Oppenheimer and JFK

[James DiEugenio]

Yes, before the bomb went off, like I said , Oppenheimer thought it was not their decision.

But like Sean mentions and I did in my review, I thought the worst decision was to keep on working on it after they knew Germany--for whatever reason--was never even close to the bomb.  BTW, Oppenheimer had met Heisenberg  many years previous, I think in his student days.

 

 

Edited July 26, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Brancato]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yes, before the bomb went off, like I said , Oppenheimer thought it was not their decision.

But like Sean mentions and I did in my review, I thought the worst decision was to keep on working on it after they knew Germany--for whatever reason--was never even close to the bomb.  BTW, Oppenheimer had met Heisenberg  man years previous, I think in his student days.

 

 

So Oppenheimer was following the dictates of the Pentagon

[James DiEugenio]

Well Groves had hired him to run the Manhattan Project.  It had that name since that is where it started.

Afterward, Oppenheimer did not think that.  He thought a civilian commission should control atomic energy.  And he did not want to build the H bomb.

So many people from Los Alamos disagreed with Teller that this is why I think they moved the second HQ to Livermore.

[Michael Griffith]

On 7/14/2023 at 10:41 PM, James DiEugenio said:

In preparation for the upcoming film on Oppenheimer, I am reading American Prometheus, probably the best book about the famous Manhattan Project leader.

The authors of that book, Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin, have also produced some excellent scholarship on the immorality of our nuking of Japan. There was absolutely no need to nuke Hiroshima, and there was doubly no need to nuke Nagasaki. The nuking of Japan and our subsequent treatment of radiation victims in Japan constitute one of the most shameful stains on our history and honor. 

My website The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb presents some of the evidence that nuking Japan was wholly unnecessary and unjustified.

Edited July 26, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[James DiEugenio]

I would have to agree about that Mike.

I chalk that up to Truman and Byrnes.

Nagasaki was completely egregious.  The Japanese had not even figured out what happened at Hiroshima.

Even McCloy said we should not have demanded unconditional surrender.

BTW, is that not how Douglass begins his book, the difference between Truman and Kennedy on atomic weapons?

Edited July 26, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Michael Griffith]

5 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

The authors of that book, Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin, have also produced some excellent scholarship on the immorality of our nuking of Japan. There was absolutely no need to nuke Hiroshima, and there was doubly no need to nuke Nagasaki. The nuking of Japan and our subsequent treatment of radiation victims in Japan constitute one of the most shameful stains on our history and honor. 

My website The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb presents some of the evidence that nuking Japan was wholly unnecessary and unjustified.

For anyone who might be interested, I have fixed the broken links on the page of articles on the unnecessary nuking of Japan. Half the links worked, but the other half were not linked (now they are).

The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb

unnecessary.pdf - Google Drive

[Matthew Koch]

Saw the Oppenheimer yesterday, I noticed that Luis Alvarez was in the movie along with a JKF assassination conspirator suspect that I don't see researchers talking much about, which is Boris Pass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Pash 

 

[Ken Davies]

Let's not forget the fire bombing of Tokyo, and Dresden for that matter.  Death by air for thousands of civilians.

[Roger Odisio]

Here is a take on Oppenheimer and the bomb by a native of Hiroshima currently a physician in Hawaii.  https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/08/03/oppenheimer-war-criminal/.

Particularly telling incident:   "The reference to “those who advocate a purely technical demonstration would wish to outlaw the use of atomic weapons” is presumably to the scientists who signed Hungarian physicist  Leó Szilárd’s petition, which argued “that such attacks on Japan could not be justified, at least not until the terms which will be imposed after the war on Japan were made public in detail and Japan were given an opportunity to surrender.” ³ Szilárd circulated the petition during the summer of 1945 mostly among scientists at the Metallurgical Laboratory in Chicago. He asked Edwin Teller to circulate it in Los Alamos, but Teller turned it over to Oppenheimer, who in turn turned it over to Leslie Groves. Groves stamped it “classified” and put it in a safe. It therefore never reached Truman."

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/26/2023 at 11:24 AM, Michael Griffith said:

There was absolutely no need to nuke Hiroshima, and there was doubly no need to nuke Nagasaki.

 

If so, then why did Truman choose to nuke them?

 

(I just did a little researching and found that this is far from being a settled case. Plus it's hard to believe that Truman would kill so many without finding it necessary.)

 

[Robert Montenegro]

20 hours ago, Ken Davies said:

Let's not forget the fire bombing of Tokyo, and Dresden for that matter.  Death by air for thousands of civilians.

 

Technically—not that I condone the murder of civilians, mind you—but technically, the moment Tojo and Hitler declared a state of "Total War," no one under the Nazi régime or the Imperial Japanese fascist government, was a civilian—everything and everyone was a target of opportunity in a state of "Total War."

 

Once again, I do not condone the murder of innocent civilians. 

 

Ain't war Hell?

 

Edited August 3, 2023 by Robert Montenegro

[Pat Speer]

Saw the film last week. It digs into a lot of the issues surrounding the bomb, and Oppenheimer's thoughts about his role in history. 

Now some thoughts about the war. As the war closed in on Japan, the Japanese military as well as its people made it clear they had no interest in unconditional surrender, and would fight on no matter the cost. The war was lost. They could not win. They were banking that the U.S. would allow them to save face and hold onto power in exchange for an end to the war, but they failed to see that the American military and American public was as determined as they were...to punish them. While it's true that the war could have ended before Hiroshima, such an ending would not have satisfied the American beast, which was determined to make Japan pay. This is perhaps the darkest side of propaganda. Once it is unleashed to stir people into action, they are not satisfied with a handshake. Only blood atonement will do. In this case, the U.S. could have fire-bombed Japan into oblivion and the American people would have been delighted. The atomic bomb, however, was a very Big Bang, and might very well shock the Japanese leaders into unconditional surrender. So...ironically, the bomb saved lives, hundreds of thousands of American lives, sure, but perhaps a few million Japanese lives as well. It worked. Now, was it ethical? No. But is war ever ethical? 

Now, back to the movie. There is an excellent scene where Oppenheimer meets Truman and tells Truman (the always-amazing Gary Oldman) that he, Oppenheimer, feels like he has blood on his hands. Sad, right. But Truman's response is classic. He tells Oppenheimer that the Japanese don't care who built the bomb, they care about who dropped it. As Oppenheimer leaves his office, moreover, Truman tells an assistant to make sure he never sees that cry-baby again. 

War is hell, and sometimes you have to sell your soul to win. 

P.S. I just went to a school orientation for my son and ended up rapping with some other parents. One couple just moved back from Japan, where they confirmed that few Japanese bear any grudges against the U.S. about the bomb. IOW, they understand that it was the quickest way to end the war. 

This, of course, doesn't answer one of the questions raised in Oppenheimer. Should the military have told the Japanese people what was coming if they didn't surrender? It seems like a long-shot. But long-shots are not impossible shots. 

Edited August 4, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Paul Cummings]

If I'm not mistaken, over 500,000 U.S. troops were expected to die with the eventual invasion of Japan if the bomb was not dropped. 

[Joe Bauer]

On 8/4/2023 at 1:47 AM, Pat Speer said:

Saw the film last week. It digs into a lot of the issues surrounding the bomb, and Oppenheimer's thoughts about his role in history. 

Now some thoughts about the war. As the war closed in on Japan, the Japanese military as well as its people made it clear they had no interest in unconditional surrender, and would fight on no matter the cost. The war was lost. They could not win. They were banking that the U.S. would allow them to save face and hold onto power in exchange for an end to the war, but they failed to see that the American military and American public was as determined as they were...to punish them. While it's true that the war could have ended before Hiroshima, such an ending would not have satisfied the American beast, which was determined to make Japan pay. This is perhaps the darkest side of propaganda. Once it is unleashed to stir people into action, they are not satisfied with a handshake. Only blood atonement will do. In this case, the U.S. could have fire-bombed Japan into oblivion and the American people would have been delighted. The atomic bomb, however, was a very Big Bang, and might very well shock the Japanese leaders into unconditional surrender. So...ironically, the bomb saved lives, hundreds of thousands of American lives, sure, but perhaps a few million Japanese lives as well. It worked. Now, was it ethical? No. But is war ever ethical? 

Now, back to the movie. There is an excellent scene where Oppenheimer meets Truman and tells Truman (the always-amazing Gary Oldman) that he, Oppenheimer, feels like he has blood on his hands. Sad, right. But Truman's response is classic. He tells Oppenheimer that the Japanese don't care who built the bomb, they care about who dropped it. As Oppenheimer leaves his office, moreover, Truman tells an assistant to make sure he never sees that cry-baby again. 

War is hell, and sometimes you have to sell your soul to win. 

P.S. I just went to a school orientation for my son and ended up rapping with some other parents. One couple just moved back from Japan, where they confirmed that few Japanese bear any grudges against the U.S. about the bomb. IOW, they understand that it was the quickest way to end the war. 

This, of course, doesn't answer one of the questions raised in Oppenheimer. Should the military have told the Japanese people what was coming if they didn't surrender? It seems like a long-shot. But long-shots are not impossible shots. 

Great points Pat.

I saw the film last week.

I wish I could write as well as Jim D... and if I could I would express at least a few critical thoughts.

Ones that had some intellectual gravitas versus my typical low brow entries.

Great acting by the way.

I recommend Robert Downey Jr. for the best supporting actor Academy Award this next March.

And GREAT make up work. Academy award for this as well. Imo anyways.

It took a minute or two for me to recognize Gary Oldman as Truman.

Curious coincidence that Oldman played Lee Harvey Oswald in Oliver Stone's film "JFK." I wonder who picked Oldman for the Truman role.

And yes, I caught that line ( some may have missed it because it was through a closing Oval Office door) where Truman tells his other guest...I don't want that cry-baby ( Oppenheimer ) in this office again.

I love Matt Damon for 75% of the films he has been in.

But not this one.

Guess I have him type cast in my mind too much as Jason Bourne and other younger person roles.

I think casting an older actor, even if not a famous one, would have lessened the miscast distraction for me Damon was.

Should we have dropped the first Atomic bombs ( 2 ) on Japanese cities?

So much legitimate debate there that there is no way any one person can answer that question simply imo.

War is hell as Pat says.

It's ruthless and those that create it are usually ruthless psychopathic power mad cult leaders whom you have to confront just as ruthlessly to defeat them.

And one could easily constantly cite the atrocities of the Japanese as being way more brutal than their losses in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...and to a point even the Tokyo and Dresden bombings.

Many Jews wanted to exact revenge on the German people after their defeat that would have killed more than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Diabolical actions such as poisoning their drinking water on a huge scale.

Surprised the Chinese didn't get to pound on the Japanese at wars end for Nanking "alone!"

I grew up with a Burmese friend.

His mother got out of the country one step ahead of the Japanese take over.

As her plane was lifting off, she witnessed sword armed Japanese soldiers cutting the heads off of other Burmese civilians left on the tarmac who didn't get out in time.

Also my son interviewed a Bataan Death March survivor for a Junior High history class project back in the mid-1990's.

I accompanied my son and we met in this fellow's home in Salinas, CA. His name was "Ben Cicone."  Or "Ciccone?"

He survived the march, only to be shipped off to Japan and interred into a Japanese prisoner of war camp there.

Let me just say that the atrocities he described the Japanese inflicting upon the Death March men and later in their main island prison camp...made you feel the Japanese couldn't be punished enough for their unbelievably brutal en masse war crimes.

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Matthew Koch]

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Great points Pat.

I saw the film last week.

I wish I could write as well as Jim D... and if I could I would express at least a few critical thoughts.

Ones that had some intellectual gravitas versus my typical low brow entries.

Great acting by the way.

I recommend Robert Downey Jr. for the best supporting actor Academy Award this next March.

And GREAT make up work. Academy award for this as well. Imo anyways.

It took a minute or two for me to recognize Gary Oldman as Truman.

Curious coincidence that Oldman played Lee Harvey Oswald in Oliver Stone's film "JFK." I wonder who picked Oldman for the Truman role.

And yes, I caught that line ( some may have missed it because it was through a closing Oval Office door) where Truman tells his other guest...I don't want that cry-baby ( Oppenheimer ) in this office again.

I love Matt Damon for 75% of the films he has been in.

But not this one.

Guess I have him type cast in my mind too much as Jason Bourne and other younger person roles.

I think casting an older actor, even if not a famous one, would have lessened the miscast distraction for me Damon was.

Should we have dropped the first Atomic bombs ( 2 ) on Japanese cities?

So much legitimate debate there that there is no way any one person can answer that question simply imo.

War is hell as Pat says.

It's ruthless and those that create it are usually psychopathic power mad cult leaders whom you have to confront just as ruthlessly to defeat them.

And one could easily constantly cite the atrocities of the Japanese as being way more brutal than their losses in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...and to a point even the Tokyo and Dresden bombings.

Many Jews wanted to exact revenge on the German people after their defeat that would have killed more than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Diabolical actions such as poisoning their drinking water on a huge scale.

Surprised the Chinese didn't get to pound on the Japanese at wars end for Nanking "alone!"

I grew up with a Burmese friend.

His mother got out of the country one step ahead of the Japanese take over.

As her plane was lifting off, she witnessed Japanese soldiers samurai sword cutting the heads off of other Burmese civilians left on the tarmac who didn't get out in time.

Also my son interviewed a Bataan Death March survivor for a Junior High class history project back in the mid-1990's.

I accompanied my son and we met in this fellow's home in Salinas, CA. His name was "Ben Cicone."  Or "Ciccone?"

He survived the march, only to transported back to Japan and interred into a Japanese prisoner of war camp there.

Let me just say that the atrocities he described the Japanese inflicting upon the Death March men and later in their main island prison camp...made you feel the Japanese couldn't be punished enough for their unbelievably brutal en masse war crimes.

 

Joe, Matt Damon reminded me of Brad Pitt's character from Inglorious Bastards, as if that was his inspiration for the character. Something I think people forget about Imperial Japan is that they are kinda like the original Nazis, just like Nazi is used as a slur Jap in Asia means about the same thing.. 

You know what else is interesting that ties this back into the Kennedy Assassination, is that David Harold Byrd aka Dry Hole Byrd who owned the Texas School Book Depository was in Africa with James Doolittle on Safari. Doolittle worked with Lemay with the fire bombing of Japan and Dresden Germany, and wrote the Doolittle Report which is cited for CIA's Covert Operations becoming agressive.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Report,_1954

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP86B00269R000100040001-5.pdf