background, they've been having complaints about the use of force. the guy was a mess. we don't find out about until he kill somebody. >> he argues there are ways that the work a bit ended other than dropping the atomic bomb. -- oness last about 51 hour and 15 minutes. i have been busy the last few days doing interviews about the nuclear security summit in washington, d.c., right now.

there are 50 heads of state gathered here in washington, trying to deal with the question of nuclear terrorism and how to secure the highly enriched .lements around the world that is a nuclear reactors, that is in hospitals, universities, research centers. there is the possibility of dirty bombs, the possibility of terrorists getting a hold of this. that is a small part of the nuclear material out there. most of the material is in the weapons programs. this gathering is not going to be dealing with weapons issues. you might recall that in the spring of 2009, president obama made an important speech in prague that called for nuclear abolition. one could say it was the high

point of the obama presidency. it is what helped him get the nobel peace prize, which a lot of people have urged him to give back since then. we need nuclear abolition. he said the united states has to lead the effort. it is the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons and warfare against another country. that is where i want to begin today. on the one hand, there is a certain hypocrisy in what is going on. in 1945.em begins back it has progressed to the point where how many countries have nuclear weapons now? nine exactly. nine countries have nuclear weapons today. how many nuclear weapons are there in the world today? approximately.

we know a lot about climate , what and global warming seems to be the threats to our existence. i would argue this -- of the existencereat to our is still nuclear annihilation. there are just a little under 16,000 nuclear weapons today. peak? weapons at the there were approximately 70,000 nuclear weapons in the world in the 70's. only one sign at the nuclear bomb museum in hiroshima. one bomb is all it takes to wipe out a city.

why do we need 1.7 million of them? in the 1950'stes actually held congressional sundial to project discuss the possibilities of building one bomb that would be 700,000 times as big as the bomb that wiped out hiroshima. megatons.lone, 100 this is the kind of insanity that the world embarked on, that though we have back -- pulled back a little bit on that, it is not far enough. we had a series of agreements -- obama is the one who called for nuclear abolition. not asked to sharply reduce the number of bombs. obama has called for

the modernization of america's nuclear arsenal. the modernization of our nuclear weapons that will cost $1 trillion over the next three decades. while he talked about how insane for saying that south korea and japan should develop their own nuclear bombs, insane.y says that is the obama administration is encouraging that i think we need our nuclear weapons. if the united states is so dependent on its nuclear arsenal, how can we argue that korea like iran or north or south korea or japan should not have their own nuclear weapons? the story i want to tell today is the beginning of this.

it is the decision to drop the atomic bomb in 1945. there are basically three narratives that govern the way historians have interpreted this. the first is the triumphal or heroic narrative. that is the traditional one that most of you probably learned in school. that's one argues that the was the good guy in world war ii. it was a good war that beat fascism and japanese militarism. the united states dropped the bomb, and why is the main reason that we are taught in this country for that? we had already invaded okinawa. the formula for winning the war in the pacific was what?

it was a combination of a , strategic bombing, and a u.s. invasion. the belief was that if the united states invaded, it would cost a lot of lights. -- lives. the highest estimate for american casualties was 46,000. president truman said in his memoir that general marshall told him that a half-million men would've been lost in the invasion. war said thatof believed one million casualties from invasion. president george h w bush praised truman's tough, calculating decision. he says it saves millions of american lives.

it started with thousands and end up with millions. wereustification was we the good guys and drop the bomb in order to avoid an invasion in which so many americans would be killed. this was the heroic narrative. the tragic narrative, the second narrative, argues that the atomic bombs were not necessary. the japanese were already defeated and were trying to find a way to end the war. the united states dropped the bomb unnecessarily and killed hundreds of thousands of innocent victims, mostly women and children. for those whody were killed, for those who with the results of the bombings for the rest of their lives. i would add a third narrative which i call the apocalyptic narrative. the apocalyptic narrative says that dropping bombs ,nnecessarily is a war crime

and seriously to be condemned. what truman did was even worse. he knowingly began a process that threatened the future existence of all life on the planet. killing some people is a war crime. to threaten all of humanity with i say trumanhich knowingly did at a time when there was no military justification, is even worse. is thethat represents worst imaginable crime that can be committed, and we have been lucky to survive ever since. the threat of nuclear annihilation exists with us today, which is why it is so important to understand this. there are three fundamental myths of world war ii. the first was that the united states won the war in europe. any historian knows that it was the soviets who won the war in europe with important united

states and some british help. that will sidetrack is too much of the going to that. i want to boil down a 12 hour lecture into 75 minutes. ii second myth of world war is that the cold war started during world war ii because of soviet aggression and the soviet plans to conquer the world. the third method is that the , andc bombs ended the war that they were just and humane and we save lives by doing so. that is the one i want to tackle today. the story begins in december of scientiststwo german -- let me backtrack a little. to defy the myth that the bombs all six of, first of america's 75 star admirals and generals who receive their fifth

star during the war are on record as saying the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both. one.is number the second point to defy what you are taught in school about the atomic bombs ending the war -- in the national museum of the u.s. navy, the official u.s. navy museum says in their exhibit that the vast destruction by the bombs and nagasaki and the loss of 100 35,000 people made little impact on the japanese military. 130 5000 people made little impact on the japanese military. 0 people made little impact on the japanese military. it was not the atomic bomb.

truman it is a visor's new -- and his advisers knew there were ways to end the war sooner. let's start at the beginning. the story begins in december of 1938, when two german's -- -- two german physicist split the uranium atom. meals were brought back word that the germans had -- niels bohr brought back word that the germans had split the atom. to drawts began diagrams of the theoretical possibilities of making an atomic bomb. it was here -- clear from the very beginning that those most concerned with the emigre scientists.

they had come to the united states fleeing occupied europe, and they were terrified. what they were afraid of where that hitler's, given germany's advanced scientific process cap -- prowess, would be able to create an atomic bomb and take over the world. the americans were not listening. among the group of emigre physicists were seven very brilliant hungarians. two of them figured out a strategy to try to do something about it. was leo szilard. were going tohey approach the most famous scientist in america. who would be the most famous scientists in america in 1939? albert einstein. he was vacationing in long island. nobody knew quite where he

lived. they found a kid to tell them where einstein lived. he was working on his unified field theory. he didn't know that germans had split the uranium atom. they explained what happened, einstein understood, and agrees to sign the letter. they wrote a letter to president roosevelt urging the united states to begin bomb research as a deterrent against the germans. the bomb from the very beginning was thought of not as a weapon of war for the united states, but as a deterrent to stop the germans from using their own nuclear bombs. the letter was delivered by a new deal economist who is friends with roosevelt. roosevelt said that he did not want to see the germans blow up the world. he authorized the beginning of a program.esearch

einstein later apologized. he said he had one great regret in his life, and that was writing the letter to president roosevelt beginning the atomic project. slowly. very the early meetings were like honey and syrup. things were moving slowly until the end of 1941 and the beginning of 1942, at which point the night states began taking the project more seriously. withanhattan project began scientists at the university of chicago lab. they developed the person that's the first atomic pile, tested the first chain reaction. i'll be speaking about this topic at the university of

chicago in the beginning of may. .hey organized to beoup was authorized headed by jay. robert oppenheimer. oppenheimer. he is sometimes considered the father of the atomic bomb. a team ofd together physicists and went out to berkeley. a lot of the top physicists of the country would wrestle with the problem. they went out to berkeley to start to think about this. they were in for a bit of a shock. possibleulated that if , an atomic bomb could ignite all of the hydrogen indices or all the nitrogen in the atmosphere, and set the entire world on fire.

they looked in a horror at the blackboard as they did the calculations. oppenheimer said stop immediately. possibility, and compton said stop the project immediately. it is better to live in slavery then to bring down the final curtain on mankind. formulas, and they realized they had made a mistake with the math, and the chances of blowing up the entire world were only three and one one million.ree in they proceeded with the project in 1942. the project continues. 1944, july 16, the

u.s. tests the bomb. test?was the first bomb alamogordo, new mexico. it was called the trinity test. thereientists who were could not believe it. it got so bright that they thought that they had set the atmosphere on fire. [indiscernible] prof. kuznick: you can still go there. it is open one day a year on july 16, if you want to go there. the they talk about it, target but all the frogs out there croaking and copulating the night before at the scientists were measuring everything. all of a sudden, the life there

was wiped out. they were shocked by how powerful it was. they always used the term "dooms day" to describe. they understand the decision -- to understand the decision to drop the bomb, there some things you need to know about. the unitedident of states from 1932 through 1945 -- who was president of the united states from 1932-1945? roosevelt. who was vice president from 1941-1945? truman? prof. kuznick: any other guests -- guesses?

henry wallace. how many of you could say two sentences about henry wallace? that is not accidental. henry wallace has been largely wiped out of the history books, and it is a crime that that has been the case. let me give you a little background on henry wallace. a distinguished farm family from iowa. his father was secretary of our -- agriculture under harding and coolidge. wallace is actually a republican, but when roosevelt began the new deal, he wanted wallace in the cabinet as secretary of agriculture. great secretary of agriculture, a leading progressive. in 1940, roosevelt was going to run for his third term. he knew they were on the verge of a war with fascism and militarism, and he wanted a

leading progressive on the ticket as vice president. wallace was the leading anti-fascist spokesman in the united states. the party bosses did not want wallace on the ticket. actually wrote a letter to the democratic downntion in 1940 turning the presidential nomination. you see how desperate all these people are to get it? roosevelt turned it down. there was already 1 wall st dominated party. if the democrats were not going to stand up for liberal values and social justice, they had no reason for existing. roosevelty, eleanor went to the floor of the convention and told them he was serious, and they gave him wallace on the ticket as vice president. they would exact their revenge in four years. wallace becomes vice president.

was ae president, wallace visionary, as he had always been. 1941, the head of the time life empire wrote an editorial saying the 20 century must be the american century. wallace as vice president refuted that. he said the 20th century must be the century of the common man. he said we need a worldwide people's resolution -- the vein of the american revolution, the french revolution, the latin american revolutions, and the russian revolution, that would and poverty,sm, get rid of spread technology around the planet. he also said that america's fascists are those that think that wall street comes first and the nation comes second. now we call the democrats or republicans. in those days, wallace labeled

them america's fascists. he had a radical agenda. there were a lot of people who hated him. he was up for renomination as vice president, a lot of people were opposed to him. -- southern segregationists wallace was the leading spokesperson for african-american civil rights. -- wallace with a leading spokesperson for women's rights. wallace was the leading opponent of colonialism in the democratic party at that time. interests, the business interests -- he was a leading spokesperson for unions at the time. he had a lot of enemies. coup.was a the leaders of the party ran a campaign to try to get wallace off the ticket in 1944. i won't go into details of how they did it, but it meant that

wallace was the second most popular person in the country behind roosevelt. the david democratic party convention started, july 20, , they released a poll asking potential democratic voters who they wanted as vice president. 2% said they wanted harry truman. 65% said they wanted wallace back as president -- as vice president. , how couldemocracy they get wallace off the ticket if he had 65% public support? the partym was that bosses controlled the convention. the first night of the convention, they had the whole thing cooked against wallace for truman. the first night, wallace made a speech for roosevelt. the place went wild, a spontaneous applause led by

adlai stevenson. that, by senator from florida realize that if he could get to the microphone and get wallace is name and is --tion -- get wallace wallace? name for the nomination. he was within five feet of the podium before sam jackson under the order of the party bosses set a half an -- have a motion to adjourn. maybe 5% said i've. , and then carried meeting was adjourned. had he gotten 54 feet to the microphone, he could have gotten nomination.me and i argue that all of history would have been different.

there would have been no atomic bombs used in world war ii. there would likely have been no cold war. in the same. where we work -- in the same period where we were worried about hiding under our desks and being bombed, it could've been at completely -- it could have been a completely different history. wallace did not get the nomination. on the third valid -- on the third ballot, truman's name was added. that is the first major tournament point and is history. the second major turning point occurs on april 12, 1945. what happens then? why should you all be on morning on april 12 every year? died on april 12, 1945.

he passed away. -- that meant that truman was over at sam rayburn's office at the capital and had just gotten a new supply of .hiskey he gets there and they say you have to get over to the white house before you have a drink or dealer hand. truman knew something was up. he rushes over, he gets to the white house and is greeted on the second floor by eleanor roosevelt. she was a big woman and truman was a little man. him, "harry, the president is dead."

he and had nightmares that the secret service would knock at his door in the middle of the night and tell him he was president. out. most passes finally, he gets his bearings snd asks "i'm so sorry, i there any thing i can do for you?" and she says that it is a city to do some degree. truman had been vice president for 82 days. during that time, he had met with roosevelt twice. they had not discussed anything of substance. he did not know any of the agreements with the russians. he had no idea of our policy. now he is going to be making the most monumental decision in history, and it is unfortunate. levy me give you a background on truman. missouri.n in 1884 in his father was a little guy, but he was a tough guy.

his nickname was "peanuts." he was an unsuccessful farmer who would go around picking fights with guys who were a foot taller than him. he really wanted a macho son. he had a macho son, and that was harry's younger brother vivian. harry had hyper metro be a pit , hee couldn't play sports could not roughhouse with other kids. he was afraid to do rough-and-tumble stuff because he was afraid his eyes would pop out. he becomes the kid in the neighborhood that everyone else takes on. -- picks on. every day, the gain would chase

them home from school. he would run home crying. his mother would meet him and say that he was meant to be a girl anyway. we know this from truman's own memoirs. laterld write letters where he would always talk about these feminine attributes that he had. psychology, of the he would later want to seem like a tough guy. he would later be the guy who could stand up to churchill, and more significantly would be the one who could stand up to stalin and boston russians around, show how tough he was, make it father proud. truman was not very successful. where did he go to college?

he didn't. not because he wasn't smart notgh, but his family did have any money and he did not have any advantages. .e went into business the business is all failed. he was very unsuccessful. of 40, he andht in world war i succeeded. came backed troops, and felt successful -- he commanded troops, quebec and felt successful. the machine that ran kansas city --'son by aust pendergast -- boss pendergast.

he was relatively honest and a corrupt urban machine. in 1933, he says to his daughter tomorrow, i will be 50 years old -- 49 years old. from the gut i have done, they could take away the 40 -- for all the good i have done, they could take away the 40 and just say i was nine years old. he was ready to tell them he was leaving the machine and going back to the farm. pendergast says that they needed him and wanted to run him for the senate. pentagon says they would get them elected and get people to tell him what to do. he runs and he gets elected to the senate in 1934. most of the other senators shun

him. they call him the senator from pendergast. he does not have much of a reputation. in 1940, he is running for reelection. roosevelt is not backing him. pendergast is in federal prison in kansas city. the pendergast machine has fallen apart. he is coming in third in the primary. the heads of with , andachine in st. louis they get him narrowly reelected. as senator, he does a little better during the second term. he has an important investigation of the defense industry and develops a match -- a national reputation. by 1945, he doesn't really have .ny support he had 2% support the polls, but he gets the nomination.

when roosevelt dies, he becomes president of the united states. his first day of office, he goes to the capital to talk to the congressman. the reporters find him outside and asked how he was doing. "boys, if you pray, pray for me now. i don't know if you've ever had a bad hail fall on you, but i feel it i've had the moon and sons -- and son follow me -- sun fall on me." he felt he should not be president. finally, they tell him to act like he is present because the country will lose faith -- act like he is president because the country will lose faith otherwise. he was vice president for 82 days.

during that time, no one had enough respect for him, no one halton and high enough regard to even tell him the united states was building atomic bombs. not find out about the bombs until he is sworn in as president. the next a, jimmy burns comes in to see him. -- the next day, jimmy burns comes in to see him. jimmy burns is a very important figure. senator fromer south carolina, at a former supreme court judge. of truman's few allies well he was in the senate. shuman says that he does not know anything about what is going on, fill me in on everything. what happens is a lot of the who are talking to truman

did not have much influence with roosevelt. these are hard-line anti-communist. the unitedsays that states is working on a weapon great enough to destroy the whole world. from the beginning, truman understands that the atomic bomb is not a bigger bomb, and more powerful bomb, it is a weapon great enough to destroy the whole world. on april 25, he gets a fuller briefing. this is from secretary of war stinson. do you have a secretary of war today? no, because he don't fight wars anymore. what a call today? -- what are they called today? secretary of defense. a euphemism. stinson was secretary of war at the time.

, and growsie grove important also. does that mean anything to you anymore? leslie grove? he was the military head of the manhattan project. he is the brigadier in charge of the manhattan project. about theed truman atomic bomb. they basically tell him that within four months, they would have a weapon that could wipe out an entire city. do we use it and what we with it will determine the future of mankind. truman later records that stinson said to him that even if we had the weapon, maybe we should not use it because it could end life on the planet.

truman later says he agreed with him when he said that. that is the second time truman acknowledges the apocalyptic potential. 25,third time is on july when he gets a full report on the trinity test in alamogordo. diary thates in his we have discovered the most terrible bomb in history. this may be the fire destruction prophecy in the afraid he's batty -- euphrates valley era. not just a bomb, but the end of the world. truman had it is mind as he was contemplating this throughout -- had it in his mind as he was contemplating this throughout. so why do we use the bomb? why do we develop the bomb, and use it?

deterrent, and then we later see it as a way to invasion.y avoid an what was happening then in terms of the war? to getre any other way the japanese to surrender without use of the bomb? i am going to argue there were two other ways. to make sense out of the afterion, the japanese the battle of saipan in july , the japanese recognized they were militarily defeated, that they could not win the war militarily. officers too deploy

think about how to get out of the war. the japanese navy was decimated at that point. the air force was badly damaged, the army tied down. the food supply was beginning to , transportation systems --eady up for in a shambles already were in a shambles. they understood after the battle of saipan that they could not win the war. there is a new government at the point, and the government decides to wait until one more major victory for better surrender terms from the united states. they never get a better victory from that point on. 1945, the former prime minister writes a memo to ineror hero veto -- hirohito

which he says that he regrets to inform you that defeat is inevitable. that we have say to be careful there will be a communist revolution accompanying defeat inside japan. , in the spring of 1945, the japanese are knowledge in their defeat. acknowledging their defeat -- are acknowledging their defeat. why did they just surrender and --p the bloodshed why didn't why didn't they just surrender and stop the bloodshed?

what were the terms that the united states was demanding? what kind of surrender terms were the united states demanding? -- this takeste place at the meeting in famous meeting inween roosevelt, churchill, 1943. they decide on unconditional surrender. what is unconditional surrender whatto the japanese -- does unconditional surrender mean to the japanese? why are they so opposed to unconditional surrender? one of the concerns was the u.s.

, conducting war crimes trials. was elimination of the monarchy. japanese, the emperor was the equivalent of a god. macarthur douglas issued a background report that says the execution of the emperor to them is like the crucifixion of christ to us. all would fight to die like ants. they realized the main stumbling walk to japanese surrender was for unconditional surrender, which meant the emperor being tried as a war criminal. however, roosevelt and churchill had adopted that in january of

1943. there was a lot of pressure on truman to change that demand. in fact, almost every one of his supportedsers changing surrender terms to speed up the end of the war. the washington post has an editorial calling for a change of terms. republican leaders in the senate asked for changing the prior terms. could convince truman not to do that was jimmy burns. he said truman would be politically crucified if he did not leave the japanese people there emperor. burns that i can't point you secretary of state now, but i want you to be my main advisor.

the u.n.s you finish negotiations, i wants to appoint you sector estate. -- secretary of state. they refuse to change the surrender terms. even at the meeting and pot stem -- meeting at potsdam. meets stalintruman and churchill for the first time. secretary ofng, war stinson implores truman to change the surrender terms, and truman says to his frail 76-year-old secretary of war that if he didn't like it, he could pack his bags and go home. to theresisted changes terms, even though all the experts around him urged him to do so.

the second consideration in terms of ways to end the war was the plan for the soviet union to invade. the united states had been the sovieturging union to join the pacific war for years. stalin kept saying they had to when the war in europe first, and then they could worry about japan. 1945, stalin finally agreed. war would enter the pacific three months after the end of the war in europe. ends in earlyope may, so the soviets would invade manchuria on august 9. new -- knewtates what was going on inside japan. how do you know what is going on inside japan?

how do you what the japanese leaders are thinking? we had broken the japanese code and were intercepting their cables. the japanese decide at a meeting ,f the war cabinet on may 16-18 they say the invasion of the -- of japan by the soviet union would deal a death blow to the empire. as the soviet union invades japan, there would be a death blow to the empire. they said they would have to do everything they could to avoid a soviet invasion of japan. they also decided then and there that maybe we can get better surrender terms if we get the soviet union to negotiate on our

behalf. to approach the soviet union to get them better surrender terms. in return, they would give the soviet union certain concessions. that thenot realize americans had made concessions with the soviet union to enter the war. the japanese would return everything russia had lost in the 1904-5 war. it was very important to get all of that back. japanese are looking for help from the soviets to get better surrender terms. -- june 3and third japanese the former prime minister meets with the soviet ambassador in tokyo to

discuss the possibility of ending the war. right backambassador to the soviet union, saying the japanese are desperate to end the war. --rican leaders knew that to american leaders knew that, to thank -- too. unconditional surrender was the only obstacle to peace. the americans knew that. describes the intercepted july 18 cable as the telegram from the japanese emperor asking for peace. truman and everybody around him said the japanese seem to desperate to surrender. if the japanese were desperate to surrender, why would the united states not just let them surrender?

why would the united states go on to use the bomb? it is one thing to understand why hitler's does terrible --ngs, -- why hitler's why hitler does terrible things. that soviet invasion was about to occur. a change in surrender terms would make a huge difference. is what has puzzled historians, how do we make sense of truman's behavior? let me put this in a certain moral context. in 1945, there were two major factors that were influencing the moral context. the first was american attitudes towards the japanese. the americans hated the japanese. no foe and all of

american history has been so detested as were the japanese. why did the americans hate the japanese so much? the british embassy reporting back to london said that there is a universal extermination asked sentiment in the united states. statements at the and the images that we use of the images -- of the japanese simian images. japanese are said ignorant and unreasoning. our leading wartime correspondent switched from europe to the pacific in early 1945. --said in europe, our effort our enemy were at least treated

as human beings. here i get the sense that everybody think of the japanese as subhuman. where did that come from? some of it is old-fashioned racism. not all of it. there are stories constantly about japanese atrocities. what they subjected the american soldiers and the filipinos to do .as astounding in the cruelty they tied them to trees for bayonet practice, they castrated them, they buried them alive, they cut off their heads. isisorrors you hear of

sounds tame by comparison to the japanese in world war ii. of racial animus towards the japanese, but some of it was not just racism. it was also based on stories of japanese atrocities. about world war ii and the treatment of the japanese? what else to be due to the japanese? between 100 10,000-120,000 japanese americans into internment -- 119 0,000-120,000 japanese americans into internment camps. we didn't put germans or italians into caps. .- into camps at least we know our leaders .eren't racist

would we expect harry truman to racist? he was deeply racist. when his journal came out in when his journal came out, i wrote an op-ed about the racial terms he used. inman wrote a letter earlier to beth and hees says i think what man is as good as another, so long as he is honest and decent, and not a nigger or chinaman. it is race prejudice i guess, but i'm stronger of the opinion that negroes are to be in

africa, yellow man in asia, and white man in europe and add -- and america. toalways referred african-americans in private conversation as "niggers." he never used any other word. he was full of prejudices. the second thing we have to factor in is the fact that the united states bombing policies in asia are what we called .trategic bombings ted cruz got a little bit of slack when he called for carpet bombing of civilians in syria. that is because it is a war crime, and should be. the united states policy in asia was what we call strategic bombing. , urbanant indiscriminate bombing. we took great care of

until late in the war to avoid bombing civilians. beginningrom the very , we went right after civilian populations and tried to burn down what we could of japan's paper cities. the former head of u.s. foreign policy in japan refused to start bombing civilians, and was ousted and replaced by general curtis lemay. he had no compunctions whatsoever about bombing civilians. his masterpiece occurred the night of march 9-10 with the bombing of tokyo. was the first massive bombing of an urban population on that scale. flesh was so burnt overpowering that the pilots

were throwing up in their planes. people burst spontaneously into flame. the canals were boiling. the cities were on fire. that was the beginning. the united states went on to firebomb 100 japanese cities. 99.5% of theeached llama -- of one japanese city. of 1945, we had run out of important military and startedomb, bombing secondary cities of almost no military significance whatsoever. it was astounding. it got so bad that, according to brigadier general, the u.s. bombing is one of the most ruthless and barbaric killings

of noncombatants in all of history. organized atates group of strategic bombing survey to assess the effects of the bombing, and they said stop bombing civilians, go after transportation, go after key industries. that is what is going to speed up the end of the war. the united states instead continued its bombing policy. it was pretty horrific. a famous physicist was part of the tiger force of 300 bombers that was involved in the bombing of japan. he said he found this --tinually slaughter continuous slaughter of the japanese even more sickening than the slaughter of well

defended germans. i did not quit. i that time, i had been in war so long that i could not remember peace. no poet has written about the emptiness of the soul that would allow me to go on killing without hatred or remorse. so we kept on this bombing the group that was assigned to decide how to use the bonds was called the interim committee. jimmy burns was the main influence. robert oppenheimer reached the 1945.tee on may 31, oppenheimer warmed them --

warned them. he set the bombs they are developing now are like firecrackers. he said in three years we are upely to have homes -- bombs to seven times as powerful as that we will use in this war. seven times as powerful as what was used in hiroshima. so he warned them. they knew that your in the beginning they knew was possible. they proceeded to go on and to develop and use the bomb. some people were used to it. the scientists at chicago set up a series of committees. the main committee was headed by a nobel laureate, james frank. it was the frank committee. he said on the social and political implications of bombs.

even if we have a bomb, we should not use it. he said it is likely to trigger an uncontrollable arms race between the united states and soviet union that will lead to total mutual annihilation. there were others, also, who shared that view. if we had more time, i would go into a lot of this. let me just make it brief. andan was urged by others so were those around him to consider other alternatives. but i mentioned earlier, i want to make sure you got it, that the admirals and generals around truman urged him -- they said that the atomic bombs were militarily unnecessary and reprehensible. william leahy was among those. he is another name was then lost history.

he chaired the meetings of the joints chief of staff and was truman's personal chief of staff . his words are unforgettable. he described the bomb along with chemical warfare as a violation of every christian ethic i have ever heard of and every law of war. already the japanese are defeated and ready to surrender, the use of this weapon was of no material assistance in our war against hand. being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard, to barbarians of the dark ages. wars cannot be won by string women and children. -- by destroying women and children. he later said the truman told it would only be used to hit

military objectives, but they women and hit children, as well, which is what they wanted all the time. it was not only admiral leahy. another of those admirals was dwight eisenhower, whom you have heard of. extreme commander in europe and north africa. he says about his meeting with stimson, if they told me they were going to -- they told me they were going to drop it on the japanese but i did not say anything because my war was over in europe, but i got depressed thinking about it. i told him i was against it on two counts. first, the japanese were ready to surrender.

second, i hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon. that was eisenhower. douglas mcarthur, you have also heard of. supreme commander and southwest command of your he advocated the use of nuclear weapons in korea, that the use of the atomic bomb against the japanese was an outrage. to formerrote president hoover about a memo he had written in may of 1945 urging them to find some other way to end the war inch changing the surrender terms. said,e road to hoover and it was a wife and statesmanlike documents. had it been put into effect, it would have eliminated the slaughter. the japanese would have accepted it and gladly. macarthur says he is sure the japanese would have accepted it and maybe surrendered as early

as may, saving american lives and japanese lives and not having to use the bomb. again, the united states did not take that option. -- arnoldral armor said it was unnecessary because the japanese were already collapsing. -- bonnie sellers -- the commander-in-chief of the u.s. navy said he was opposed to the use of the bomb. nimitz, number two in the navy, set at the washington monument that the japanese had in fact sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of hiroshima and before the russian entry into the world. henry burns later acknowledged in charge of man

the intelligence summary said, we brought them down with hunger alone. we did not need to do it and knew we did not need to do it, and they knew we did not need to do it. we use them as an experiment for the atomic bomb. the war department issued a special department -- report thing there was little discussion about using the bomb. the discussion was really all about the soviet entry into the war, which changed the whole balance. the thinking on the part of japanese leaders, they accepted that the united states could wipe out cities. united states at already wiped out more than 100 cities. the japanese leaders, it did not make any difference whether it was one claim -- plain and one of bomb or 10,000 planes and 10,000 bombs. they expected the u.s. could

wipe out their cities and with doing so. what changed the equation, which was predicted by intelligence, a look at the intelligence report and one on july 6, they say over and over again, the soviet entry into the war will convince all japanese that further resistance is utile -- futile. the shocking thing is that truman knew that, too. he said, i went to pop them to , andstalin, and they met stalin in short truman that the soviets were coming to the war. -- wrote in his journal that stalin would be in the japanese war by august 15. ambiguous.

truman writes home to his wife the next night saying that the russians will come in, and in the war a year soonertruman wri. think of all the boys who will not be killed. , so whyt an evil man does he use the bomb? ,hat gets into the geopolitics and gets into something even more disturbing, that the united states use the bomb knowingly, understanding that it was not warr -- necessary to in the , but because the united states fell as the frank committee -- it was in large part used against the soviet union. even of the soviet union was our ally.

-- even though the soviet union was our ally. a novell winning physicist said that the atomic bombing was not the last act of world war ii, it was the first act of of the cold war against the soviet union. have that work -- how does that work? there, as truman gets in tensions immediately heat up. was convinced the united states and soviets would remain friends. truman, from his first day in office adopted a hostile stance with the soviet union. within 10 days, he is reversed the friendship and alliance. it goes through certain fits and starts, ups and downs, but he

treated them not as our ally that an enemy. pottstown,ing at trinkets word of how -- truman , andword of how powerful he was a changed man. stalin and the russians how to get on and off. his psychology changes as soon as he found out that the bomb was so powerful and would work. he becomes a tough guy. he is no longer the little guy getting bullied and chased every day. he will stand up to stalin and the russians. he changed his attitude. threat toe bomb as a the soviet union, it begins an invisible way starting then and

continuing in the. afterward -- in the period afterward. they dropped the bomb on nagasaki on august 9. no one in the war cabinet in japan changes their opinion based on that. what changes their thinking is the soviet invasion. it undermines the japanese undermines the japanese strategy. to welcome an american invasion and then inflict heavy casualties on the americans to get better surrender terms that way. once the soviets invade, the whole strategy for the japanese is bankrupt. bankrupt. strategy is sovietst 9 and 10th, the invasion occurs at midnight on august 8, and immediately the

japanese leaders said what we feared has happened and we have to sue for peace. said the japanese are ready, and the foundation of japan will be destroyed. we must sue for peace now while we can deal with americans and set of the soviets. the japanese surrender on august 14 and the workers on a little longer with the soviets and finally the war comes to an end. if i had more time, i would give , but as theail deputy chief of staff for japan says, the bombs we knew were important, but the soviet thinkingchanged our

and forced us to surrender. how did the soviet leaders in the kremlin interpret the atomic bomb? just as a scientist predicted they would. the interpreted it as if it were dropped on the soviet union. , they said on down the united states is going to use this to spread imperialism around the world, to spread hegemony and to roll back the soviet union wherever it could. andas interpreted that way, their aerobic effort -- here growing effort had been in vain. there were some fits and starts and reversals, to the point we are at now with a nuclear summit. nine countries have the bomb.

according to the atomic energy agency, at least for more countries now have the capability of developing nuclear weapons. that mythe world generation the before my generation, has bequeathed to you. this nuclearich threat, the threat of annihilation is still real. that if even 100 nuclear weapons were used in a small scare -- scale nuclear war, it would lead to 2 million deaths, a decade of disease, famine, starvation, and that is just 100 being use. there almost 16,000 still left on the planet. when you're thinking about global warming and climate change, also think about the threat of nuclear warfare.

thesereat of all of governments having these weapons and maintaining hostile policies. thank you. [applause] >> joint is every saturday evening at 8 p.m. and midnight eastern as we join students in classrooms to hear lectures ranging from the american revolution to 9/11. lectures and history are also available as podcasts. visit our website or download them from itunes. up next, a ceremony to celebrate the publication of the seventh and final volume of the george c marshall papers. marshall was army chief of staff in world war ii, was appointed secretary of state under president truman and