Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

were the most experienced. most
powerful and most effective
member Of the opposition to the
hydrogen bomb?
"A.-Well, would say ! was
not the most powerful, ! was not
the most experienced, and I was
not the most influential. But If
you take all three factors to-
gether perhaps I combined a lit
tie more experience, a little more
power and a little more of in
ftuence than anyone else"
What could be more candid
that that?
(c) DIR. Oppenheimer's Attitude
at Different Stages of the His
tory of the H-BOmb Program.
At p. 80 of the report the ma
jority of the board stated:
"The board has. reluctantly
concluded that DR.. Oppenhei-
mer'S candor left much to be de-
sired in his discussion with the
board of his attitude and posi-
ton in the entire chronology of
the hydrogen bomb problem.
This passage came right after
the one just discussed, concern
ing the degree Of his influence.
Since the majority cited no
further instances. we cannot re-
spond to specifics; but there are
some observations which seem to
us to bear directly on the whole
question of candor. These have
to do chiefly with the inherent
difficulties which DR.. Open
hiemer faced in trying to inter-
pref for the board an enormously
complicated and voluminous his
tory, much of which involved
classified and highly technical
matters.
He had, first. of all, to discuss
the varied aspects Of the hydro
gen problem in general terms so
as to avoid straying into CLASH
fed areas and SO as to be under
stood by men who did not have
technical training. But of course
essential factors bearing on the
problem were both classified and
technical.
There was a certain confusion
in the questioning. particularly
by special counsel to the commits
sion, who frequently asked about
"the thermonuclear" or "the hy-
drogen bomb" But in fact there
is no "the hydrogen bomb" At
different times, people were talk
ing and thinking about different
devices. We heard something
about families of weapons"
Some of the devices talked about |
apparently turned out to be
practical and feasible and others
not. It is important in assaylng
DR.. Oppenheimer's attitude at a
particular time with respect to
'the hydrogen bomb" to know
which device it was that was be-
ing considered. In particular, the |
Super, the thing that the GAG |
was talking and thinking about |
in october, 1949, simply is not
the same thing as the weapons
or family of weapons that were
finally successfully made. The
successful weapons were not in
vented until long after. The
GAG in october, 1949, DR..
Oppenheinner said, was talking
about single design which was
in its essence frozen, and that
the possibility did not occur to us
very strongly that there may be
quite other ways of going about
to- Our report had single struc-
ture in mind-or almost a single
structure"
DIR. ,Rabi said:
-. The subject which we dis
cuSsed in the 1919 meeting, that
particular thing has never been
made and probably never will be
made, and we still don't know to
this day whether something like
that will function.
This other thing was some
thing quite different, a much
more modest and more definite
idea on which one could co."
DR.. Teller testified about DIR.
Oppenheimer'S attitude at the
Princeton meeting of June, 1851,
that:
"Dr. Oppenheimer warmly sup
ported this new approach, and I
understand that he made a state
ment to the effect that if any
thing of this kind had been sug-
gested right away he never would
have opposed it,"
Another fact which made for
difficulty in exposition and in
understanding was that the state
of technical knowledge differed
at different times with respect to
particular devices. At one time,
one device Of weapon may have
looked like promising and fea-
sible development; as work on it
progressed it may have looked
less and less promising, so that
perhaps it might have looked
hopeless; and then somebody
would have an idea for some
thing entirely different, and that
might look quite promising.
DR.. Teller testified:
IT hope that I can keep my
answer in an unclassified way.
I hope I am not disclosing a
secret when I say that to con-
struct the thermometer bomb
is not a very easy thing, and
that in our discussions, all of us
frequently believed it could be
done, and again we frequently
believed it could not be done.
I think that DR.. Oppenheimer's
opinion shifted with the shifting
evidence"
And as the record shows, there
were very striking and dramatic
developments after the GAGS
report of October, 1949, during
which. according to Mr.. Dean,
it looked as though the making
of bomb "along the lines that