WI: No Nazi propaganda about A-bombs

[jerry kraus]

It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base, with the A-bomb. And, in any case, they probably had neither the resources nor the industrial capacity to build one. So, why the worry, at the time?

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do. Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

Indeed, our great friend and favorite spy, Jewish baseball player Mo Berg, was quite specifically hired by the OSS to deal with this problem. After all, how many incredibly fit, incredibly brilliant, incredibly socially skilled Princeton educated linguists could American Intelligence get hold of on short notice? Mo Berg was only mediocre in the big leagues, but, because of his unique intelligence, he was a great favorite among the sports writers and the fans. So, Mo Berg was given some training in Physics, and sent to Europe to soft sell the European scientists on cooperating with the U.S. Or, in the case of Nazi atomic scientist Werner Heisenberg, to kill/abuct and/or persuade him to relocate in the U.S. He really was given the authority, on his own, to decide if he should kill Heisenberg at a conference in Switzerland, and had both a pistol and a cyanide capsule at hand for the purpose. Actually he knew neither enough German nor enough Physics to understand a word of Heisenberg's talk, but, he could see from the response of the audience that it had nothing to do with the A-bomb. So, instead of killing Heisenberg, he had his Swiss physicist contacts invite him to dinner, where Mo Berg's German was simply too poor for him to persuade the man to do anything other than avoid him. Mo Berg's great spying achievement was simply to confirm that the Nazis never had a serious A-bomb program at all, and that it was all just propaganda. And, he had some trouble persuading them of that!

But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested so much time and money in the program? They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would put them at risk. I would suggest that Nazi Germany is the true father of the A-bomb. No Josef Goebbels, we still would be a nuclear free world!

[Chrysi Cat]

Post by jerry kraus
It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base, with the A-bomb. And, in any case, they probably had neither the resources nor the industrial capacity to build one. So, why the worry, at the time?
Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do. Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.
Indeed, our great friend and favorite spy, Jewish baseball player Mo Berg, was quite specifically hired by the OSS to deal with this problem. After all, how many incredibly fit, incredibly brilliant, incredibly socially skilled Princeton educated linguists could American Intelligence get hold of on short notice? Mo Berg was only mediocre in the big leagues, but, because of his unique intelligence, he was a great favorite among the sports writers and the fans. So, Mo Berg was given some training in Physics, and sent to Europe to soft sell the European scientists on cooperating with the U.S. Or, in the case of Nazi atomic scientist Werner Heisenberg, to kill/abuct and/or persuade him to relocate in the U.S. He really was given the authority, on his own, to decide if he should kill Heisenberg at a conference in Switzerland, and had both a pistol and a cyanide capsule at hand for the purpose. Actually he knew neither enough German nor enough Physics to understand a word of Heisenberg's talk, but, he could see from the response of the audience that it had nothing to do with the A-bomb. So, instead of killing Heisenberg, he had his Swiss physicist contacts invite him to dinner, where Mo Berg's German was simply too poor for him to persuade the man to do anything other than avoid him. Mo Berg's great spying achievement was simply to confirm that the Nazis never had a serious A-bomb program at all, and that it was all just propaganda. And, he had some trouble persuading them of that!
But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested so much time and money in the program? They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would put them at risk. I would suggest that Nazi Germany is the true father of the A-bomb. No Josef Goebbels, we still would be a nuclear free world!

I 'love' how you think this is a good thing, Jerry. *Sure*, a world
where *Operation Downfall* had actually gone through and nearly
depopulated the Home Islands (along with killing more Americans than all
wars the US had fought in, combined, to that point--is it wrong to hope
one would have been your father, while my grandfathers would have still
been around because one was 14 and the other was 4-F?) would be superior
to an atomic one.

I'd say pull the other one, but nothing has bells on it today.

--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat,

[jerry kraus]

Post by Chrysi Cat

Post by jerry kraus
It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base, with the A-bomb. And, in any case, they probably had neither the resources nor the industrial capacity to build one. So, why the worry, at the time?
Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do. Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.
Indeed, our great friend and favorite spy, Jewish baseball player Mo Berg, was quite specifically hired by the OSS to deal with this problem. After all, how many incredibly fit, incredibly brilliant, incredibly socially skilled Princeton educated linguists could American Intelligence get hold of on short notice? Mo Berg was only mediocre in the big leagues, but, because of his unique intelligence, he was a great favorite among the sports writers and the fans. So, Mo Berg was given some training in Physics, and sent to Europe to soft sell the European scientists on cooperating with the U.S. Or, in the case of Nazi atomic scientist Werner Heisenberg, to kill/abuct and/or persuade him to relocate in the U.S. He really was given the authority, on his own, to decide if he should kill Heisenberg at a conference in Switzerland, and had both a pistol and a cyanide capsule at hand for the purpose. Actually he knew neither enough German nor enough Physics to understand a word of Heisenberg's talk, but, he could see from the response of the audience that it had nothing to do with the A-bomb. So, instead of killing Heisenberg, he had his Swiss physicist contacts invite him to dinner, where Mo Berg's German was simply too poor for him to persuade the man to do anything other than avoid him. Mo Berg's great spying achievement was simply to confirm that the Nazis never had a serious A-bomb program at all, and that it was all just propaganda. And, he had some trouble persuading them of that!
But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested so much time and money in the program? They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would put them at risk. I would suggest that Nazi Germany is the true father of the A-bomb. No Josef Goebbels, we still would be a nuclear free world!

I 'love' how you think this is a good thing, Jerry. *Sure*, a world
where *Operation Downfall* had actually gone through and nearly
depopulated the Home Islands (along with killing more Americans than all
wars the US had fought in, combined, to that point--is it wrong to hope
one would have been your father, while my grandfathers would have still
been around because one was 14 and the other was 4-F?) would be superior
to an atomic one.
I'd say pull the other one, but nothing has bells on it today.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!

Oh, I'm not saying it's good, bad or indifferent, Chris. I just think it's rather likely. After all, without the Nazi propaganda, I rather doubt anyone in the U.S. would even have thought it was possible! The Nazis were very, very good at propaganda, if nothing else.

[Don P]

Post by jerry kraus
It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base

. . . After all, without the Nazi propaganda, I rather doubt anyone in the U.S. would even have thought it was possible! The Nazis were very, very good at propaganda, if nothing else.

The OP is obviously unaware that the physics convention where nuclear
fission was first public discussed (1939), and the assembled physicists
agreed (mostly) to publish no more results that might contribute to
wider knowledge of fission power, took place in Washington DC. There
was time for both enterprising newspapermen to buttonhole scientists,
and for politicians interested in science or strategy (admittedly few)
to catch up with timely news. Remember too that Szilard was the first
man to file a (secret) patent on nuclear explosives: he had traveled
from Britain to attend the congress (and look for a job in the USA.)
There was in both geographic Washington and among the world community of
physicists more than a critical mass who feared the predictable
consequences.

[jerry kraus]

Post by Don P

Post by jerry kraus
It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base

. . . After all, without the Nazi propaganda, I rather doubt anyone in the U.S. would even have thought it was possible! The Nazis were very, very good at propaganda, if nothing else.

The OP is obviously unaware that the physics convention where nuclear
fission was first public discussed (1939), and the assembled physicists
agreed (mostly) to publish no more results that might contribute to
wider knowledge of fission power, took place in Washington DC. There
was time for both enterprising newspapermen to buttonhole scientists,
and for politicians interested in science or strategy (admittedly few)
to catch up with timely news. Remember too that Szilard was the first
man to file a (secret) patent on nuclear explosives: he had traveled
from Britain to attend the congress (and look for a job in the USA.)

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

Post by Don P
There was in both geographic Washington and among the world community of
physicists more than a critical mass who feared the predictable
consequences.

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

Why, Don? There was nothing to be afraid of, the Germans didn't have the resources or industrial base to build the bomb. And the British openly acknowledged that they couldn't do it, and that it was up to the Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee

So, ultimately, we're left with that hitherto unmentioned, undiscussed issue -- German threats of atomic annihilation, in German propaganda. This is discussed in "The Catcher was a Spy -- The mysterious life of Mo Berg" by Nicholas Davidoff, Vintage, 1994. The Germans were terrorizing the people of Europe with threats of atomic annihilation while the American armies were advancing through Europe after D-day. That's why Mo Berg had so much trouble convincing his OSS superiors that it was all total nonsense.

Post by Don P
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Don P]

Post by jerry kraus

It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? . . .

Why, Don? There was nothing to be afraid of, the Germans didn't have the resources or industrial base to build the bomb. And the British openly acknowledged that they couldn't do it, and that it was up to the Americans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee
So, ultimately, we're left with that hitherto unmentioned, undiscussed issue -- German threats of atomic annihilation, in German propaganda. This is discussed in "The Catcher was a Spy -- The mysterious life of Mo Berg" by Nicholas Davidoff, Vintage, 1994.

Simple chronology dissolves these supposed mysteries.
1938-9: The concepts of fission and chain reaction appeared -- so all
knowledgeable atomic physicists said, "Aha -- now if only . . ."
1940: Peierls and Frisch calculated the (unexpectedly small) minimum
size of an A-bomb. This gave the researchers a target, viz. initiated
research (1) in the UK on how to separate fissile uranium
(2) in the USA on how to separate fissile uranium
(3) in the USA on building a solid (graphite) reactor (when the
British had attempted and given up on graphite reactors, and
both British and Germans contemplated a a heavy water reactor,
but never actually started.)
1942: Only by 1942 could the British calculate uranium separation was
unfeasibly expensive. The Germans knew it would be expensive but at this
date V1 and V2 missiles got priority denied to Heisenberg's project.

German propaganda periodically threatened annihilation by "wonder
weapons" or "vengeance weapons," neither ever defined (although Allied
intelligence identified V1 and V2 by early 1944 or late 1943.)

Of course the British never "openly acknowledged that they couldn't do
it:" both Tube Alloys and the Manhattan were ultra-secret.

Moe Berg did not start looking into nuclear energy until late 1943 or
early 1944, when the essential commitments (Oak Ridge, Hanford, Los
Alamos) had already been made (and his target population, German
scientists, did not yet know the content of the 1940 MAUD calculation,
cf. bugged comment at Farm Hall in August 1945.)

[jerry kraus]

Post by Don P

Post by jerry kraus

It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? . . .

Why, Don? There was nothing to be afraid of, the Germans didn't have the resources or industrial base to build the bomb. And the British openly acknowledged that they couldn't do it, and that it was up to the Americans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee
So, ultimately, we're left with that hitherto unmentioned, undiscussed issue -- German threats of atomic annihilation, in German propaganda. This is discussed in "The Catcher was a Spy -- The mysterious life of Mo Berg" by Nicholas Davidoff, Vintage, 1994.

Simple chronology dissolves these supposed mysteries.
1938-9: The concepts of fission and chain reaction appeared -- so all
knowledgeable atomic physicists said, "Aha -- now if only . . ."
1940: Peierls and Frisch calculated the (unexpectedly small) minimum
size of an A-bomb. This gave the researchers a target, viz. initiated
research (1) in the UK on how to separate fissile uranium
(2) in the USA on how to separate fissile uranium
(3) in the USA on building a solid (graphite) reactor (when the
British had attempted and given up on graphite reactors, and
both British and Germans contemplated a a heavy water reactor,
but never actually started.)
1942: Only by 1942 could the British calculate uranium separation was
unfeasibly expensive. The Germans knew it would be expensive but at this
date V1 and V2 missiles got priority denied to Heisenberg's project.

Heisenberg continually said he was "working" on the A-bomb in public, although he wasn't. By 1943 Josef Goebbels was regularly bragging about the German "uranium torpedo" on Nazi radio, that could annihilate half the planet. It was far from clear to the American scientists that the A-bomb was even possible at this stage, and it was far from completion. As you say, by 1942 the British were quite clear that the Nazis had no possibility of building an atomic weapon within the context of the second world war, and the American scientists knew it. Hence, there was nothing to keep the American pacifist physicists on the project, other than what they were hearing from the Germans, that Hitler was about to get the A-bomb. Otherwise, like Einstein says, they would "have done nothing".

The really interesting question, Don, is why the Germans were bragging about a weapon they knew they couldn't produce. Were they actively goading the Americans on, hoping that an American A-bomb might keep the Soviets in line?
The Nazis knew they couldn't do it, but they actually wanted the Americans to develop the A-bomb, because they feared Russian communism?

Post by Don P
German propaganda periodically threatened annihilation by "wonder
weapons" or "vengeance weapons," neither ever defined (although Allied
intelligence identified V1 and V2 by early 1944 or late 1943.)
Of course the British never "openly acknowledged that they couldn't do
it:" both Tube Alloys and the Manhattan were ultra-secret.
Moe Berg did not start looking into nuclear energy until late 1943 or
early 1944, when the essential commitments (Oak Ridge, Hanford, Los
Alamos) had already been made (and his target population, German
scientists, did not yet know the content of the 1940 MAUD calculation,
cf. bugged comment at Farm Hall in August 1945.)

Don, there was really no reason for Mo Berg to have been doing anything, at all. Other than Heisenberg's public pronouncements, and the Nazi propaganda, there wasn't the slightest evidence that the Nazis had any atomic bomb project, at all. Indeed, as you note, by 1942 the British made it quite clear to the Americans that they couldn't possibly do it in the foreseeable future.

Post by Don P
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[The Horny Goat]

Post by Chrysi Cat
I 'love' how you think this is a good thing, Jerry. *Sure*, a world
where *Operation Downfall* had actually gone through and nearly
depopulated the Home Islands (along with killing more Americans than all
wars the US had fought in, combined, to that point--is it wrong to hope
one would have been your father, while my grandfathers would have still
been around because one was 14 and the other was 4-F?) would be superior
to an atomic one.
I'd say pull the other one, but nothing has bells on it today.

I agree - even though my father was 12 when the war ended, 1
grandfather was 4-F and the other volunteered for service (his father
had been a Royal Navy officer in WW1) but was rejected as he was minus
3 fingers due to a fishing accident about 8 years before.

Even if the US had suffered no losses in Downfall at all (!) the 2018
Japanese population would be 5-7 milliion below OTL's as there was a
catastrophic failure of the Japanese rice crop in 1945 and while in
OTL immediate American food aid after the surrender saved the day that
aid certainly would not have been forthcoming with ongoing
hostilities.

The studies I've read about Kyushu (Operation Olympic) estimate
Japanese casualties at about triple US casualties with civilian
casualties above 1 million - and that was before landings on Honshu
(the main Japanese island).

Apparently the US Government was still debating whether or not to use
poison gas on Honshu but had not decided by the surrender. Obviously
that would have massively increased civilian deaths.

I cannot imagine a scenario with a 2018 Japanese population roughly 50
million to be in any way 'good'. And without use of the atomic bomb
that would NOT require ASBs.

[jerry kraus]

Post by The Horny Goat

Post by Chrysi Cat
I 'love' how you think this is a good thing, Jerry. *Sure*, a world
where *Operation Downfall* had actually gone through and nearly
depopulated the Home Islands (along with killing more Americans than all
wars the US had fought in, combined, to that point--is it wrong to hope
one would have been your father, while my grandfathers would have still
been around because one was 14 and the other was 4-F?) would be superior
to an atomic one.
I'd say pull the other one, but nothing has bells on it today.

I agree - even though my father was 12 when the war ended, 1
grandfather was 4-F and the other volunteered for service (his father
had been a Royal Navy officer in WW1) but was rejected as he was minus
3 fingers due to a fishing accident about 8 years before.
Even if the US had suffered no losses in Downfall at all (!) the 2018
Japanese population would be 5-7 milliion below OTL's as there was a
catastrophic failure of the Japanese rice crop in 1945 and while in
OTL immediate American food aid after the surrender saved the day that
aid certainly would not have been forthcoming with ongoing
hostilities.
The studies I've read about Kyushu (Operation Olympic) estimate
Japanese casualties at about triple US casualties with civilian
casualties above 1 million - and that was before landings on Honshu
(the main Japanese island).
Apparently the US Government was still debating whether or not to use
poison gas on Honshu but had not decided by the surrender. Obviously
that would have massively increased civilian deaths.
I cannot imagine a scenario with a 2018 Japanese population roughly 50
million to be in any way 'good'. And without use of the atomic bomb
that would NOT require ASBs.

As I've already said, Horny, I'm making no moral evaluation here. I'm simply noting that the motivation to develop the A-bomb was NOT a desire to be able to defeat Japan without an invasion. Indeed, as has been pointed out repeatedly on this very site, the A-bomb alone would NOT have defeated Japan, if Japan had been intent on continuing to fight. The motivation to develop the A-bomb was quite specifically to make sure that the Nazis wouldn't be the only ones who would have one, because the Nazis kept bragging about how their superior German technology would make this such a simple task for them. And, apparently, such luminaries as Albert Einstein and Leo Szilard actually believed it too. Not to mention FDR and the leadership of the OSS. So, what's the world like at this stage without Nazi propaganda goading the U.S. into investing enormously in nuclear technology in the early 1940's?

[Ed Stasiak]

jerry kraus
But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested
so much time and money in the program?

Weren’t most of the scientists who were knowledgable on the subject already
here in the U.S. at the time?

Seems to me that even without Nazi propaganda, the U.S. was the leader
in the field and where most discussion on the subject was happening and the
possibility of building a huge-ass bomb would have come to the government’s
attention before too long.

They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would
put them at risk.

I don’t see how working on nukes puts the U.S. at risk? NOT working on
nukes that we knew were theoretically possible put us at risk and meant
that we had no choice but to try, or someone else would.

[jerry kraus]

Post by Ed Stasiak

jerry kraus
But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested
so much time and money in the program?

Weren’t most of the scientists who were knowledgable on the subject already
here in the U.S. at the time?
Seems to me that even without Nazi propaganda, the U.S. was the leader
in the field and where most discussion on the subject was happening and the
possibility of building a huge-ass bomb would have come to the government’s
attention before too long.

Albert Einstein disagrees --

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter

'According to Linus Pauling, Einstein later regretted signing the letter because it led to the development and use of the atomic bomb in combat, adding that Einstein had justified his decision because of the greater danger that Nazi Germany would develop the bomb first.[26] In 1947 Einstein told Newsweek magazine that "had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing."[23][27]'

Post by Ed Stasiak

They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would
put them at risk.

I don’t see how working on nukes puts the U.S. at risk? NOT working on
nukes that we knew were theoretically possible put us at risk and meant
that we had no choice but to try, or someone else would.

Obviously, once the nuclear genie was out of the bottle, other countries would develop the A-bomb, and this was the only weapon that really posed a threat to the U.S.

[Don P]

Post by Ed Stasiak
Seems to me that even without Nazi propaganda, the U.S. was the leader
in the field and where most discussion on the subject was happening and the
possibility of building a huge-ass bomb would have come to the government’s
attention before too long.

Yes but . . . Roosevelt's "Uranium Committee" (run by the elderly CEO of
the National Bureau of Standards) did nothing useful until the arrival
in the USA (from Britain) of the second Maud Report calculating that the
minimum amount of fissile material for a bomb was orders of magnitude
smaller than anyone hitherto expected. No less to the point, this did
not go to the Uranium Committee but the new (wartime, temporary) OSRD
organization headed by Vannevar Bush and J.B. Conant.

Collateral to that, it seems important that most successful wartime
research was completed by prewar (familiar) institutions only in the
smaller allied countries, e.g. Canada and Australia. In both the USA
and the UK the prewar institutions were judged ineffective within one
year and superseded by new temporary ones, the US Office of Scientific
Research & Development and the UK Ministry of Supply.

[SolomonW]

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.

The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.

The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

[jerry kraus]

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

Albert Einstein disagrees --

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter

'According to Linus Pauling, Einstein later regretted signing the letter because it led to the development and use of the atomic bomb in combat, adding that Einstein had justified his decision because of the greater danger that Nazi Germany would develop the bomb first.[26] In 1947 Einstein told Newsweek magazine that "had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing."[23][27]'

[jerry kraus]

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

Albert Einstein disagrees --

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter

'According to Linus Pauling, Einstein later regretted signing the letter because it led to the development and use of the atomic bomb in combat, adding that Einstein had justified his decision because of the greater danger that Nazi Germany would develop the bomb first.[26] In 1947 Einstein told Newsweek magazine that "had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing."[23][27]'

[jerry kraus]

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

Solomon, the Einstein-Szilard letter is considered critical to the development of the A-bomb program.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter

Einstein said he would never have signed the letter if he had't thought the Nazis were seriously working on the A-bomb, and were likely to develop one. He felt personally responsible for the use of the A-bomb in combat, and he was a pacifist. He regretted having ever encouraged the U.S. government to work on the project, and felt if he hadn't, the A-bomb would never have been developed. Hence, the Nazi propaganda deception was critical, historically, for the development of the A-bomb. Certainly, according to Albert Einstein.

[jerry kraus]

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

What's particularly interesting, Solomon, though, is that even Einstein doesn't admit that the Nazis had him fooled! I guess even Einstein didn't want to openly admit THAT! He says he was mistaken in believing the Nazis would get a bomb, but doesn't acknowledge that they'd tricked him!

[jerry kraus]

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.

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

Post by SolomonW
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee

The MAUD committee sped things up a bit, perhaps by a few months. But, that's all. It was the Einstein-Szilard letter to FDR that got the ball rolling

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter

and that was pure fear on Einstein's part of a Nazi bomb, by his own admission. And, that fear was based on Nazi generated propaganda, which had lots of other people scared too. We just don't hear about it, because it shows just how good the Nazis were at psychological warfare, and how many brilliant and powerful people got taken in by it.

[SolomonW]

Post by jerry kraus

Post by SolomonW

Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do.

A better exmple would be Saddam, its very dangerous to bluff with nuclear
weapons.

Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.

The propaganda did not help, but the scientific community was already
talking about the atomic bomb even before the NAZI atomic bomb program
started. Leó Szilárd was talking about as early as 1933.
The British were already working on an atomic bomb before the Americans.
The Russians and Japanese we're talking about too all before the American
atomic bomb program starts.

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

Post by SolomonW
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee
The MAUD committee sped things up a bit, perhaps by a few months. But, that's all. It was the Einstein-Szilard letter to FDR that got the ball rolling

No much, it was only after the MAUD report got going that the ball got
rolling.

Post by jerry kraus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter
and that was pure fear on Einstein's part of a Nazi bomb, by his own admission. And, that fear was based on Nazi generated propaganda, which had lots of other people scared too. We just don't hear about it, because it shows just how good the Nazis were at psychological warfare, and how many brilliant and powerful people got taken in by it.

It was Szilard that was the driving force

[The Horny Goat]

On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:01:39 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by SolomonW
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee
The MAUD committee sped things up a bit, perhaps by a few months. But, that's all. It was the Einstein-Szilard letter to FDR that got the ball rolling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter
and that was pure fear on Einstein's part of a Nazi bomb, by his own admission. And, that fear was based on Nazi generated propaganda, which had lots of other people scared too. We just don't hear about it, because it shows just how good the Nazis were at psychological warfare, and how many brilliant and powerful people got taken in by it.

Even without Nazi nuclear weapons Hitler was a clear and present
danger to the peace of the world.

FDR and Churchill agreed at Argentia Bay that in a world war involving
Germany and Japan it would be Germany First.

Truman reported that Stalin's response to his news of the atomic bomb
(at Potsdam) was good wishes and hoped it would be used to good
purpose against the enemy. (It is believed Stalin's personal reaction
was much less sanguine but had he been informed of a super-bomb any
time after 22/6/1941 do you think he would have responded any
differently? I don't)

[jerry kraus]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:01:39 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by SolomonW
The American program only really took off after the British report MAUD
arrives in the US, so I doubt the NAZI propaganda had much to do with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAUD_Committee
The MAUD committee sped things up a bit, perhaps by a few months. But, that's all. It was the Einstein-Szilard letter to FDR that got the ball rolling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Szil%C3%A1rd_letter
and that was pure fear on Einstein's part of a Nazi bomb, by his own admission. And, that fear was based on Nazi generated propaganda, which had lots of other people scared too. We just don't hear about it, because it shows just how good the Nazis were at psychological warfare, and how many brilliant and powerful people got taken in by it.

Even without Nazi nuclear weapons Hitler was a clear and present
danger to the peace of the world.
FDR and Churchill agreed at Argentia Bay that in a world war involving
Germany and Japan it would be Germany First.
Truman reported that Stalin's response to his news of the atomic bomb
(at Potsdam) was good wishes and hoped it would be used to good
purpose against the enemy. (It is believed Stalin's personal reaction
was much less sanguine but had he been informed of a super-bomb any
time after 22/6/1941 do you think he would have responded any
differently? I don't)

You're missing a critical point here, Horny. First of all, the physicists, virtually to a man, shared Einstein's position -- the only reason they were working on a A-bomb, was the fear that the Nazis might get one first. They were all pacifists. Absent that, they would NOT have cooperated with the Manhattan Project, at all. And, without the physicists, there would have been no A-bomb. And, the position of British Intelligence was quite consistent, well known and clear -- the Nazis had no A-bomb, they had no A-bomb program, and they were quite incapable, from an industrial point of view, of building an A-bomb. Hence, the ONLY REASON the physicists cooperated with the Manhattan Project was the Nazi propaganda boasting of their "uranium torpedo" -- that, and Werner Heisenberg's repeated public insistence that he was working on the A-bomb. Now, Heisenberg was anti-Nazi and a pacifist himself, so, his motivations are rather mysterious, indeed, here. Also, as a theoretical physicist, he actually wouldn't have been of much use on an applied project of this type.

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 06:09:15 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus
You're missing a critical point here, Horny. First of all, the physicists, virtually to a man, shared Einstein's position -- the only reason they were working on a A-bomb, was the fear that the Nazis might get one first. They were all pacifists. Absent that, they would NOT have cooperated with the Manhattan Project, at all. And, without the physicists, there would have been no A-bomb. And, the position of British Intelligence was quite consistent, well known and clear -- the Nazis had no A-bomb, they had no A-bomb program, and they were quite incapable, from an industrial point of view, of building an A-bomb. Hence, the ONLY REASON the physicists cooperated with the Manhattan Project was the Nazi propaganda boasting of their "uranium torpedo" -- that, and Werner Heisenberg's repeated public insistence that he was working on the A-bomb. Now, Heisenberg was anti-Nazi and a pacifist himself, so, his motivations are rather mysterious, indeed, here. Also, as a
theoretical physicist, he actually wouldn't have been of much use on an applied project of this type.

The Manhattan project was at least as much about engineering
industrial infrastructure as physics. Germany had the physics but was
unable to build the required infrastructure.

Heisenberg was no more 'strictly theoretical' than Fermi - determining
the required critical mass was crucial and it depended on what uranium
(or plutonium) isotope was used. That's theory and critically
important.

[jerry kraus]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 06:09:15 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus
You're missing a critical point here, Horny. First of all, the physicists, virtually to a man, shared Einstein's position -- the only reason they were working on a A-bomb, was the fear that the Nazis might get one first. They were all pacifists. Absent that, they would NOT have cooperated with the Manhattan Project, at all. And, without the physicists, there would have been no A-bomb. And, the position of British Intelligence was quite consistent, well known and clear -- the Nazis had no A-bomb, they had no A-bomb program, and they were quite incapable, from an industrial point of view, of building an A-bomb. Hence, the ONLY REASON the physicists cooperated with the Manhattan Project was the Nazi propaganda boasting of their "uranium torpedo" -- that, and Werner Heisenberg's repeated public insistence that he was working on the A-bomb. Now, Heisenberg was anti-Nazi and a pacifist himself, so, his motivations are rather mysterious, indeed, here. Also, as a
theoretical physicist, he actually wouldn't have been of much use on an applied project of this type.

The Manhattan project was at least as much about engineering
industrial infrastructure as physics. Germany had the physics but was
unable to build the required infrastructure.
Heisenberg was no more 'strictly theoretical' than Fermi - determining
the required critical mass was crucial and it depended on what uranium
(or plutonium) isotope was used. That's theory and critically
important.

Oh, come now, you're not really saying they didn't need the physicists to build the A-bomb, are you??

The really interesting thing is the amount of power these scientists wielded, and their degree of idealism and altruism. It's almost inconceivable in terms of the current generation of mercenary/whore scientists who will do and say anything for a buck, and who are simply bureaucrats fitting into a slot for a paycheck. Things have really changed, and not for the better!

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:23:35 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by The Horny Goat
The Manhattan project was at least as much about engineering
industrial infrastructure as physics. Germany had the physics but was
unable to build the required infrastructure.
Heisenberg was no more 'strictly theoretical' than Fermi - determining
the required critical mass was crucial and it depended on what uranium
(or plutonium) isotope was used. That's theory and critically
important.

Oh, come now, you're not really saying they didn't need the physicists to build the A-bomb, are you??
The really interesting thing is the amount of power these scientists wielded, and their degree of idealism and altruism. It's almost inconceivable in terms of the current generation of mercenary/whore scientists who will do and say anything for a buck, and who are simply bureaucrats fitting into a slot for a paycheck. Things have really changed, and not for the better!

Of course I'm not saying engineers alone could have built the bomb.

As for altruism then vs now - well they WERE at war at the time and
there was a very strong ethos of 'doing your part' which is absent in
peacetime.

[jerry kraus]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:23:35 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by The Horny Goat
The Manhattan project was at least as much about engineering
industrial infrastructure as physics. Germany had the physics but was
unable to build the required infrastructure.
Heisenberg was no more 'strictly theoretical' than Fermi - determining
the required critical mass was crucial and it depended on what uranium
(or plutonium) isotope was used. That's theory and critically
important.

Oh, come now, you're not really saying they didn't need the physicists to build the A-bomb, are you??
The really interesting thing is the amount of power these scientists wielded, and their degree of idealism and altruism. It's almost inconceivable in terms of the current generation of mercenary/whore scientists who will do and say anything for a buck, and who are simply bureaucrats fitting into a slot for a paycheck. Things have really changed, and not for the better!

Of course I'm not saying engineers alone could have built the bomb.
As for altruism then vs now - well they WERE at war at the time and
there was a very strong ethos of 'doing your part' which is absent in
peacetime.

Indeed. So, the really fascinating thing is that the scientists were all pacifists!! The only thing that got them to work on the bomb was propaganda from Josef Goebbels! Otherwise, they would simply have told Groves and FDR to build the bomb themselves!

[The Horny Goat]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:46:58 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by The Horny Goat
Of course I'm not saying engineers alone could have built the bomb.
As for altruism then vs now - well they WERE at war at the time and
there was a very strong ethos of 'doing your part' which is absent in
peacetime.

Indeed. So, the really fascinating thing is that the scientists were all pacifists!! The only thing that got them to work on the bomb was propaganda from Josef Goebbels! Otherwise, they would simply have told Groves and FDR to build the bomb themselves!

Jerry you DO understand that Adolf Hitler had the "gift" of making
pacificists into fierce anti-Nazis right?

He did plenty of things that disgusted the world long before the
opening of the camps in 1945.

[jerry kraus]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:46:58 -0700 (PDT), jerry kraus

Post by jerry kraus

Post by The Horny Goat
Of course I'm not saying engineers alone could have built the bomb.
As for altruism then vs now - well they WERE at war at the time and
there was a very strong ethos of 'doing your part' which is absent in
peacetime.

Indeed. So, the really fascinating thing is that the scientists were all pacifists!! The only thing that got them to work on the bomb was propaganda from Josef Goebbels! Otherwise, they would simply have told Groves and FDR to build the bomb themselves!

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

Post by The Horny Goat
Jerry you DO understand that Adolf Hitler had the "gift" of making
pacificists into fierce anti-Nazis right?
He did plenty of things that disgusted the world long before the
opening of the camps in 1945.

Of course Horny. But, an anti-Nazi pacifist, is still a pacifist. He won't unleash a whole new level of military destruction on the world unless he feels it is absolutely necessary. The physicists would have concluded, without the Nazi propaganda and Heisenberg's public pronouncements, that Hitler couldn't build a bomb. That's what the British were regularly telling them. So, the physicists would have said -- fine, let's use what we've got to beat them, we know we can do that. We don't need even more apocalyptic weapons on the planet. Why do you think Oppenheimer and Einstein were so guilty about the A-bomb?

[a***@gmail.com]

Post by jerry kraus
It is instructive to bear in mind that Leo Szilard and Albert Einstein's letter to FDR, suggesting he might want to develop the A-bomb, was specifically about the danger of Nazi Germany developing one. After all, the U.S. had overwhelming industrial superiority to Germany, so, this was really the only potential threat from Germany. Now, why were they so worried about this? After all, as it turned out, Germany never really got to first base, with the A-bomb. And, in any case, they probably had neither the resources nor the industrial capacity to build one. So, why the worry, at the time?
Well, you know, there was one thing the the Nazis were, quite indisputably, very good at, indeed -- self-aggrandizing propaganda. And, they were so good at this, that many people actually believed they could do things that they couldn't possibly do. Even, sometimes, very bright and well informed people. And, the Nazis had been quite actively bragging of their ability to develop and deploy atomic weapons from quite early on, and this lasted until very nearly the end of the war.
Indeed, our great friend and favorite spy, Jewish baseball player Mo Berg, was quite specifically hired by the OSS to deal with this problem. After all, how many incredibly fit, incredibly brilliant, incredibly socially skilled Princeton educated linguists could American Intelligence get hold of on short notice? Mo Berg was only mediocre in the big leagues, but, because of his unique intelligence, he was a great favorite among the sports writers and the fans. So, Mo Berg was given some training in Physics, and sent to Europe to soft sell the European scientists on cooperating with the U.S. Or, in the case of Nazi atomic scientist Werner Heisenberg, to kill/abuct and/or persuade him to relocate in the U.S. He really was given the authority, on his own, to decide if he should kill Heisenberg at a conference in Switzerland, and had both a pistol and a cyanide capsule at hand for the purpose. Actually he knew neither enough German nor enough Physics to understand a word of Heisenberg's talk, but, he could see from the response of the audience that it had nothing to do with the A-bomb. So, instead of killing Heisenberg, he had his Swiss physicist contacts invite him to dinner, where Mo Berg's German was simply too poor for him to persuade the man to do anything other than avoid him. Mo Berg's great spying achievement was simply to confirm that the Nazis never had a serious A-bomb program at all, and that it was all just propaganda. And, he had some trouble persuading them of that!
But, with no Nazi A-bomb propaganda, why would America have invested so much time and money in the program? They knew they could win the war without it, and that its invention would put them at risk. I would suggest that Nazi Germany is the true father of the A-bomb. No Josef Goebbels, we still would be a nuclear free world!

https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI