Group 18

Discussion Question #1
Why do you think Harry Gold provided sensitive information to the Russians?  Could there be spies in Crawford County collecting sensitive information for another country's benefit?


Discussion Question #2
The chapter, “Quiet Fellow,” ends with the following statement: “It was a decision that would haunt him for the rest of his life.”  What is the meaning of the word haunt as it is used in the previous sentence?  Why do you think Sheinkin used this statement at this point in the book?  What could he be telling his audience?



Discussion Question #3

On page 113, we learn that twenty-six Norwegian civilians were killed when Knut Haukelid and his commandos sank the ferry carrying the German heavy water.  What are your thoughts and feelings about loss of innocent lives during any war?

Discussion Question #4


Why is it important that you understand the different perspectives regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction?

13 comments:

  1. Blog #1 Group #18

    Thank you, Mr. Vanschoyck, for not only taking your time to read our blogs, but also for your service. We greatly appreciate your sacrifices and your bravery.

    Question #1

    Harry Gold provided sensitive information to the Russians because he felt he needed to resolve the debt he accumulated. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal- The World's Most Dangerous Weapon, Steve Sheinkin explicitly stated on page twenty-four, “Some spies do it for the money; other spies are trying to change the world. Gold’s reasons were a lot less dramatic. He was thankful to Black for getting him the job and wanted to repay the debt.” This passage affirms our point by explaining that Harry Gold felt he needed to repay Black for the services that he provided for him, leading him to be a Communist and eventually a spy against our country. One can infer that had Gold not been as childish and felt the “puppy like” urge to repay his debt, he would not have helped Tom Black and the Soviet Union to steal all of the valuable information that they took. In the end, Gold was greedy and thought only of himself, and not of our wonderful country. What are your thoughts?

    Question #2

    Callie, Austin, Braeden, Christian, and I know that there really could be spies inside of Crawford County. Reason being, although Crawford County is comprised of small towns, there lays a large industrial economy inside the county, and the industry is just what those spies are looking for, as it has a satisfying amount of intelligence that could eventually be used against us. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal- The World's Most Dangerous Weapon, author, Steve Sheinkin, implied that these companies have information that, when given to the wrong person, could have a devastating effect. One could infer that Marathon Petroleum Corporation or Flying S, Inc. is one of the highly possible places to be spied on, as Marathon is housing a large amount of energy, and Flying S manufactures products that of which are shipped to large companies like N.A.S.A., the U.S. government, and others. While this is important, we must remember that most of the world is majorly developed, and no world wars are happening. Due to this, there would be no major reason for espionage. In the end, who knows?


    Callie, Braeden, Austin, Christian, and I look forward to your response.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, I would agree that Harry felt the need to repay a debt, so he began to spy. However, at some point he must’ve felt that his debt had been repaid. After being a spy for the Russians for so many years, I wonder if his motive may have change as the years passed? Possibly, he had become so good at his job as a spy that there was a point in time in which he enjoyed doing the job. One thing I am certain of is that it would have been a very difficult job to quit. I wouldn’t imagine that after all of the things he did, saw, and knew the Russian officials overseeing him would let him walk away from his duties as a spy. Could you imagine the amount of pressure he must have felt knowing that if he decided to stop he would probably be killed? What do you all think?

    Question #2

    I don’t think it is too far fetched to thing there are spies in our area. The world is always turning, and relationships and opinions change in a flash. Just because we are not currently fighting a war doesn’t mean that rival countries aren’t gathering information against one another just in case. If I were going to gather information about a country I could possibly go to war with one of the first things I would want to do would be to cut off their ability to supply their troops. When I deployed to Iraq in 2004, all of our equipment was transported to our mobilization site by trucks via our interstate system. In order to disable a mobilizing army, destroying the roadways and fuel supply would prove beneficial. As you all mentioned, we have a major supplier of rural for the Midwest in our very town. Destroying that refinery along with its 7 sister refineries would be a deviating blow for our area of the country. So, absolutely I think there could be spies around here. I think it would be a great place to have secret information about. What about you?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Also, please feel free to call me Matt!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Matt, thanks again for taking the time to read our response; we appreciate your help. Christian, Austin, Callie, Braeden, and I agree with the fact that Gold wanted to stop, but he was too far in. We believe that Gold continued to spy because he did not want to be killed or discovered by other citizens. This would have been horrendous for Gold. Christian, Austin, Callie, Braeden, and I also believe it is not too far fetched to think that there could be spies in Crawford County. We agree with your point on future wars and are glad to have the opinion of a veteran. Thanks again for giving us a different point of view on the matter and also for taking time out of your day to look at this reply.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, author, Steve Sheinkin, used the word ‘haunt’ to make the reader think and infer about the way Oppenheimer would end up. The word ‘haunt’ means that an action will be remembered remorsefully, and that the action would be regretted. Author, Steve Sheinkin, explicitly proves our claim though the discussion we have been having. Christian, Austin, Callie, Braeden and I have been having a ravenous discussion about the placement of this word for an hour! We guessed that Sheinkin used this word in that point of the book as, the book stated, “ Oppenheimer chose not to tell General Groves that he had been approached by the Soviets.” This proves our point because Oppenheimer should have told Groves about being approached by the Soviets instead of keeping it from him. If Oppenheimer told Groves, our guess is that Groves would have supported him. We know this because Groves had already supported him in the past. On page fifty, Sheinkin explicitly stated, “Oppenheimer insisted he was a loyal American...Groves believed him. FBI agents and army intelligence officers did not. Groves made the call.” This backs up our claim by proving that General Groves may have trusted Oppenheimer had he told the general that he had been approached by the Soviets. In hindsight, Sheinkin added this in his book to show the future anguish that Oppenheimer will eventually encounter upon his journey as a nuclear physicist.

    We look forward to your response.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think you're all dead on about the way the word "haunt" was used in the book. In a time where secrets were guarded often times with life or death being on the line, having that sort of skeleton in his closet must have been difficult. Oppie must've looked back on that day many times with dread, knowing that one day down the road it would come back to bite him.
    I think the the statement was used at that point in the book because even though the general trusted Oppie, there were still people out there that had their doubts about his loyalty. Maybe Groves would have supported him, maybe not.
    I think everyone knew that the project would change the world for the future. Both to Russians and the Americans needed the upper hand when the world would change. So, they needed to insure the secrecy of the project and all of its details. Everyone involved needed to be one hundred percent trustworthy. With this secret, Oppies loyalties could have certainly been questioned.
    Do you think America had spies in Russia during this time? What do you think the Russians would have done to one of their scientists with the same sort of secret that Oppie had? - Matt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Matt,
      We do believe that there were spies in Russia during WWII. We considered this as Russia was our Ally, but a very sneaky one. We needed to make sure that the citizens of the United States of America were safe. We are all in agreement that the U.S.S.R. would execute their citizens at the slightest wrongdoing. Thanks again,
      Joe, Braeden, Christian, Austin, and Callie.

      Delete
  7. Matt, thanks again for reading our blogs. We hope to respond to your reponse soon, but until then we have our third blog,
    Joe, Callie, Chirstan, Austin, and Breaden.

    On pages 113-115 of Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, Austin, Braeden, Callie, Christian, and I learned that twenty-six Norwegian civilians lost their lives on the Hydro, a ferry carrying heavy water for the Germans. It was blown up by the Allied team commanded by Knut Haukelid. These people, even if they never knew it, were becoming heroes for the greater good. United Flight 93 explicitly proves our claim as a group of men and women did the exact same, and are praised for it to this day. These brave people decided to help the for the greater good and stood up to terrorists. Due to the unwavered sacrifices, Flight 93 did not hit the intended target in Washington D.C. We’ve included a link to the passengers who gave their life to the greater good by diverting that plane into a field of grass and trees. We believe as a group that because of Flight 93 and the brave people who sacrificed their lives to save our country, we are sure that the Norwegian citizens would be willing to sacrifice their lives to save their country as well. This proves our claim by showing that human beings on United Flight 93 risked their lives for the greater good. Not all of them were Americans. One can infer that since all humans have the same kind of brain, the Norwegians could have wanted the same. All in all, the heroes who lost their lives are exactly that. Heroes. We must understand that we, as a nation, are part of a greater picture. Those civilians led to a better free world.

    Callie, Austin, Christian, Braeden, and I believe that this link would be great to visit to pay respects to the fallen heroes that protected our country against the terrorists who tried to destroy a symbol of our country. https://www.flight93friends.org/explore-learn/passenger .

    We look forward to hearing your reply on this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  8. All,

    There is no doubt that those civilians on flight 93 went above and beyond in service to their fellow countrymen. It seems to me, that when the need arises American's tend to step up to the plate to fill that need. I think those brave people on flight 93 realized there was a need for someone to do something, so they jumped into action and did what needed to be done in the moment.
    I do however think there is a difference between what those on flight 93 did and what the people on the ship did. You see, the people on flight 93 realized that if they didn't spring into action, there would have been immediate consequences. Without their bravery, flight 93 would have, without a doubt, on that day crashed into a building and killed more people.
    The civilians on the ferry had no idea what was going on. They didn't know what the ship was carrying. Even if they did I'm not entirely sure they would have realized the gravity of the situation. If that ferry would have made its crossing, there wouldn't have been people killed that day. There was still a lot of work that needed to be done before the bomb could be released.

    While I agree that if they had known the entire story about what was going on with the race to build a nuclear weapon they may have been willing to sacrifice their lives for the greater good. Man is a difficult being. People have opinions about everything, and they're all different. I'm sure that not everyone would have agreed that day to sacrifice their life for something they didn't know anything about.

    War is a messy business. Without ever knowing anything more about a war than what we see in movies or read in books we are drawn to stories of courage and bravery. We dream of the glory and honor that soldiers will gain through their time on the battlefield. We are delusional. There is nothing glorious about war. The reality is that men and women are hurt or killed in the most horrid ways. That includes civilians on the battlefield.
    There was a time in our history when wars were fought on battlefields, marked and clear. The enemy wore a recognizable uniform and we could tell soldiers apart from civilians. Conventional wars no longer exist. War is now fought on street corners from one building to the next. There are no clear lines that separate the warrior from the regular person, or markers that designate the battlefield. It has always been then case, but now more than ever there will be civilian loss of life during any war. It is a hard truth to face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Matt,
      We would all like to thank you for reading our blog and giving your opinion on this matter. We recognize your opinion and are glad that we can see multiple options to make sure we have made the right choice. It is horrible that civilians have been dragged into war, and we hope that there could be a way to save as many human lives as possible. In a perfect world, everyone would get along. We know that is not always going to be the case so we are thankful for the brave men and women willing to fight for us on the battlefield. Thank you for your service!
      We hope that you found our link helpful in recognizing the heroes of flight 93.
      Thank you for everything,

      Joe, Braeden, Christian, Austin, and Callie.

      Delete
  9. It is important that we, as a group, understand the different perspectives regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction because we, as the United States of America, need to make the best educated decision possible in using these deadly weapons. The United States should strive to maintain peace, order, and democracy in the world and understanding all perspectives is vital. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-And Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, author Steve Sheinkin explains the following four perspectives: scientific, military, Japanese political, and Japanese civilians.
    The first perspective we will be reviewing is the scientific. This point of view is important because the scientists were the creators of these weapons of mass destruction. Most scientists at Los Alamos felt a sense of pride and horror with the success of the atomic bomb. Steve Sheinkin explicitly states on page 217, “ He lifted his trembling hands in front of Truman. ‘ Mr. President,’ he said, ‘I feel I have blood on my hands.’” This excerpt proves our point by demonstrating how the scientists in this case. These scientists felt proud of their accomplishment, but worry soon overcame that feeling, knowing the bomb would be used on civilians. We can infer that the scientists were shocked that something that they loved was used to kill so many innocent civilians. To end, the scientific view can be described as a quite sympathetic one.
    The point of view of the military is almost always the same. That perspective is the trait of conquering and protecting is burned into all major players in that field. James Byrnes proves our point exactly. In the book, Bomb, The Race to Build-and Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, Steve Sheinkin includes a quote of his, on page 214, “Tell Doctor Oppenheimer for the time being his proposal of an international agreement is not practical...pursue the work at full force.” This proves that the military’s job is to protect the United States, and that it what the bomb did. The military knew that some countries have not followed treaties before, therefore one can infer this would leave us in a vulnerable state.
    Furthermore, the Japanese political perspective is also important to understand. It is important to understand this perspective in Japanese politics, as they did not have a main reason for setting the making of the atomic bomb as a high priority. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build- and Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, Sheinkin explicitly states on page 203, “...the government had put Nishina in charge of fission bomb research in Japan. But the country never made building the bomb a high priority.” This backs up our claim by proving that they had no way of defending themselves. One could infer that the Japanese did this as they knew Germany was making a bomb, and possibly thought they were further in the project than the U.S! Japan felt that Germany would save them and build the atomic bomb before the United States. All in all, we should understand the Japanese political perspective as a moral, we must be able to defend ourselves, and not rely on others.

    ReplyDelete
  10. “Ichiro’s friend had been killed right in front of him, struck in the head by a sharp, flying debris. Ichiro raced home, looking for everyone, but the house had collapsed. No one was in sight.” This is from the book Sachiko, By Caren Stelson. As fellow humans, we can understand immediately the viewpoint of Japanese civilians. The Japanese were hurt by the bomb. As victims, many felt that happened to them must never happen again. Many have stories have not been told due to immediate death. We see the troubles they have faced and are saddened by this.“ What happened to me must never happened to you”- Sachiko Yasui.
    Many of these viewpoints are not the same. This is important to us, like it should be to you, because we believe in democracy. We believe that we need to listen to all of the unique viewpoints and make choices together. If democracy had not prevailed, this story would be a much different one. “A house divided cannot stand.” - Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States.
    We look forward your response.



    ReplyDelete
  11. On page 236, Steve Sheinkin writes, “In the end, this is a difficult story to sum up. The making of the atomic bomb is one of history's most amazing examples of teamwork, genius, and poise under pressure. But it's also the story of how humans created a weapon capable of wiping our species off the planet. It’s a story with no end in sight. And like it or not, you’re in it." Overall, Sheinkin is trying to say that the story is difficult to sum up. Also, that this story is for you to decide, and the arms race will never truly end. One can infer Sheikin wants us to think about our involvement in the arms race. Even if a person disagrees with the arms race, they are still in it. All in all, Sheikin wants the reader to recognize the fact that the whole world is involved whether we all agree or not, so we must be prepared.
    What do you think?

    ReplyDelete