The Hydrogen Bomb and Oppenheimer Affair

It is interesting how Oppenheimer switched roles between the development of the original atomic bomb and the development of the hydrogen bomb. During the Manhattan Project Oppenheimer was one of the main proponents that it was not the responsibility of scientists to determine how and if the bomb was used and that the development and use of such a terrible weapon would prevent future wars. Yet Oppenheimer opposed the development of the hydrogen bomb for moral reasons. The guilt for developing the atomic bomb must have had a significant impact on Oppenheimer, for his opinion changed drastically.

Ironically enough, it was Oppenheimer's opponent Teller who articulated the arguments for the hydrogen bomb that most resembled Oppenheimer's arguments for the atomic bomb. Teller argued that it was inevitable that the hydrogen bomb would be build if it was possible. I'm inclined to agree with his argument. Even if the United States had not develop thermonuclear weapons, the Soviet Union would have.

The H-bomb is a terrible weapon, but his argument has proven true to a certain extent, no one has ever used a thermonuclear weapon. The hydrogen bomb is imprecise and isn't particularly practical as a weapon, but the very existence of such a weapon made the necessary for the United States the develop it, if for no other reason than to prevent the Soviet Union from gaining an advantage. The bomb wasn't developed by military need, but rather for diplomatic need.

I don't agree with Teller's argument that all knowledge is a good thing, the world would probably be better off if we didn't possess the knowledge to make thermonuclear weapons, but it was inevitable that someone would develop them. The readings make an issue over how the hydrogen bomb differed from the atomic bomb in that its primary target was civilians. One could also argue that this was also the case with the original atomic bomb. The atomic bomb was dropped on civilians in cities, it wasn't used as a tactical weapon. The atomic bomb has the potential to be used as a tactical weapon because it is more precise than the hydrogen bomb, but that wasn't how it was used. The difference between the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb is one of scale more than target. It may not be justifiable to use a hydrogen bomb, but no more than any nuclear weapon.

Oppenheimer's hearing is an example of how such hearings were more about politics than about whether a person was truly a "traitor." Oppenheimer's security clearance was due to expire regardless of the trial, and its main purpose was to discredit Oppenheimer and his causes, namely to eliminate any obstacle to developing the hydrogen bomb.