doing interviews about the nuclear security summit taking

place in washington, d.c. right now. state inot 50 heads of washington trying to deal with the question of the threat of nuclear terrorism and how to secure all the highly enriched uranium and plutonium that stretched widely around the reactors,lear hospitals, universities, concernedenters, about the threat of materials and the possibility of dirty bombs and terrorists getting a hold of it. that is a small part of nuclear material out there because most of the nuclear material is in the weapons program and this gathering will not deal with weapons issues. you might recall in spring of 2009, obama made a very important each in prague in

which he called for nuclear abolition. could say it was the high point of the obama presidency and it is what helped them get the nobel peace prize. in 2009, he said the united states has got to lead the effort. the united states is the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons out of warfare against another country. on the one hand, there is a certain hypocrisy and what is going on, but it begins really back in 1945. to the pointssed where now, how many countries have nuclear weapons? how many now? nine, exactly. nine countries. how many nuclear weapons are in the world today?

give or take a few hundred? how many? you know a lot about climate andge and global warming what seems to be a threat to our the threat to our existence is still the threat of nuclear annihilation. how many are in the world today? 16,000. under how many nuclear weapons at the peak? does anybody know? approximately 70,000 nuclear weapons in the world in the 1970's. there'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? that is with the cold war was about in large part. -- what the cold war was about in large part. the united states in the 1950's actually held congressional hearings on project sundial to discuss the possibilities of building one bomb that would be 700,000 times as big as the bomb that wiped out hiroshima. one bomb alone, 100 megatons. 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. he has not asked to sharply

reduce the number of bombs. in fact, 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 donald trump is for saying that south korea and japan should develop their own nuclear bombs, everybody says that is insane. 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 others like iran or north korea 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 united states 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 blockade, 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. the secretary of war said that he 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. the justification was we were 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.

it was a tragedy for those who were killed, for those who survived 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 unnecessarily 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 extinction, which i say truman knowingly did at a time when there was no military justification, is even worse. what's that represents is the 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. the second myth of world war ii 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 -- myth is that the atomic bombs ended the war, and 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 1938, when two german scientists -- let me backtrack a little. to defy the myth that the bombs and the war, first of all six 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. that is number one. 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. -- 135,000 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 -- physicists -- 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. physicists began to draw 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. most prominent was leo szilard. they decided they were going to 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

nuclear research program. 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. it began very slowly. 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. the manhattan project began with 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. they organized. the group was authorized to be headed by jay. robert oppenheimer.

-- j. robert oppenheimer. he is sometimes considered the father of the atomic bomb. he gathered together a team of 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. they calculated that if possible , 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. he laid out the possibility, and compton said stop the project immediately. it is better to live in slavery then to bring down the final curtain on mankind. they redid the 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 million -- three in one million. they proceeded with the project in 1942. the project continues. in july of 1944, july 16, the u.s. tests the bomb. where was the first bomb test? alamogordo, new mexico. it was called the trinity test. the scientists who were there 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. when they talk about it, the

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.

he was president of the united states from 1932 through 1945 -- who was president of the united states from 1932-1945? franklin d 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. he came from 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. he was a 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. roosevelt actually wrote a letter to the democratic convention in 1940 turning down 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. fortunately, eleanor roosevelt 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. as vice president, wallace was a visionary, as he had always been. in 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 -- revolution in the vein of the american revolution, the french revolution, the latin american revolutions, and the russian revolution, that would and imperialism, get rid of poverty, 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. by 1944, when he was up for renomination as vice president, a lot of people were opposed to him. the southern segregationists -- wallace was the leading

spokesperson for african-american civil rights. the misogynists -- wallace with a leading spokesperson for women's rights. wallace was the leading opponent of colonialism in the democratic party at that time. the wall street interests, the business interests -- he was a leading spokesperson for unions at the time. he had a lot of enemies. there was a coup. 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, 1944, 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. given our democracy, how could they get wallace off the ticket if he had 65% public support? the problem was that the party 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. in the midst of that, by senator

from florida realize that if he could get to the microphone and get wallace is name and nomination -- get wallace is -- wallace? -- wallace's 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. the motion carried, and the meeting was adjourned. had he gotten 54 feet to the microphone, he could have gotten wallace's name and nomination. 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? fdr died on april 12, 1945. he passed away. roosevelt -- that meant that truman was over at sam rayburn's office at the capital and had just gotten a new supply of whiskey. 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. eleanor says to 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. he'll most passes out. finally, he gets his bearings and asks "i'm so sorry, is 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. he was born in 1884 in missouri. 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 -- he couldn't play sports, he 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. -- 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. he would write letters later where he would always talk about these feminine attributes that he had. that is part of the psychology, 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 enough, but his family did not have any money and he did not have any advantages. he went into business. the business is all failed. he was very unsuccessful. until about the age of 40, he fought in world war i and succeeded. he committed troops, came back

and felt successful -- he commanded troops, quebec and felt successful. the machine that ran kansas city was won by aust pendergast --'s -- 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. he cut a deal with the heads of the machine in st. louis, and 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 any 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. he says, "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. he does 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. he was a former senator from south carolina, at a former supreme court judge. he was one 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 people who are talking to truman did not have much influence with roosevelt. these are hard-line anti-communist.

burns also says that the united 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. he and leslie grove, and grows 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. they briefed truman about the atomic bomb. they basically tell him that

within four months, they would have a weapon that could wipe out an entire city. how we use it and what we do 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. the third time is on july 25, when he gets a full report on the trinity test in alamogordo. truman writes in his diary that 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? we see it as a deterrent, and then we later see it as a way to

potentially avoid an invasion. what was happening then in terms of the war? was there any other way to get 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 situation, the japanese after the battle of saipan in july 1944, the japanese recognized they were militarily defeated, that they could not win the war militarily. they begin to deploy officers to 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

shrink, transportation systems already 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 war -- at that 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. in february 1945, the former prime minister writes a memo to emperor hero veto -- hirohito in which he says that he regrets to inform you that defeat is inevitable. he goes on to say that we have to be careful there will be a

communist revolution accompanying defeat inside japan. increasingly, in the spring of 1945, the japanese are knowledge in their defeat. -- our acknowledging their defeat -- are acknowledging their defeat. why did they just surrender and stop 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 takes plate -- this takes place at the meeting in casablanca, a famous meeting between roosevelt, churchill, in 1943.

they decide on unconditional surrender. what is unconditional surrender mean to the japanese -- what does unconditional surrender mean to the japanese? why are they so opposed to unconditional surrender? one of the concerns was the u.s. disarming them, conducting war crimes trials. the biggest one was elimination of the monarchy. to the japanese, the emperor was the equivalent of a god. as general douglas macarthur 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 the demand 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 close advisers supported

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. feeling one who 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. truman system burns that i can't

point you secretary of state now, but i want you to be my main advisor. as soon as you finish the u.n. 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. that is when truman meets stalin and churchill for the first time. at that meeting, secretary of 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. truman resisted changes to the 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 earning -- urging the soviet 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. at yalta in 1945, stalin finally agreed. they would enter the pacific war three months after the end of the war in europe.

the war in europe ends in early may, so the soviets would invade manchuria on august 9. the united states new -- knew 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 of 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.

they decide to approach the soviet union to get them better surrender terms. in return, they would give the soviet union certain concessions. they did not realize that the 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. the japanese are looking for help from the soviets to get better surrender terms. on june 2 and third -- june 3 and four, the former japanese prime minister meets with the soviet ambassador in tokyo to discuss the possibility of ending the war.

the soviet ambassador right back to the soviet union, saying the japanese are desperate to end the war. american leaders knew that to -- american leaders knew that, to thank -- too. unconditional surrender was the only obstacle to peace. the americans knew that. truman 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 things, -- 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. that 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. in fact, 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. they want to exterminate the vermin. if you look at the statements and the images that we use of the images -- of the japanese were simeon -- simian images. apes, monkeys, vermin. time magazine said japanese are ignorant and unreasoning. our leading wartime correspondent switched from europe to the pacific in early 1945.

he 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. in fact, there are stories constantly about japanese atrocities. what they subjected the american soldiers and the filipinos to do was astounding in the cruelty. they tied them to trees for bayonet practice, they castrated them, they buried them alive, they cut off their heads. the horrors you hear of isis sounds tame by comparison to the japanese in world war ii. there was a lot of racial animus

towards the japanese, but some of it was not just racism. it was also based on stories of japanese atrocities. what else doing about world war ii and the treatment of the japanese? what else to be due to the japanese? we put 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 weren't racist. would we expect harry truman to be racist? he was deeply racist. when his journal came out in 1947, i've -- when his journal came out, i wrote an op-ed about the racial terms he used. truman wrote a letter earlier in which he proposes to beth and he 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. he always referred to 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 strategic 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. that meant indiscriminate, urban bombing. in europe, we took great care of until late in the war to avoid bombing civilians. in japan from the very beginning , 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. it was the first massive bombing of an urban population on that scale. the stench of burnt flesh was so 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. distraction reached 99.5% of the llama -- of one japanese city. by the summer of 1945, we had run out of important military targets to bomb, and started 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. the united states organized a 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 continually 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. but shakespeare understood it. so we kept on this bombing policy through the end of the war. the group that was assigned to decide how to use the bombs was called the interim committee. jimmy burns was the main influence. robert oppenheimer reached the committee on may 31, 1945. oppenheimer warned them.

he said the bombs they are developing now are like firecrackers. he said in three years we are likely to have bombs up to seven times as powerful as that we will use in this war. 7000 times as powerful as what was used in hiroshima. so he warned them. they knew that your in the beginning they knew was possible. yet we proceeded to go on and to develop and use the bomb. some people were used to it. -- some people were opposed 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. truman was urged by others and 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. he said, the japanese already are defeated and ready to surrender, the use of this barbarous weapon was of no material assistance in our war against hand. -- against japan. being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard, to barbarians of the dark ages. wars cannot be won by destroying women and children. he later said the truman told him it would only be used to hit military objectives, but they

used it to hit women and 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. supreme commander in europe and north africa. he says about his meeting with stimson, 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. he later wrote to former 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. he wrote to hoover and said, 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. also, general arnold said it was unnecessary because the japanese were already collapsing. the commander-in-chief of the u.s. navy said he was opposed to the use of the bomb. admiral chester 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. jimmy burns later acknowledged this that the man in charge of

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 report that 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. to the japanese leaders, it did not make any difference whether it was one plane 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 on april 11, 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 futile. the shocking thing is that you but they never entered the war truman knew that, too. he said, i went to pop them to potsdam to meet stalin, and they met, and stalin in short truman that the soviets were coming to the war. truman wrote in his journal that stalin would be in the japanese war by august 15. and he was in not ambiguous.

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

physicist said that the atomic bombing was not the last act of world war ii, it was the first act of the cold war against the soviet union. how does that work? as soon as truman gets in there, tensions immediately heat up. roosevelt was convinced the united states and soviets would remain friends. the truman, from his first day was stalin you if you don't know jack truman, from his first day in office adopted a hostile stance with the soviet union. within 10 days, he is reversed know that 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. in the meeting at pottsdam, truman gets word of how powerful, and he was a changed man. he told 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. he used the bomb as a threat to the soviet union, it begins an invisible way starting then and

continuing 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 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. diplomatic strategy is bankrupt. on august 9 and 10th, the soviet 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. he 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 you more detail, but as the deputy chief of staff for japan says, the bombs we knew were important, but the soviet invasion changed our thinking

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. from stalin on down, they said 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. it was interpreted that way, and their heroic 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 is the world that my generation, the generation before my generation, has bequeathed to you. a world in which this nuclear threat, the threat of annihilation is still real. the estimate is that if even 100 nuclear weapons were used in a small-scale nuclear war, it would lead to 2 million deaths, a decade of disease, famine, starvation, and that is just 100 being used. there are 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.

the threat of all of these governments having these weapons and maintaining hostile policies. thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] you are watching american history tv. all weekend, every weekend on c-span 3.>> ladies and to join the conversation like us on facebook. the ceremony to celebrate the publishing of the george marshall papers. was appointed secretary of state under president truman and became secretary of defense during the korean war. marshallf the george c foundation discusses l