Manhattan Project Poll

[pauldun170]

http://iedllc.com/AskPeople_2_2_2/survey.php?sid=C859D7

[azoomm]

[waits patiently for someone to ask what the Manhattan Project is]

And, wow. How different would this world be?

[askmrjesus]

And, wow. How different would this world be?

Well for one thing, "Nuke the Whales" t-shirts wouldn't make any sense.

Japanese people would also be significantly taller.

JC

[Dave]

Where's unrestricted distribution and usage at?

[Adeptus_Minor]

Wow... 26% of scientists in 1945 agreed with me.

[goof2]

I'm surprised 100 of the 250 polled didn't answer. I'm curious about what the results would have been had they all answered. I would be tempted to choose option 2 but really can't. We are reported to have had a total of 3 weapons at that point. We used one for the private Trinity test. We had to know the thing would work first. With 2 remaining weapons in my view the prudent thing was to use the first for maximum effect and keep the last in reserve (which as history shows we needed). Of course I tried to avoid using it in my analysis, but I'm still working with the benefit of hindsight.

I'm not surprised about the result in July 1945 though. Some atomic scientists (around 70 I believe) at about the same time sent a letter/petition to Truman which boiled down to a plea to exhaust some other options before using the bomb.

[Amber Lamps]

Interesting that they asked a bunch of scientists... now what do you think the results would have been if they had asked the thousands of families that had lost their children, fathers, brothers in the war? What about polling the people who lost loved ones at Pearl Harbor? You know, people who actually have something/someone to lose. Most would have answered that we should have dropped the bomb sooner. Many in fact, would question why we didn't drop it on Berlin... Sometimes I seriously believe that it's only luck and money that has allowed us to win the wars that we have.:idk:

[Riceaholic]

Give a military demonstration in Japan to be followed by renewed opportunity for surrender before full use of the weapon is employed.

I'm assuming this would have been a "controlled" detonation off the mainland?

[Amber Lamps]

Give a military demonstration in Japan to be followed by renewed opportunity for surrender before full use of the weapon is employed.

I'm assuming this would have been a "controlled" detonation off the mainland?

I could have swore that they did that...

[Riceaholic]

I could have swore that they did that...

I don't know everything (or anything) that's why I'm asking.

[smileyman]

Where was the use new weapon tech to force Japan into surrender then run the Russians back to Stalingrad? Patton woulda chose that one...

[Particle Man]

very interesting...

[VatorMan]

Put those scientists on a ship headed for Japan coastline and I wonder how they would have answered.

[Homeslice]

Option #1 wins today, only because men age 18-35 are the predominant users of the internet.

[goof2]

I could have swore that they did that...

No, the first detonation was the Trinity test at White Sands, New Mexico and that was done in secret. The next two detonations were over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[smileyman]

Hiroshima was an adequate public test/demonstration but thanks to examples like Coventry and Dresden we had to prove to the Japanese that it was indeed just one bomb.