted, though there is debate on Japan's intentions. [65] The Emperor, who was waiting for a Soviet reply to Japanese peace feelers, made no move to change the government position. [66] In the PBS documentary "Victory in the Pacific" (2005), broadcast in the American Experience series, historian Donald Miller argues, in the days after the declaration, the Emperor seemed more concerned with moving the Imperial Regalia of Japan to a secure location than with "the destruction of his country". This comment is based on declarations made by the Emperor to Kōichi Kido on 25 and 31 July 1945, when he ordered the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal of Japan to protect "at all cost" the Imperial Regalia. [67]It has sometimes been argued Japan would have surrendered if simply guaranteed the Emperor would be allowed to continue as formal head of state. However, Japanese diplomatic messages regarding a possible Soviet mediation—intercepted through Magic, and made available to Allied leaders—have been interpreted by some historians to mean, "the dominant militarists insisted on preservation of the old militaristic order in Japan, the one in which they ruled." [61] On 18 and 20 July 1945, Ambassador Sato cabled to Foreign Minister Togo, strongly advocating that Japan accept an unconditional surrender provided that the U. S. preserved the imperial house (keeping the emperor). On 21 July, in response, Togo rejected the advice, saying that Japan would not accept an unconditional surrender under any circumstance. Togo then said that, "Although it is apparent that there will be more casualties on both sides in case the war is prolonged, we will stand as united against the enemy if the enemy forcibly demands our unconditional surrender." [68] [69] They also faced potential death sentences in trials for Japanese war crimes if they surrendered. [70] This was also what occurred in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and other tribunals. History professor Robert James Maddox wrote: Another myth that has attained wide attention is that at least several of Truman's top military advisers later informed him that using atomic bombs against Japan would be militarily unnecessary or immoral, or both. There is no persuasive evidence that any of them did so. None of the Joint Chiefs ever made such a claim, although one inventive author has tried to make it appear that Leahy did by braiding together several unrelated passages from the admiral's memoirs. Actually, two days after Hiroshima, Truman told aides that Leahy had 'said up to the last that it wouldn't go off. 'Neither Mac Arthur nor Nimitz ever communicated to Truman any change of mind about the need for invasion or expressed reservations about using the bombs. When first informed about their imminent use only days before Hiroshima, Mac Arthur responded with a lecture on the future of atomic warfare and even after Hiroshima strongly recommended that the invasion go forward. Nimitz, from whose jurisdiction the atomic strikes would be launched, was notified in early 1945. 'This sounds fine,' he told the courier, 'but this is only February. Can't we get one sooner? 'The best that can be said about Eisenhower's memory is that it had become flawed by the passage of time. Notes made by one of Stimson's aides indicate that there was a discussion of atomic bombs, but there is no mention of any protest on Eisenhower's part. [71]Maddox also wrote, "Even after both bombs had fallen and Russia entered the war, Japanese militants insisted on such lenient peace terms that moderates knew there was no sense even transmitting them to the United States. Hirohito had to intervene personally on two occasions during the next few days to induce hardliners to abandon their conditions." [71] "That they would have conceded defeat months earlier, before such calamities struck, is far-fetched to say the least." [72]Some argue that the fact that after the triple shock of the Soviet intervention and two atomic bombs, the Japanese cabinet was still deadlocked and incapable of deciding upon a course of action is telling both of the power of the Army and naval factions in the cabinet, and of their unwillingness to even consider surrender. Even following the personal intervention of the emperor to break the deadlock in favour of surrender, there were no less than three separate coup attempts by senior Japanese officers to try to prevent the surrender and take the Emperor into 'protective custody'. Once these coup attempts had failed, senior leaders of the air force and Navy ordered bombing and kamikaze raids on the U. S. fleet (in which some Japanese generals personally participated) to try to derail any possibility of peace. It is clear from these accounts that while many in the civilian government knew the war could not be won, the power of the military in the Japanese government kept surrender from even being considered as a real option prior to the two atomic bombs. [73]Another argument is that it was the Soviet declaration of war in the days between the bombings that caused the surrender. After the war, Admiral Soemu Toyoda said, "I believe the Russian participation in the war against Japan rather than the atom bombs did more to hasten the surrender." [74] Prime Minister Suzuki also declared that the entry of the USSR into the war made "the continuance of the war impossible". [75] Upon hearing news of the event from Foreign Minister Togo, Suzuki immediately said, "Let us end the war", and agreed to finally convene an emergency meeting of the Supreme Council with that aim. The official British history, The War Against Japan, also writes the Soviet declaration of war "brought home to all members of the Supreme Council the realization that the last hope of a negotiated peace had gone and there was no alternative but to accept the Allied terms sooner or later". [ citation needed]The "one condition" faction, led by Togo, seized on the bombing as decisive justification of surrender. Kōichi Kido, one of Emperor Hirohito's closest advisers, stated, "We of the peace party were assisted by the atomic bomb in our endeavor to end the war." Hisatsune Sakomizu, the chief Cabinet secretary in 1945, called the bombing "a golden opportunity given by heaven for Japan to end the war". [76]Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should We continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers. Extract from Emperor Hirohito 's Gyokuon-hōsō surrender speech, August 15, 1945Other [ edit]This section needs expansion with: additional explanation and examples. You can help by adding to it. (April 2017)Truman felt that the effects of Japan witnessing a failed test would be too great of a risk to arrange such a demonstration. [77]Opposition [ edit]See also: Anti-nuclear movement Militarily unnecessary [ edit]Assistant Secretary Bard was convinced that a standard bombardment and naval blockade would be enough to force Japan into surrendering. Even more, he had seen signs for weeks that the Japanese were actually already looking for a way out of the war. His idea was for the United States to tell the Japanese about the bomb, the impending Soviet entry into the war, and the fair treatment that citizens and the Emperor would receive at the coming Big Three conference. Before the bombing occurred, Bard pleaded with Truman to neither drop the bombs (at least not without warning the population first) nor to invade the entire country, proposing to stop the bloodshed. [15]The 1946 United States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan, whose members included Paul Nitze, [ citation needed] concluded the atomic bombs had been unnecessary to win the war. After reviewing numerous documents, and interviewing hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered, they reported: There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. [78] [79]This conclusion assumed conventional fire bombing would have continued, with ever-increasing numbers of B-29s, and a greater level of destruction to Japan's cities and population. [80] [81] One of Nitze's most influential sources was Prince Fumimaro Konoe, who responded to a question asking whether Japan would have surrendered if the atomic bombs had not been dropped by saying resistance would have continued through November or December 1945. [82]Historians such as Bernstein, Hasegawa, and Newman have criticized Nitze for drawing a conclusion they say went far beyond what the available evidence warranted, in order to promote the reputation of the Air Force at the expense of the Army and Navy. [83] [84] [85]Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote in his memoir The White House Years: In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. [86]Other U. S. military officers who disagreed with the necessity of the bombings include General of the Army Douglas Mac Arthur, [87] [88] Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U. S. officials), Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz (Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet), Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr. (Commander of the US Third Fleet), and even the man in charge of all strategic air operations against the Japanese home islands, then-Major General Curtis Le May: The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.— Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U. S. Pacific Fleet, [79]The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.— Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, 1950, [89]The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.— Major General Curtis Le May, XXI Bomber Command, September 1945, [90]The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment ... It was a mistake to ever drop it ... [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it— Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr., 1946, [90]Stephen Peter Rosen of Harvard believes that a submarine blockade would have been sufficient to force Japan to surrender. [91]Historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa wrote the atomic bombings themselves were not the principal reason for Japan's capitulation. [92] Instead, he contends, it was the Soviet entry in the war on 8 August, allowed by the Potsdam Declaration signed by the other Allies. The fact the Soviet Union did not sign this declaration gave Japan reason to believe the Soviets could be kept out of the war. [93] As late as 25 July, the day before the declaration was issued, Japan had asked for a diplomatic envoy led by Konoe to come to Moscow hoping to mediate peace in the Pacific. [94] Konoe was supposed to bring a letter from the Emperor stating: His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice of the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But as long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender the Japanese Empire has no alternative to fight on with all its strength for the honour and existence of the Motherland ... It is the Emperor's private intention to send Prince Konoe to Moscow as a Special Envoy ... [95]Hasegawa's view is, when the Soviet Union declared war on 8 August, [96] it crushed all hope in Japan's leading circles that the Soviets could be kept out of the war and also that reinforcements from Asia to the Japanese islands would be possible for the expected invasion. [97] Hasegawa wrote: On the basis of available evidence, however, it is clear that the two atomic bombs ... alone were not decisive in inducing Japan to surrender. Despite their destructive power, the atomic bombs were not sufficient to change the direction of Japanese diplomacy. The Soviet invasion was. Without the Soviet entry in the war, the Japanese would have continued to fight until numerous atomic bombs, a successful allied invasion of the home islands, or continued aerial bombardments, combined with a naval blockade, rendered them incapable of doing so. [92]Ward Wilson wrote that "after Nagasaki was bombed only four major cities remained which could readily have been hit with atomic weapons", and that the Japanese Supreme Council did not bother to convene after the atomic bombings because they were barely more destructive than previous bombings. He wrote that instead, the Soviet declaration of war and invasion of Manchuria and South Sakhalin removed Japan's last diplomatic and military options for negotiating a conditional surrender, and this is what prompted Japan's surrender. He wrote that attributing Japan's surrender to a "miracle weapon", instead of the start of the Soviet invasion, saved face for Japan and enhanced the United States' world standing. [98]Bombings as war crimes [ edit]Nowhere is this troubled sense of responsibility more acute, and surely nowhere has it been more prolix, than among those who participated in the development of atomic energy for military purposes. ... In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humor, no over-statement can quite extinguish, the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose. [99]“”— Robert Oppenheimer1947 Arthur D. Little Memorial Lecture A number of notable individuals and organizations have criticized the bombings, many of them characterizing them as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and/or state terrorism. Early critics of the bombings were Albert Einstein, Eugene Wigner and Leó Szilárd, who had together spurred the first bomb research in 1939 with a jointly written letter to President Roosevelt. Szilárd, who had gone on to play a major role in the Manhattan Project, argued: Let me say only this much to the moral issue involved: Suppose Germany had developed two bombs before we had any bombs. And suppose Germany had dropped one bomb, say, on Rochester and the other on Buffalo, and then having run out of bombs she would have lost the war. Can anyone doubt that we would then have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and that we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them? [100]The cenotaph at the Hiroshima Peace Park is inscribed with the sentence: " Let all the souls here rest in peace; this mistake shall not be repeated ." Although the sentence may seem ambiguous, it has been clarified that its intended agent is all of humanity, and the mistake referred to is war in general. [101]A number of scientists who worked on the bomb were against its use. Led by Dr. James Franck, seven scientists submitted a report to the Interim Committee (which advised the President) in May 1945, saying: If the United States were to be the first to release this new means of indiscriminate destruction upon mankind, she would sacrifice public support throughout the world, precipitate the race for armaments, and prejudice the possibility of reaching an international agreement on the future control of such weapons. [102]Mark Selden writes, "Perhaps the most trenchant contemporary critique of the American moral position on the bomb and the scales of justice in the war was voiced by the Indian jurist Radhabinod Pal, a dissenting voice at the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, who balked at accepting the uniqueness of Japanese war crimes. Recalling Kaiser Wilhelm II 's account of his duty to bring World War I to a swift end—"everything must be put to fire and sword; men, women and children and old men must be slaughtered and not a tree or house be left standing." Pal observed: This policy of indiscriminate murder to shorten the war was considered to be a crime. In the Pacific war under our consideration, if there was anything approaching what is indicated in the above letter of the German Emperor, it is the decision coming from the Allied powers to use the bomb. Future generations will judge this dire decision ... If any indiscriminate destruction of civilian life and property is still illegal in warfare, then, in the Pacific War, this decision to use the atom bomb is the only near approach to the directives of the German Emperor during the first World War and of the Nazi leaders during the second World War. Selden mentions another critique of the nuclear bombing, which he says the U. S. government effectively suppressed for twenty-five years, as worth mention. On 11 August 1945, the Japanese government filed an official protest over the atomic bombing to the U. S. State Department through the Swiss Legation in Tokyo, observing: Combatant and noncombatant men and women, old and young, are massacred without discrimination by the atmospheric pressure of the explosion, as well as by the radiating heat which result therefrom. Consequently there is involved a bomb having the most cruel effects humanity has ever known ... The bombs in question, used by the Americans, by their cruelty and by their terrorizing effects, surpass by far gas or any other arm, the use of which is prohibited. Japanese protests against U. S. desecration of international principles of war paired the use of the atomic bomb with the earlier firebombing, which massacred old people, women and children, destroying and burning down Shinto and Buddhist temples, schools, hospitals, living quarters, etc ... They now use this new bomb, having an uncontrollable and cruel effect much greater than any other arms or projectiles ever used to date. This constitutes a new crime against humanity and civilization. [103]Selden concludes, despite the war crimes committed by the Empire of Japan, nevertheless, "the Japanese protest correctly pointed to U. S. violations of internationally accepted principles of war with respect to the wholesale destruction of populations". [103]In 1963, the bombings were the subject of a judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State. [104] On the 22nd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of nuclear weapons in general, but found, "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war." [105]In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was at the time governed by international law found in the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923 [106] and was therefore illegal. [107]In the documentary The Fog of War, former U. S. Secretary of Defense Robert S. Mc Namara recalls General Curtis Le May, who relayed the Presidential order to drop nuclear bombs on Japan, [108] said:"If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals." And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war criminals. Le May recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win? [109]As the first combat use of nuclear weapons, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki represent to some the crossing of a crucial barrier. Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, wrote of President Truman: "He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species." [110] Kuznick said the atomic bombing of Japan "was not just a war crime; it was a crime against humanity." [110]Takashi Hiraoka, mayor of Hiroshima, upholding nuclear disarmament, said in a hearing to The Hague International Court of Justice (ICJ): "It is clear that the use of nuclear weapons, which cause indiscriminate mass murder that leaves [effects on] survivors for decades, is a violation of international law". [111] [112] Iccho Itoh, the mayor of Nagasaki, declared in the same hearing: It is said that the descendants of the atomic bomb survivors will have to be monitored for several generations to clarify the genetic impact, which means that the descendants will live in anxiety for [decades] to come ... with their colossal power and capacity for slaughter and destruction, nuclear weapons make no distinction between combatants and non-combatants or between military installations and civilian communities ... The use of nuclear weapons ... therefore is a manifest infraction of international law. [111]Although bombings do not meet the definition of genocide, some consider the definition too strict, and argue the bombings do constitute genocide. [113] [114] For example, University of Chicago historian Bruce Cumings states there is a consensus among historians to Martin Sherwin 's statement, " [T]he Nagasaki bomb was gratuitous at best and genocidal at worst". [115]The scholar R. J. Rummel instead extends the definition of genocide to what he calls democide, and includes the major part of deaths from the atom bombings in these. His definition of democide includes not only genocide, but also an excessive killing of civilians in war, to the extent this is against the agreed rules for warfare; he argues the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes, and thus democide. [116] Rummel quotes among others an official protest from the US government in 1938 to Japan, for its bombing of Chinese cities: "The bombing of non-combatant populations violated international and humanitarian laws." He also considers excess deaths of civilians in conflagrations caused by conventional means, such as in Tokyo, as acts of democide. In 1967, Noam Chomsky described the atomic bombings as "among the most unspeakable crimes in history". Chomsky pointed to the complicity of the American people in the bombings, referring to the bitter experiences they had undergone prior to the event as the cause for their acceptance of its legitimacy. [117]In 2007, a group of intellectuals in Hiroshima established an unofficial body called International Peoples' Tribunal on the Dropping of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On 16 July 2007, it delivered its verdict, stating: The Tribunal finds that the nature of damage caused by the atomic bombs can be described as indiscriminate extermination of all life forms or inflicting unnecessary pain to the survivors. About the legality and the morality of the action, the unofficial tribunal found: The ... use of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was illegal in the light of the principles and rules of International Humanitarian Law applicable in armed conflicts, since the bombing of both cities, made civilians the object of attack, using nuclear weapons that were incapable of distinguishing between civilians and military targets and consequently, caused unnecessary suffering to the civilian survivors. [118]State terrorism [ edit]Historical accounts indicate the decision to use the atomic bombs was made in order to provoke a surrender of Japan by use of an awe-inspiring power. These observations have caused Michael Walzer to state the incident was an act of "war terrorism: the effort to kill civilians in such large numbers that their government is forced to surrender. Hiroshima seems to me the classic case." [119] This type of claim eventually prompted historian Robert P. Newman, a supporter of the bombings, to say "there can be justified terror, as there can be just wars". [120]Certain scholars and historians have characterized the atomic bombings of Japan as a form of "state terrorism". This interpretation is based on a definition of terrorism as "the targeting of innocents to achieve a political goal". As Frances V. Harbour points out, the meeting of the Target Committee in Los Alamos on 10 and 11 May 1945 suggested targeting the large population centers of Kyoto or Hiroshima for a "psychological effect" and to make "the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized". [121] [122] As such, Professor Harbour suggests the goal was to create terror for political ends both in and beyond Japan. [122] However, Burleigh Taylor Wilkins believes it stretches the meaning of " terrorism " to include wartime acts. [123]Historian Howard Zinn wrote that the bombings were terrorism. [124] Zinn cites the sociologist Kai Erikson who said that the bombings could not be called "combat" because they targeted civilians. [124] Just War theorist Michael Walzer said that while taking the lives of civilians can be justified under conditions of 'supreme emergency', the war situation at that time did not constitute such an emergency. [125]Tony Coady, Frances V. Harbour, and Jamal Nassar also view the targeting of civilians during the bombings as a form of terrorism. Nassar classifies the atomic bombings as terrorism in the same vein as the firebombing of Tokyo, the firebombing of Dresden, and the Holocaust. [126]Richard A. Falk, professor Emeritus of International Law and Practice at Princeton University has written in detail about Hiroshima and Nagasaki as instances of state terrorism. [127] He said that "the explicit function of the attacks was to terrorize the population through mass slaughter and to confront its leaders with the prospect of national annihilation". [128]Author Steven Poole said that the "people killed by terrorism" are not the targets of the intended terror effect. He said that the atomic bombings were "designed as an awful demonstration" aimed at Stalin and the government of Japan. [129]Alexander Werth, historian and BBC Eastern Front war correspondent, suggests that the nuclear bombing of Japan mainly served to demonstrate the new weapon in the most shocking way, virtually at the Soviet Union's doorstep, in order to prepare the political post-war field. [130]Fundamentally immoral [ edit]The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano expressed regret in August 1945 that the bomb's inventors did not destroy the weapon for the benefit of humanity. [131] Rev. Cuthbert Thicknesse, the Dean of St Albans, prohibited using St Albans Abbey for a thanksgiving service for the war's end, calling the use of atomic weapons "an act of wholesale, indiscriminate massacre". [132] In 1946, a report by the Federal Council of Churches entitled Atomic Warfare and the Christian Faith, includes the following passage: As American Christians, we are deeply penitent for the irresponsible use already made of the atomic bomb. We are agreed that, whatever be one's judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. [133]The bombers' chaplain, Father George Benedict Zabelka, would later renounce the bombings after visiting Nagasaki with two fellow chaplains. Continuation of previous behavior [ edit]American historian Gabriel Kolko said certain discussion regarding the moral dimension of the attacks is wrong-headed, given the fundamental moral decision had already been made: During November 1944 American B-29s began their first incendiary bomb raids on Tokyo, and on 9 March 1945, wave upon wave dropped masses of small incendiaries containing an early version of napalm on the city's population—for they directed this assault against civilians. Soon small fires spread, connected, grew into a vast firestorm that sucked the oxygen out of the lower atmosphere. The bomb raid was a 'success' for the Americans; they killed 125,000 Japanese in one attack. The Allies bombed Hamburg and Dresden in the same manner, and Nagoya, Osaka, Kobe, and Tokyo again on May 24. The basic moral decision that the Americans had to make during the war was whether or not they would violate international law by indiscriminately attacking and destroying civilians, and they resolved that dilemma within the context of conventional weapons. Neither fanfare nor hesitation accompanied their choice, and in fact the atomic bomb used against Hiroshima was less lethal than massive fire bombing. The war had so brutalized the American leaders that burning vast numbers of civilians no longer posed a real predicament by the spring of 1945. Given the anticipated power of the atomic bomb, which was far less than that of fire bombing, no one expected small quantities of it to end the war. Only its technique was novel—nothing more. By June 1945 the mass destruction of civilians via strategic bombing did impress Stimson as something of a moral problem, but the thought no sooner arose than he forgot it, and in no appreciable manner did it shape American use of conventional or atomic bombs. "I did not want to have the United States get the reputation of outdoing Hitler in atrocities", he noted telling the President on June 6. There was another difficulty posed by mass conventional bombing, and that was its very success, a success that made the two modes of human destruction qualitatively identical in fact and in the minds of the American military. "I was a little fearful", Stimson told Truman, "that before we could get ready the Air Force might have Japan so thoroughly bombed out that the new weapon would not have a fair background to show its strength." To this the President "laughed and said he understood." [134]Japanese nuclear weapon program [ edit]Main article: Japanese nuclear weapon program During the war, and 1945 in particular, due to state secrecy, very little was known outside Japan about the slow progress of the Japanese nuclear weapon program. The US knew that Japan had requested materials from their German allies, and 560 kg (1,230 lb) of unprocessed uranium oxide was dispatched to Japan in April 1945 aboard the submarine U-234, which however surrendered to US forces in the Atlantic following Germany's surrender. The uranium oxide was reportedly labeled as "U-235", which may have been a mislabeling of the submarine's name; its exact characteristics remain unknown. Some sources believe that it was not weapons-grade material and was intended for use as a catalyst in the production of synthetic methanol to be used for aviation fuel. [135] [136]If post-war analysis had found that Japanese nuclear weapons development was near completion, this discovery might have served in a revisionist sense to justify the atomic attack on Japan. However, it is known that the poorly coordinated Japanese project was considerably behind the US developments in 1945, [137] [138] [139] and also behind the unsuccessful German nuclear energy project of WWII. [140] [141]A review in 1986 of the fringe hypothesis that Japan had already created a nuclear weapon, by Department of Energy employee Roger M. Anders, appeared in the journal Military Affairs: Journalist Wilcox's book describes the Japanese wartime atomic energy projects. This is laudable, in that it illuminates a little-known episode; nevertheless, the work is marred by Wilcox's seeming eagerness to show that Japan created an atomic bomb. Tales of Japanese atomic explosions, one a fictional attack on Los Angeles, the other an unsubstantiated account of a post-Hiroshima test, begin the book. (Wilcox accepts the test story because the author [Snell], "was a distinguished journalist"). The tales, combined with Wilcox's failure to discuss the difficulty of translating scientific theory into a workable bomb, obscure the actual story of the Japanese effort: uncoordinated laboratory-scale projects which took paths least likely to produce a bomb. [142]Nagasaki bombing unnecessary [ edit]The black marker indicates "ground zero" of the Nagasaki atomic bomb explosion. The second atomic bombing, on Nagasaki, came only three days after the bombing of Hiroshima, when the devastation at Hiroshima had yet to be fully comprehended by the Japanese. [143] The lack of time between the bombings has led some historians to state that the second bombing was "certainly unnecessary", [144] "gratuitous at best and genocidal at worst", [145] and not jus in bello. [143] In response to the claim that the atomic bombing of Nagasaki was unnecessary, Maddox wrote: Some historians have argued that while the first bomb might have been required to achieve Japanese surrender, dropping the second constituted a needless barbarism. However, the record shows otherwise. American officials believed more than one bomb would be necessary because they assumed Japanese hard-liners would minimize the first explosion or attempt to explain it away as some sort of natural catastrophe, which is precisely what they did. In the three days between the bombings, the Japanese minister of war, for instance, refused even to admit that the Hiroshima bomb was atomic. A few hours after Nagasaki, he told the cabinet that "the Americans appeared to have one hundred atomic bombs ... they could drop three per day. The next target might well be Tokyo." [71]Jerome Hagen indicates that War Minister Anami's revised briefing was partly based on interrogating captured American pilot Marcus Mc Dilda. Under torture, Mc Dilda reported that the Americans had 100 atomic bombs, and that Tokyo and Kyoto would be the next atomic bomb targets. Both were lies; Mc Dilda was not involved or briefed on the Manhattan Project and simply told the Japanese what he thought they wanted to hear. [146]One day before the bombing of Nagasaki, the Emperor notified Foreign Minister Shigenori Tōgō of his desire to "insure a prompt ending of hostilities". Tōgō wrote in his memoir that the Emperor "warned [him] that since we could no longer continue the struggle, now that a weapon of this devastating power was used against us, we should not let slip the opportunity [to end the war] by engaging in attempts to gain more favorable conditions". [147] The Emperor then requested Togo to communicate his wishes to the Prime Minister. Dehumanization [ edit]Historian James J. Weingartner sees a connection between the American mutilation of Japanese war dead and the bombings. [148] According to Weingartner both were partially the result of a dehumanization of the enemy. " [T]he widespread image of the Japanese as sub-human constituted an emotional context which provided another justification for decisions which resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands." [149] On the second day after the bombing of Nagasaki, President Truman had stated: "The only language they seem to understand is the one we have been using to bombard them. When you have to deal with a beast you have to treat him like a beast. It is most regrettable but nevertheless true". [150]International law [ edit]See also: Aerial bombardment and international law At the time of the atomic bombings, there was no international treaty or instrument protecting a civilian population specifically from attack by aircraft. [151] Many critics of the atomic bombings point to the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 as setting rules in place regarding the attack of civilian populations. The Hague Conventions contained no specific air warfare provisions but it prohibited the targeting of undefended civilians by naval artillery, field artillery, or siege engines, all of which were classified as " bombardment ". However, the Conventions allowed the targeting of military establishments in cities, including military depots, industrial plants, and workshops which could be used for war. [152] This set of rules was not followed during World War I which saw bombs dropped indiscriminately on cities by Zeppelins and multi-engine bombers. Afterward, another series of meetings were held at The Hague in 1922–23, but no binding agreement was reached regarding air warfare. During the 1930s and 1940s, the aerial bombing of cities was resumed, notably by the German Condor Legion against the cities of Guernica and Durango in Spain in 1937 during the Spanish Civil War. This led to an escalation of various cities bombed, including Chongqing, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Hamburg, Dresden, and Tokyo. All of the major belligerents in World War II dropped bombs on civilians in cities. [153]Modern debate over the applicability of the Hague Conventions to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki revolves around whether the Conventions can be assumed to cover modes of warfare that were at the time unknown; whether rules for artillery bombardment can be applied to rules for aerial bombing. As well, the debate hinges on to what degree the Hague Conventions was being followed by the warring countries. If the Hague Conventions is admitted as applicable, the critical question becomes whether the bombed cities met the definition of "undefended". Some observers consider Hiroshima and Nagasaki undefended, some say that both cities were legitimate military targets, and others say that Hiroshima could be considered a legitimate military target while Nagasaki was comparatively undefended. [154] Hiroshima has been argued as not a legitimate target because the major industrial plants were just outside the target area. [155] It has also been argued as a legitimate target because Hiroshima was the headquarters of the regional Second General Army and Fifth Division with 40,000 combatants stationed in the city. Both cities were protected by anti-aircraft guns, which is an argument against the definition of "undefended". The Hague Conventions prohibited poison weapons. The radioactivity of the atomic bombings has been described as poisonous, especially in the form of nuclear fallout which kills more slowly. [156] [157] [158] However, this view was rejected by the International Court of Justice in 1996, which stated that the primary and exclusive use of ( air burst) nuclear weapons is not to poison or asphyxiate and thus is not prohibited by the Geneva Protocol. [159] [160] [161]The Hague Conventions also prohibited the employment of "arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering". The Japanese government cited this prohibition on 10 August 1945 after submitting a letter of protest to the United States denouncing the use of atomic bombs. [162] However, the prohibition only applied to weapons as lances with a barbed head, irregularly shaped bullets, projectiles filled with glass, the use of any substance on bullets that would tend unnecessarily to inflame a wound inflicted by them, along with grooving bullet tips or the creation of soft point bullets by filing off the ends of the hard coating on full metal jacketed bullets. It however did not apply to the use of explosives contained in artillery projectiles, mines, aerial torpedoes, or hand grenades. [163] In 1962 and in 1963, the Japanese government retracted its previous statement by saying that there was no international law prohibiting the use of atomic bombs. [162]The Hague Conventions stated that religious buildings, art and science centers, charities, hospitals, and historic monuments were to be spared as far as possible in a bombardment, unless they were being used for military purposes. [152] Critics of the atomic bombings point to many of these kinds of structures which were destroyed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. [164] However, the Hague Conventions also stated that for the destruction of the enemy's property to be justified, it must be "imperatively demanded by the necessities of war". [165]: 94 Because of the inaccuracy of heavy bombers in World War II, it was not practical to target military assets in cities without damage to civilian targets. [165]: 94–99 [166] [167] [168]Even after the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, no international treaty banning or condemning nuclear warfare has ever been ratified. The closest example is a resolution by the UN General Assembly which stated that nuclear warfare was not in keeping with the UN charter, passed in 1953 with a vote of 25 to 20, and 26 abstentions. [151]Impact on surrender [ edit]See also: Soviet–Japanese War § Importance and consequences Varying opinions exist on the question of what role the bombings played in Japan's surrender: some regard the bombings as the deciding factor, [169] others see the bombs as a minor factor, and yet others assess their importance as unknowable. [170]The mainstream position in the United States from 1945 through the 1960s regarded the bombings as the decisive factor in ending the war; commentators have termed this the "traditionalist" view, or pejoratively the "patriotic orthodoxy". [171]Some, on the other hand, see the Soviet invasion of Manchuria as primary or decisive. [172] [173] [174] [175] In the US, Robert Pape and Tsuyoshi Hasegawa in particular have advanced this view, which some have found convincing, [176] [177] but which others have criticized. [178] [179]Robert Pape also argues that: Military vulnerability, not civilian vulnerability, accounts for Japan's decision to surrender. Japan's military position was so poor that its leaders would likely have surrendered before invasion, and at roughly the same time in August 1945, even if the United States had not employed strategic bombing or the atomic bomb. Rather than concern for the costs and risks to the population, or even Japan's overall military weakness vis-a-vis the United States, the decisive factor was Japanese leaders' recognition that their strategy for holding the most important territory at issue—the home islands—could not succeed. [180]In Japanese writing about the surrender, many accounts consider the Soviet entry into the war as the primary reason or as having equal importance with the atomic bombs, [181] while others, such as the work of Sadao Asada, give primacy to the atomic bombings, particularly their impact on the emperor. [182] The primacy of the Soviet entry as a reason for surrender is a long-standing view among some Japanese historians, and has appeared in some Japanese junior high school textbooks. [182] Notably however, the Soviet Navy was well regarded as chronically lacking the naval capability to invade the home islands of Japan, despite having received numerous ships under loan from the US. The argument about the Soviet role in Japan's surrender has a connection with the argument about the Soviet role in America's decision to drop the bomb: [174] both arguments emphasize the importance of the Soviet Union. The former suggests that Japan surrendered to the US out of fear of the Soviet Union, and the latter emphasizes that the US dropped the bombs to intimidate the Soviet Union. Soviet accounts of the ending of the war emphasised the role of the Soviet Union. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia summarised events thus: In August 1945 American military air forces dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima (6 August) and of Nagasaki (9 August). These bombings were not caused by military necessity, and served primarily political aims. They inflicted enormous damage on the peaceable population. Fulfilling the obligations entered into by agreement with its allies and aiming for a very speedy ending of the second world war, the Soviet government on 8 August 1945 declared that from 9 August 1945 the USSR would be in a state of war against J [apan], and associated itself with the 1945 Potsdam declaration ... of the governments of the USA, Great Britain and China of 26 July 1945, which demanded the unconditional capitulation of J [apan] and foreshadowed the bases of its subsequent demilitarization and democratization. The attack by Soviet forces, smashing the Kwantung Army and liberating Manchuria, Northern Korea, Southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands, led to the rapid conclusion of the war in the Far East. On 2 September 1945 J [apan] signed the act of unconditional capitulation. [183]However contrary to the narrative presented by the Soviet Encyclopedia, Japan had already declared its surrender 3 days before the August 18th Soviet invasion of the Kuril Islands, where Soviet forces received comparatively little military opposition due to the earlier declaration of surrender. Still others have argued that war-weary Japan would likely have surrendered regardless, due to a collapse of the economy, lack of army, food, and industrial materials, threat of internal revolution, and talk of surrender since earlier in the year, while others find this unlikely, arguing that Japan may well have, or likely would have, put up a spirited resistance. [171]The Japanese historian Sadao Asada argues that the ultimate decision to surrender was a personal decision by the emperor, influenced by the atomic bombings. [182]Atomic diplomacy [ edit]This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (January 2010)A further argument, discussed under the rubric of "atomic diplomacy" and advanced in a 1965 book of that name by Gar Alperovitz, is that the bombings had as primary purpose to intimidate the Soviet Union, being the opening shots of the Cold War. [184] Along these lines some [ who?] argue that the United States raced the Soviet Union and hoped to drop the bombs and receive surrender from Japan before a Soviet entry into the Pacific War. However, the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom came to an agreement at the Yalta Conference on when the Soviet Union should join the war against Japan, and on how the territory of Japan was to be divided at the end of the war. [185]Others argue that such considerations played little or no role, the United States being instead concerned with the surrender of Japan, and in fact that the United States desired and appreciated the Soviet entry into the Pacific War, as it hastened the surrender of Japan. [186] In his memoirs Truman wrote: "There were many reasons for my going to Potsdam, but the most urgent, to my mind, was to get from Stalin a personal reaffirmation of Russia's entry into the war against Japan, a matter which our military chiefs were most anxious to clinch. This I was able to get from Stalin in the very first days of the conference." [187]Campbell Craig and Fredrik Logevall argue the two bombs were dropped for different reasons: Truman's disinclination to delay the second bombing brings the Soviet factor back into consideration. What the destruction of Nagasaki accomplished was Japan's immediate surrender, and for Truman this swift capitulation was crucial in order to preempt a Soviet military move into Asia. ... In short, the first bomb was dropped as soon as it was ready, and for the reason the administration expressed: to hasten the end of the Pacific War. But in the case of the second bomb, timing was everything. In an important sense, the destruction of Nagasaki—not the bombing itself but Truman's refusal to delay it—was America's first act of the Cold War. [188]See also [ edit]Hiroshima, by John Hersey Nuclear disarmament Cultural treatments of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki References [ edit]Notes [ edit]^ "The Avalon Project : Soviet Declaration of War on Japan". avalon.law.yale.edu. Retrieved 22 July 2017.^ "Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender issued at Potsdam Germany", 26 July 1945. Retrieved on 15 January 2012.^ a b Walker 2005, p. 334.^ The Collins Encyclopedia of Military History, Dupuy & Dupuy, BCA 1994, page 1308^ Stohl 1988, p. 279.^ Kramer, Ronald C; Kauzlarich, David (2011), Rothe, Dawn; Mullins, Christopher W, eds., "Nuclear weapons, international law, and the normalization of state crime", State crime: Current perspectives, pp. 94–121, ISBN 978-0-8135-4901-9.^ Tanner, Harold Miles (2013). The Battle for Manchuria and the Fate of China: Siping, 1946. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-253-00734-6.^ Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi (2007). The End of the Pacific War: Reappraisals. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-8047-5427-9.^ "House of Commons Debate 16 August 1945: Debate on the Address". Hansard. Series 5, Vol. 413, cc. 70–133. Retrieved 8 April 2013.^ Ending the Pacific War: Harry Truman and the Decision To Drop the Bomb April 2009 http://www.fpri.org/footnotes/1404.200904.frank.trumanbomb.html Archived April 17, 2012, at the Wayback Machine.^ Allan Brooke: War Diaries 1939-1945. June 28.^ "OLYMPIC VS KETSU-GO".^ President Truman to James L. Cate, January 12, 1953. http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/small/mb18g.htm Archived December 3, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.^ Giangreco, Dennis M. (1998-02-16). "Transcript of "Operation Downfall [U. S. invasion of Japan]: US Plans and Japanese Counter-Measures " ". Beyond Bushido: Recent Work in Japanese Military History. Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ a b Maddox 2004, pp. 69–71.^ The Final Months of the War With Japan. Part V: Did the SIGINT Picture Affect the Discussions at Potsdam?https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/the-final-months-of-the-war-with-japan-signals-intelligence-u-s-invasion-planning-and-the-a-bomb-decision/csi9810001.html#rtoc7^ Frank 1999, pp. 135–7.^ The Final Months of the War With Japan. Part III, note 24 https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/the-final-months-of-the-war-with-japan-signals-intelligence-u-s-invasion-planning-and-the-a-bomb-decision/csi9810001.html#rtoc7^ Carroll 2006, p. 48.^ Skates, John Ray (2000). The Invasion of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb. University of South Carolina Press. p. 79. ISBN 1570033544.^ Newman 2004, p. 11.^ Frank 2004, pp. 133–4.^ The End of the Pacific War: Reappraisals. Stanford University Press. March 1, 2007. p. 89. ISBN 9780804754279. Retrieved 25 June 2013.^ "The Mission". The Smithsonian and the Enola Gay. U. S. Air Force Association. Archived from the original on 2008-03-09. Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ a b Correll, John T. (1994-03-15). "The Smithsonian and the Enola Gay". U. S. Air Force Association. Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ Burrell 2006, p. 83, talks about how many historians have overestimated the number Japanese defenders, with 20,000 and even 25,000 listed. Burrell puts the range between 18,061 and 18,591, with exactly 216 of these taken prisoner. The rest were KIA or MIA.^ "Battle for Iwo Jima, 1945". The Navy Department Library. 16 January 2008. Archived from the original on 6 December 2006.^ Appleman et al. 2000, p. 36.^ a b Giangreco, Dennis M. & Moore, Kathryn, "Are New Purple Hearts Being Manufactured to Meet the Demand? "; History News Network (December 1, 2003), Retrieved December 4, 2006^ Frank 1999, p. 163. This justification of "saving lives" was never used by Truman in the weeks following the strikes, and there was no need to: the American public viewed the nuclear attacks positively. It did surface years afterwards in his memoirs: during the interim, of course, questions had been raised about the necessity and morality of his decision to atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. See Miles 1985, p. 1: "Even when secret wartime documents were declassified, historians did not focus on the striking inconsistencies between these documents and those parts of the principal decision-makers' memoirs that dealt with estimates of lives saved." Miles, a veteran governmebhnt official and former senior fellow of the Wilson Center, described the notion that Hiroshima saved 500,000 American military and numerous other deaths simply as a "myth".^ Library of Congress, 1992, "Indonesia: World War II and the Struggle For Independence, 1942–50; The Japanese Occupation, 1942–45" Access date: 9 February 2007.^ http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Document_No._2701, The only existing original copy of this general order was found by Jack Edwards after the war, in the ruins of the Kinkaseki prisoner of war camp in Formosa. ( Edwards References Page 260)^ a b Hanson, Victor Davis (2005-08-05). "60 Years Later: Considering Hiroshima". National Review. Retrieved 2008-03-24.^ Freeman Dyson. Part I: A Failure of Intelligence. Technology Review, November 1, 2006, MIT^ David Mc Neill. The night hell fell from the sky. Japan Focus, 10 March 2005 Archived December 5, 2008, at the Wayback Machine ..^ Rhodes, Richard. "The Making of the Atomic Bomb". p 599. Simon & Schuster Paperbacks (1984) ISBN 0-684-81378-5.^ Groves 1962.^ Frank 1999, p. 351; citing Irokawa, The Age of Hirohito: In Search of Modern Japan (1995), p. 37.^ Karl T. Compton, "If the Atomic Bomb Had Not Been Used", The Atlantic Monthly, December 1946. (Italics in the original. )^ Dower 1998, p. 473.^ "March 9, 1945: Burning the Heart Out of the Enemy". Wired. Condé Nast Digital. 9 March 2011. Retrieved 8 August 2011.^ Wolk 2010, p. 125^ John Toland, The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire 1936–1945, Random House, 1970, p. 671.^ Stephen L. Mc Farland, A Concise History of the U. S. Air Force, Air Force History and Museums Program, October 20, 1997, p. 38.^ "Curtis Le May and his bombing strategy during World War II". Retrieved 21 December 2014.^ Brian M. Mazanec (November 1, 2015). Evolution of Cyber War: International Norms for Emerging-Technology Weapons. Potomac Books. p. 96. ISBN 1612-3476-30.^ John Toland, The Last Great Victory: The End of World War II, July/August 1945, Dutton Adult, 1995, p. 205.^ "Hiroshima Before the Bombing". Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ Hiroshima: Hubertus Hoffmann meets the only U. S. Officer on both A-Missions and one of his Victims Archived 2008-06-23 at the Wayback Machine ., Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann^ "the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima".^ Nuke-Rebuke: Writers & Artists Against Nuclear Energy & Weapons (The Contemporary anthology series). The Spirit That Moves Us Press. May 1, 1984. pp. 22–29.^ Nagasaki 1945: the first full-length eyewitness account of the atomic bomb attack on Nagasaki, 1985, page 134-137, Tatsuichirō Akizuki and Gordon Honeycombe^ The Impact of the A-bomb, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1945-85, page 56-78, Iwanami Shoten^ "Japanese Defense Chief: Atomic Bombing 'Couldn't Be Helped ' ". Fox News. 30 June 2007. Retrieved 9 July 2007.^ Bix 2000, p. 676; Dower 1998, p. 606.^ Allen & Polmar 1995, pp. 266–70.^ "Emperor Hirohito, Accepting the Potsdam Declaration, Radio Broadcast". 14 August 1945. Retrieved 9 July 2007.^ "Least Abhorrent Choice", Time magazine, 3 February 1947^ Clear Conscience: The Atom Bomb Vs.-- the Super Holocaust, page 87, Raymond Davis^ a b c The Pacific War Research Society (2005). Japan's Longest Day. Oxford University Press. p. 352.^ a b Frank, Richard B. (2005-08-08). "Why Truman Dropped the Bomb". The Weekly Standard. 010 (44). Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ Rezelman, David; Gosling, F. G.; Fehner, Terrence R. (2000). "Japan Surrenders, August 10–15, 1945". The Manhattan Project: An Interactive History. U. S. Department of Energy. Retrieved 2008-03-16. External link in |work= ( help)^ Bix 2000, p. 512.^ Bix 2000, p. 513.^ Coughlin 1953.^ Bix 1996, p. 290.^ Kido Koichi nikki, Tokyo, Daigaku Shuppankai, 1966, p. 1120–1121^ "Between: Naotaki Sato, Japanese Ambassador to the Soviet Union and Togo Shigenori, Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs (Togo)". Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Retrieved 25 June 2013.^ Gruhl 2007, p. 215; Lee 2001, p. 521; Wainstock 1996, p. 71; Lynn 2008, 209.^ Rising, Gerry (2001-11-08). "Book review: Downfall [by Richard B. Frank, 1999]". Art Voice of Buffalo. Retrieved 2008-03-16.^ a b c Maddox 1995.^ Maddox 2004, p. xvii.^ Frank 1999, p. 331.^ Toland 2003, p. 807.^ Edward Bunting, World War II Day by Day (Dorling Kindersley Limited, 2001) p.652^ Kristof, Nicholas D. (5 August 2003). "Blood On Our Hands?". nytimes.com. Retrieved 9 June 2012.^ "The Decision to Drop the Bomb". U. S. History Online Textbook. Independence Hall Association in Philadelphia. 2012. Retrieved 2012-03-16.^ "United States Strategic Bombing Survey; Summary Report". United States Government Printing Office. 1946. p. 26. Retrieved 28 July 2006.^ a b Freeman, Robert (6 August 2005). "Was the Atomic Bombing of Japan Necessary?". Common Dreams.org.^ "United States Strategic Bombing Survey; Summary Report" (Transcription of original work). Report. United States Government Printing Office. 1946. p. 29. Retrieved 28 July 2006.^ Richard Frank: Review of Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Racing the Enemy (2006). Frank states: I do think, however, that buried in the mass of USSBS work was evidence not cited in the summary report that there was yet another scenario that might have produced surrender without the atomic bombs or Soviet entry. And I believe there is a reason why, if the author or authors of that opinion had this evidence in mind, they chose not to refer to it explicitly. The additional evidence submerged within the USSBS reports concerns the new August 11 strategic bombing directive. This reoriented the B-29 campaign away from urban incendiary attacks in favor of a massive attack on Japan's railroad system. This new bombing campaign coupled with Japan's extremely dire food situation does raise a legitimate question as to whether Japan might have surrendered without the atomic bombs or Soviet entry.^ Gentile 2000, p. 116.^ Gentile 2000, p. 115: " Paul Nitze recalled in his memoirs that he believed in July 1945 that Japan would surrender [in a matter of months] 'even without the atomic bomb.' ... It was natural for Nitze to begin his analysis with a hypothesis concerning the effects of the atomic bombs on ending the war with Japan. Yet Nitze remained committed to that notion even when the evidence—the interrogations of Japanese officials—did not reasonably support his conclusions. And Nitze's bold statement that his conclusions on why Japan surrendered were based on 'all the facts', after a mere three months of evidence gathering, stretches the limits of believability. "^ Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi. "The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender?". Japan Focus. Archived from the original on February 14, 2009. Retrieved 2008-08-06.^ Newman, Robert P. (2004-08-02). "Remember the Smithsonian's Atomic Bomb Exhibit? You Only Think You Know the Truth". History News Network. George Mason University. Retrieved 2008-08-06.^ Eisenhower 1963, pp. 312–3.^ Manchester, William. American Caesar: Douglas Mac Arthur 1880–1964, Dell, pg. 512^ Norman Cousins writes, "When I asked General Mac Arthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor." See Cousins 1987, pp. 65, 70–71.^ Leahy 1950, p. 441.^ a b Gar Alperovitz (6 August 2015). "The War Was Won Before Hiroshima—And the Generals Who Dropped the Bomb Knew It". The Nation. Retrieved 31 May 2016.^ Holmes, James (July–August 2014). "Hail to the Deep: A Strategy for Submarines Hail to the Deep: A Strategy for Submarines". The National Interest (132).^ a b Hasegawa 2005, p. 298.^ Hasegawa 2005, p. 170.^ Hasegawa 2005, p. 162.^ Hasegawa 2005, p. 124.^ "Hyper War: USSR Decl War Japan".^ Hasegawa 2005, chapter 6–7.^ Wilson, Ward. "The Bomb Didn't Beat Japan ... Stalin Did". foreignpolicy.com. The FP Group. Retrieved 9 Aug 2015.^ Oppenheimer 1948, p. 66.^ "Leo Szilard, Interview: President Truman Did Not Understand". U. S. News and World Report. 15 August 1960. pp. 68–71. Retrieved 9 July 2007. (republished at [1], reached through Leó Szilárd page at [2])^ "Q&A about the Atomic Bombing".^ Toland 2003, p. 762.^ a b Selden & Selden 1989.^ Shimoda et al. v. The State Archived March 11, 2007, at the Wayback Machine ., Tokyo District Court, 7 December 1963^ Falk, Richard A. (1965-02-15). "The Claimants of Hiroshima". The Nation. reprinted in Richard A. Falk; Saul H. Mendlovitz, eds. (1966). "The Shimoda Case: Challenge and Response". The Strategy of World Order. Volume: 1. New York: World Law Fund. pp. 307–13.^ Boyle 2002, p. 58.^ Falk, op. cit., p. 308.^ Narvaez, Alfonso A. (2 October 1990). "NY Times: Gen. Curtis Le May, an Architect Of Strategic Air Power, Dies at 83". NY Times. Retrieved 2011-07-08.^ Carroll 2006, p. 533 n233. On p. 97, Carroll proceeds to note the words of Freeman Dyson in this regard: " 'They [Nazi officials] had sat in their offices, writing memoranda and calculating how to murder people efficiently, just like me. The main difference was that they were sent to jail or hanged as war criminals, while I went free.' It can seem outrageous to equate Allied officers with perpetrators of the anti-Jewish genocide, but the obligation to maintain a moral standard in war is universal, even if the Nazi violation of that standard was unique in its barbarity. "^ a b "Hiroshima bomb may have carried hidden agenda". New Scientist.com. 21 July 2005. Retrieved 28 July 2006.^ a b November 1995 Public Sitting, in the Case of Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflicts Archived 2004-07-11 at the Wayback Machine. at La Hague International Court of Justice^ See also 1995 Peace Conference Archived 2007-08-13 at the Wayback Machine ., by Takashi Hiraoka, Mayor of Hiroshima^ Frey 2004. Reviewed by Rice 2005.^ Dower 1995.^ Cumings 1999, p. 54; Sherwin 1974.^ R. J. Rummel (1997). "Statistics of democide, ch. 13: Death by American bombings and other democide". Charlottesville, Virginia: Center for National Security Law, School of Law, University of Virginia. Retrieved 3 February 2009.^ Chomsky 1967a; Chomsky 1967b: "And, quite properly, he turns the question back to us: To what extent are the British or American people responsible for the vicious terror bombings of civilians, perfected as a technique of warfare by the Western democracies and reaching their culmination in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, surely among the most unspeakable crimes in history. To an undergraduate in 1945–46—to anyone whose political and moral consciousness had been formed by the horrors of the 1930s, by the war in Ethiopia, the Russian purge, the 'China Incident', the Spanish Civil War, the Nazi atrocities, the Western reaction to these events and, in part, complicity in them—these questions had particular significance and poignancy. ' "^ Judgement of the International Peoples' Tribunal on the Dropping of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki^ Walzer, Michael (2002). "Five Questions About Terrorism" (PDF). Dissent Magazine. Foundation for the Study of Independent Social Ideas, Inc. 49 (1). Retrieved 2016-05-23.^ Newman 2004, pp. xiv–xv.^ Record Group 77, Records of the Office of the Chief of Engineers, Manhattan Engineer District, TS Manhattan Project File (1945-05-26). "Minutes of the second meeting of the Target Committee". Retrieved 2005-08-06. It was agreed that psychological factors in the target selection were of great importance. Two aspects of this are (1) obtaining the greatest psychological effect against Japan and (2) making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released. B. In this respect Kyoto has the advantage of the people being more highly intelligent and hence better able to appreciate the significance of the weapon. Hiroshima has the advantage of being such a size and with possible focusing from nearby mountains that a large fraction of the city may be destroyed. The Emperor's palace in Tokyo has a greater fame than any other target but is of least strategic value.^ a b Harbour 1999, p. 133ff.^ Wilkins 1992, p. 11.^ a b Howard Zinn. "Hiroshima; Breaking the Silence". Archived from the original on 2007-12-01. Retrieved 2008-01-30.^ Simon Caney (2006). Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford University Press. p. 197. ISBN 9780199297962.^ Nassar 2009, p. 30.^ Falk, Richard (28 January 2004). "Gandhi, Nonviolence and the Struggle Against War". The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research. Retrieved 2013-02-20.^ Falk 2003, p. 45.^ 2006 Poole, Steven 'Unspeak', Little Brown, London. ISBN 0 316 73100 5^ Russia At War, 1941-1945. London: Barrie & Rockliff, 1964.^ "Vatican Regrets Inventors Did Not Destroy Bomb". The Miami News. Associated Press. August 7, 1945. pp. 1–A. Retrieved August 22, 2013.^ "No abbey service". The Guardian. 1945-08-15. Retrieved 17 July 2016.^ Marty 1996, p. 117; Cox 1997, pp. 26–7. Some American educationalists have argued that their country's failure to accept the profound immorality of the attacks and to understand the suffering they caused has led to "insane scenarios" of celebrating the bombs' use. See, for example, Kazemek 1994, p. 531: "Martin Luther King, Jr., contended that 'it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends.' ... [D]uring Desert Storm, many Americans saw nothing wrong with using tactical nuclear weapons if necessary. And in a frighteningly insane scenario that might have come straight from Kurt Vonnegut, the crew of the Enola Gay has made a national tour of shopping malls – signing autographs and selling Enola Gay coffee mugs, photographs, videos, and copies of the order authorizing the use of the atomic bomb. We can only shake our heads in wonder. "^ Kolko 1990, pp. 539–40^ Boyd & Yoshida 2002, p. 164.^ Scalia 2000.^ Maga, Timothy P. (2001). Judgment at Tokyo: the Japanese War Crimes Trials. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 51–52. ISBN 0-8131-2177-9.^ Snell, David (3 October 1946). "Japan Developed Atom Bomb; Russia Grabbed Scientists". Atlanta Constitution.^ Dees, pp. 20-21^ Home, R. W.; Low, Morris F. (September 1993). "Postwar Scientific Intelligence Missions to Japan". Isis. 84 (3): 527–537. doi: 10.1086/356550.^ Grunden, Walter E. (1998). "Hungnam and the Japanese Atomic Bomb: Recent Historiography of a Postwar Myth". Intelligence and National Security. 13 (2): 32–60. doi: 10.1080/02684529808432475.^ Anders 1986.^ a b Polkinghorn, Brian (1994). "History Held Hostage: Learned Lessons from the Conflict over the Smithsonian Institute's Enola Gay Exhibit". George Mason University. Retrieved 2008-08-27. References Okamoto, Mitsou. "War Memories or History: The Enola Gay Debate and the Peace Prayer Memorial". Peace Studies Association Conference, Tufts University, 10 March 1994.^ Sherwin 2003, p. 237.^ Cumings 1999, p. 54.^ Jerome T. Hagen. War in the Pacific: America at War, Volume I. Hawaii Pacific University, ISBN 0-9762669-0-3. Chapter, "The Lie of Marcus Mc Dilda", 159–162^ Togo, Shigenori: The Cause of Japan, page 315. Simon & Schuster, 1956.^ Weingartner 1992.^ Weingartner 1992, p. 67.^ Weingartner 1992, p. 54.^ a b Javier Guisández Gómez (June 30, 1998). "The Law of Air Warfare". International Review of the Red Cross (323): 347–363. Archived from the original on April 25, 2013. Retrieved June 21, 2013.^ a b Elmar Rauch (1984). "The Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Repercussions on the Law of Naval Warfare". Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Internationales Recht an der Universität Kiel. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. 90: 67. ISBN 3-428-05703-1.^ Newman 2011, pp. 121–5.^ Christopher L. Blakesley (2008). "Acting Out Against Terrorism, Torture and Other Crimes". In Leila Nadya Sadat; Michael P. Scharf. The Theory and Practice of International Criminal Law: Essays in Honor of M. Cherif Bassiouni. BRILL. p. 167. ISBN 9789004166318.^ Axinn 1986, p. 277.^ Newman 2011, p. 88^ Degroot, Gerard (2011). The Bomb: A Life. Random House. p. 95. ISBN 9781446449615.^ Tannenwald, Nina (2007). The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons. Cambridge University Press. pp. 95–98. ISBN 9781139467469.^ John Burroughs (November 17, 1997). The legality of Threat Or Use of Nuclear Weapons: A Guide to the Historic Opinion of the International Court of Justice. Lit Verlag. pp. 24–25. ISBN 3-8258-3516-2. Retrieved 23 June 2013.^ Haralambos Athanasopulos (February 2000). Nuclear Disarmament in International Law. Mc Farland & Company. pp. 163–164. ISBN 0-7864-0587-2. Retrieved 23 June 2013.^ "The Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons". International Committee of the Red Cross. Retrieved 23 June 2013.^ a b Antonio Cassese (August 30, 2008). The Human Dimension of International Law: Selected Papers of Antonio Cassese. Oxford University Press. p. 178. ISBN 0-1992-3291-1. Retrieved 17 October 2013.^ Indian Study Group of International Affairs. "The Indian Year Book of International Affairs, Volume 7". 1958^ Bevan, Robert (2007). The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War. Reaktion Books. pp. 270–271. ISBN 9781861896384.^ a b Sienho Yee, ed. (May 20, 2004). International Crime And Punishment: Selected Issues, Volume 2. University Press of America. ISBN 0-7618-2887-7. Retrieved 24 June 2013.^ Michael Bess (March 11, 2008). Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II. Vintage Books. p. 97. ISBN 0-3072-7580-9. Retrieved 24 June 2013.^ Alan Axelrod (June 14, 2011). The Real History of World War II: A New Look at the Past. Sterling Publishing. p. 301. ISBN 1-4027-7999-2. Retrieved 24 June 2013.^ Robin Havers (July 24, 2003). The Second World War (2): Europe 1939-1943. Routledge. p. 70. ISBN 0-4159-6846-1. Retrieved 24 June 2013.^ Gaddis 2005, p. 50: " [Hiroshima and Nagaski] brought about the Japanese surrender".^ "The Japanese leaders themselves do not know the answer to that question [whether Japan would have surrendered absent the atomic bombings], and if they cannot answer it, neither can I." Butow 1954^ a b Frank, Richard B. (2005-08-08). "Why Truman Dropped the Bomb". The Weekly Standard. 010 (44). Archived from the original on 2012-09-14..^ Wilson, Ward (2007). "The Winning Weapon? : Rethinking Nuclear Weapons in Light of Hiroshima" (PDF). International Security. 31 (4): 163–164. doi: 10.1162/isec.2007.31.4.162. ISSN 1531-4804. Retrieved 2015-08-31. From the Japanese perspective, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese-held territory was the event that dramatically changed the strategic landscape and left Japan with no option but to surrender unconditionally. The Hiroshima bombing was simply an extension of an already fierce bombing campaign.^ Pape 1993.^ a b Hasegawa 2005.^ Hasegawa 2007.^ Dominick Jenkins (August 6, 2005). "The bomb didn't win it". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2008-03-23.^ "THE WORLD QUESTION CENTER 2008 — Page 2".^ Kort 2006; Levering 2007.^ "Roundtable Reviews: Racing the Enemy " (links to PDFs). h-net.org. January–February 2006. Retrieved 2008-03-23.^ Pape 1993, p. 156.^ Review of Racing the Enemy by Gar Alperovitz in H-Diplo Roundtable Volume VII, No. 2, 2006, p. 2, footnote 1, citing research by Ayako Doi and Kimi Yoshida (bottom of page 7).^ a b c Tsuyoshi Hasegawa vs. Sadao Asada: Debating Hiroshima, in the History News Network^ "Япония" [Japan]. Большая советская энциклопедия (in Russian). Советская Энциклопедия. Retrieved 2015-09-01. В августе 1945 американские военно-воздушные силы сбросили атомные бомбы на города Хиросима (6 августа) и Нагасаки (9 августа). Эти бомбардировки не вызывались военной необходимостью и преследовали прежде всего политические цели. Они повлекли огромные жертвы среди мирного населения. Выполняя обязательства, взятые на себя по соглашениям с союзниками, и стремясь к быстрейшему окончанию 2-й мировой войны, Советское правительство 8 августа 1945 объявило, что с 9 августа 1945 СССР будет находиться в состоянии войны с Я., и присоединилось к Потсдамской декларации 1945 ... правительств США, Великобритании и Китая от 26 июля 1945, требовавшей безоговорочной капитуляции Я. и намечавшей основы её последующей демилитаризации и демократизации. Наступление советских войск, разгромивших Квантунскую армию и освободивших Маньчжурию, Северную Корею, Южный Сахалин и Курильские острова, привело к быстрому завершению войны на Дальнем Востоке. 2 сентября 1945 Я. подписала акт о безоговорочной капитуляции.^ Alperovitz 2004. Alperovitz's thesis met with disagreement from across the spectrum, though subsequent research did confirm key parts of it. See Walker 1996, p. 13ff.^ "The Avalon Project : Yalta (Crimea) Conference".^ Kort 2006.^ Memoirs by Harry S. Truman, Volume One: Year of Decisions, page 411, http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~theed/Cold_War/b_Stalin_era/c_Potsdam/readings/Truman_Ch_24_25_ocr.pdf^ Craig & Logevall 2009, pp. 55–6. Bibliography [ edit]Allen, Thomas; Polmar, Norman (1995). Code-Name Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan—And Why Truman Dropped the Bomb. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-684-80406-4. Alperovitz, Gar (2004) [1965]. Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-745-30947-7. Anders, Roger M. (1986). "Military Library: Nuclear America by Gerard H. Clarfield and William M. Wiecek; Japan's Secret War by Robert K. Wilcox". Military Affairs. 50 (1): 56–57. JSTOR 1988558. Appleman, Roy E.; Burns, James M.; Gugeler, Russell A.; Stevens, John (2000). Okinawa: The Last Battle. Washington, DC: United States Army Center of Military History. Axinn, Sidney (1986). "Honor, Patriotism, and Ultimate Loyalty". In Avner Cohen & Steven Lee, eds., Nuclear Weapons and the Future of Humanity: The Fundamental Questions (pp. 273–288). Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld. ISBN 978-0-847-67258-5. Bess, Michael (2006). Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II. New York, NY: Knopf. ISBN 978-0-307-26365-0. Bevan, Robert (2007). The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War. London: Reaktion Books. ISBN 978-1-861-89638-4. Bix, Herbert P. (1996). "Japan's Delayed Surrender: A Reinterpretation". In Michael J. Hogan, ed., Hiroshima in History and Memory (pp. 80–115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-56206-5.——— (2000). Hirohito And The Making Of Modern Japan. London: Gerald Duckworth. ISBN 978-0-715-63077-8. Boyd, Carl; Yoshida, Akihiko (2002). The Japanese Submarine Force and World War II. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 978-1-557-50015-1. Boyle, Francis A. (2002). The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence. Atlanta, GA: Clarity Press. ISBN 978-0-932-86333-1. Burrell, Robert S. (2006). The Ghosts of Iwo Jima. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. ISBN 978-1-585-44483-0. Caney, Simon (2005). Justice beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-198-29350-7. Carroll, James (2006). House of War: The Pentagon and the Disastrous Rise of American Power. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. ISBN 978-0-618-18780-5. Chomsky, Noam (1967a). "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". The New York Review of Books. 8 (3). Retrieved 2 December 2013. Chomsky, Noam (1967b). "An Exchange on 'The Responsibility of Intellectuals' ". The New York Review of Books. 8 (7). Retrieved 2 December 2013. Coughlin, William (1953). "The Great Mokusatsu Mistake: Was This the Deadliest Error of Our Time?". Harper's Magazine. 206 (1234): 31–40. ISSN 0017-789X. Cousins, Norman (1987). The Pathology of Power. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0-393-02378-7. Cox, Harvey (1997). "Repentance and Forgiveness: A Christian Perspective". In Amitai Etzioni and David E. Carney, eds., Repentance: A Comparative Perspective (pp. 21–30). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-847-68470-0. Craig, Campbell; Logevall, Fredrik (2009). America's Cold War: The Politics of Insecurity. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. ISBN 978-0-674-03553-9. Cumings, Bruce (1999). Parallax Visions: Making Sense of American–East Asian Relations at the End of the Century. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-822-32276-4. Davies, Roger J.; Ikeno, Osamu, eds. (2002). The Japanese Mind: Understanding Contemporary Japanese Culture. Boston, MA: Tuttle Publishing. ISBN 978-0-804-83295-3. Dower, John W. (1995). "The Bombed: Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japanese Memory". Diplomatic History. 19 (2).——— (1998). Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-04686-1. Eisenhower, Dwight D. (1963). The White House Years; Mandate For Change: 1953–1956. New York, NY: Doubleday & Company. Falk, Richard (2003). "State Terror versus Humanitarian Law". In Mark Selden and Alvin Y. So, eds., War and State Terrorism: The United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the Long Twentieth Century (pp. 41–61). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-742-52391-3. Frank, Richard B. (1999). Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. New York, NY: Random House. ISBN 978-0-679-41424-7. Frank, Richard B. (2004). "President Harry S. Truman's Farewell Address and the Atomic Bomb: The High Price of Secrecy". In Richard Stewart Kirkendall, ed., Harry's Farewell: Interpreting and Teaching the Truman Presidency (pp. 105–142). Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press. ISBN 978-0-826-21552-9. Frey, Robert S., ed. (2004). The Genocidal Temptation: Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Rwanda and Beyond. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. ISBN 978-0-761-82743-6. Gaddis, John Lewis (2005). The Cold War. London: Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-713-99912-9. Gentile, Gian P. (2000). How Effective is Strategic Bombing? : Lessons Learned from World War II to Kosovo. New York, NY: New York University Press. ISBN 978-0-814-73135-2. Groves, Leslie (1962). Now it Can be Told: The Story of the Manhattan Project. New York, NY: Harper & Row. ISBN 0-306-70738-1. OCLC 537684. Gruhl, Werner (2007). Imperial Japan's World War Two: 1931–1945. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-765-80352-8. Grunden, Walter E. (1998). "Hungnam and the Japanese Atomic Bomb: Recent Historiography of a Postwar Myth". Intelligence and National Security. 13 (2): 32–60. doi: 10.1080/02684529808432475. Harbour, Frances Vryling (1999). Thinking About International Ethics: Moral Theory and Cases from American Foreign Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. ISBN 978-0-813-32847-8. Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi (2005). Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. ISBN 978-0-674-01693-4. Home, R. W.; Low, Morris F. (1993). "Postwar Scientific Intelligence Missions to Japan". Isis. 84 (3): 527–537. doi: 10.1086/356550. JSTOR 235645. Kazemek, Francis E. (1994). " ' Two Handfuls of Bone and Ash': Teaching Our Children about Hiroshima". Phi Delta Kappan. 75 (7): 531–534. JSTOR 20405161. Kolko, Gabriel (1990) [1968]. The Politics of War: The World and United States Foreign Policy, 1943–1945. New York, NY: Random House. ISBN 978-0-679-72757-6. Kort, Michael (2006). "Racing the Enemy: A Critical Look". Historically Speaking. 7 (3). Leahy, William D. (1950). I was there. New York, NY: Mc Graw Hill Book Company. Lee, Bruce (2001). Marching Orders: The Untold Story Of World War II. New York, NY: Da Capo Press. ISBN 978-0-306-81036-7. Levering, Ralph B. (2007). "Book Review: Racing the Enemy by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa". Journal of American History. 94 (1): 329. JSTOR 25094908. Lynn, John A. (2008). Battle: A History of Combat and Culture. New York, NY: Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-813-33372-4. Maddox, Robert James (1995). "The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb". American Heritage. 46 (3). Retrieved 1 June 2012.——— (2004) [1995]. Weapons for Victory: The Hiroshima Decision. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press. ISBN 978-0-826-21562-8. Maga, Timothy P. (2001). Judgment at Tokyo: the Japanese War Crimes Trials. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 978-0-813-12177-2. Marty, Martin E. (1996). Modern American Religion, Volume 3: Under God, Indivisible, 1941–1960. Chicago, IL: University Of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-50898-6. Miles, Rufus E. (1985). "Hiroshima: The Strange Myth of Half a Million American Lives Saved". International Security. 10 (2): 121–140. JSTOR 2538830. Miscamble, Wilson D. (2011). The Most Controversial Decision: Truman, the Atomic Bombs, and the Defeat of Japan. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-51419-4. Nassar, Jamal (2009). Globalization and Terrorism: The Migration of Dreams and Nightmares. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-742-55788-8. Newman, Robert P. (2004). Enola Gay and the Court of History. New York, NY: Peter Lang. ISBN 978-0-820-47457-1. Newman, Robert P. (2011). Truman and the Hiroshima Cult. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press. ISBN 978-0-870-13940-6. Oppenheimer, J. Robert (1948). "Physics in the contemporary world". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 4 (3): 65–68, 85–86. Pape, Robert A. (1993). "Why Japan Surrendered". International Security. 18 (2): 154–201. JSTOR 2539100. Rice, Sarah (2005). "Book Notes: The Genocidal Temptation: Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Rwanda and Beyond by Robert S. Frey, ed". Harvard Human Rights Journal. 18: 289ff. Scalia, Joseph M. (2000). Germany's Last Mission to Japan: The Failed Voyage of U-234. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 978-1-557-50811-9. Selden, Kyoko; Selden, Mark, eds. (1989). The Atomic Bomb: Voices from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. ISBN 978-0-873-32556-1. Sherwin, Martin (1974). A World Destroyed: The Atomic Bomb and the Grand Alliance. New York, NY: Random House. ISBN 978-0-394-49794-5. Sherwin, Martin (2003). A World Destroyed: The Atomic Bomb and the Grand Alliance (3rd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-804-73957-3. Stohl, Michael (1988). "National Interests and State Terrorism in International Affairs". In Michael Stohl, ed., The Politics of Terrorism (pp. 273–294) (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-824-77814-9. Toland, John (2003) [1970]. The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire, 1936–1945. New York, NY: Modern Library. ISBN 978-0-812-96858-3. Wainstock, Dennis (1996). The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 978-0-275-95475-8. Walker, J. Samuel (2005). Recent Literature on Truman's Atomic Bomb Decision: A Search for Middle Ground. Diplomatic History. 29. pp. 311–334. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7709.2005.00476.x.——— (1996). "The Decision to Use the Bomb: A Historiographical Update". In Michael J. Hogan, ed., Hiroshima in History and Memory (pp. 11–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-56206-5. Weingartner, James J. (1992). "Trophies of War: U. S. Troops and the Mutilation of Japanese War Dead, 1941–1945". Pacific Historical Review. 61 (1): 53–67. JSTOR 3640788. Wilkins, Burleigh Taylor (1992). Terrorism and Collective Responsibility. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-04152-X. Wilson, Ward (2007). "The Winning Weapon? Rethinking Nuclear Weapons in the Light of Hiroshima" (PDF). International Security. 31 (4): 162–179. doi: 10.1162/isec.2007.31.4.162. Wolk, Herman S. (2010). Cataclysm : General Hap Arnold and the Defeat of Japan. Denton, Texas: University of North Texas Press. ISBN 978-1-57441-281-9. Further reading [ edit]Allen, Thomas B.; Polmar, Norman (1995). Code-Name Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan And Why Truman Dropped the Bomb. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-80406-9. Concludes the bombings were justified. Alperovitz, Gar (1995). The Decision To Use The Atomic Bomb And The Architecture Of An American Myth. Knopf. ISBN 0-679-44331-2. Weighs whether the bombings were justified or necessary, concludes they were not. Bernstein, Barton J. (Editor) (1976). The Atomic Bomb: The Critical Issues. Little, Brown. ISBN 0-316-09192-8. Weighs whether the bombings were justified or necessary. Bird, Kai; Sherwin, Martin J. (2005). American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer. Knopf. ISBN 0-375-41202-6. "The thing had to be done", but "Circumstances are heavy with misgiving. "Butow, Robert (1954). Japan's Decision to Surrender. Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-8047-0460-0. Explains the conflicts and debates within the Japanese government from the onset of World War II until surrender. Concludes the bombings were justified. Feis, Herbert (1961). Japan Subdued: The Atomic Bomb and the End of the War in the Pacific. Princeton University Press. Concludes that the bombs were not only necessary, but legally and morally acceptable (1966 reprint). Frank, Richard B. (1999). Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. Random House. ISBN 0-679-41424-X. Based on previously classified documents. Concludes that the dropping the bombs was superior to all other alternatives and saved Japanese as well as American lives. Fussell, Paul (1988). Thank God For The Atom Bomb, And Other Essays. Summit Books. ISBN 0-345-36135-0. Exceedingly Orthodox article, defends the bomb but not a serious academic work. Grayling, A. C. (2006). Among the Dead Cities. Walker Publishing Company Inc. ISBN 0-8027-1471-4. Philosophical/moral discussion concerning the Allied strategy of area bombing in World War II, including the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Ham, Paul (2011). Hiroshima Nagasaki. Harper Collins Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7322-8845-7. Concludes that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. Challenges the view that the atomic bombings were necessary to end the Pacific War and save lives. Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi (2005). Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan. Belknap Press. ISBN 0-674-01693-9. Argues that the bombs were not the deciding factor in ending the war. The Soviet entrance into the Pacific War was the primary cause for Japan's surrender. Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi (17 August 2007). "The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender?". Japan Focus. Retrieved 17 June 2012. Here he sharpens his earlier view that the Soviet entrance into the Pacific War was the primary cause for Japan's surrender. Maddox, Robert James (1995). Weapons for Victory: The Hiroshima Decision. University of Missouri Press. ISBN 0-8262-1562-9. Author is a diplomatic historian who favors Truman's decision to drop the atomic bombs. Newman, Robert P. (1995). Truman and the Hiroshima Cult. Michigan State University Press. ISBN 0-87013-403-5. An analysis critical of postwar opposition to the atom bombings. Nobile, Philip (Editor) (1995). Judgement at the Smithsonian. Marlowe and Company. ISBN 1-56924-841-9. Covers the controversy over the content of the 1995 Smithsonian Institution exhibition associated with the display of the Enola Gay; includes complete text of the planned (and canceled) exhibition. Takaki, Ronald (1995). Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb. Little, Brown. ISBN 0-316-83124-7. External links [ edit]Hiroshima: Was It Necessary? Reflections of a Far East Prisoner of War on the use of the atomic bombs Annotated bibliography on the decision to use the atomic bombs on Japan —The Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues Unconditional Surrender, Demobilization, and the Atomic Bomb by Michael D. Pearlman U. S. Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027-1352"The Obliteration of Hiroshima", Stephen Shalom (from New Politics, vol. 6, no. 1 (new series), whole no. 21, Summer 1996)Hiroshima: the 'White Man's Bomb' revisited: Dropping the Bomb on Japan was the final act of a bitter race war in the Pacific. by Mick Hume, Spiked, 2 August 2005. Abridged version of a 1995 article in Living Marxism. Yuki Tanaka and Richard Falk, "The Atomic Bombing, The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal and the Shimoda Case: Lessons for Anti-Nuclear Legal Movements", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 44-3-09, 2 November 2009. Record of private talk between Winston Churchill and Generalissimo Stalin after the Plenary Session on 17 July 1945 at Potsdam [ permanent dead link]The Enola Gay Controversy - About - Overview International Peoples' Tribunal on the Dropping of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki Dietrich, Bill (1995). "Pro and Con on Dropping the Bomb". Seattle Times. Mac Laren, Don (1998). "Troubling memories of the past", "Better to bomb than blockade". The Japan Times.v t e Manhattan Project Timeline Sites Ames Berkeley Chicago Dayton Hanford Inyokern Los Alamos Montreal New York Oak Ridge Trinity Wendover Heavy water sites Administrators Vannevar Bush Arthur Compton James Conant Priscilla Duffield Thomas Farrell Leslie Groves John Lansdale Ernest Lawrence James Marshall Franklin Matthias Dorothy Mc Kibbin Kenneth Nichols Robert Oppenheimer Deak Parsons William Purnell Frank Spedding Charles Thomas Paul Tibbets Bud Uanna Harold Urey Stafford Warren Ed Westcott Roscoe Wilson Scientists Luis Alvarez Robert Bacher Hans Bethe Aage Bohr Niels Bohr Norris Bradbury James Chadwick John Cockcroft Harry Daghlian Enrico Fermi Richard Feynman Val Fitch James Franck Klaus Fuchs Maria Goeppert-Mayer George Kistiakowsky George Koval Willard Libby Edwin Mc Millan Mark Oliphant Norman Ramsey Isidor Isaac Rabi James Rainwater Bruno Rossi Glenn Seaborg Emilio Segrè Louis Slotin Henry De Wolf Smyth Leo Szilard Edward Teller Stanisław Ulam John von Neumann John Wheeler Eugene Wigner Robert Wilson Leona Woods Operations Alsos Mission Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Operation Crossroads Operation Peppermint Project Alberta Silverplate 509th Composite Group Enola Gay Bockscar The Great Artiste Weapons Fat Man Little Boy Pumpkin bomb Thin Man Related topics Atomic Energy Act of 1946 British contribution Chicago Pile-1 Demon core Einstein–Szilárd letter Interim Committee Oppenheimer security hearing Plutonium Quebec Agreement Ra La Experiment S-1 Executive Committee S-50 Project Smyth Report Uranium X-10 Graphite Reactor Manhattan Projectv t e World War IICategories:1945 controversies Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Controversies in the United States  Result and Effects of World War II War Crimes Top of Page Millions of Jews, gypsies, gays, and invalids were imprisoned in concentration camps in Europe. Many were tortured or used in experiments, and over twelve million were reported murdered by the end of World War II. Though Hitler and many of his close conspirators committed suicide, most high-ranking officials in Germany did not escape justice so easily. When the concentration camps throughout Europe were liberated, the world was shocked to see what horrors lay within. Around twelve million people had been murdered in total (half of them Jews) and this number did not include those who had been used for medical experimentation or tortured by the camp guards. Here the Allies were faced with a dilemma: since genocide had never been publicly recognized before, there were no formal laws against such mass murder. Instead, the Nuremberg Trials (November 1945), during which Hitler's remaining officials were declared guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, set a standard to judge others who would commit genocide in the future. The United Nations Top of Page Having corrected many flaws from the League of Nations, the United Nations was meant to keep peace after World War II. Another result of World War II was the formation of the United Nations (UN). After the first world war, the Allies had created the League of Nations (Lo F), whose purpose was to keep peace and stability in Europe. This was the first global organization in history, but it had several problems, which led to World War II. When they created the United Nations on October 24, 1945, the Allies made sure to improve the UN, especially by splitting the power among five major countries (United Kingdom, France, United States, China, and USSR) instead of just two or three, as in the League of Nations. New Superpowers Top of Page After World War II, most of Western Europe had been destroyed by the fighting. This left the USSR and the US, two countries relatively untouched by the war, to dominate the world's economy and military. However, though the UN had five major powers, there were only two countries that were economically powerful after World War II. The war severely injured the natural resource supply and the economy of the Western European countries, especially Britain, France, and Germany. These countries had previously dominated the world's trade market, and now two new countries who had been relatively unharmed during the war took their places -- the Soviet Union (USSR) and the United States. The USSR had only been damaged on its western side; the east was completely unharmed. The U. S. had only sent its armies over to Europe; none of the fighting had taken place on American soil. The war actually boosted the American economy, ending the Great Depression and allowing the U. S. to become a superpower in the post-war global market. Women's Rights Top of Page Women filled the job vacuum left in factories, offices, and farms when the men had been drafted to fight during World War II. But after the men returned, many women refused to give up their jobs. The war also resulted in a major victory for women's rights advocates. During the war, the government of every country drafted men to serve in the army. Since men had held most of the jobs at this time, the military draft left behind a vacuum in factories, offices, and farms. This vacuum was filled by women, many of whom had never worked before. As the war progressed, these women developed their self-confidence and gained a strong sense of independence. By the time the fighting ended and the men returned, the women refused to give up their jobs; many of them enjoyed making their own living and not having to depend on their husbands or brothers or sons for money. The government was forced to allow women to work and to increase equality in pay (though pay is not completely equal even today). Women continue to fight for complete equality, but World War II helped them considerably on their way. Books on World War IITop of Page The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer The Story of World War II by Donald L. Miller The Second World War: A Complete History by Martin Gilbert The Historical Encyclopedia of World War II by Marcel Baudot Winston's War: Churchill, 1940-1945 by Sir Max Hastings Links to other sites on WWIITop of Pagehttp://www.worldwar2database.com/html/marianas.htmhttp://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htmhttp://www.worldwar-2.net/http://www.historycentral.com/ww2/http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/causes.htmhttp://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/famous_battles_of_world_war_two.htmhttp://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/effectww2.html Top of Page  . THE EFFECTS ON THE INHABITANTS OF A CITY OF THE EXPLOSION OF ANUCLEARBOMB"The effect of a single bomb would depend on its power, and where it exploded - high in the air or at ground level - and whether in a densely populated and built-up area like a city or in open country like an attack on a missile silo..."By Alan F. Phillips, M. D., D. M. R. T. Copyright © 2001, 3 A. M. MAGAZINE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDINTRODUCTIONThe detonation of a single nuclear bomb or "warhead" would cause a local disaster on a scale that few people in the world have seen and survived. However, it should not be confused with the effects of a nuclear war, in which many nuclear bombs would be exploded. That would cause the end of civilization in the countries concerned, and perhaps over the whole world, as well as radioactive contamination of whole continents, and terrible damage to the environment and ecology. The effect of a single bomb would depend on its power, and where it exploded -- high in the air or at ground level -- and whether in a densely populated and built-up area like a city or in open country like an attack on a missile silo. The nuclear bombs available to the great military powers of the world (China, France, Israel, Russia, United Kingdom, United States) range in power from several megatons down to a few kilotons (and some even smaller). A "megaton" is the explosive power of one million tons of TNT. A "kiloton" is the power of one thousand tons of TNT. Bombs likely to be available to terrorist organizations or governments other than the great military powers would be in the 10- to 100-kiloton range. Bombs made by amateurs might not explode with the full power they were designed for. [FOOTNOTE: TNT stands for tri-nitro-toluene, a high explosive commonly used in shells and bombs throughout the Second World War. Weight for weight, its explosive power is roughly equal to that of dynamite. ]The two bombs that have been exploded over cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in August 1945, were in the ten- to twenty-kiloton range. A ONE-MEGATON BOMB DETONATED IN THE AIRFirst, we will look at the result of a single bomb of one megaton detonated at an altitude of 2,500 metres above a city, to cause maximum blast effects. This is believed to have been a main part of the targeting strategy of the Soviet Union and the United States during the "Cold War". The Russian and U. S. governments have stated that missiles would not remain targetted on cities. However, thousands of missiles and warheads are still deployed. They could be targetted on any city in the world in a matter of minutes, and re-targetted to their original targets in seconds. Flash and fireball The first effect of a nuclear explosion in the air is an intense flash of light, as quick as a lightning flash but a thousand times as bright. It is accompanied by a powerful pulse of heat radiation, sufficient to set fire to light combustible material out to a distance of fourteen km., and to paint or wood at half that distance. There is also an intense pulse of X-rays, sufficient to be lethal at a distance of three km. ; in fact that would be a rather small factor, since people that close would all or nearly all be killed by the blast that follows. Immediately after the flash, a "fireball" forms in the air and rises for several seconds, blindingly bright and radiating much heat. On a clear day or night, people up to eighty km. away who happened to be facing that way, or who turned their eyes to look where the flash came from, would be temporarily or permanently blinded. Within ten km. of "ground zero" (which is the point directly under the explosion) all parts of the body exposed to the flash would be burned deeply into the flesh. Superficial burns would be caused at greater distances, out to fifteen km. at least. Clothing that caught fire would cause many more burns. The weather conditions prevailing, and the time of day the bomb exploded, would both influence the degrees of damage. For example, the radii for skin burns and blindness would depend on the weather. Mist or fog reduces the range of the heat and light rays; on the other hand, darkness dilates the pupils of the eyes increasing the probability of severe eye damage from the flash. Blast Starting at the same instant, but travelling more slowly (like the sound of thunder following a lightning flash) is an enormously powerful blast wave. It would destroy even reinforced concrete buildings for a radius of two km., and ordinary brick or timber frame houses out to eight km. Major damage to houses would extend out to fourteen km., and windows would be broken at twenty or thirty km. People at a distance, if they realized what had happened when they saw the flash, would have a few seconds to lie down, or even to dive into a ditch or hollow, before the blast hit. Within three km., almost everyone would be killed, either directly by the blast or by collapsing or flying masonry. At eight km., it is estimated that about fifty per cent of people would be killed by the effects of the blast. Immediately following the blast wave would be hurricane force winds, first outwards from the explosion, and many seconds later inwards to replace the air that went out. Within four km., the wind would be of tornado force, six hundred km./hr., sufficient to drive straws into wooden utility poles or glass splinters into people, but of course over a much wider area than a tornado. People in the open would be picked up and hurled into any object strong enough to be still standing. Firestorm Many fires would have been started by the first flash. Burst fuel tanks, gas mains, and collapsed buildings would provide more fuel, and it is likely that confluent fires would cause a "firestorm". This is when coalescent fires cause sufficient updraft to form their own wind, blowing inwards from all sides and thereby increasing the intensity of the fire. The temperature even in basements and bomb shelters rises above lethal levels, and all available oxygen is used by the fire. The wind blowing inwards is of gale force, so that even strong uninjured people would have difficulty walking or trying to run outwards away from the fire. Delayed Radiation ("fallout")A nuclear explosion, as well as giving off a great pulse of radiation at the time, leaves everything in the vicinity radioactive. In the case of an "air-burst" as just described, most of the radioactive products would be gaseous, or completely vaporized, and would rise with the fireball and come down slowly, if at all. There might be a rainstorm containing radioactivity, as there was at Hiroshima; and the rubble within a kilometre or two of the ground zero would be radioactive. This might hamper later rescue efforts, and affect the very few survivors from that central area, but would not be a major factor. In any nuclear bomb explosion, a large fraction (a minimum of one-third) of the original fissile material (plutonium or U-235) does not get destroyed. This would result in widespread contamination, increasing the late risk of cancer for those who survived ten to twenty years. (These amounts of plutonium and uranium would have no immediate toxic effects.) Rescue Problems If the bomb exploded squarely over the centre of a city, no rescue services within the area of major structural damage would be able to function. All down-town hospitals would be destroyed, and there would be no electricity, water, or telephone communication in the area served by city utilities. Rescue services from outside would be hampered by impassable roads and the central area of severe damage would be inaccessible. The number of injured in the peripheral area would be so great that emergency services of surrounding cities would be completely overloaded, as would be any surviving suburban hospitals and all the hospitals of neighbouring cities. Even to be seen by a doctor and given analgesics, the injured from one city would need to be distributed among all the hospitals of North America. The destroyed city would be radioactive. Decisions to attempt rescue work would depend first on a survey of the area by a specialist team with appropriate protection, and then on a policy decision as to how much radiation the rescue teams should be permitted. Willingness of the team members and their unions to accept the risk would be a final factor. Medical Problems The estimates for a city of one million or two million struck by a single one-megaton bomb are that around one third of the inhabitants would be killed instantly or fatally injured, one third seriously injured, and the rest uninjured or only slightly injured. That number of injured, if they could be distributed throughout the hospitals of North America, would occupy something like a third of the total number of beds; and of course no hospital can deal adequately with such an influx of urgent cases within a few days. There might be fifty times as many cases of severe burns as there are burn beds in the whole of North America. A whole year's supply of blood for transfusion would be needed immediately, and>> Next Page GET OUR NEWSLETTER!Your Name: Your Email: Enter your email address above for 3 AM MAGAZINE'S Monthly Newsletter. Each time a new issue is posted, we'll let you know. (Your email address will be kept confidential!)  US Hist Exam 2 50 terms michael_tillema US Hist Exam 2HIST 1302 at San Antonio College with Prof. Johnston Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Sort"Twenty Years at Hull-House" (1910) was an autobiography of Jane Addams who started Hull House in Chicago What did the social gospel movement of the late nineteenth century advocate? Societal and Individual reform The 1909 strik at New York City's Triangle Shirtwaist Company demonstrated that women in the workplace could exercise solidarity How did Wisconsin governor Robert La Follette unite his supporters during the first years of the twentieth century? By emphasizing reform over party loyalty The Hepburn Act (1906) marked the first time that a government commission could examine records of private business How did President Theodore Roosevelt impact land conservation during his administration? He quadrupled the land allotted for for conservation and preservation The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine established the United States as the "police power" of the western hemisphere What did Eugene V. Debs advocate as an alternative to the progressive programs of the Republicans and Democrats? urged men and women to liberate themselves from the "barbarism of private ownership and wage slavery"Margaret Sanger promoted birth control in the 1910s because she wanted to alter social and political power relationships The Progressive Era's Jim Crow laws in the South were designed to legally segregate blacks What motivated the rebellion of Mexican farmers led by Pancho Villa in 1916- 1917? the new government betrayed their revolutionary promises the help the common people THe outbreak of WWI in 1914 was triggered by the killing of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his pregnant wife Sophie Germany reacted to the 1914 blockade by blockading Great Britain The Selective Service Act of 1917 authorized the armed forces to conscript all young men The U. S. government passed the Espionage Act,, the Trading with the Enemy Act and the Sedition Act during WWI to enable punishment for any opinion or activity deemed "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive. "In his Fourteen Points, President Wilson called for free trade and right of Europeans to self determination Senator Henry Cabot Lodge strongly opposed the Treaty of Versailles because he believed it would lessen the autonomy of the USWhich of the following events describes the American Red Scare of 1919 and 1920? postwar recession, labor unrest,terrorist acts, and difficulties reintegrating How did the U. S. Supreme Court rule in t;he case of Schenck v. United States (1919)? Clear and Present Danger test When Warren G. Harding appealed to a return to normalcy, he was calling for regular, steady order President Harding's administration was characterized by many scandals What was the purpose of the Dawes Plan, which was instituted in 1924? cut reparation payment in half for Germany, and initiated new loans When black veterans of WWI returned home from the deployments, they found grim economic hardship and race riots Describe the Ku Klux Klan of the mid-1920s? Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma What did the outcome of teh Sacco and Vanzetti trial suggest about the United States in the 1920s? Americans were very xenophobic and anti-foreign movements were rampant. In 1927, Charles Lindbergh became the first person to fly across the Atlantic nonstop The purpose of the President Hoover's Reconstruction Finance Corporation, created in 1932, was to pump money in harmed banks (trickle down economics)Which group was hid hardest by the Great Depression? The unemployed, tenant farmers, and sharecroppers (mainly minorities)How did the Great Depression affect the American family in the 1930s? resentment among men grew, as women were in the workplace The Hoover administration responded to the WWI veterans who asked for the immediate payment of their pension or bonus by evicting them from their camps, and sending armies to quell the riots In order to win the presidential election in 1932, FDR had to unite the Democrats What was the name of President ROosevelt's signature program? The New Deal The Emergency Banking Act of 1933 stregthened american banks by releasing federal funds to bolster bank assets The purpose of the Franklin Roosevelt's Civilian Conservation Cops was to create jobs for young men conserving natural resources How did the Agricultual Adjustment and Farm Credit Acts of 1935 aim to help American farmers? paid them not to plant crops and provided long term credit In 1936, the Supreme Court supported agricultural processors and distributors when it ruled against the Agricultural Adjustment Act The Wagner Act helped which of the following unions to mobilize organizing drives in the major industries? The Committee for Industrial Organizations The framers of Social Security agreed to fund the program individually by tax contributions from workers The Social Security Act of 1934 provided old age pensions, and assistance for dependent mothers and the unemployed The objective of the Neutrality Act of 1937 was to prevent involvement in European affairs Which of the following describes the overall impact of the New Deal? Kept the U. S. more democratic The purpose of teh Lend-Lease Act of 1941 was to lend arms, munitions, and supplies to Britain, while leasing their land in the Caribbean What did African Americans who migrated to take jobs in defense industries experience in their new locations? widespread racial violence In February 1945, the Big Three met at Yalta to discuss self determination What occurrence made April 30, 1945 a turning point in the war Hitler committed suicide The capture of Okinawa in 1944 was especially crucial to Allied forces becuase it provided a launching point for allied invasions The primary mission of Japanese kamikaze pilots was to defend Okinawa Why did American scientists begin to develop a superbomb in 1942 to keep the Germans from doing it!What was demonstrated during the six-month battle to force the withdrawal of Japanese forces from the Guadalcanal in February, 1943? how costly it would be The United States dropped a second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki only three days after the attack on Hiroshima because it was the center of the wartime and government operations  chapter 26 10 terms constance_camariochapter 26the cold war Learn Flashcards Write Spell Test Match Gravity Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads Like this study set? Create a free account to save it. Create a free account Maybe later Sort In response to the 1948 Soviet blockade of West Berlin, the United States used an airlift to re-supply West Berlin. Why was Inchon significant to the Korean War? General Douglas Mac Arthur launched a daring amphibious assault at Inchon that forced North Korea's forces to retreat. The Korean War was an example of all the following except the triumph of military over political leadership. In 1950, Joseph Mc Carthy argued that there were communists working in the American government. What was President Truman's motive in adopting an active pro-civil-rights policy beginning in 1946? 1. He believed that every American should enjoy the full rights of citizenship. 2. He wanted to cultivate the African-American vote for future elections. 3. He felt that racial inequality in the United States undercut American foreign policy in its contest with the Soviet Union. ALL OF THESE CHOICESWhich of the following was accomplished during Truman's presidency? The armed forces were desegregated. Between 1947 and 1951, what did the loyalty boards that were established to root out subversives in government service do? They forced several thousand government employees to resign and led to the dismissal of almost six hundred on charges of disloyalty. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, what did the House Un-American Activities Committee, Hollywood, and some thirty-nine state legislatures have in common? They all contributed to the anticommunist hysteria of the period and tried to root out subversives in American society. Who were the "Hollywood Ten"? They were a group of prominent film directors and screenwriters who refused to say whether they had been members of the Communist Party. In the "Eisenhower Doctrine," Dwight Eisenhower declared the United States would send military aid and, if necessary, troops to help counter communist thrusts in The Middle East.  "Advantages And Disadvantages Of Atomic Bomb" Essays and Research Papers Advantages And Disadvantages Of Atomic Bomb The Atomic Bomb The Manhattan Project was a United States government research project where they produced the first atomicbomb. The project started in 1942, with only six thousand dollars in funding, and ended in 1945, when the first atomic bomb was produced. “ The atomic bomb took four years to produce about two billion dollars” (Moss 22). Dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified, that is why we dropped the bombs. The dropping of the atomic bombs saved many... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Little Boy 1568 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Dakota Guthrie Michael A. Joyner English 112 25 0ctober 2014 The Atomic Bombings Were Necessary To the dismay of many people on August 6, 1945, the first atomic bomb was used in the history of mankind as a part of warfare. Many people died as a result of these bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and because of the bombings, Japan knew it had been defeated, so it soon afterwards surrendered to America. I believe that the bombings were necessary in order to make Japan surrender because Harry Truman... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Fat Man 1747 Words | 6 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb On August 6, 1945, the United States of America dropped an atomicbomb on Hiroshima, Japan. The United States was justified to do this because of the unprovoked attack and bombing of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, which occurred three years prior to the bombing of Hiroshima, and it was necessary to stop the war because it saved thousands of American lives. Until then, the fight had never been on United States soil. The innocent civilians of Japan did not have to worry about being killed on their land until... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Attack on Pearl Harbor, Empire of Japan 1120 Words | 2 Pages Open Document The Atomic Bomb The End of World War II The United States Decision to drop the Atomicbomb has been a controversial topic since the day the first bomb was dropped August 6, 1945. President Harry Truman made the ultimate decision to use the atomic bomb, to him it was a clear decision that this would end the war with America’s most hated enemy: Japan (Nathan, 2012). There had been thousandths of bloody deaths up to-this-point in the war, Japan was destroyed, they had just about nothing, their country was in starvation... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Douglas Mac Arthur 1333 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Q2) After WWII, some of the key developments in science and technology became deeply involved in the production of military weapons, such as the atomic bomb and other conventional weapons used in the Korean and/or Vietnam Wars. Choose any one exemplary weapon or military-related technologies, such as the atomic bomb, missiles, rockets, or chemical weapons and pesticides. Please then describe the scientific and/or other social, political, organizational, and industrial developments that enabled the... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, DNA 1310 Words | 4 Pages Open Document The Atomic Bomb The Atomic Bomb: Beneficial or Disastrous? Was dropping the atomicbomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II the most affective action that the United States could have taken? In the American eyes it was a good punishment on Japan in response to the Pearl Harbor attacks on December 7, 1941. The way the Japanese leaders launched the fighter planes that came in a destroyed many U. S. naval ships and took thousands lives, including soldiers and innocent bystanders, was a completely immoral... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Fat Man 1387 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bombduring World War II, he decided to drop the atomic bomb on two cities in Japan. The first bomb that dropped on Hiroshima was nicknamed “Little Boy”. The explosion wiped out 90 percent of the Hiroshima and immediately killed an estimation of 80,000 people; thousands more people would later die of radiation exposure. Three days later, a second bomb dropped another on the city of Nagasaki, it is estimated to have killed about 40,000 people. Although the bomb that was dropped on the city of Nagasaki was... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 917 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Dropping the Atomic Bomb: Was It Necessary? Dropping the Atomic Bomb: Was it really necessary? In 1945, the United States with help from Canada, released a new force into unsuspecting Japan which shocked the world. It was the weapon the Manhattan project spent months working on while spending approximately $20 billion. It used up to 12% of America’s electricity during the war even though many people did not know what they were working on. It was a weapon so powerful that many heads of this project feared it would go terribly wrong. It would... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Los Alamos National Laboratory 1717 Words | 5 Pages Open Document The Atomic Bomb in World War Ii The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki marked the end to the world's largest armed conflict. Many debates have surfaced over the ethics of such an attack. The bomb itself caused massive amounts of casualties while the unknown effects of radiation caused many more deaths amongst the survivors of the blast. Despite the ghastly effects of such a weapon, it offered the best choice for a quick and easy defeat of Japan. President Truman, who authorized the use of the atomicbomb, made a wise decision... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 1928 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Research paper- Atomic bomb On August 6, 1945, a plane called the Enola Gay dropped an atomicbomb , Little Boy on the city of Hiroshima. Hiroshima was a very industrial city; it had a military base and had not yet been bombed. The U. S. military thought Hiroshima would be a good target to display the destructive power of their new super bomb . Harry S. Truman, the president of The United States from 1945 to 1953, decided to drop the atomic bomb due to several reasons. First, he wanted to end the war as soon as possible, second... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Empire of Japan 775 Words | 4 Pages Open Document The Dropping of the atomic bombs The Dropping of the Atomic Bombs during WWII On August 6th 1945 the United States, under President Harry S. Truman, dropped the first of two atomic bombs on Hiroshima, a fairly large city in Japan. Three days later on August 9th, a second atomic bomb was dropped on another Japanese city, Nagasaki. A big question that is still argued today is whether the droppings of the two atomic bombs, that forced the Japanese to surrender, were a necessary act. Many historians and politicians argue this point... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Franklin D. Roosevelt 1441 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Why Not to Drop the Atomic Bombcome to my attention that you are wavering the use of an atomic bomb. I have been following the development of the ungodly weapon for quite some time now, ever since 1942, when more than 100,000 scientists were gathered together to work on the Manhattan Project. In specific, I believe it’s my moral obligation to report the information I’ve gathered from the 37 installations across the United States that have been developing the atomic bomb. Once I saw the mushroom cloud that seemed to touch stratosphere... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 874 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb - Hiroshima and Nagasaki“The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a necessary evil to end the Second World War.” To what extent do you agree with the statement? Explain your answer. I agree with the statement to a large extent. World War II is known for acts of heroism on both sides, as well as controversial decisions. One major event that has long been debated was the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The political landscape before the bomb was dropped prevented a Japanese surrender. The war would... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Harry S. Truman 1498 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Albert Einstein and the Atomic Bomb ALBERT EINSTEIN and the ATOMIC BOMB The physicist Albert Einstein did not directly participate in the invention of the atomic bomb. But as we shall see, he was instrumental in facilitating its development. In 1905, as part of his Special Theory of Relativity, he made the intriguing point that a large amount of energy could be released from a small amount of matter. This was expressed by the equation E=mc2 (energy = mass times the speed of light squared). The atomic bomb would clearly illustrate... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Manhattan Project 976 Words | 3 Pages Open Document The Dropping of the Atomic Bombthe Right to Drop the Atomic Bomb “On the morning of August 6, 1945, the American B-29 Enola Gay dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later another B-29, Bock’s Car, released one over Nagasaki. Both caused enormous casualties and physical destruction.” (Maddox 1). These disastrous events have weighted upon the American conscience ever since that day in history. Even though there are some people that disagree with the dropping of the atomic bomb, President Truman’s decision... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Harry S. Truman 1290 Words | 2 Pages Open Document Atomic bomb essay Taha Elghamudi Mr. Paleczny CHC 2DI-02 June 10, 2013 Atomic Bomb Essay Weapons of all kinds have been used by humanity in wars, sometimes to instigate, and sometimes to make the best of a bad situation. In the case of the atomic bomb there has been a great deal of opposition to it: that it is not necessary to end the war and there are better alternatives to it. In actuality, the atomic is necessary to end the war, and it is not as “evil” as a weapon in war, as many seem to think. It will make the... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 1055 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Dbqof one of the most destructive weapons known to humanity occurred within the United States. This weapon, known as “the atomic bomb ,” was used on the two Japanese cities: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, resulting in a death toll unprecedented by any military weapon used before and an immediate, unconditional surrender. Some historians believe President Truman decided to drop the atomic bomb in order to intimidate the Soviet Union whereas others believe it was a strictly military measure designed to force Japan’s... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Franklin D. Roosevelt 949 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Justified? Was the Atomic Bombing Justified? The Atomic Bomb made a very serious statement at a time when the world was in disarray (“Manhattan”). World War II was one of the most destructive times in history causing over 50 million deaths and leaving behind mental and physical casualties of war. (“World War II”) It started in September, 1939 when Germany invaded Poland and continued on a destructive path through Europe. Britain and France declared war on Germany. Two years prior in 1937, the Sino Japanese... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Little Boy 1658 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb - 2On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb dubbed “Little Boy” was dropped on Hiroshima and was followed by another, named “Fat Boy” at Nagasaki three days later in an attempt by the United States to end WWII. Germany had been defeated and the allied forces were sure to win the war. The main concern was how to defeat Japan. Japan surrendered unconditionally on August 14th, 1945. President Truman’s decision to use the bombs is often criticized given that the effects of an atomic bomb are so devastating and... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 1125 Words | 3 Pages Open Document The decision to drop the atomic bomb (Alperovitz, Gar (2010-12-29). The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb (p. 39). )” So if the war were to end the Japanese would have to unconditionally surrender, secretary of state James Byrnes said as much, “For instance, in his 1947 book Speaking Frankly, James F. Byrnes declared without qualification: “Had the Japanese Government listened to [Ambassador to Soviet Union] Sato and surrendered unconditionally, it would not have been necessary to drop the atomicbomb. (Alperovitz, p. 34)” The Japanese refused... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Dwight D. Eisenhower 1235 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Truman's Decision to Use the Atomic Bombhistory 138w-38 | Why did Truman use the atomic bomb against Japan? What did his decision say about priorities of American foreign policy? | Truman decision and reasons behind deployment of the atomic bomb | | Min Yong Jung | 11/2/2010 | | Harry S. Truman, the 33rd President of the United States, deployed the atomic bomb on Japan to ensure the end of the Pacific War with minimal US casualties. Upon rejection of the Potsdam Declaration and calls for unconditional surrender by the... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 2152 Words | 6 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki John Evans Mrs. Heilmann Honors English 9 April 29 2013 Atomic Bomb: Hiroshima and Nagasaki The atomic bombings on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the first and only use of nuclear weapons in war. These two bombings were both conducted by the United States in an attempt to force surrender from Japan. It is estimated that as many as 200,000 Japanese civilians died as a result of the two bombings, thousands more were also killed by radiation poisoning following the actual bombing. This... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Little Boy 1174 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb: Alperovitz Why did the Truman Administration decide to drop the atomic bombs on Japan in 1945? There has been much debate as to why Truman elected to drop the atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945. Historians have long debated the true purpose to which the atomic bombs were designed to fulfil upon there deployment. The Alperovitz thesis of the 1960 was accepted for many years. The thesis revolved around the idea that the atomic weapons were deployed as diplomatic tools to intimidate... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Empire of Japan 2383 Words | 7 Pages Open Document The Creation and Use of the Atomic Bomb The Atomic Bomb Probably no other man-made object has wielded as much terror or destruction as the Atomic Bomb. Created, tested, and used during World War II, it brought about the end of that bloody conflict. Unfortunately, it also was the cause of much loss in human life. However, why it was created, creation, and use are very interesting, although somewhat sad, and offer many topics for study. The creation of the bomb was actually started before the war- early 1941, because the president... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Los Alamos National Laboratory 971 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Joan Hinton: Atomic Bomb5/3/2011 Joan Hinton – Atomic Bomb Topic Outline & Thesis Statement According to Joan Hinton, “As long as there is war, scientists will never be free, are we scientists going to spend our lives in slavery for madmen who want to destroy the world?” Joan Hinton wanted to use her gift as a mathematician to help people around the world; instead, she was deceitfully recruited to work on a project that would kill sixty – seventy thousand people and injure one hundred... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Little Boy, Los Alamos National Laboratory 440 Words | 3 Pages Open Document The Effects of the Atomic Bomb The Atomic Bomb: Effects on Hiroshima and Mankind The nuclear bomb was the most devastating weapon ever created by man. It was developed between 1942 and 1945 during the second World War. The project to build the worlds first atomic weapon was called The Manhattan Project. The nuclear bomb was based on the idea of splitting an atom to create energy, this is called fission. Three bombs were created, "Trinity", "Little Boy", and "Fat Man". "Trinity" was dropped on a test site in New Mexico on July... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Little Boy 1359 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Dropping A specific type of bomb activated and dropped created a new age and generation of weapon warfare. The atomic bomb was dropped on Japan not once, but twice which generated two completely different feelings and atmospheres. One was triumph and success while the other was terror and death. America and its president, Truman, believed that the atomic bomb was the only answer for WWII to end, but was it really necessary? Hundreds of thousands died from the bomb in Japan in both cities of Hiroshima... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 932 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Essay Lucas Goldoni US2 Mr. Oosting 12/15/14 Decision to Drop the Atomic Bombs Essay President Truman was justified in using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945. As commander-in Chief of US Armed forces, President Truman was responsible for the men and women in harms way. Americans and Japanese were dying, suffering life-altering injuries and experiencing torture and deprivation in prison camps each day the war raged. Additionally, it is important to look at the cultural elements... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 738 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb Morality The development of the atomic bomb and chemical warfare forever changed the way people saw the world. It was a landmark in time for which there was no turning back. The constant balancing of the nuclear super powers kept the whole of humankind on the brink of atomic Armageddon. Fear of nuclear winter and the uncertainty of radiation created its own form of a cultural epidemic in the United States. During these tense times in human history officials made controversial decisions such as the bombings... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Manhattan Project 1793 Words | 5 Pages Open Document The Atomic Bomb: a Brief History The Atomic Bomb Abigail Dockstader Senior Division Research Paper The Atomic Bomb The Atomic Bomb is one of the deadliest weapons ever to be created. It has changed the history of the world. The atomicbomb would be the first weapon to bring together the world and shatter it altogether. In 1945, the only weapon that could destroy the world was built. This is the story of the history, creation, and innovation of the Atomic Bomb . In 1905... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Manhattan Project 1844 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Some advantages and disadvantages of internet Some advantages and disadvantages of internet Availability of Knowledge Advantages The internet which was once just a little puddle, now, have become an ocean; an ocean of knowledge. It is like a magical crystal ball which has an answer for every question of yours and the best thing about it is; it is completely free. I know how much I have learnt from the internet. How internet is better than books when it comes to knowledge? The answer to this would be the infinity of the internet. Plus,... History of the Internet, Instant messaging, Internet 1426 Words | 6 Pages Open Documentadvantages and disadvantages Advantages of Total Quality Management (TQM) Improves Reputation - TQM programs have the advantage of improving corporate as well as product reputations in the marketplace, because errors and defective products are discovered much more rapidly than under a non-TQM system, and often before they are ever sent to market or found in the hands of the public. Higher Employee Morale - Compared to employees who are motivated, disengaged workers are less efficient, miss more workdays and cost organizations... Employment, Ethics, Human 1366 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Was the Atomic Bomb Justifiable? Was The Use Of The Atomic Bomb Justifiable? "The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender..." Admiral William D. Leahy (Alperovitz,The Decision To Use The Atomic Bomb, date of publication unknown) There have been many issues involved with the use of the atomic bomb because of the high cost of lives, and that it was considered to be immoral and unethical. However it... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Harry S. Truman 1787 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Why did the atomic bomb hit? America dropped the first Atomic bomb on Hiroshima in Japan because Japan would not surrender. 130,000 people were killed by the initial blow, mostly women and children and the Atomic bomb caused many more deaths afterwards due to radiation. 3 days later, 9th August America dropped another bomb, which was much more powerful than and just as devastating as the first, on Nagasaki in Japan killing 70,000 people. Since 1940 scientists in the U. S. A had been working on a new bomb which could destroy whole... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Nuclear weapon 914 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Atomic Bombhow their lives completely changed at 8:15 on the 6th of August 1945 by the dropping of the first atomic bomb. The author, John Hersey, through his use of descriptive language the in book Hiroshima exposes the many horrors of a nuclear attack. Through the shocking and troubling graphic detail of human suffering and the physical effect of radiation and burns caused by the dropping of the atomic bomb Hersey exposes to the reader the deeply disturbing physical impact of a nuclear attack. In the book... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 1451 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Deciding to Save Lives with the Atomic Bomb DECIDING TO SAVE LIVES WITH THE ATOMIC BOMB During the crucial days and weeks in the summer of 1945, American officials from President Harry S. Truman on down, sought out a strategy to save as many U. S. soldiers and sailors lives as possible. As one may well imagine, these officials were willing to use almost any measure to end what had become a fight to the finish against the forces of Imperial Japan. The Germans forced America into manufacturing an atomicbomb that would change the history of... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 2548 Words | 7 Pages Open Document Were Atomic Bombs Necessary to End the World War II?the atomic bombs necessary to end the World War II? Hiroshima is one of the most well known Japanese cities in the world as it is one of only two cities experienced atomic bomb dropping. I went to Hiroshima a couple years ago and visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial. There were many photos of victims of atomic bomb in Hiroshima which I could not even keep my eyes on for seconds as they were really awfully injured. “The hell on earth” is the only way I can describe Hiroshima after the atomic bomb... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Empire of Japan 1885 Words | 5 Pages Open Documentatomic bomb and the origins of the cold war Analysis Due: 3/3/14 The title itself, “ Atomic Bomb and the Origins of the Cold War,” simply depicts the true cause of this international standstill. Although the writers introduce the audience to the underlying background behind this war, such as increasing political tension between a soon-to-be-called Anglo-American alliance and the U. S. S. R during and previous to World War II, the main focus of this composition is exemplified by the impact which the atomic bomb had on establishing an international... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Franklin D. Roosevelt 1548 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Decision to drop atomic bomb thesis WWII: The Decision to Drop the Atom Bomb ******* ****** North Carolina State University Author Note This paper was prepared on XX/XX/XXXX for HI 350 taught by Professor Caddell. WWII: The Decision to Drop the Atom Bomb On the morning of July 16th, 1945 the first successful detonation of an atomic bomb was recorded at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. The explosion from the blast yielded more power than twenty thousand tons of TNT and could be seen... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Franklin D. Roosevelt 1834 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Life and Success Because of the Atomic Bomb Mario Lopez ENC 1102 Fiedler 23 October 2012 Argumentative Essay Life and Success because of the Atomic bomb After defeating Nazi Germany there was only one step for the United States to end World War II and achieve world peace. The U. S. had to make the Japanese Empire surrender. The U. S. armed forces had already devastated the Japanese and conquered Japanese territories of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and Japanese-held Luzon at a very high casualty rate. The last effort to make Japan surrender was to... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Japan 1668 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Pros and Cons of the Atomic Bomb in WWIIAmerica has always, and most likely will always place a high value on American lives. In order to protect these lives and to insure that the world is safe for democracy, American leaders had to make a very tough decision, whether or not to drop the atomic bomb on Japan. This act would essentially be trading Japanese lives for American lives. The Japanese, who were the aggressors, much like the Germans, were not sympathized with. They were responsible for hundreds of thousands of American casualties in... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 944 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Was the dropping of the atomic bombs justified?launched the Manhattan project, developing the greatest weapon created at that time, the Atomic Bomb. On August 6th, 1945, The Atomic Bomb was first unlatched from a bomber above the city of Hiroshima, reducing the city to rubble. Three days later, the next bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, marking the quick yet gruesome end of WWII. There has been a big debate and a lot of controversy towards the dropping of these two bombs; ‘Little Boy’ and ‘Fat man’. Was it really necessary? Some think it was necessary as... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Empire of Japan 1490 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Science: Advantages & Disadvantages Science – Its Advantages and Disadvantages One of the striking features of 20 century is the progress of is no section oh human society in which science has not brought revolution. But still the term is debated among the conscious people that whether science is blessing or it is a curse for humanity. The facts, which are drawn by systematic study, are applied practically for the welfare of mankind or for the destruction of humanity. For example a gun in the hand of a guard is used for the safety... Empirical, Human, Pseudoscience 1920 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Consequences of Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasakithe first atomic bomb used in warfare on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, and then on August the 9th,President Truman announced “sixteen hours ago an American airplane dropped one bomb on Hiroshima and destroyed its usefulness to the enemy” and then on August the 9th three days later another American bomber plane dropped the second bomb on the industrial section of the city of Nagasaki, these two bombed completely destroyed most of the cities. There were lots of consequences of the bomb being dropped... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 869 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Advantages and Disadvantages of Sole Proprietorship Advantages and Disadvantages of Sole Proprietorship Profits and Losses – Advantages: Proprietor receives all the profits because he or she takes all the risks. Disadvantages: Losses are not shared. Liability - Disadvantages: 1) The proprietor has unlimited liability. 2) If the firm is unable to pay its bills, the proprietor can be force to sell personal assets as well as the business to pay debts. Management – Advantages: 1) Decisions on starting and running the business can be made... Business law, Business terms, Corporate tax 830 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Advantages and Disadvantages of Conformyit The advantages and disadvantages of conformity. The New Zealand Oxford dictionary defines conformity as accordance with established practise and agreement suitability. Conformity comes with many advantages and disadvantages. Conformity exists so people don’t feel left out. It also comes with many dangers such as losing your logic and forgetting whether what you’re doing is good or bad. An advantage of conformity is feeling that you’re not alone. You feel accepted and a part of a group where...1998 United States embassy bombings, Al-Qaeda, Islamic terrorism 1542 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Advantages and Disadvantages of Tourism Short Advantages and Disadvantages of Tourism - Short Essay New pedagogy St vincent & Grenadines Island is a small island with limited education facilities. Primarily motivated students can easily start their own education. Many people think of education as something that occurs in a school or classroom. However, knowledge-eager students can gain additional... 368 Words | 2 Pages Advantages and Disadvantages of Tourism. “Tourism can be a blessing to a country but it is by no means an unmixed blessing... Geotourism, Space tourism, Sustainable tourism 1057 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Advantages and Disadvantages of Vegetarians Advantages of vegetarianism One advantage that cannot be disputed is that vegetarian’s conscience can be at peace in the sense that he does not cause the death of animals grown for meat and fat such as rabbits, poultry or pigs. This idea alone persuades many people, especially women to start embracing vegetarianism as their way of life. Another undisputable advantage of vegetarianism is that long-term vegetarians are rarely overweight thus people can make losing weight easier by becoming vegetarians... Ethics of eating meat, In vitro meat, Meat 478 Words | 3 Pages Open Document The Atomic Bomb World War II & the Atomic Bomb The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki marked the end to the world's largest armed conflict. Many debates have surfaced over the ethics of such an attack. The bomb itself caused massive amounts of casualties while the unknown effects of radiation caused many more deaths amongst the survivors of the blast. Despite the ghastly effects of such a weapon, it offered the best choice for a quick and easy defeat of Japan. President Truman, who authorized... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fat Man, Hiroshima 540 Words | 2 Pages Open Document Advantage and Disadvantage of the Public Slauhgterhousedetermine the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the operation of the public slaughterhouse to the Guimbalanon living on the area and its workers by the length of stay in the area. Statement of the Problem This study aimed to determine the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the operation of the public slaughterhouse to the Guimbalanon. Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions: 1.) What is the extent of the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the operation of... Dictionary, Hygiene, Merriam-Webster 1422 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Atomic Bomb: Introduction of Nuclear Weapon In ww2 , the atomic bomb was dropped on japan to put an immediate end to the war and not draw other countries (i.e. the soviet union or china) into fighting combatively against the U. S. As far as foreign relations go, it proved to the world that the U. S was the most powerful country in that time ( superpower) . This also relates to several years later during the cold war. It prompted the Soviet Union to develop their own nuclear warfare. (i.e us comes out with hydrogen bomb and a year later USSR... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Nuclear proliferation 3290 Words | 6 Pages Open Document Advantages/Disadvantages of Rev. War There are advantages and disadvantages in every war that can either be minute details or change the whole course of the war. In the Revolutionary war, there were many advantages and disadvantages of either side. America and Britain both had different things working for them or against them, many of these things were very significant by the end of the war. Although both sides had various advantages and disadvantages, America's advantages outweighed those of the British. In the war, America had...2003 invasion of Iraq, American Revolutionary War, Army 868 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Why Truman Chose to Drop the Atomic Bomb America's decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan was only done to assert our position over the Soviet Union, and Japan's surrender was only an extra accomplishment of the attack. During the years 1939 to 1947, numerous conferences were held to discuss diplomatic matters, and the strive towards getting Japan to accept an unconditional surrender. The Japanese had already been weakened, and the military predicted that they would eventually be forced to surrender in a short amount of time. Even the... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Empire of Japan 895 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Was the Atomic Bomb Dropped on Hiroshima Justifiedthe atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945? The dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945 by the Americans is a very controversial issue with no definite answer. Both sides of the issue have very justifiable arguments. Reasons for dropping the bomb include the fact that Truman’s options were limited at this point in the war, that the bomb did have the desired outcome of Japans surrender and that the majority of reasons America had for dropping the bomb are justifiable... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Empire of Japan, Hiroshima 1576 Words | 4 Pages Open Document Types of Modulation: Advantages and Disadvantagescontrast the advantages and disadvantages of amplitude modulation, frequency modulation, phase modulation, and Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM). Refrences: Electronics and Radio Today. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.electronics-radio.com/articles/radio/modulation/amplitude_modulation/am.php Electronics and Radio Today. (n.d.1). Retrieved from http://www.electronics-radio.com/articles/radio/modulation/frequency_modulation/fm.php M. S. Richer. (2006). Advantages / disadvantages /applications... Amplitude modulation, Carrier wave, Frequency modulation 985 Words | 3 Pages Open Document ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SOCIAL NETWORKING [ a DVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SOCIAL NETWORKING ] March 6, 2012 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ADVANTAGES Low Costs Builds Credibility Connections DISADVANTAGES Lack of Anonymity Scams and Harassment Time Consuming REFERENCE Advantages and Disadvantage of Social Networking INTRODUCTION Do you think you’re hunting for is bablyuncovered these although anyone might possibly in the 1 | Page [ a DVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SOCIAL NETWORKING ] March 6, 2012 same manner get hold of ... Table of contents 1775 Words | 7 Pages Open Documentadvantages & disadvantages of social network SOCIAL NETWORKING Advantages and Disadvantages 1 Bart John Jared A social network is a social structure made up of a set of social actors (such as individuals or organizations) and a set of the dyadic ties between these actors. 2 Advantage Disadvantage Conclusion 3 ADVANTAGES OF SOCIAL NETWORKING 4 ADVANTAGES Meet new people Gives you the possibility of regaining connection with the people who you have stopped seeing. Keep in contact with old friends and colleagues Getting answers... Disadvantage, Marketing, My Space 296 Words | 14 Pages Open Document The Advantages and Disadvantages of Living in the Country Some advantages to living in the country include these points: Clean Air, no neighbors, open spaces, quiet, birds, deer and other critters. You have to love nature to live in the country. No crime, and people are usually friendly. Some disadvantages to living in the country include these points: No shopping mall or large supermarket. Power outages occur more often and usually out in the country everything runs on electric, like a well pump so you can flush the toilet, so no power and therefore... City, Ecology, Population 957 Words | 3 Pages Open Document Advantages and Disadvantages of Marketing Advantages and Disadvantages of Marketing By Adrian “Marketing” is defined by Wikipedia as “the process by which companies create customer interest in goods or services… through which companies build strong customer relationships and creates value for their customers and for themselves.” Start with a marketing plan – identifying the customer and their needs and wants. Since the essence of business is fulfilling a need it is an important to know which need you are trying to fulfil. Then you need... Advertising, Broadcasting, Business 1417 Words | 5 Pages Open Document Why the United States Should Have Dropped the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima Should We Have Used the Atomic Bomb to Defeat the Japanese in WWII? Despite its destructive consequences, the American bombing of Hiroshima was necessary to put an end to the war in the Pacific. President Truman’s choice to release a nuclear weapon on Japan was the fastest solution to ending the United States’ involvement in the Second World War, making the decision the most time efficient way out. Hiroshima’s destruction was also, very possibly, the only way for the United States to win the war... Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Cold War, Hiroshima 1158 Words | 3 Pages Open Document  . Cultural aspects of atomic anxiety written by Professor Alan Filreis for use in discussions of Michael Frayn's Copenhagen Penn Reading Project, University of Pennsylvania, 1999Some culture-watchers doubted that Americans were as anxious about the prospects of nuclear annihilation as everyone said they were. Was it really the "Age of Anxiety" specifically because of the bomb? The poet Rolfe Humphries, in his introduction to a 1953 anthology of New Poems by American Poets, noticed a distinct lack of such anxiety in the hundreds of poems by young writers he considered including in his book. "In the profession of anxiousness, there is an element of fashion," he noted, "of chichi: how many, I wonder, who feel sure that the Atom Bomb is going to get us all tomorrow, ever dream about bombs, instead of their father chasing their mother with a knife, or vice versa." Leaving aside his apparent naivete about how in dreams we substitute one set of fearful symbols for another, Humphries seems to have missed the point about the larger cultural effects of the nuclear age. People feared the bomb itself, yes - and probably such fears were indeed overstated by officials who wanted every new home to be built with fall-out shelters; and perhaps poets, among others, did not abide what seemed to them hysteria. But it seems also true that the bomb generally made midcentury Americans fear more acutely what they always already feared: that things that had been whole in their lives would now split, and that such splitting could not be controlled. Fragmentation was one fear. The loss of control was another. The bomb symbolized the two fears in one. In an issue of Time heralding the end of World War II, a good fight brought to its end by these remarkable new atomic weapons, the magazine summed up the cultural impact of the bomb by taking seriously the metaphor suggested in the physics that produced it. "With the controlled splitting of the atom, humanity, already profoundly perplexed and disunified, was brought inescapably into a new age in which all thoughts and things were split - and far from controlled." From the time of the linguistic disjunctions in the broken free-verse line of Gertrude Stein, the visual break-up displayed in the cubism of Braque and Duchamp, the Balkanized state of Euro-nationalism emerging from World War I, the philosophical "atomism" of Bertrand Russell and the early Ludwig Wittgenstein, modern life seemed already best characterized as disintegrated. There were no more wholes, no coherences. The A-bomb did not bring on something new. Rather it took cultural or aesthetic aspects of modern life - a "modernism" that could be safely imagined as something threatening but very far-off or at least contained, in Paris or New York - and seemed now to bring that incoherence dramatically home, or, indeed, into the home. Paul Boyer has written a book called By the Bomb's Early Light: American Thought and Culture at the Dawn of the Atomic Age (1985). He argues that after initial activism a dumb acceptance of the bomb set in. Allan Winkler's Life Under a Cloud: American Anxiety about the Atom (1993) argues the opposite: the threatened feeling continued through to the end of the cold war in the early 1990s. But Winkler and Boyer agree, as Boyer put it, that "American culture had been profoundly affected by atomic fear, by a dizzying plethora of atomic panaceas and proposals, and by endless speculation on the social and ethical implications of the new reality." No audience or reader of Michael Frayn's Copenhagen should for a moment forget Frayn's frank projection of the long view of such fears onto a conversation between two nuclear players who might not have been able to predict the culture beyond the physics. The dreams described by poet Humphries as unrelated to nuclear anxieties are the same "strange dreams" Frayn's Heisenberg has when he tries not to think about the U. S. A-bombing of Japanese cities. Once the bombs had been dropped, could Americans go on and play ping pong or poker, go shopping, shoot cap-pistols in fringed jackets and Dan'l Boaone caps? Of course. What choice did one have? Should one bite one's nails or pull at one's hair all day long because instant annihilation was always possible? When Heisenberg confronts Bohr with the deadly seriousness of the issue, one senses that he is almost mistaken in thinking he must pull Bohr out of the world of innocent quotidian acts: But, Bohr, we're not ski-ing now! We're not playing table-tennis! We're not juggling with cap-pistols and non-existent cards! I refused to believe it, when I first heard the news of Hiroshima. I thought that it was just one of the strange dreams we were living in at the time . . . . It's like a pre-war house-party - one of those house-parties in a play, that's cut off from any contact with the outside world, where you know the guests have all been invited for some secret sinister purpose. The normal was no longer normal. Every innocent act had the potential of the acutest dramatic irony. Every ping-pong game could have the feel of false innocence, of denial. In 1955 the "Hiroshima Maidens" came to the U. S. These young Japanese had been badly scarred from the atomic bombing of their hometown. Their trip had been organized by Americans who sought to help arrange for corrective plastic surgery. They stayed in host homes in the New York metropolitan area. Naturally, while they awaited treatments, they shopped, walked, saw movies, lived the life of tourists. Americans, likewise shopping and film-going, were horrified by this abruption onto the scene of innocent daily doings - activities "unrelated" to worries about the effects of the bomb. (Some people were so threatened by the presence of these disfigurements of American policy that they actually pondered whether organizers of the visit were communist agents. )In such normality the cultural impact of the atomic age was Readers of nuclear war literature might be surprised to find that, with just a few exceptions - Red Alert of 1958 is one - soldiers and the military generally are not real ly relevant. The classics of nuclear holocaust literature - John Hersey's Hiroshima (1946), Aldous Huxley's Ape and Essence (1948), Philip Wylie's Tomorrow! (1954), Neville Shute's On the Beach (1957), Pat Frank's Alas, Bab ylon! (1959), and Walter Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz (1959) - have less to say about military aspects of the bomb than about dystopias where people dream the sort of dreams in which fathers chase mothers with knives. One wonders if Rolfe Humphries, in choosing that dream as an example among all the others he could have imagined, unwittingly meant to suggest the ultimate out-of-control splitting of the American family. One of the poets whom Humphries published in his anthology of "new poets" of the 1950s was Constance Carrier, who taught Latin at a high school in quiet New Britain, Connecticut. The poem she published in Humphries' book depicts the tranquil scene of everyday life in the fifties. There is a statue honoring the Civil War heroes on a grassy "island" in Main Street. Old men sit on park benches, feeding birds nuts and breadcrusts. The contemplation of the end of that old war - bloody yet befitting placid monumentality at its end - leads Carrier to write about her own day. In a poem called "Pro Patria," which turns suddenly toward "the coming of the light" at the end of the recently concluded horrific war, who could not think of a view of a nuclear blast as seen from the pacific center of a small town? What's so eerie in the poem is the quietness - and almost the beauty - of this light succeeding "the end of the dark." Still stranger, though, is her editor's sense that poets really were not writing about the effect of the bomb on the American culture. Here is the pivotal stanza and a few of the lines that follow from it: Who can recall the day of that war's ending? Think of our own time, then, the summer night when the word came, and all the churchbells sounded the end of the dark and the coming of the light.. . . leaving no trace except some little parkwhere no one recalls that dream, that disillusion, and a monument to death is only known as a place where the harmless unambitious gather and the doves come down for bread on the sun-warmed stone.50s HOME|READING LIST|NEWS|FILREIS HOMEDocument URL: http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/atomic-anxieties.html Last modified: Thursday, 31-May-2007 09:42:48 EDT  . Section II - American Education Part 8The Second Half of the 20th Century: Post-World War II and Beyond Human diversity makes tolerance more than a virtue; it makes it a requirement for survival. -Rene Dubos, Celebrations of Life, 1981Following World War II, the population of the United States increased dramatically with a post-war baby boom. Higher education also experienced a boom as the Congress passed the GI Bill in 1944 that provided subsidies for returning veterans to attend colleges and universities. Over ten million veterans took advantage of this opportunity dramatically increasing the number of people who completed college. As the numbers of school children grew, the demand for facilities and teachers also increased. As the need for teachers increased, teacher certification requirements were lowered and in some cases almost eliminated to the point where little or no professional training was needed to teach. However, this trend later reversed itself as the teacher shortage became in actuality a teacher surplus in the late 1960's to early 1970's and teacher certification requirements were once again raised. More schools had to built to contain the large numbers of school age children and small school districts joined together with other districts to from larger ones which could better bear the burden of increased capital costs and administration. The one room schoolhouse where one teacher taught all grades (usually grades 1-8) that had been a staple of life in rural America almost disappeared because it was cheaper to build bigger schools and bus children to central locations. During the 1950's the major political concern for the United States was the Cold War. Following World War II, the Soviets had moved into Eastern Europe and asserted control over the governments of many of these countries. The United States believed its mission was to prevent the further spread of Communism and dominate the Soviets in every aspect. In 1957 the Soviet Union, set off a shock wave in the United States with the first successful launch of an artificial satellite called Sputnik. Almost immediately politicians blamed this failing on the American educational system claiming it wasn't rigorous enough and that more attention needed to be paid to mathematics and science education. Subsequently, the federal government appropriated millions of dollars for educational reform. The 1950's were also the beginning of the end of school segregation. In 1954, the Supreme Court heard the case of Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka. This case looked at the issue of segregation and this time ruled that it was illegal to deny entry to a facility based on the race. However, this ruling did not immediately end segregation. Strong opposition arose in many school districts throughout the country and schools were often the scene of violent confrontations when integration was first initiated. In the 1960's, the political emphasis changed from an external or global focus such as the Cold War to the consideration of internal affairs such as civil rights and the President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty. President John F. Kennedy, in his inaugural speech in 1961, asked the American public to consider "…not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," ushering in a new era of consciousness about the real meaning of equal opportunity and alleviating conditions associated with poverty. Both Kennedy and Johnson allocated massive amounts of dollars to breaking the cycle of poverty and education was one of the areas receiving some of these funds. Programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, subsidized school lunches, and Title One began during this time. The reform movement in education was also characterized by a new curricular emphasis. Teachers were encouraged to experiment and use their creativity to make education more interesting and involving for their students. Rather than textbook oriented stay in your seat type of learning that had characterized teaching instruction in the 1950's, students were allowed choices, given flexible scheduling, individualized instruction and non-graded schools. However, the curriculum reform movement of the sixties did not have the hoped for results in improving educational outcomes. Test scores dropped, enrollments fell and public confidence in teachers was eroded. There was a strong back to the basics curriculum movement emphasizing reading, writing and arithmetic computation along with teacher accountability. The seventies can probably be characterized as a time of economic concerns with the 1973 OPEC oil crisis, double-digit inflation, high interest rates, and high unemployment. Schools also suffered as a result of this economic pressure as funding was cut for public education. In 1975 Congress passed PL 94-142 requiring a free appropriate education for all handicapped children. This law required that handicapped children be educated to the best of their ability and that they have an individualized educational plan written to suit their specific needs. In this same year, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act took effect requiring that access to programs (in particular sports programs) not be denied on the basis of gender. Prior to the implementation of this law, females had only limited opportunities to participate in school sports because the funding (if it was provided at all) was not provided at the same level as it was for male sports programs. The eighties probably saw an escalation of the criticisms aimed at public education and teachers. In 1983 the national report A Nation at Risk was published detailing how the public school system had failed miserably in educating America's children. As a result of this report, school reform movements gained momentum and a number of states passed laws requiring higher standards and expectations for students. The educational focus for the nineties has been primarily directed at school reform. Goals 2000 are an effort by the federal government to set standards for American education. Restructuring schools to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse population and greater competition from a world that is rapidly changing in terms of technology has been the focus of most educators. For the most part teachers have risen to the occasion, taking on roles of leadership and leading the way into the 21st century. Back to Module I© 1999 Judy Gelbrich, OSU - School of Education  Section 5.0 Effects of Nuclear Explosions Section 5.0 Effects of Nuclear Explosions Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions Version 2.14: 15 May 1997COPYRIGHT CAREY SUBLETTE This material may be excerpted, quoted, or distributed freely provided that attribution to the author (Carey Sublette) and document name (Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions) is clearly preserved. I would prefer that the user also include the URL of the source. Only authorized host sites may make this document publicly available on the Internet through the World Wide Web, anonymous FTP, or other means. Unauthorized host sites are expressly forbidden. If you wish to host this FAQ, in whole or in part, please contact me at: careysub@earthling.net This restriction is placed to allow me to maintain version control. The current authorized host sites for this FAQ are the High Energy Weapons Archive hosted/mirrored at: http://gawain.membrane.com/hew/ http://nuketesting.enviroweb.org/hew/ and Rand Afrikaans University Engineering hosted at: http://www-ing.rau.ac.za/Back to Main Index5.0 Effects of Nuclear Explosions Nuclear explosions produce both immediate and delayed destructive effects. Immediate effects (blast, thermal radiation, prompt ionizing radiation) are produced and cause significant destruction within seconds or minutes of a nuclear detonation. The delayed effects (radioactive fallout and other possible environmental effects) inflict damage over an extended period ranging from hours to centuries, and can cause adverse effects in locations very distant from the site of the detonation. These two classes of effects are treated in separate subsections. The distribution of energy released in the first minute after detonation among the three damage causing effects is: Low Yield (<100 kt) High Yield (>1 Mt) Thermal Radiation 35% 45% Blast Wave 60% 50% Ionizing Radiation 5% 5% (80% gamma, 20% neutrons)The radioactive decay of fallout releases an additional 5-10% over time.5.1 Overview of Immediate Effects5.2 Overview of Delayed Effects5.3 Physics of Nuclear Weapon Effects5.4 Air Bursts and Surface Bursts5.5 Electromagnetic Effects5.6 Mechanisms of Damage and Injury5.1 Overview of Immediate Effects The three categories of immediate effects are: blast, thermal radiation (heat), and prompt ionizing or nuclear radiation. Their relative importance varies with the yield of the bomb. At low yields, all three can be significant sources of injury. With an explosive yield of about 2.5 kt, the three effects are roughly equal. All are capable of inflicting fatal injuries at a range of 1 km. The equations below provide approximate scaling laws for relating the destructive radius of each effect with yield:r_thermal = Y^0.41 * constant_th r_blast = Y^0.33 * constant_bl r_radiation = Y^0.19 * constant_rad If Y is in multiples (or fractions) of 2.5 kt, then the result is in km (and all the constants equal one). This is based on thermal radiation just sufficient to cause 3rd degree burns (8 calories/cm^2); a 4.6 psi blast overpressure (and optimum burst height); and a 500 rem radiation dose. The underlying principles behind these scaling laws are easy to explain. The fraction of a bomb's yield emitted as thermal radiation, blast, and ionizing radiation are essentially constant for all yields, but the way the different forms of energy interact with air and targets vary dramatically. Air is essentially transparent to thermal radiation. The thermal radiation affects exposed surfaces, producing damage by rapid heating. A bomb that is 100 times larger can produce equal thermal radiation intensities over areas 100 times larger. The area of an (imaginary) sphere centered on the explosion increases with the square of the radius. Thus the destructive radius increases with the square root of the yield (this is the familiar inverse square law of electromagnetic radiation). Actually the rate of increase is somewhat less, partly due to the fact that larger bombs emit heat more slowly which reduces the damage produced by each calorie of heat. It is important to note that the area subjected to damage by thermal radiation increases almost linearly with yield. Blast effect is a volume effect. The blast wave deposits energy in the material it passes through, including air. When the blast wave passes through solid material, the energy left behind causes damage. When it passes through air it simply grows weaker. The more matter the energy travels through, the smaller the effect. The amount of matter increases with the volume of the imaginary sphere centered on the explosion. Blast effects thus scale with the inverse cube law which relates radius to volume. The intensity of nuclear radiation decreases with the inverse square law like thermal radiation. However nuclear radiation is also strongly absorbed by the air it travels through, which causes the intensity to drop off much more rapidly. These scaling laws show that the effects of thermal radiation grow rapidly with yield (relative to blast), while those of radiation rapidly decline. In the Hiroshima attack (bomb yield approx. 15 kt) casualties (including fatalities) were seen from all three causes. Burns (including those caused by the ensuing fire storm) were the most prevalent serious injury (two thirds of those who died the first day were burned), and occurred at the greatest range. Blast and burn injuries were both found in 60-70% of all survivors. People close enough to suffer significant radiation illness were well inside the lethal effects radius for blast and flash burns, as a result only 30% of injured survivors showed radiation illness. Many of these people were sheltered from burns and blast and thus escaped their main effects. Even so, most victims with radiation illness also had blast injuries or burns as well. With yields in the range of hundreds of kilotons or greater (typical for strategic warheads) immediate radiation injury becomes insignificant. Dangerous radiation levels only exist so close to the explosion that surviving the blast is impossible. On the other hand, fatal burns can be inflicted well beyond the range of substantial blast damage. A 20 megaton bomb can cause potentially fatal third degree burns at a range of 40 km, where the blast can do little more than break windows and cause superficial cuts. It should be noted that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused fatality rates were ONE TO TWO ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE higher than the rates in conventional fire raids on other Japanese cities. Eventually on the order of 200,000 fatalities, which is about one-quarter of all Japanese bombing deaths, occurred in these two cities with a combined population of less than 500,000. This is due to the fact that the bombs inflicted damage on people and buildings virtually instantaneously and without warning, and did so with the combined effects of flash, blast, and radiation. Widespread fatal injuries were thus inflicted instantly, and the many more people were incapacitated and thus unable to escape the rapidly developing fires in the suddenly ruined cities. Fire raids in comparison, inflicted few immediate or direct casualties; and a couple of hours elapsed from the raid's beginning to the time when conflagrations became general, during which time the population could flee. A convenient rule of thumb for estimating the short-term fatalities from all causes due to a nuclear attack is to count everyone inside the 5 psi blast overpressure contour around the hypocenter as a fatality. In reality, substantial numbers of people inside the contour will survive and substantial numbers outside the contour will die, but the assumption is that these two groups will be roughly equal in size and balance out. This completely ignores any possible fallout effects.5.2 Overview of Delayed Effects5.2.1 Radioactive Contamination The chief delayed effect is the creation of huge amounts of radioactive material with long lifetimes (half-lifes ranging from days to millennia). The primary source of these products is the debris left from fission reactions. A potentially significant secondary source is neutron capture by non-radioactive isotopes both within the bomb and in the outside environment. When atoms fission they can split in some 40 different ways, producing a mix of about 80 different isotopes. These isotopes vary widely in stability, some our completely stable while others undergo radioactive decay with half-lifes of fractions of a second. The decaying isotopes may themselves form stable or unstable daughter isotopes. The mixture thus quickly becomes even more complex, some 300 different isotopes of 36 elements have been identified in fission products. Short-lived isotopes release their decay energy rapidly, creating intense radiation fields that also decline quickly. Long-lived isotopes release energy over long periods of time, creating radiation that is much less intense but more persistent. Fission products thus initially have a very high level of radiation that declines quickly, but as the intensity of radiation drops, so does the rate of decline. A useful rule-of-thumb is the "rule of sevens". This rule states that for every seven-fold increase in time following a fission detonation (starting at or after 1 hour), the radiation intensity decreases by a factor of 10. Thus after 7 hours, the residual fission radioactivity declines 90%, to one-tenth its level of 1 hour. After 7*7 hours (49 hours, approx. 2 days), the level drops again by 90%. After 7*2 days (2 weeks) it drops a further 90%; and so on for 14 weeks. The rule is accurate to 25% for the first two weeks, and is accurate to a factor of two for the first six months. After 6 months, the rate of decline becomes much more rapid. The rule of sevens corresponds to an approximate t^-1.2 scaling relationship. These radioactive products are most hazardous when they settle to the ground as "fallout". The rate at which fallout settles depends very strongly on the altitude at which the explosion occurs, and to a lesser extent on the size of the explosion. If the explosion is a true air-burst (the fireball does not touch the ground), when the vaporized radioactive products cool enough to condense and solidify, they will do so to form microscopic particles. These particles are mostly lifted high into the atmosphere by the rising fireball, although significant amounts are deposited in the lower atmosphere by mixing that occurs due to convective circulation within the fireball. The larger the explosion, the higher and faster the fallout is lofted, and the smaller the proportion that is deposited in the lower atmosphere. For explosions with yields of 100 kt or less, the fireball does not rise abve the troposphere where precipitation occurs. All of this fallout will thus be brought to the ground by weather processes within months at most (usually much faster). In the megaton range, the fireball rises so high that it enters the stratosphere. The stratosphere is dry, and no weather processes exist there to bring fallout down quickly. Small fallout particles will descend over a period of months or years. Such long-delayed fallout has lost most of its hazard by the time it comes down, and will be distributed on a global scale. As yields increase above 100 kt, progressively more and more of the total fallout is injected into the stratosphere. An explosion closer to the ground (close enough for the fireball to touch) sucks large amounts of dirt into the fireball. The dirt usually does not vaporize, and if it does, there is so much of it that it forms large particles. The radioactive isotopes are deposited on soil particles, which can fall quickly to earth. Fallout is deposited over a time span of minutes to days, creating downwind contamination both nearby and thousands of kilometers away. The most intense radiation is created by nearby fallout, because it is more densely deposited, and because short-lived isotopes haven't decayed yet. Weather conditions can affect this considerably of course. In particular, rainfall can "rain out" fallout to create very intense localized concentrations. Both external exposure to penetrating radiation, and internal exposure (ingestion of radioactive material) pose serious health risks. Explosions close to the ground that do not touch it can still generate substantial hazards immediately below the burst point by neutron-activation. Neutrons absorbed by the soil can generate considerable radiation for several hours. The megaton class weapons that were developed in the US and USSR during the fifties and sixties have been largely retired, being replaced with much smaller yield warheads. The yield of a modern strategic warhead is, with few exceptions, now typically in the range of 200-750 kt. Recent work with sophisticated climate models has shown that this reduction in yield results in a much larger proportion of the fallout being deposited in the lower atmosphere, and a much faster and more intense deposition of fallout than had been assumed in studies made during the sixties and seventies. The reduction in aggregate strategic arsenal yield that occurred when high yield weapons were retired in favor of more numerous lower yield weapons has actually increased the fallout risk.5.2.2 Effects on the Atmosphere and Climate Although not as directly deadly as fallout, other environmental effects can be quite harmful.5.2.2.1 Harm to the Ozone Layer The high temperatures of the nuclear fireball, followed by rapid expansion and cooling, cause large amounts of nitrogen oxides to form from the oxygen and nitrogen in the atmosphere (very similar to what happens in combustion engines). Each megaton of yield will produce some 5000 tons of nitrogen oxides. The rising fireball of a high kiloton or megaton range warhead will carry these nitric oxides well up into the stratosphere, where they can reach the ozone layer. A series of large atmospheric explosions could significantly deplete the ozone layer. The high yield tests in the fifties and sixties probably did cause significant depletion, but the ozone measurements made at the time were too limited to pick up the expected changes out of natural variations.5.2.2.2 Nuclear Winter The famous TTAPS (Turco, Toon, Ackerman, Pollack, and Sagan) proposal regarding a potential "nuclear winter" is another possible occurrence. This effect is caused by the absorption of sunlight when large amounts of soot are injected into the atmosphere by the widespread burning of cities and petroleum stocks destroyed in a nuclear attack. Similar events have been observed naturally when large volcanic eruptions have injected large amounts of dust into the atmosphere. The Tambora eruption of 1815 (the largest volcanic eruption in recent history) was followed by "the year without summer" in 1816, the coldest year in the last few centuries. Soot is far more efficient in absorbing light than volcanic dust, and soot particles are small and hydrophobic and thus tend not to settle or wash out as easily. Although the initial TTAPS study was met with significant skepticism and criticism, later and more sophisticated work by researchers around the world have confirmed it in all essential details. These studies predict that the amount of soot that would be produced by burning most of the major cities in the US and USSR would severly disrupt climate on a world-wide basis. The major effect would be a rapid and drastic reduction in global temperature, especially over land. All recent studies indicate that if large scale nucelar attack occur against urban or petrochemical targets, average temperature reductions of at least 10 degrees C would occur lasting many months. This level of cooling far exceeds any that has been observed in recorded history, and is comparable to that of a full scale ice age. In areas downwind from attack sites, the cooling can reach 35 degrees C. It is probable that no large scale temperature excursion of this size has occurred in 65 million years. Smaller attacks would create reduced effects of course. But it has been pointed out that most of the world's food crops are subtropical plants that would have dramatic drops in productivity if an average temperature drop of even one degree were to occur for even a short time during the growing season. Since the world maintains a stored food supply equal to only a few months of consumption, a war during the Northern Hemisphere spring or summer could still cause deadly starvation around the globe from this effect alone even if it only produced a mild "nuclear autumn".5.3 Physics of Nuclear Weapon Effects Thermal radiation and blast are inevitable consequences of the near instantaneous release of an immense amount of energy in a very small volume, and are thus characteristic to all nuclear weapons regardless of type or design details. The release of ionizing radiation, both at the instant of explosion and delayed radiation from fallout, is governed by the physics of the nuclear reactions involved and how the weapon is constructed, and is thus very dependent on both weapon type and design.5.3.1 Fireball Physics The fireball is the hot ball of gas created when a nuclear explosion heats the bomb itself, and the immediate surrounding environment, to very high temperatures. As this incandescent ball of hot gas expands, it radiates part of its energy away as thermal radiation (including visible and ultraviolet light), part of its energy also goes into creating a shock wave or blast wave in the surrounding environment. The generation of these two destructive effects are thus closely linked by the physics of the fireball. In the discussion below I assume the fireball is forming in open air, unless stated otherwise.5.3.1.1 The Early Fireball Immediately after the energy-producing nuclear reactions in the weapon are completed, the energy is concentrated in the nuclear fuels themselves. The energy is stored as (in order of importance): thermal radiation or photons; as kinetic energy of the ionized atoms and the electrons (mostly as electron kinetic energy since free electrons outnumber the atoms); and as excited atoms, which are partially or completely stripped of electrons (partially for heavy elements, completely for light ones). Thermal (also called blackbody) radiation is emitted by all matter. The intensity and most prevalent wavelength is a function of the temperature, both increasing as temperature increases. The intensity of thermal radiation increases very rapidly - as the fourth power of the temperature. Thus at the 60-100 million degrees C of a nuclear explosion, which is some 10,000 times hotter than the surface of the sun, the brightness (per unit area) is some 10 quadrillion (10^16) times greater! Consequently about 80% of the energy in a nuclear explosion exists as photons. At these temperatures the photons are soft x-rays with energies in the range of 10-200 Ke V. The first energy to escape from the bomb are the gamma rays produced by the nuclear reactions. They have energies in the Me V range, and a significant number of them penetrate through the tampers and bomb casing and escape into the outside world at the speed of light. The gamma rays strike and ionize the surrounding air molecules, causing chemical reactions that form a dense layer of "smog" tens of meters deep around the bomb. This smog is composed primarily of ozone, and nitric and nitrous oxides. X-rays, particularly the ones at the upper end of the energy range, have substantial penetrating power and can travel significant distances through matter at the speed of light before being absorbed. Atoms become excited when they absorb x-rays, and after a time they re-emit part of the energy as a new lower energy x-ray. By a chain of emissions and absorptions, the x-rays carry energy out of the hot center of the bomb, a process called radiative transport. Since each absorption/re-emission event takes a certain amount of time, and the direction of re-emission is random (as likely back toward the center of the bomb as away from it), the net rate of radiative transport is considerably slower than the speed of light. It is however initially much faster than the expansion of the plasma (ionized gas) making up the fireball or the velocity of the neutrons. An expanding bubble of very high temperatures is thus formed called the "iso-thermal sphere". It is a sphere were everything has been heated by x-rays to a nearly uniform temperature, initially in the tens of millions of degrees. As soon as the sphere expands beyond the bomb casing it begins radiating light away through the air (unless the bomb is buried or underwater). Due to the still enormous temperatures, it is incredibly brilliant (surface brightness trillions of times more intense than the sun). Most of the energy being radiated is in the x-ray and far ultraviolet range to which air is not transparent. Even at the wavelengths of the near ultraviolet and visible light, the "smog" layer absorbs much of the energy. Then too, at this stage the fireball is only a few meters across. Thus the apparent surface brightness at a distance, and the output power (total brightness) is not nearly as intense as the fourth-power law would indicate.5.3.1.2 Blast Wave Development and Thermal Radiation Emission As the fireball expands, it cools and the wavelength of the photons transporting energy drops. Longer wavelength photons do not penetrate as far before being absorbed, so the speed of energy transport also drops. When the isothermal sphere cools to about 300,000 degrees C (and the surface brightness has dropped to being a mere 10 million times brighter than the sun), the rate of radiative growth is about equal to the speed of sound in the fireball plasma. At this point a shock wave forms at the surface of the fireball as the kinetic energy of the fast moving ions starts transferring energy to the surrounding air. This phenomenon, known as "hydrodynamic separation", occurs for a 20 kt explosion about 100 microseconds after the explosion, when the fireball is some 13 meters across. A shock wave internal to the fireball caused by the rapidly expanding bomb debris may overtake and reinforce the fireball surface shock wave a few hundred microseconds later. The shock wave initially moves at some 30 km/sec, a hundred times the speed of sound in normal air. This compresses and heats the air enormously, up to 30,000 degrees C (some five times the sun's surface temperature). At this temperature the air becomes ionized and incandescent. Ionized gas is opaque to visible radiation, so the glowing shell created by the shock front hides the much hotter isothermal sphere inside. The shock front is many times brighter than the sun, but since it is much dimmer than the isothermal sphere it acts as an optical shutter, causing the fireball's thermal power to drop rapidly. The fireball is at its most brilliant just as hydrodynamic separation occurs, the great intensity compensating for the small size of the fireball. The rapid drop in temperature causes the thermal power to drop ten-fold, reaching a minimum in about 10 milliseconds for a 20 kt bomb (100 milliseconds for 1 Mt bomb). This "first pulse" contains only about 1 percent of the bomb's total emitted thermal radiation. At this minimum, the fireball of a 20 kt bomb is 180 meters across. As the shock wave expands and cools to around 3000 degrees, it stops glowing and gradually also becomes transparent. This is called "breakaway" and occurs at about 15 milliseconds for a 20 kt bomb, when the shock front has expanded to 220 meters and is travelling at 4 km/second. The isothermal sphere, at a still very luminous 8000 degrees, now becomes visible and both the apparent surface temperature and brightness of the fireball climb to form the "second pulse". The isothermal sphere has grown considerably in size and now consists almost entirely of light at wavelengths to which air is transparent, so it regains much of the total luminosity of the first peak despite its lower temperature. This second peak occurs at 150 milliseconds for a 20 kt bomb, at 900 milliseconds for a 1 Mt bomb. After breakaway, the shock (blast) wave and the fireball do not interact further. A firm cutoff for this second pulse is impossible to provide because the emission rate gradually declines over an extended period. Some rough guidelines are that by 300 milliseconds for a 20 kt bomb (1.8 seconds for a 1 Mt) 50% of the total thermal radiation has been emitted, and the rate has dropped to 40% of the second peak. These figures become 75% total emitted and 10% peak rate by 750 milliseconds (20 kt) and 4.5 second (1 Mt). The emission time scales roughly as the 0.45 power of yield (Y^0.45). Although this pulse never gets as bright as the first, it emits about 99% of the thermal radiation because it is so much longer.5.3.2 Ionizing Radiation Physics There are four types of ionizing radiation produced by nuclear explosions that can cause significant injury: neutrons, gamma rays, beta particles, and alpha particles. Gamma rays are energetic (short wavelength) photons (as are X-rays), beta particles are energetic (fast moving) electrons, and alpha particles are energetic helium nuclei. Neutrons are damaging whether they are energetic or not, although the faster they are, the worse their effects. They all share the same basic mechanism for causing injury though: the creation of chemically reactive compounds called "free radicals" that disrupt the normal chemistry of living cells. These radicals are produced when the energetic radiation strikes a molecule in the living issue, and breaks it into ionized (electrically charged) fragments. Fast neutrons can do this also, but all neutrons can also transmute ordinary atoms into radioactive isotopes, creating even more ionizing radiation in the body. The different types of radiation present different risks however. Neutrons and gamma rays are very penetrating types of radiation. They are the hardest to stop with shielding. They can travel through hundreds of meters of air and the walls of ordinary houses. They can thus deliver deadly radiation doses even if an organism is not in immediate contact with the source. Beta particles are less penetrating, they can travel through several meters of air, but not walls, and can cause serious injury to organisms that are near to the source. Alpha particles have a range of only a few centimeters in air, and cannot even penetrate skin. Alphas can only cause injury if the emitting isotope is ingested. The shielding effect of various materials to radiation is usually expressed in half-value thickness, or tenth-value thickness: in other words, the thickness of material required to reduce the intensity of radiation by one-half or one-tenth. Successive layers of shielding each reduce the intensity by the same proportion, so three tenth-value thickness reduce the intensity to one-thousandth (a tenth-value thickness is about 3.3 half-value thicknesses). Some example tenth-value thicknesses for gamma rays are: steel 8.4-11 cm, concrete 28-41 cm, earth 41-61 cm, water 61-100 cm, and wood 100-160 cm. The thickness ranges indicate the varying shielding effect for different gamma ray energies. Even light clothing provides substantial shielding to beta rays.5.3.2.1 Sources of Radiation5.3.2.1.1 Prompt Radiation Radiation is produced directly by the nuclear reactions that generate the explosion, and by the decay of radioactive products left over (either fission debris, or induced radioactivity from captured neutrons). The explosion itself emits a very brief burst (about 100 nanoseconds) of gamma rays and neutrons, before the bomb has blown itself apart. The intensity of these emissions depends very heavily on the type of weapon and the specific design. In most designs the initial gamma ray burst is almost entirely absorbed by the bomb (tamper, casing, explosives, etc.) so it contributes little to the radiation hazard. The neutrons, being more penetrating, may escape. Both fission and fusion reactions produce neutrons. Fusion produces many more of them per kiloton of yield, and they are generally more energetic than fission neutrons. Some weapons (neutron bombs) are designed specifically to emit as much energy in the form as neutrons as possible. In heavily tamped fission bombs few if any neutrons escape. It is estimated that no significant neutron exposure occurred from Fat Man, and only 2% of the total radiation dose from Little Boy was due to neutrons. The neutron burst itself can be a significant source of radiation, depending on weapon design. As the neutrons travel through the air they are slowed by collisions with air atoms, and are eventually captured. Even this process of neutron attenuation generates hazardous radiation. Part of the kinetic energy lost by fast neutrons as they slow is converted into gamma rays, some with very high energies (for the 14.1 Me V fusion neutrons). The duration of production for these neutron scattering gammas is about 10 microseconds. The capture of neutrons by nitrogen-14 also produces gammas, a process completed by 100 milliseconds. Immediately after the explosion, there are substantial amounts of fission products with very short half-lifes (milliseconds to minutes). The decay of these isotopes generate correspondingly intense gamma radiation that is emitted directly from the fireball. This process is essentially complete within 10 seconds. The relative importance of these gamma ray sources depends on the size of the explosion. Small explosions (20 kt, say) can generate up to 25% of the gamma dose from the direct gammas and neutron reactions. For large explosions (1 Mt) this contribution is essentially zero. In all cases, the bulk of the gammas are produced by the rapid decay of radioactive debris.5.3.2.1.2 Delayed Radiation Radioactive decay is the sole source of beta and alpha particles. They are also emitted during the immediate decay mentioned above of course, but their range is too short to make any prompt radiation contribution. Betas and alphas become important when fallout begins settling out. Gammas remain very important at this stage as well. Fallout is a complex mixture of different radioactive isotopes, the composition of which continually changes as each isotope decays into other isotopes. Many isotopes make significant contributions to the overall radiation level. Radiation from short lived isotopes dominates initially, and the general trend is for the intensity to continually decline as they disappear. Over time the longer lived isotopes become increasingly important, and a small number of isotopes emerge as particular long-term hazards. Radioactive isotopes are usually measured in terms of curies. A curie is the quantity of radioactive material that undergoes 3.7x10^10 decays/sec (equal to 1 g of radium-226). More recently the SI unit bequerel has become common in scientific literature, one bequerel is 1 decay/sec . The fission of 57 grams of material produces 3x10^23 atoms of fission products (two for each atom of fissionable material). One minute after the explosion this mass is undergoing decays at a rate of 10^21 disintegrations/sec (3x10^10 curies). It is estimated that if these products were spread over 1 km^2, then at a height of 1 m above the ground one hour after the explosion the radiation intensity would be 7500 rads/hr. Isotopes of special importance include iodine-131, strontium-90 and 89, and cesium-137. This is due to both their relative abundance in fallout, and to their special biological affinity. Isotopes that are readily absorbed by the body, and concentrated and stored in particular tissues can cause harm out of proportion to their abundance. Iodine-131 is a beta and gamma emitter with a half-life of 8.07 days (specific activity 124,000 curies/g) Its decay energy is 970 Ke V; usually divided between 606 Ke V beta, 364 Ke V gamma. Due to its short half-life it is most dangerous in the weeks immediately after the explosion, but hazardous amounts can persist for a few months. It constitutes some 2% of fission-produced isotopes - 1.6x10^5 curies/kt. Iodine is readily absorbed by the body and concentrated in one small gland, the thyroid. Strontium-90 is a beta emitter (546 Ke V, no gammas) with a half-life of 28.1 years (specific activity 141 curies/g), Sr-89 is a beta emitter (1.463 Me V, gammas very rarely) with a half-life of 52 days (specific activity 28,200 Ci/g). Each of these isotopes constitutes about 3% of total fission isotopes: 190 curies of Sr-90 and 3.8x10^4 curies of Sr-89 per kiloton. Due to their chemical resemblance to calcium these isotopes are absorbed fairly well, and stored in bones. Sr-89 is an important hazard for a year or two after an explosion, but Sr-90 remains a hazard for centuries. Actually most of the injury from Sr-90 is due to its daughter isotope yttrium-90. Y-90 has a half-life of only 64.2 hours, so it decays as fast as it is formed, and emits 2.27 Me V beta particles. Cesium-137 is a beta and gamma emitter with a half-life of 30.0 years (specific activity 87 Ci/g). Its decay energy is 1.176 Me V; usually divided by 514 Ke V beta, 662 Ke V gamma. It comprises some 3-3.5% of total fission products - 200 curies/kt. It is the primary long-term gamma emitter hazard from fallout, and remains a hazard for centuries. Although not important for acute radiation effects, the isotopes carbon-14 and tritium are also of interest because of possible genetic injury. These are not direct fission products. They are produced by the interaction of fission and fusion neutrons with the atmosphere and, in the case of tritium, as a direct product of fusion reactions. Most of the tritium generated by fusion is consumed in the explosion but significant amounts survive. Tritium is also formed by the capture of fast neutrons by nitrogen atoms in the air: N-14 + n -> T + C-12. Carbon-14 in also formed by neutron-nitrogen reactions: N-14 + n -> C-14 + p. Tritium is a very weak beta emitter (18.6 Ke V, no gamma) with a half-life of 12.3 years (9700 Ci/g). Carbon-14 is also a weak beta emitter (156 Ke V, no gamma), with a half-life of 5730 years (4.46 Ci/g). Atmospheric testing during the fifties and early sixties produced about 3.4 g of C-14 per kiloton (15.2 curies) for a total release of 1.75 tonnes (7.75x10^6 curies). For comparison, only about 1.2 tonnes of C-14 naturally exists, divided between the atmosphere (1 tonne) and living matter (0.2 tonne). Another 50-80 tonnes is dissolved in the oceans. Due to carbon exchange between the atmosphere and oceans, the half-life of C-14 residing in the atmosphere is only about 6 years. By now the atmospheric concentration has returned to within 1% or so of normal. High levels of C-14 remain in organic material formed during the sixties (in wood, say, or DNA).5.4 Air Bursts and Surface Bursts It might seem logical that the most destructive way of using a nuclear weapon would be to explode it right in the middle of its target - i.e. ground level. But for most uses this is not true. Generally nuclear weapons are designed to explode above the ground - as air bursts (the point directly below the burst point is called the hypocenter). Surface (and sub-surface) bursts can be used for special purposes.5.4.1 Air Bursts When an explosion occurs it sends out a shock wave like an expanding soap bubble. If the explosion occurs above the ground the bubble expands and when it reaches the ground it is reflected - i.e. the shock front bounces off the ground to form a second shock wave travelling behind the first. This second shock wave travels faster than the first, or direct, shock wave since it is travelling through air already moving at high speed due to the passage of the direct wave. The reflected shock wave tends to overtake the direct shock wave and when it does they combine to form a single reinforced wave. This is called the Mach Effect, and produces a skirt around the base of the shock wave bubble where the two shock waves have combined. This skirt sweeps outward as an expanding circle along the ground with an amplified effect compared to the single shock wave produced by a ground burst. The higher the burst altitude, the weaker the shock wave is when it first reaches the ground. On the other hand, the shock wave will also affect a larger area. Air bursts therefore reduce the peak intensity of the shock wave, but increase the area over which the blast is felt. For a given explosion yield, and a given blast pressure, there is a unique burst altitude at which the area subjected to that pressure is maximized. This is called the optimum burst height for that yield and pressure. All targets have some level of vulnerability to blast effects. When some threshold of blast pressure is reached the target is completely destroyed. Subjecting the target to pressures higher than that accomplishes nothing. By selecting an appropriate burst height, an air burst can destroy a much larger area for most targets than can surface bursts. The Mach Effect enhances shock waves with pressures below 50 psi. At or above this pressure the effect provides very little enhancement, so air bursts have little advantage if very high blast pressures are desired. An additional effect of air bursts is that thermal radiation is also distributed in a more damaging fashion. Since the fireball is formed above the earth, the radiation arrives at a steeper angle and is less likely to be blocked by intervening obstacles and low altitude haze.5.4.2 Surface Bursts Surface bursts are useful if local fallout is desired, or if the blast is intended to destroy a buried or very hard structure like a missile silo or a dam. Shock waves are transmitted through the soil more effectively if the bomb is exploded in immediate contact with it, so ground bursts would be used for destroying buried command centers and the like. Some targets, like earth-fill dams, require actual cratering to be destroyed and would be ground burst targets.5.4.3 Sub-Surface Bursts Exploding a bomb below ground level can be even more effective for producing craters and destroying buried structures. It can also eliminate thermal radiation and reduce the range of blast effects substantially. The problem, of course is getting the bomb underground. Earth-penetrating bombs have been developed that can punch over one hundred feet into the earth.5.5 Electromagnetic Effects The high temperatures and energetic radiation produced by nuclear explosions also produce large amounts of ionized (electrically charged) matter which is present immediately after the explosion. Under the right conditions, intense currents and electromagnetic fields can be produced, generically called EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse), that are felt at long distances. Living organisms are impervious to these effects, but electrical and electronic equipment can be temporarily or permanently disabled by them. Ionized gases can also block short wavelength radio and radar signals (fireball blackout) for extended periods. The occurrence of EMP is strongly dependent on the altitude of burst. It can be significant for surface or low altitude bursts (below 4,000 m); it is very significant for high altitude bursts (above 30,000 m); but it is not significant for altitudes between these extremes. This is because EMP is generated by the asymmetric absorption of instantaneous gamma rays produced by the explosion. At intermediate altitudes the air absorbs these rays fairly uniformly and does not generate long range electromagnetic disturbances. The formation EMP begins with the very intense, but very short burst of gamma rays caused by the nuclear reactions in the bomb. About 0.3% of the bomb's energy is in this pulse, but it lasts for only 10 nanoseconds or so. These gamma rays collide with electrons in air molecules, and eject the electrons at high energies through a process called Compton scattering. These energetic electrons in turn knock other electrons loose, and create a cascade effect that produces some 30,000 electrons for every original gamma ray. In low altitude explosions the electrons, being very light, move much more quickly than the ionized atoms they are removed from and diffuse away from the region where they are formed. This creates a very strong electric field which peaks in intensity at 10 nanoseconds. The gamma rays emitted downward however are absorbed by the ground which prevents charge separation from occurring. This creates a very strong vertical electric current which generates intense electromagnetic emissions over a wide frequency range (up to 100 MHZ) that emanate mostly horizontally. At the same time, the earth acts as a conductor allowing the electrons to flow back toward the burst point where the positive ions are concentrated. This produces a strong magnetic field along the ground. Although only about 3x10^-10 of the total explosion energy is radiated as EMP in a ground burst (10^6 joules for 1 Mt bomb), it is concentrated in a very short pulse. The charge separation persists for only a few tens of microseconds, making the emission power some 100 gigawatts. The field strengths for ground bursts are high only in the immediate vicinity of the explosion. For smaller bombs they aren't very important because they are strong only where the destruction is intense anyway. With increasing yields, they reach farther from the zone of intense destruction. With a 1 Mt bomb, they remain significant out to the 2 psi overpressure zone (5 miles). High altitude explosions produce EMPs that are dramatically more destructive. About 3x10^-5 of the bomb's total energy goes into EMP in this case, 10^11 joules for a 1 Mt bomb. EMP is formed in high altitude explosions when the downwardly directed gamma rays encounter denser layers of air below. A pancake shaped ionization region is formed below the bomb. The zone can extend all the way to the horizon, to 2500 km for an explosion at an altitude of 500 km. The ionization zone is up to 80 km thick at the center. The Earth's magnetic field causes the electrons in this layer to spiral as they travel, creating a powerful downward directed electromagnetic pulse lasting a few microseconds. A strong vertical electrical field (20-50 KV/m) is also generated between the Earth's surface and the ionized layer, this field lasts for several minutes until the electrons are recaptured by the air. Although the peak EMP field strengths from high altitude bursts are only 1-10% as intense as the peak ground burst fields, they are nearly constant over the entire Earth's surface under the ionized region. The effects of these field on electronics is difficult to predict, but can be profound. Enormous induced electric currents are generated in wires, antennas, and metal objects (like missiles, airplanes, and building frames). Commercial electrical grids are immense EMP antennas and would be subjected to voltage surges far exceeding those created by lightning, and over vastly greater areas. Modern VLSI chips are extremely sensitive to voltage surges, and would be burned out by even small leakage currents. Military equipment is generally designed to be resistant to EMP, but realistic tests are very difficult to perform and EMP protection rests on attention to detail. Minor changes in design, incorrect maintenance procedures, poorly fitting parts, loose debris, moisture, and ordinary dirt can all cause elaborate EMP protections to be totally circumvented. It can be expected that a single high yield, high altitude explosion over an industrialized area would cause massive disruption for an indeterminable period, and would cause huge economic damages (all those damaged chips add up). A separate effect is the ability of the ionized fireball to block radio and radar signals. Like EMP, this effect becomes important with high altitude bursts. Fireball blackout can cause radar to be blocked for tens of seconds to minutes over an area tens of kilometers across. High frequency radio can be disrupted over hundreds to thousands of kilometers for minutes to hours depending on exact conditions.5.6 Mechanisms of Damage and Injury The different mechanisms are discussed individually, but it should be no surprise that in combination they often accentuate the harm caused by each other. I will discuss such combined effects wherever appropriate.5.6.1 Thermal Damage and Incendiary Effects Thermal damage from nuclear explosions arises from the intense thermal (heat) radiation produced by the fireball. The thermal radiation (visible and infrared light) falls on exposed surfaces and is wholly or partly absorbed. The radiation lasts from about a tenth of a second, to several seconds depending on bomb yield (it is longer for larger bombs). During that time its intensity can exceed 1000 watts/cm^2 (the maximum intensity of direct sunlight is 0.14 watts/cm^2). For a rough comparison, the effect produced is similar to direct exposure to the flame of an acetylene torch. The heat is absorbed by the opaque surface layer of the material on which it falls, which is usually a fraction of a millimeter thick. Naturally dark materials absorb more heat than light colored or reflective ones. The heat is absorbed much faster than it can be carried down into the material through conduction, or removed by reradiation or convection, so very high temperatures are produced in this layer almost instantly. Surface temperatures can exceed 1000 degrees C close to the fireball. Such temperatures can cause dramatic changes to the material affected, but they do not penetrate in very far. More total energy is required to inflict a given level of damage for a larger bomb than a smaller one since the heat is emitted over a longer period of time, but this is more than compensated for by the increased thermal output. The thermal damage for a larger bomb also penetrates further due to the longer exposure. Thermal radiation damage depends very strongly on weather conditions. Cloud cover, smoke, or other obscuring material in the air can considerably reduce effective damage ranges over clear air conditions. For all practical purposes, the emission of thermal radiation by a bomb is complete by the time the shock wave arrives. Regardless of yield, this generalization is only violated in the area of total destruction around a nuclear explosion where 100% mortality would result from any one of the three damage effects. Incendiary effects refer to anything that contributes to the occurrence of fires after the explosion, which is a combination of the effects of thermal radiation and blast.5.6.1.1 Thermal Injury The result of very intense heating of skin is to cause burn injuries. The burns caused by the sudden intense thermal radiation from the fireball are called "flash burns". The more thermal radiation absorbed, the more serious the burn. The table below indicates the amount of thermal radiation required to cause different levels of injury, and the maximum ranges at which they occur, for different yields of bombs. The unit of heat used are gram-calories, equal to 4.2 joules (4.2 watts for 1 sec). Skin color significantly affects susceptibility, light skin being less prone to burns. The table assumes medium skin color. SEVERITY 20 Kilotons 1 Megaton 20 Megatons 1st Degree 2.5 cal/cm^2 (4.3 km) 3.2 cal/cm^2 (18 km) 5 cal/cm^2 (52 km) 2nd Degree 5 cal/cm^2 (3.2 km) 6 cal/cm^2 (14.4 km) 8.5 cal/cm^2 (45 km) 3rd Degree 8 cal/cm^2 (2.7 km) 10 cal/cm^2 (12 km) 12 cal/cm^2 (39 km)Convenient scaling laws to allow calculation of burn effects for any yield are: r_thermal_1st = Y^0.38 * 1.20 r_thermal_2nd = Y^0.40 * 0.87 r_thermal_3rd = Y^0.41 * 0.67 Range is in km, yield is in kt; the equations are accurate to within 10% or so from 1 kt to 20 Mt. First degree flash burns are not serious, no tissue destruction occurs. They are characterized by immediate pain, followed by reddening of the skin. Pain and sensitivity continues for some minutes or hours, after which the affected skin returns to normal without further incident. Second degree burns cause damage to the underlying dermal tissue, killing some portion of it. Pain and redness is followed by blistering within a few hours as fluids collect between the epidermis and damaged tissue. Sufficient tissue remains intact however to regenerate and heal the burned area quickly, usually without scarring. Broken blisters provide possible infection sites prior to healing. Third degree burns cause tissue death all the way through the skin, including the stem cells required to regenerate skin tissue. The only way a 3rd degree burn can heal is by skin regrowth from the edges, a slow process that usually results in scarring, unless skin grafts are used. Before healing 3rd degree burns present serious risk of infection, and can cause serious fluid loss. A 3rd degree burn over 25% of the body (or more) will typically precipitate shock in minutes, which itself requires prompt medical attention. Even more serious burns are possible, which have been classified as fourth (even fifth) degree burns. These burns destroy tissue below the skin: muscle, connective tissue etc. They can be caused by thermal radiation exposures substantially in excess of those in the table for 3rd degree burns. Many people close to the hypocenter of the Hiroshima bomb suffered these types of burns. In the immediate vicinity of ground zero the thermal radiation exposure was 100 c/cm^2, some fifteen times the exposure required for 3rd degree burns, most of it within the first 0.3 seconds (which was the arrival time of the blast wave). This is sufficient to cause exposed flesh to flash into steam, flaying exposed body areas to the bone. At the limit of the range for 3rd degree burns, the time lapse between suffering burns and being hit by the blast wave varies from a few seconds for low kiloton explosions to a minute of so for high megaton yields.5.6.1.2 Incendiary Effects Despite the extreme intensity of thermal radiation, and the extraordinary surface temperatures that occur, it has less incendiary effect than might be supposed. This is mostly due to its short duration, and the shallow penetration of heat into affected materials. The extreme heating can cause pyrolysis (the charring of organic material, with the release of combustible gases), and momentary ignition, but it is rarely sufficient to cause self-sustained combustion. This occurs only with tinder-like, or dark, easily flammable materials: dry leaves, grass, old newspaper, thin dark flammable fabrics, tar paper, etc. The incendiary effect of the thermal pulse is also substantially affected by the later arrival of the blast wave, which usually blows out any flames that have already been kindled. Smoldering material can cause reignition later however. The major incendiary effect of nuclear explosions is caused by the blast wave. Collapsed structures are much more vulnerable to fire than intact ones. The blast reduces many structures to piles of kindling, the many gaps opened in roofs and walls act as chimneys, gas lines are broken open, storage tanks for flammable materials are ruptured. The primary ignition sources appear to be flames and pilot lights in heating appliances (furnaces, water heaters, stoves, ovens, etc.). Smoldering material from the thermal pulse can be very effective at igniting leaking gas. Although the ignition sources are probably widely scattered a number of factors promote their spread into mass fires. The complete suppression of fire fighting efforts is extremely important. Another is that the blast scatters combustible material across fire breaks that normally exist (streets, yards, fire lanes, etc.). The effectiveness of building collapse, accompanied by the disruption of fire fighting, in creating mass fires can be seen in the San Francisco earthquake (1906), the Tokyo-Yokahama earthquake (1923), and the recent Kobe earthquake (1995). In these disasters there was no thermal radiation to ignite fires, and the scattering of combustible materials did not occur, but huge fires still resulted. In San Francisco and Tokyo-Yokohama these fires were responsible for most of the destruction that occurred. In Hiroshima the fires developed into a true firestorm. This is an extremely intense fire that produces a rapidly rising column of hot air over the fire area, in turn powerful winds are generated which blow in to the fire area, fanning and feeding the flames. The fires continue until all combustible material is exhausted. Firestorms develop from multiple ignition sources spread over a wide area that create fires which coalesce into one large fire. Temperatures in firestorm areas can reach many hundreds of degrees, carbon monoxide reaches lethal levels, few people who see the interior of a firestorm live to tell about it. Firestorms can melt roads, cars, and glass. They can boil water in lakes and rivers, and cook people to death in buried bomb shelters. The in-blowing winds can reach gale force, but they also prevent the spread of the fires outside of the area in which the firestorm initially develops. The firestorm in Hiroshima began only about 20 minutes after the bombing. Nagasaki did not have a firestorm, instead it had a type of mass fire called a conflagration. This is a less intense type of fire, it develops and burns more slowly. A conflagration can begin in multiple locations, or only one. Conflagrations can spread considerable distances from their origins. The fires at Nagasaki took about 2 hours to become well established, and lasted 4-5 hours.5.6.1.3 Eye Injury The brightness and thermal output of a nuclear explosion presents an obvious source of injury to the eye. Injury to the cornea through surface heating, and injury to the retina are both possible risks. Surprisingly, very few cases of injury were noted in Japan. A number of factors acted to reduce the risk. First, eye injury occurs when vision is directed towards the fireball. People spend relatively little time looking up at the sky so only a very small portion of the population would have their eyes directed at the fireball at the time of burst. Second, since the bomb exploded in bright daylight the eye pupil would be expected to be small. About 4% of the population within the 3rd degree burn zone at Hiroshima reported keratitis, pain and inflammation of the cornea, which lasted several hours to several days. No other corneal damage was noted. The most common eye injury was flashblindness, a temporary condition in which the visual pigment of retina is bleached out by the intense light. Vision is completely recovered as the pigment is regenerated, a process that takes several seconds to several minutes. This can cause serious problems though in carrying out emergency actions, like taking cover from the oncoming blast wave. Retinal injury is the most far reaching injury effect of nuclear explosions, but it is relatively rare since the eye must be looking directly at the detonation. Retinal injury results from burns in the area of the retina where the fireball image is focused. The brightness per unit area of a fireball does not diminish with distance (except for the effects of haze), the apparent fireball size simply gets smaller. Retinal injury can thus occur at any distance at which the fireball is visible, though the affected area of the retina gets smaller as range increases. The risk of injury is greater at night since the pupil is dialated and admits more light. For explosions in the atmosphere of 100 kt and up, the blink reflex protects the retina from much of the light.5.6.2 Blast Damage and Injury Blast damage is caused by the arrival of the shock wave created by the nuclear explosion. Shock waves travel faster than sound, and cause a virtually instantaneous jump in pressure at the shock front. The air immediately behind the shock front is accelerated to high velocities and creates a powerful wind. The wind in turn, creates dynamic pressure against the side of objects facing the blast. The combination of the pressure jump (called the overpressure)and the dynamic pressure causes blast damage. Both the overpressure and dynamic pressure jump immediately to their peak values when the shock wave arrives. They then decay over a period ranging from a few tenths of a second to several seconds, depending on the strength of the blast and the yield. Following the this there is a longer period of weaker negative pressure before the atmospheric conditions return to normal. The negative pressure has little significance as far as causing damage or injury is concerned. A given pressure is more destructive from a larger bomb, due its longer duration. The is a definite relationship between the overpressure and the dynamic pressure. The overpressure and dynamic pressure are equal at 70 psi, and the wind speed is 1.5 times the speed of sound. Below an overpressure of 70 psi, the dynamic pressure is less than the overpressure; above 70 psi it exceeds the overpressure. Since the relationship is fixed it is convenient to use the overpressure alone as a yardstick for measuring blast effects. At 20 psi overpressure the wind speed is still 500 mph, higher than any tornado wind. As a general guide, city areas are completely destroyed (with massive loss of life) by overpressures of 5 psi, with heavy damage extending out at least to the 3 psi contour. The dynamic pressure is much less than the overpressure at blast intensities relevant for urban damage, although at 5 psi the wind speed is still 162 mph - close to the peak wind speeds of the most intense hurricanes. Humans are actually quite resistant to the direct effect of overpressure. Pressures of over 40 psi are required before lethal effects are noted. This pressure resistance makes it possible for unprotected submarine crews to escape from emergency escape locks at depths as great as one hundred feet (the record for successful escape is actually an astonishing 600 feet, representing a pressure of 300 psi). Loss of eardrums can occur, but this is not a life threatening injury. The danger from overpressure comes from the collapse of buildings that are generally not as resistant. The violent implosion of windows and walls creates a hail of deadly missiles, and the collapse of the structure above can crush or suffocate those caught inside. The dynamic pressure causes can cause injury by hurling large numbers of objects at high speed. Urban areas contain many objects that can become airborne, and the destruction of buildings generates many more. Serious injury or death can also occur from impact after being thrown through the air. Blast effects are most dangerous in built-up areas due to the large amounts of projectiles created, and the presence of obstacles to be hurled against. The blast also magnifies thermal radiation burn injuries by tearing away severely burned skin. This creates raw open wounds that readily become infected. These many different effects make it difficult to provide a simple rule of thumb for assessing the magnitude of harm produced by different blast intensities. A general guide is given below:1 psi Window glass shatters Light injuries from fragments occur. 3 psi Residential structures collapse. Serious injuries are common, fatalities may occur. 5 psi Most buildings collapse. Injuries are universal, fatalities are widespread. 10 psi Reinforced concrete buildings are severely damaged or demolished. Most people are killed. 20 psi Heavily built concrete buildings are severely damaged or demolished. Fatalities approach 100%. Suitable scaling constants for the equation r_blast = Y^0.33 * constant_bl are: constant_bl_1_psi = 2.2 constant_bl_3_psi = 1.0 constant_bl_5_psi = 0.71 constant_bl_10_psi = 0.45 constant_bl_20_psi = 0.28 where Y is in kilotons and range is in km.5.6.3 Radiation Injury Ionizing radiation produces injury primarily through damage to the chromosomes. Since genetic material makes up a very small portion of the mass of a cell, the damage rarely occurs from the direct impact of ionizing radiation on a genetic molecule. Instead the damage is caused by the radiation breaking up other molecules and forming chemically reactive free radicals or unstable compounds. These reactive chemical species then damage DNA and disrupt cellular chemistry in other ways - producing immediate effects on active metabolic and replication processes, and long-term effects by latent damage to the genetic structure. Cells are capable of repairing a great deal of genetic damage, but the repairs take time and the repair machinery can be overwhelmed by rapid repeated injuries. If a cell attempts to divide before sufficient repair has occurred, the cell division will fail and both cells will die. As a consequence, the tissues that are most sensitive to radiation injury are ones that are undergoing rapid division. Another result is that the effects of radiation injury depend partly on the rate of exposure. Repair mechanisms can largely offset radiation exposures that occur over a period of time. Rapid exposure to a sufficiently large radiation dose can thus cause acute radiation sickness, while a longer exposure to the same dose might cause none. By far the most sensitive are bone marrow and lymphatic tissues - the blood and immune system forming organs of the body. Red blood cells, which provide oxygen to the body, and white blood cells, which provide immunity to infection, only last a few weeks or months in the body and so must be continually replaced. The gastrointestinal system is also sensitive, since the lining of the digestive tract undergoes constant replacement. Although they are not critical for health, hair follicles also undergo continual cell division resulting in radiation sickness' most famous symptom - hair loss. The tissues least sensitive to radiation are those that never undergo cell division (i.e. the nervous system). This also means that children and infants are more sensitive to injury than adults, and that fetuses are most sensitive of all. If the individual survives, most chromosome damage is eventually repaired and the symptoms of radiation illness disappear. The repair is not perfect however. Latent defects can show up years or decades later in their effects on reproductive cells, and in the form of cancer. These latent injuries are a very serious concern and can shorten life by many years. They are the sole form of harm from low level radiation exposure.5.6.3.1 Units of Measurement for Radiation Exposure Three units of measurement have been commonly used for expressing radiation exposure: roentgens (R), rads, rems, the "three r's" of radiation measurement. In the scientific literature these are dropping out of use in favor of the SI (System Internationale) units grays (Gy) and sieverts (Sv). Each of the "three r's" measures something different. A rad is a measure of the amount of ionizing . A roentgen measures the amount of ionizing energy, in the form of energetic photons (gamma rays and x-rays) energy to which an organism is exposed. This unit is the oldest of the three and is defined more the convenience of radiation measurement, than for interpreting the effects of radiation on living organisms. Of more interest is the rad, since it includes all forms of ionizing radiation, and in addition measures the dose that is *actually absorbed* by the organism. A rad is defined as the absorption of 100 ergs per gram of tissue (or 0.01 J/kg). The gray measures absorbed doses as well, one gray equals 100 rads. The rem is also concerned with all absorbed ionizing radiations, and also takes into account the *relative effect* that different types of radiation produce. The measure of effect for a given radiation is its Radiation Biological Effect (RBE). A rem dose is calculated by multiplying the dose in rads for each type of radiation by the appropriate RBE, then adding them all up. The sievert is similar to the rem, but is derived from the gray instead of the rad. Sieverts use a somewhat simplified system of measuring biological potency - the quality factor (Q). One sievert is roughly equal to 100 rems. The rem and the sievert are the most meaningful unit for measuring and discussing the effects of radiation injury. Type Of Radiation RBE Q Gamma rays/X-rays 1 1 Beta Particles 1 1 Alpha Particles 10-20 20 (ingested emitter) Neutrons (fast) - 10 Overall effects 1 Immediate Effect 4-6 Delayed cataract formation 10 Cancer Effect 20 Leukemia Effect5.6.3.2 Types of Radiation Exposure An important concept to understand is the distinction between _whole body doses_ and radiation exposures concentrated in particular organs. The radiation dose units described above are defined per unit weight of tissue. An exposure of 1000 rems can thus refer to an exposure of this intensity for the whole body, or for only a small part of it. The total absorbed radiation energy will be much less if only a small part of the body is affected, and the overall injury will be reduced. Not all tissues are exposed equally even in whole body exposures. The body provides significant shielding to internal organs, so tissues located in the center of the body may receive doses that are only 30-50% of the nominal total body dose rate. For example there is a 50% chance of permanent female sterility if ovaries are exposed to 200 rems, but this internal exposure is only encountered with whole body doses of 400-600 rems. Radiation exposures from nuclear weapons occur on three time scales: The shortest is exposure from the prompt radiation emitted by the fireball which lasts about one minute. This can cause very intense exposures for individuals close to the burst point. Neutron bombs rely on prompt radiation as the primary damage mechanism, in this case the prompt radiation arrives in a fraction of a second. The second scale is due to early (tropospheric) fallout from ground bursts. Fallout particles begin settling to the ground within an hour to a few hours after an explosion, most of the fallout descend within a day or two. At any particular site, the fallout deposition will last no more than several hours. Radiation exposure is accumulated as long as an individual remains within the fallout deposit zone, but due to the rapid initial decay most of the radiation exposure is incurred within the first few days. Exposures can be very large during the first few days. The third scale is long term exposure to low levels of radiation, lasting months or years. This may be due to any of several causes:prolonged residence in areas contaminated by early fallout;exposure to delayed (stratospheric) fallout;exposure to radioisotopes absorbed by the body. Long term exposures are not intense, but large total doses can accumulate over long periods of time. The effects of radiation exposure of usually divided into acute and latent effects. Acute effects typically result from rapid exposures, the effects show up within hours to weeks after a sufficient dose is absorbed. Latent effects take years to appear, even after exposure is complete. Since the latent effects of radiation exposure are cumulative, and there does not appear to be any threshold exposure below which no risk is incurred, radiation safety standards have been set to minimize radiation exposure over time. Current standards are: Occupational Exposure 0.3 rem/wk (whole body exposure) 1.5 rem/yr (whole body exposure for pregnant women) 5 rem/yr (whole body exposure) 15 rem/yr (eye tissue exposure) 50 rem/yr (limit for any tissue) 200 rem lifetime limit (whole body exposure) Public Exposure 0.5 rem/yr (whole body exposure) 5 rem/yr (limit for any tissue)The occupational exposure limits are likely to be reduced soon (if they have not been already). The normal human annual radiation exposure varies considerably with location (elevation and surface mineral composition), and medical treatment. Typical values are 0.1 rems from natural radiation and 0.08 rems from medical x-rays, for a total of 0.18 rem/yr. In the US, Colorado has one of the highest natural backgrounds (0.25 rem) since high altitudes cause greater cosmic ray exposures, and granite rock formations contain uranium series radioisotopes. If natural radioisotopes are unusually concentrated, levels as high as 0.5-12 rems/yr have been recorded (some areas of Sri Lanka, Kerala India, and Brazil). This does not count indoor radon exposure which depends heavily on building design, but can easily exceed all other exposure sources combined in regions with high soil radon levels. This source has been known to cause lung exposures in the home of 100 rem/yr (a risk factor comparable to heavy smoking)!5.6.3.3 Prompt Radiation Emission From Nuclear Explosions Although the subject is complex, a simplified guide to estimating the prompt radiation exposure from nuclear explosions is given here. The following scaling law can be used to determine the lethal radius with yield:r_radiation = Y^0.19 * constant_rad If Y is in kilotons, range is in meters, and the dose standard is 1000 rads then: constant_rad_1000 = 700 m This can then be scaled for distance by adjusting for attenuation with range using the table below. The table lists tenth-ranges, the distance over which the dose decreases (for greater distance) or increases (for shorter distance) by a factor of 10.1 kt 330 m 10 kt 440 m 100 kt 490 m 1 Mt 560 m 10 Mt 670 m 20 Mt 700 m So, for example to calculate the radiation dose for a 10 Mt bomb at 5000 m, we calculate: dose = (1000 rads) / 10^ [ (5000- [10000^0.19]*700)/670] = 35 rads This guide assumes 100% fission yield for bombs <100 kt, and 50/50 fission/fusion for higher yields. Due to the enhanced radiation output of low-yield neutron bombs different factors need to be used:constant_rad_1000 = 620 m tenth-range 385 m5.6.3.4 Acute Radiation Sickness This results from exposure to a large radiation dose to the whole body within a short period of time (no more than a few weeks). There is no sharp cutoff to distinguish acute exposures from chronic (extended) ones. In general, higher total doses are required to produce a given level of acute sickness for longer exposure times. Exposures received over a few days do not differ substantially from instantaneous ones, except that the onset of symptoms is correspondingly delayed or stretched out. Nuclear weapons can cause acute radiation sickness either from prompt exposure at the time of detonation, or from the intense radiation emitted by early fallout in the first few days afterward. The effects of increasing exposures are described below. A notable characteristic of increasing doses is the non-linear nature of the effects. That is to say, a threshold exists below which observable effects are slight and reversible (about 300 rems), but as exposures rise above this level the possibility of mortality (death) begins and increases rapidly with dose. This is believed to be due in part to the saturation of cellular repair mechanisms. The total energy absorbed by a 75 kg individual with a whole body exposure of 600 rads (fatal in most cases) is 450 joules. It is interesting to compare this to the kinetic energy of a .45 caliber bullet, which is about 900 joules. A power law for scaling radiation effects for longer term exposures has been proposed in which the dose required for a given effect increases by t^0.26, where time is in weeks. For exposures of one week or less the effect of rem of radiation is assumed to be constant. Thus an exposure capable of causing 50% mortality is 450 rems if absorbed in a week or less, but is 1260 rems if it occurs over a year.5.6.3.4.1 Acute Whole Body Exposure Effects Below 100 REMS In this dose range no obvious sickness occurs. Detectable changes in blood cells begin to occur at 25 rems, but occur consistently only above 50 rems. These changes involve fluctuations in the overall white blood cell count (with drops in lymphocytes), drops in platelet counts, and less severe drops in red blood cell counts. These changes set in over a period of days and may require months to disappear. They are detectable only by lab tests. At 50 rems atrophy of lymph glands becomes noticeable. Impairment to the immune system could increase the susceptibility to disease. Depression of sperm production becomes noticeable at 20 rems, an exposure of 80 rems has a 50% chance of causing temporary sterility in males.100-200 REMS Mild acute symptoms occur in this range. Tissues primarily affected are the hematopoietic (blood forming) tissues, sperm forming tissues are also vulnerable. Symptoms begin to appear at 100 rems, and become common at 200 rems. Typical effects are mild to moderate nausea (50% probability at 200 rems) , with occasional vomiting, setting in within 3-6 hours after exposure, and lasting several hours to a day. This is followed by a latent period during which symptoms disappear. Blood changes set in and increase steadily during the latency period as blood cells die naturally and are not replaced. Mild clinical symptoms return in 10-14 days. These symptoms include loss of appetite (50% probability at 150 rems), malaise, and fatigue (50% probability at 200 rems), and last up to 4 weeks. Recovery from other injuries is impaired and there is enhanced risk of infection. Temporary male sterility is universal. The higher the dosage in this range, the more likely the effects, the faster symptoms appear, the shorter the latency period, and the longer the duration of illness.200-400 REMS Illness becomes increasingly severe, and significant mortality sets in. Hematopoietic tissues are still the major affected organ system. Nausea becomes universal (100% at 300 rems), the incidence of vomiting reaches 50% at 280 rems. The onset of initial symptoms occurs within 1-6 hours, and last 1-2 days. After this a 7-14 day latency period sets in. When symptoms recur, the may include epilation (hair loss, 50% probability at 300 rems), malaise, fatigue, diarrhea (50% prob. at 350 rems), and hemorrhage (uncontrolled bleeding) of the mouth, subcutaneous tissue and kidney (50% prob. at 400 rems). Suppression of white blood cells is severe, susceptibility to infection becomes serious. At 300 rems the mortality rate without medical treatment becomes substantial (about 10%). The possibility of permanent sterility in females begins to appear. Recovery takes 1 to several months.400-600 REMS Mortality rises steeply in this dose range, from around 50% at 450 rems to 90% at 600 (unless heroic medical intervention takes place). Hematopoietic tissues remain the major affected organ system. Initial symptoms appear in 0.5-2 hours, and last up to 2 days. The latency period remains 7-14 days. The symptoms listed for 200-400 rems increase in prevalence and severity, reaching 100% occurrence at 600 rems. When death occurs, it is usually 2-12 weeks after exposure and results from infection and hemorrhage. Recovery takes several months to a year, blood cell counts may take even longer to return to normal. Female sterility becomes probable.600-1000 REMS Survival depends on stringent medical intervention. Bone marrow is nearly or completely destroyed, requiring marrow transfusions. Gastrointestinal tissues are increasingly affected. Onset of initial symptoms is 15-30 minutes, last a day or two, and are followed by a latency period of 5-10 days. The final phase lasts 1 to 4 weeks, ending in death from infection and internal bleeding. Recovery, if it occurs, takes years and may never be complete. Above 1000 REMS Very high exposures can sufficient metabolic disruption to cause immediate symptoms. Above 1000 rems rapid cell death in the gastrointestinal system causes severe diarrhea, intestinal bleeding, and loss of fluids, and disturbance of electrolyte balance. These effects can cause death within hours of onset from circulatory collapse. Immediate nausea occurs due to direct activation of the chemoreceptive nausea center in the brain. In the range 1000-5000 rems the onset time drops from 30 minutes to 5 minutes. Following an initial bout of severe nausea and weakness, a period of apparent well-being lasting a few hours to a few days may follow (called the "walking ghost" phase). This is followed by the terminal phase which lasts 2-10 days. In rapid succession prostration, diarrhea, anorexia, and fever follow. Death is certain, often preceded by delirium and coma. Therapy is only to relieve suffering. Above 5000 rems metabolic disruption is severe enough to interfere with the nervous system. Immediate disorientation and coma will result, onset is within seconds to minutes. Convulsions occur which may be controlled with sedation. Victim may linger for up to 48 hours before dying. The U. S. military assumes that 8000 rads of fast neutron radiation (from a neutron bomb) will immediately and permanently incapacitate a soldier. It should be noted that people exposed to radiation doses in the 400-1000 rem range following the Chernobyl disaster had much higher rates of survival than indicated above. This was made possible by advances in bone marrow transfusions and intensive medical care, provided in part by Dr. Robert Gale. However two caveats apply: Such care is only available if the number of cases is relatively small, and the infrastructure for providing it is not disrupted. In the case of even a limited nuclear attack it would be impossible to provide more than basic first aid to most people and the fatality rates might actually be higher than given here. Many of the highly exposed Chernobyl survivors have since died from latent radiation effects.5.6.3.4.2 Acute Localized Tissue Exposure Localized acute exposure is important for two organs: the skin, and the thyroid gland. Beta Burns Beta particles have a limited range in tissue. Depending on their energy, betas are completely absorbed by 1 mm to 1 cm of tissue. External exposures to beta particles from fallout thus primarily affect the skin, causing "beta burns". Due to the poor penetrating power of betas, these injuries only occur if there is direct skin exposure to fallout particles, or if an individual remains outdoors in a strong radiation field. Remaining indoors, wearing substantial clothing, and decontamination by washing can prevent this type of exposure. Beta burns were encountered in Marshall Islanders, and the crew of a Japanese fishing vessel, following the Castle Bravo test which unexpectedly dumped high fallout levels over a large area. The initial symptom for beta burns are an itching or burning sensation during the first 24-48 hours. These symptoms are marked only if the exposure is intense, and do not occur reliably. Within 1-2 days all symptoms disappear, but after 2-3 weeks the burn symptoms appear. The first evidence is increased pigmentation, or possibly erythema (reddening). Epilation and skin lesions follow. In mild to moderate cases damage is largely confined to the epidermis (outer skin layers). After forming a dry scab, the superficial lesions heal rapidly leaving a central depigmented area, surrounded by an irregular zone of increased pigmentation. Normal pigmentation returns over a few weeks. In more serious cases deeper ulcerated lesions form. These lesions ooze before becoming covered with a hard dry scab. Healing occurs with routine first aid care. Normal pigmentation may take months to return. Hair regrowth begins 9 weeks after exposure and is complete in 6 months. Thyroid Exposure The short-lived radioisotope iodine-131 (half-life 8 days) presents a special risk due to the tendency for ingested iodine to be concentrated in the thyroid gland. This risk is mitigated by the fact that direct ingestion of fallout is rare, and easily avoided. Iodine-131 typically enters the body through the consumption of contaminated milk, which in turn results from milk cows consuming contaminated fodder. The short half-life means that the initial radiation intensity of I-131 is high, but it disappears quickly. If uncontaminated fodder can be provided for a month or two, or if dry or canned milk can be consumed for the same period, there is little risk of exposure. If I-131 contaminated food is consumed, about one-third of the ingested iodine is deposited in the thyroid gland which weighs some 20 g in adults, and 2 g in infants. This can result in very high dose rates to the gland, with negligible exposures to the rest of the body. Due to the smaller glands of infants and children, and their high dairy consumption, they are particularly vulnerable to thyroid injury. Some Marshallese children received thyroid doses as high as 1150 rems. Most of the children receiving doses over 500 rems developed thyroid abnormalities within 10 years, including hypothyroidism and malignancies. I-131 exposure can be prevented by prompt consumption of potassium iodide supplements. Large doses of potassium iodide saturate the body with iodine and prevent any subsequent retention of radioiodine that is consumed. 5.6.3.4.3 Fetal Injury Acute radiation exposure during pregnancy can cause significant harm to the fetus. At Hiroshima and Nagasaki adverse effects were seen when pregnant women who were exposed to 200 rems of radiation or more. When exposure occurred during the first trimester a significant increase in mentally impaired children were noted. When exposure occurred during the last trimester, there was a marked increase in stillbirths and in elevated infant mortality during the first year of life.5.6.3.5 Chronic Radiation Exposure Long term radiation exposure results from residing in a fallout contaminated area for an extended period (external exposure), consuming food produced in a contaminated area (internal exposure), or both. If the exposure rate is low enough, no symptoms of radiation sickness will appear even though a very large total radiation dose may be absorbed over time. Latent radiation effects (i.e. cancer, genetic damage) depend on total dosage, not dose rate, so serious effects can result. An exposure of 0.25 rem/day over 5 years would accumulate 450 rems with little chance of overt sickness, but it would have a high mortality rate if the exposure were acute. The exposure time scaling law given above also indicates that a slow onset of symptoms characteristic of acute radiation sickness can occur. As an example, the most heavily contaminated location of the Rongelap atoll (160 km downwind of the March 1, 1954 15 Mt Castle Bravo test), received a total accumulated exposure of 3300 rads. Of this, 1100 rads was accumulated during the interval from 1 month to 1 year following the test. If the site had been occupied during this period, the effective exposure for radiation sickness effects would be 1100/ (48 weeks)^0.26 = 403 rads.5.6.3.5.1 External Exposure When an area is contaminated by gamma emitting isotopes, a radiation field is created that exposes all organisms that are not shielded from it. Only gamma rays have the necessary range and penetration to create a significant hazard. The principal source of long-term external exposure is cesium-137 (30 year half-life, 0.6 Me V gamma energy). A megaton of fission yield produces enough Cs-137 to contaminate 100 km^2 with a radiation field of 200 rad/year. A megaton-range ground burst can contaminate an area of thousands of square kilometers with concentrations that would exceed occupational safety guidelines. 3,000 megatons of fission yield, if distributed globally by stratospheric fallout, would double the world's background radiation level from external exposure to this isotope alone. It is possible to substantially reduce external exposure in contaminated areas by remaining indoors as much as possible. Exposure can be reduced by a factor of 2-3 for a frame house, or 10-100 for a multi-story building, and adding additional shielding to areas where much time is spent (like the bedroom) can increase these factors substantially. Since the half-life of Cs-137 is long, these would be permanent lifestyle adjustments. Such measures have been necessary (especially for children) in areas of Belarus that were heavily contaminated by Chernobyl.5.6.3.5.2 Internal Exposure Internal exposure to radiation is the most serious chronic risk from fallout if food grown in contaminated areas is consumed. Widespread contamination from a nuclear war, or a major radiation accident (like the Kyshtym and Chernobyl disasters), may leave no other practical choice. Alternatively, people residing in contaminated areas may come to disregard safety instructions about locally produced food (as has happened in the Marshall Islands and Ukraine). Radioisotopes may be taken up into plants through the root system, or they may be contaminated by fallout descending on the leaves. Gross contamination of food plants or fodder from the fallout plume of a ground burst is an obvious hazard, but the gradual descent of worldwide fallout is also a problem. The primary risks for internal exposure are cesium-137 and strontium-90. Strontium-89, transuranics alpha emitters, and carbon-14 are also significant sources of concern. Only a few curies of radioisotopes per km^2 are sufficient to render land unsuitable for cultivation under current radiation safety standards. A megaton of fission yield can thus make some 200,000 km^2 useless for food production for decades. Depression of leukocyte levels have been observed in people in Belarus living in areas that were contaminated with only 0.2 curies/km^2. Cesium-137 This alkali metal has chemistry resembling that of potassium. As a result, it is readily absorbed by food plants, and by animal tissues. Once consumed cesium distributes itself fairly evenly through the body, which means that Cs-137 absorption causes whole body exposure (a fact further aided by the penetrating nature of its gamma emissions). Cesium has a moderate residence time in the body, the residence half-life ranging from 50-100 days, so that the body will be cleared of the isotope once consumption of contaminated material ceases in a matter of several months, to a few years. Strontium 90 and 89 Strontium is chemically similar to calcium, and is deposited in bone along with calcium. Most of the strontium ingested does not end up in bone, it has a biological half-life only 40 days. Somewhat less than 10% of the Sr is retained in the bone, but it has a biological half-life of 50 years. Since the bone marrow is among the most sensitive tissue in the body to radiation, this creates a very serious hazard. Sr-90 (28.1 yr half-life) thus can cause long term damage, while Sr-89 (52 days) can cause significant short term injury. Safety exposure standards impose a Sr-90 body burden limit of 2 microcuries (14 nanograms) for occupational exposure, 0.2 microcuries for individual members of the general population, and 0.067 micro Ci averaged over the whole population. It is estimated that 10 micro Ci per person would cause a substantial rise in the incidence of bone cancer. The explosion of several thousands of fission megatons in the atmosphere could raise the average body burden of the entire human race to above the occupational exposure limit for Sr-90 for a couple of generations. Contamination of 2 curies of Sr-90 per km^2 is the U. S. limit for food cultivation. Alpha emitting heavy elements can be serious health risks also. The isotopes of primary concern here are those present in substantial quantities in nuclear weapons: short lived uranium isotopes (U-232 and U-233) and transuranic elements (primarily Pu-239, Pu-240, and Americium-241). These elements are hazardous if ingested due to radiotoxicity from the highly damaging alpha particles. The quantities of these isotopes present after a nuclear explosion are negligible compared to the amount of fission product radioisotopes. They represent a hazard when nuclear weapons are involved in "broken arrow" incidents, that is, accidents where the fissile isotopes inside are released. The exposure areas are of course small, compared to the areas threatened by fallout from a nuclear detonation. A typical nuclear weapon will contain some 300-600 curies of alpha emitter (assuming 5 kg plutonium). The isotope breakdown is approximately: 300 curies Pu-239, 60 curies Pu-240, and up to 250 curies of Am-241. If small particles of alpha emitters are inhaled, they can take up permanent residence in the lung and form a serious source of radiation exposure to the lung tissue. A microcurie of alpha emitter deposited in the lungs produce an exposure of 3700 rems/yr to lung tissue, an extremely serious cancer risk. Uranium and the transuranic elements are all bone-seekers (with the exception of neptunium). If absorbed, they are deposited in the bone and present a serious exposure risk to bone tissue and marrow. Plutonium has a biological half-life of 80-100 years when deposited in bone, it is also concentrated in the liver with a biological half-life of 40 years. The maximum permissible occupational body burden for plutonium-239 is 0.6 micrograms (.0375 microcuries) and 0.26 micrograms for lung burden (0.016 micro Ci). Carbon-14 is a weak beta particle emitter, with a low level of activity due to its long half-life. It presents a unique hazard however since, unlike other isotopes, it is incorporated directly into genetic material as a permanent part throughout the body. This means that it presents a hazard out of proportion to the received radiation dose as normally calculated. 5.6.3.5.3 Cancer The most serious long term consequence of radiation exposure is the elevation of cancer risk. Estimates of the carcinogenicity of radiation, especially of low exposures, have tended to increase over the years as epidemiological data has accumulated. The current state-of-the-art in low level risk estimation is the 1990 report issued by the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) entitled _Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation_, also known as BEIR V. As a general rule of thumb, it appears that cancer risk is more or less proportional to total radiation exposure, regardless of the quantity, rate or duration. 500 rems received over a decade is thus as serious a risk as 500 rems received all at once, and 50 rems is one-tenth as bad as 500. There is no evidence of a threshold effect or "safe dose". Safety standards are established primarily to keep the increased incidence of cancer below detectable levels. Significant deviations from the above rule of proportionality for total exposure do occur. In particular, low doses (for which the risk is small anyway) received over an extended period of time are significantly less carcinogenic (by about a factor of 2) than the same dose received all at once. Cancer risk to radiation exposure can be expressed as the increase in the lifetime probability of contracting fatal cancer per unit of radiation. The current estimate of overall risk is about a 0.8% chance of cancer per 10 rems for both men and women, averaged over the age distribution of the U. S. population. Thus a 1000 rem lifetime whole body radiation exposure would bring about a 80% chance of contracting fatal cancer, in addition to the normal incidence of cancer (about 20%). The risk for children appears to be about twice as great (due at least partly to the fact that they will live longer after exposure, and thus have greater opportunity to contract cancer). There are also risk coefficient for specific tissue exposures. These are (approximately): Female Breast 1.0%/100 rems Bone Marrow 0.2%/100 rems (0.4% for children) Bone Tissue 0.05%/100 rems Lung 0.2%/100 rems5.6.3.5.4 Genetic Effects Radiation damage to the germ cells of the reproductive organs can cause mutations that are passed on to subsequent generations. Although this is very important, it can nonetheless be overplayed. It may seem surprising, but no elevated mutation rate from radiation has ever been detected in the human population, not even in the substantial population of atomic bomb survivors and descendants. One reason for this is that humans are wild animals, that is, they have not been subjected to controlled breeding and thus have a high incidence of natural genetic variability and disorders, compared to laboratory and domestic animals. About 10% of the human population has detectable genetic disorders (most are not serious). This makes it difficult to detect additional mutations unless the rate is also high. Two factors act to limit the effective radiation exposure for genetic effects, one for acute exposures, the other for chronic exposures. High acute exposures to the reproductive organs can cause permanent sterility, which prevents transmission of genetic effects. The cumulative effect of chronic exposure is limited by the fact that only exposures prior to reproduction count. Since most reproduction occurs before the age of 30, exposures after that age have little effect on the population. It is estimated that the dose to reproductive tissue required to double the natural incidence of genetic disorders is 100-200 rems. The initial rate of observable disorders (the first generation) is only about 1/3 of the eventual rate once genetic equilibrium is established. Of course increases in the rate of genetic disorders (especially in a large population) is a _permanent_ alteration of the human species.5.6.3.5.5 Cataracts Eye tissue exposed to radiation shows an increased incidence of cataracts at dose levels below which most tissues show increased cancer rates. This makes cataract risk the most important tissue dose criterion for establishing safety standards. 