Slashdot Mirror


60th Anniversary of the Atomic Bomb

An anonymous reader writes "On July 16, 1945, the world's first nuclear bomb exploded at Trinity Site, New Mexico, marking the beginning of the Nuclear Age. Manhattan Project veteran Herb Lehr has no regrets: 'In a lot of respects I felt as if I had done something worthwhile. I am in no way ashamed of what I had done in any way, shape, matter or form. I did what I was told to do. I did it to the best of my ability.' Lehr will return to Trinity Site for the first time since the explosion. He said, 'I'm just interested in going and seeing it and maybe getting some memories back. Los Alamos was a whole interesting experience. It was something unique. I worked very hard down there.'"

19 of 559 comments (clear)

  1. Note by simonharvey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For thoes people who are interested in building their own, here is a primer

    Good Luck

    1. Re:Note by beacher · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I actually found this atom bomb instruction set to be a little more detailed. Any instructions that include
      "Please remember that Plutonium, especially pure, refined Plutonium, is somewhat dangerous. Wash your hands with soap and warm water after handling the material, and don't allow your children or pets to play in it or eat it."

      or "Now hide the completed device from the neighbors and children. The garage is not recommended because of high humidity and the extreme range of temperatures experienced there. Nuclear devices have been known to spontaneously detonate in these unstable conditions. The hall closet or under the kitchen sink will be perfectly suitable."

      definately have the end user in mind. It's these thoughtful tips that make this probably the best DIY WMD kit! /sarcasm>

    2. Re:Note by Elkboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      "If it does detonate, remember to duck and cover." "Afterwards, shadows burned into walls will make great conversation pieces at parties. Arming your car and grow a crazy Mad Max-hairdo will help you and your family prosper in the nuclear wasteland."

  2. As it hasn't been said yet... by RRRussian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    WTF!!!

    Lehr said it is unfortunate the bombs were used for war.

    Sooo, what were you expecting, thermonuclear noisemakers?

    Seriously, whenever someone tries to justify something truely horrific, it always comes out as the most asinine comment one could make, under those circumstances.

    Much like this one...

    1. Re:As it hasn't been said yet... by Zarhan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope. B-29 was the first bomber that could fly really high (indeed, USAF discovered jet stream when they first flew at those heights), and japanese had no AA equipment that could deal with them at 30000+ feet.

      Altough, actually most of the air raids with B-29's were done at low altitudes - japanese had 88 mm AA cannons, so they could not turn fast enough for low-altitude bombing. This saved fuel and allowed for higher payloads (and also prevented some engine troubles - flying at high altitudes caused overheating problems).

      So yeah, that demo could have been done without any problems for subsequent real droppings.

  3. His moral? by scarlac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's strange to see how he's arguing that he doesn't feel ashamed (a moral feeling) and he argues that he was instructed to do so, so that makes it morally legitimate? He must be a bureaucrat.

  4. Whenever I play a game of Civilization by John+Seminal · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Whenever any civilization completes the Manhatten project, the game pretty much sucks. Everyone wants to nuke everyone else. It becomes hard to build a nation when every city must hault production on whatever it was doing to build a Star Wars Defense system.

    I wonder what will happen in the next 50 years, as most countries should have nukes by then. It will not matter how wealthy a country is, their diplomats will smile and say "Defended by Nuclear Weapons". We are already there with North Korea, all that is missing for them is long range missles to deliver those Nukes to far away places.

    Imagine smaller nations nuking each other. Does anyone think that Iran and Iraq would not have nuked each other in the 1980's when they had a decade long war? Or what about Israel, how many different nations want to nuke them?? And how would foriegn policy of Israel be different if the palestinians had Nukes? Would the Israeli government treat them any better?

    And I can see former soviet union states getting Nukes. It could get to be messy. What country keeps setting off bombs in Moscow? Uzbekestan or is it Checkizstan. The Chenyans I think. I am too lazy to look it up at the moment, but I believe they are the ones who took a theater filled with people hostage and then killed a bunch of them, and the same people who took a school of 1000+ hostage and killed half the elementary school kids. They held a bunch of 6 to 11 year olds for 4 or 5 days without water or food. If someone can torture another human like that, setting off a nuke probably would make them loose sleep.

    Will there be no wars in the future if everyone has nukes, because everyone will be scared of starting a major conflict? Or will it be like the game Civilization where as soon as everyone has nukes, they use them?? At least our leaders have deep bunkers. In 20 years when the radiation clears, they can come out of the bunkers and start the game all over.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  5. Lehr is right by Travoltus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Had the US not developed and deployed the bomb, someone else would have been the first to use it.

    Questions about our righteousness in nuking Japan (who themselves slaughtered even more civilians in Nanking than we killed with 2 A-bombs) will never die, but I'm confident that the US getting the bomb before China, the USSR and other nations, made it possible for us to scare everyone into not using them again.

    We sure as heck could not have ended the war with harsh insults in Japanese... a direct invasion would have cost millions of lives and left Russia open to join in. Ask the Germans what happened when the Soviet men came into Berlin, and overlay that disaster onto Tokyo...

    This isn't meant as a troll or flamebait, seriously, I think millions of lives were saved, perhaps billions.

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
  6. obligatory Ozzy quote by Stormwatch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Thank God for the Bomb"
    Ozzy Osbourne

    --------------------

    Like moths to a flame
    Is man never gonna change
    Time's seen untold aggression
    And infliction of pain
    If that's the only thing that's stopping war

    Then thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb

    Nuke ya nuke ya

    War is just another game
    Tailor made for the insane
    But make a threat of their annihilation
    And nobody wants to play
    If that's the only thing that keeps the peace

    Then thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb

    Nuke ya nuke ya

    Today was tommorow yesterday
    It's funny how the time can slip away
    The face of the doomsday clock
    Has launched a thousand wars
    As we near the final hour
    Time is the only foe we have

    When war is obsolete
    I'll thank God for war's defeat
    But any talk about hell freezing over
    Is all said with tongue in cheek
    Until the day the war drums beat no more

    I'll thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb
    Thank God for the bomb

    Nuke ya nuke ya

    --------------------

    (Ozzy Osbourne/Jake E. Lee)

  7. Einstein by Malfourmed · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Herb Lehr has no regrets, which is his right. On the other hand Einstein said
    "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made."
    and
    "The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking...the solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind. If only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker."
    1. Re:Einstein by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And maybe we'd all be speaking German and drinking Schnapps. Or sake.

      While I'm not going to say that the use of the atomic bomb was immoral, given the circumstances, the construction of the atomic bomb was not what caused Japan or Germany to lose the war. As advanced as it was, I really don't believe that Japan's atomic bomb project would have been able to offer Japan any kind of shot at victory.

      Perhaps the bomb ended the war a little faster.

      Perhaps if the resources that went into building cyclotrons had gone for conventional bombs and planes instead, the war would have ended quicker.

      Probably without nukes at the end of WWII, the cold war would have proceeded differently.

      The US would have wanted to enlist the help of the Chineese and Russians in invading Japan, which those nations would have eagerly given after all the death and shame Japan had visited upon them.
      More than anything, without the bomb the Japanese would probably be speaking Pu Tong Hua or Russian.

      Things could have gone differently, sure.

      But the bomb was not what made Japan or Germany lose the war.

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  8. Do what you are told to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How I hate the sentence "I did what I was told to do". Everybody should check the orders against his conscience, no matter where they come from.

    It is this attitude that made WWII, or better the nazi regime, possible in the first place. And everyone living with that attitude is, in my eyes, a coward, who is too afraid to think for himself.

    How else could you explain that, by order of the DOD, soldiers were forced to remain close to the detonation to check for its impact on human beeings, while it was well known for years that there were long-term illnesses caused by it.

  9. Richard Feynman by John+Seminal · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lehr said it is unfortunate the bombs were used for war.

    Seriously, whenever someone tries to justify something truely horrific, it always comes out as the most asinine comment one could make, under those circumstances.

    This is a question that I have wondered for some time, as I have read his books.

    It seems that many of the people who helped build the atomic bomb were later pushed out of any talk about how the bomb was to be used. Oppenheimer lost his top secret clerance and was labled a communist by the FBI. Some in government wanted to jail or kill him, they were worried he would defect to the Soviet Union in the 1960's. I think Senator McCarthy had public statements about wanting to see Oppenheimer jailed.

    If there is a team of 3 or 4 that is 90% responsible for building the worlds worst weapon, should they have a say if it is used? Or do they lose that right when the finish making it? Without them, the bomb could never have been made. It seems like a huge burden to have for life, knowing your creation killed so many people.

    And why did the USA need to drop 2 bombs on Japan? Didn't the first one do enough to scare the crap out of them? How far was Truman ready to go? Kill every Japanese person on the earth.

    And didn't the USA during WWII jail every American citizen that looked Japanese by force, even if they never broke any laws?

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Richard Feynman by b17bmbr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's is, and there's going to be more here, historical revisionism. Suffice to say there were several reasons:

      1) marianas, iwo jima and okinawa. a friend's dad served on iwo and saipan. hell would be a gentle term. plus, i've read volumes. the fighting was unlike anything in the history of warfare. we'd have had 100X worse on japanese mainland. we expected 1 million allied casualties, and probably 10-20 million japanese. so it's lincoln's "terrible arithmetic" multiplied by 100.

      2) russia. sure, we were their ally, but we all knew what they were, what they were going to do, and we wanted to send a message. if the rosenbergs (yes they were soviet spies) not given up the bomb, we'd have been in a totally different situation. we had to let them know they were well behind the curve. and yes we allowed many nazi scientists off the hook, that's not the point.

      3) japan didn't surrender after bomb #1. and in fact, didn't after bomb #2. remember, the bombs were aug. 6 and aug. 9, they surrendered after the soviets invaded sakhalin and not until aug. 15. in fact, if you check, we actually had a bomber raid on aug. 10, and i believe aug. 12. ironic is that the communications were severed between the emperor (who wanted to surrender) and the military (who didn't). the militray was actualyl coming to the palace to arrest the emp and hold him so he couldn;t surrender. we didn't know this until much later. however, two nukes, two more B29 raids, and still no surrender.

      4) politics. we were getting really tired of the war. europe was well over, domestic life was returning to normal, and yet 10,000 were dying on okinawa. how many more thousands were the public going to send? truman knew the war must end. and soon.

      most of the second guessing has come from succeeding generations that had the luxury of self-relection that on;y peace can bring. like the greeks, it is our freedom that allows to us to be hyper-critical of ourselves (like a sophocles or aristophanes). we did much that we view as oppressive (japanese internement) yet at the time was wholly palatable by the large body of people. times change and so do cultures. but i think it is poor history and a worse morality play to go back and make assumptions about the bomb. look at japan today. not that 2 nukes are a tradeoff for a peaceful and free society (ah moral equivalency), but consider this:

      40 years after the sedan the french were screaming revanche and we got ypres and verdun. 40 years after hiroshima, the japanese were not and we got toyotas.

      --
      My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
    2. Re:Richard Feynman by learn+fast · · Score: 5, Informative

      most of the second guessing has come from succeeding generations that had the luxury of self-relection...

      "Prof. Albert Einstein... said that he was sure that President Roosevelt would have forbidden the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had he been alive and that it was probably carried out to end the Pacific war before Russia could participate." --Einstein Deplores Use of Atom Bomb, New York Times, 8/19/46, pg. 1

      "...in [July] 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. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.

      "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. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..." -- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate for Change

      "...the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." -- Dwight Eisenhower, Ike on Ike, Newsweek, 11/11/63

      On August 8, 1945, after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, [Herbert] Hoover wrote to Army and Navy Journal publisher Colonel John Callan O'Laughlin, "The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul." -- quoted from Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 635.

      "MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed. ... When I asked General MacArthur 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." -- Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65, 70-71.

  10. Re:So much for stopping nuclear proliferation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The actual physics involved in building a bomb will be covered by any standard undergraduate physics course. Thats not the tricky bit. It gets difficult when the recipe called for a few kgs of U235 or Pu-239. Even if you could get your hands on some Uranium you would still have to process it to extract the fissile U235 from the U233, requiring all kinds of highly restricted and monitored hardware.

  11. Re:60? by joke_dst · · Score: 5, Funny
    Hey! Don't look down on 60 just because of your "hey, I've got ten fingers! let's use a decimal system"-thinking!

    60 happens to be the base of the Babylonian number system and the second Unitary perfect number. You insensitive clod.

  12. Re:So much for stopping nuclear proliferation. by Fenresulven · · Score: 5, Informative

    Natural uranium contains U-238, U-235 and a TINY amount of U-234. U-233 is an isotope of uranium created by neutron bombardment of thorium and is not present in natural uranium. Above should read seperating the U-235 from the U-238.

  13. Re:But you are wrong by TGK · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Why do people feel the urge to tell a simplistic story of what happened? Claiming that the atomic bomb was seen as just another weapon simply isn't true. This doesn't have anything to do with hindsight, this has to do with the documents of the time clearly showing that this was not the case.


    As a trained historian and scientist, this disturbs me. Very little was understood of radioactive substances in the 1940s. What was understood was that exposure to large quantities of exotic substances caused a kind of sickness - little more. This does not translate, scientifically or historically, into an understanding that a detonation would result in radiation deaths.

    Without radiation deaths, the atomic bomb is just a really big bomb. That's it -- and that's what it was seen as by the US military and by Truman (who, if you'll recall, wasn't really in on the day to day goings on of the Roosevelt administration).

    US troops on the ground after the detonations didn't know what the weapon did. Radiation poisoning was called "Disease-X" and we had no idea where it came from or how to stop it.

    Ultimately, World War II was a total war. In such a war, great powers seek to destroy each other absolutely with whatever means are within their reach. Debating the morality of the atomic bomb in such a context is a historical error called anachronism - judging the actions of the past by the political, social, and scientific mores of the present. Debate the morality of total war all you like - but the atom bomb was just the latest and greatest in a series of hellish weapons developed by mankind.

    Name one weapon before the atomic bomb - any weapon, so horrible that its use in warfare was taboo before it was ever deployed. Why should this case be different? What should have fired off in Truman's head saying that obviously this weapon is worse than poison gas, incendiary bombs, biological weapons and countless other innovations of human kind?

    History is about more than just reading about the past -- it is about seeing the events and people of an era through their own eyes. If you fail to do that, you're not a historian.

    --
    Killfile(TGK)
    No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.