Group 5

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?

16 comments:

  1. Blog #1 Group #5

    Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I really appreciate your time and dedication with helping us on our blog.

    Question #1

    Harry Gold decided to provide sensitive information to the Soviets, because his family was in a crisis with money due to the economic downfall. The Great Depression truly took its toll on so many families. Gold felt strongly that it was his duty to provide for his family, because he had an eagerness to please anyone and do just about anything for them too; therefore, he was grateful for anyone who could get him a job. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, Sheinkin explicitly stated on pages twenty-four and twenty-five, “He was thankful to Black for getting him a job and wanted to repay the debt. Also, Gold had what he described as ‘An almost puppy- like eagerness to please.’ Here was a chance to do something nice for Black and help the Soviet people.” This textual evidence supports our claim by describing how Gold felt he owed Black for helping him get his family back on their feet. Logically speaking, Gold believed himself to be helping his friend and another country, but in actuality, what he was doing was despicable, for he was actually betraying his friends, workplace, and country. Our group feels that Gold should have thought about the consequences to others and not just focus on himself and his family. We understand it was a difficult time in our history economically, but was there no other way? What do you think?



    Question #2

    Could Crawford County have spies lurking in the shadows? Honestly, Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I think that with how much government resources we have in Crawford County, it could most likely be possible. With Crawford County having Marathon Petroleum Co., Flying S Inc., and Hershey, it lends itself to the possibility of spies in Crawford County. These are prime examples of places with security immensely above average, and companies would not bother with immense security measures if they were not needed. Security is highly needed to keep prying eyes and ears from any sensitive information. Common sense tell us that if a country needed to produce petroleum more efficiently, needed military information, or just wanted delicious chocolate, they may send someone to Crawford County. Do you agree?

    We look forward to your reply.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry everyone, I thought I had posted during the weekend but Chrome didn't let me sign in correctly. I got it now!
    Question 1:
    What a great response! I agree that due to the financial stress his family was in Harry Gold felt compelled to take a job even though it might mean he owned Tom Black a favor. You did a great job citing the text to support this. I think there is a reason beyond money worries for Harry Gold to share important secrets with the Communists. I believe he was also intrigued by Black’s statement from page 24 that, “the Soviets would soon wipe out greed and poverty plaguing countries like the United States.” The idea of creating a nation without economic inequality would be appealing to someone who was suffering finally. Also on Page 25 Sheikin wrote that Gold was interested in repaying his debt to Black but He was also interested in helping the Soviet people. Proving that he wanted to do more than just repay his debt. There definitely ways for Gold to get work but when you are coming out of a time of financial ruin it is hard to trust that you be able to get a job by yourself. It is definitely a despicable thing to betray your country but is it so bad to want to support your family after they had been through such hard times, show gratitude to a friend, and help a new nation reach Utopia?
    Question 2:
    I agree with you four. There could be spies in Crawford County. I immediately thought of Marathon but totally forgot about Flying S. Good catch. While chocolate is amazing and delicious and wonderful, I’m not so sure that foreign countries would be sneaking inside to get our chocolatey secrets. You are right that Marathon and Flying S do have a lot of security to make sure that no sensitive information gets into the wrong hands. So while there is a possibility that there could be a spy in our midst it is highly unlikely.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Blog Question #2 Group #5

    The word ‘haunt’ as used in the following sentence, “It was a decision that would haunt him for the rest of his life” means to have regret of doing/not doing. The use of the word ‘haunt’ reveals to be Sheinkin’s way of foreshadowing and telling us that Oppenheimer chose to be loyal to the United States. Oppenheimer was already being accused of treason, but being approached by the Soviets did not help matters. When Oppenheimer chose not to tell General Groves, he made the situation worse for himself. The decisions that followed Oppenheimer haunted him. Sheinkin used this statement, because he understood that Oppenheimer would always feel guilty about hiding information from Leslie Groves, and thereby his country. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build- And Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, by Steve Sheinkin, it is explicitly stated on page sixty-five, “ If Oppenheimer ever wanted to share any scientific information with the Soviets, he could use this connection. Oppenheimer was visibly disturbed by the suggestion. ‘That would be a frightful thing to do’, he said ‘That would be treason.’... Oppenheimer chose not to tell General Groves that he had been approached by the Soviets. It was a decision that would haunt him for the rest of his life.” This textual evidence proves to back up our claim by showing how offended and betrayed Oppenheimer felt that Chevalier would even consider that Oppenheimer would betray his country like that. Sheinkin implicitly states that Oppenheimer wished he had informed General Grove that he had been approached by a Soviet contact. Logically speaking, Oppenheimer regretted keeping the meeting hidden, but he would do his best to make sure it would follow him to his grave.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you are right that Oppenheimer did regret not telling Groves right away about being confronted by a Soviet contact. In this book I think it means a little more than just regret. To be haunted by something not only means that you regret that it happens but also that it is continuing to have a negative impact on your life. So a haunted person may feel bad or regret their past mistake but they are still feeling the results from that bad choice into their current situation. The text-based evidence for this comes from page 104-105 from the chapter “Laboratory Number 2” where Oppenheimer is followed by agents and is seen meeting with a known member of the communist party. Lieutenant colonel Pash wants to take him off of the project because of this and Groves protects him. Oppenheimer, not knowing how long he had been followed, admits to his meeting with Chavalier six months earlier. Instead of easing Pash’s suspicion,it caused him to become even more suspicious of Oppenheimer because it had taken him so long to tell anyone about it. So here Oppenheimer was haunted by his decision not to tell Groves right away because it nearly got him kicked off the project, again. You are right that Sheinkin is using it for foreshadowing. By using the word haunt instead of regret it sets up the reader to expect some fallout or repercussion from his decision.

      Delete
  4. Blog #1 Response
    Korbin, Katlynn, Paige, and I understand your viewpoint. Gold was having financial issues and needed to provide for his family. Gold was wrong with betraying his country. At the same time, he knew what he was doing was wrong, but he only had his family’s well-being in mind. Gold would had done anything for his family, and he was loyal to his friends. If Gold had to betray his country to do so, he would not hesitate to protect his family and support his friends. You made the statement, “There definitely was ways for Gold to get work but when you are coming out of a financial ruin it is hard to trust that you will be able to find a job.”

    ReplyDelete
  5. Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I agree how the word ‘haunt’ is used to explain a feeling of regret, and to foreshadow that there will be grandiose consequences. “To be haunted by something not only means that you regret that it happens but also that it is continuing to have a negative impact on your life.” We feel that ‘haunt’ means so much more than having a feeling of regret, but the way you described ‘haunt’ in your sentence went beyond our thinking “Also that is continuing to have a negative impact on your life.” This changed our way of thinking because sometimes we as middle schoolers have a tendency to get stuck in the moment; we do not always think ahead. Go figure! We look forward to blog number 3!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Blog #3 Group #5
    Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I learned that twenty-six Norwegian lives were lost when Knut Haukelid’s team sunk the Hydro. We feel that innocent lives should be protected at all costs, while we know innocent lives are always lost in war. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build-and Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, by Steve Sheinkin, he explicitly stated on page 110, “Haukelid relayed the details to British intelligence saying ‘The job would be tricky, and might resort in the loss of civilian lives.’” This backs up our claim by proving that innocent lives are being lost, and it is was acceptable to the military and British intelligence, but in our opinion it is not acceptable in any way. It is even harder to lose a loved one who you care about so much or even a friend. Sheinkin implicitly introduces to his readers to see that innocent lives were being lost, but he also wanted a reaction to the horrific situation that was happening. Even though war comes with great loss, sacrifice, and a tremendous amount of blood shed, war is inevitable, resulting because of the human condition. Humans are not always going to agree on political, religious, or even social matters and often we have a troglodytic reaction. (Korbin learned about this word from a graphic novel...What do you think about this word?)
    We look forward to your reply.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree with you that losing innocent lives during war is tragic. In this instance those lives were not lost in vain. If that heavy water had gotten to Germany and the Germans had gotten the atomic bomb just think what would have happened. Sacrificing civilians is a great cost but in some instances I think that it can be worth it. I don’t think this is true all of the time. There are definitely times when the loss is needless and there are other ways to get to the same end without losing innocent lives. I agree with you that every path to success should be examined to determine the one with the least impact on people not involved with the conflict. I want to challenge the idea that war is inevitable. I don’t think that it is necessarily inevitable. I believe there are peaceful ways to work out differences through diplomacy and concession.
    When I think of the word troglodytic or troglodyte I think of a caveman or someone who has a very sheltered view of the world. There aren’t enough context clues in the sentence you used it in to let me know how you were using it but that is my definition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for responding to us! We appreciate reading your thoughts and opinions. Had Germany gotten the heavy water and made the bomb before us, we could very well be speaking a different language. Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I agree that war is not always inevitable, but humans are always causing a conflict within themselves due to personal differences or other factors. In a perfect world, there would be no need for war, but sadly humans are not perfect and often become ludicrously cross with one another over simple matters. We also hope that our government officials will try to solve problems peacefully, and with diplomacy before issuing war against another country. We were using troglodytic in the psychological sense; all humans have basic reactions such as anger/aggression which causes humans to act irrationally. For example, a baby’s primal instinct to cry when he/she is hungry.

      We look forward to blog 4!


      Delete
  8. Blog #4 Group #5
    Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I would still like to thank you for your time and effort in helping us.
    It is important for students our age to understand the meaning of every perspective regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction in order to closely examine and pull important details to form a judgment. In the narrative nonfiction Bomb: The Race To Build-And Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, ,by Steve Sheinkin, he shows us the following perspectives: the scientific, military, political, and the Japanese civilians.
    To begin, some scientists believed that the atomic bomb was very much needed to keep us safe, but at the same time scientists realized that their creation could bring an end to the human race. Sheinkin explicitly states on page 184, “We turned to one another and offered congratulations -for the first few minutes then there was a chill, of knowing they had used something they loved-the study of physics-to build the deadliest weapon in human history. ‘Oppenheimer was feeling the chill too.’’’ This particular evidence supports our claim by describing after the adrenaline, the rush, and the high, reality set in. These intelligent scientists had a clear mind and now were starting to think about what just happened, or what could happen. To infer, the scientists started to think of possibilities both, good and bad, of the atomic bomb. Their creation could open the doors to greatness or lead to mass destruction.
    From the military perspective, weapons of mass destruction enables wars to be won, but it also can cause terrifying devastation. In the book, Bomb: The Race to Build -And Steal- The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, the author, Steve Sheinkin, explicitly states on page 184, “‘The war is over’, Farrell said. ‘Yes,’ Groves agreed, ‘as soon as we drop one or two on Japan.’” On page 197 the author explicitly states, “ A feeling of shock and horror swept over all of us.” This evidence backs up our claim by describing how the military members felt wretched about what they had done, even though the mission was a success. It is clear that people in the armed forces have to perform difficult tasks, due to their mission. This proves that the military’s personal sacrifice was great for our country.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Also, the political perspective was one of great pride. Sheinkin explicitly states on page 199, “Keep your seats, gentlemen,’ Truman said, an excited smile on his face as he waved the note in his hand. ‘I have an announcement to make. We have just dropped a new bomb on Japan which has more power than twenty thousand tons of TNT. It has been an overwhelming success!’ The room erupted in cheers.” This textual evidence shows that President Truman was pleased with all the hard work that was given from who all was involved. One can infer that he felt this way because he knew that if the atomic bomb failed, he would have failed. All in all, we understand that even today the president has the responsibility to make stressful and difficult decisions daily.
    Finally, the Japanese citizens felt pain and devastation when the atomic bomb was dropped. Sheinkin explicitly states on page 196, “These people puzzled me until I suddenly realised that they had been burned and were holding their arms out to prevent the painful friction of raw surfaces rubbing together… One thing was common to everyone I saw-- complete silence.”” This shows the destructive power of the atom bomb. One can infer that we should understand the Japanese civilian perspective because it shows the destruction that one bomb can do to an entire city. They suffered because of the decisions made by their government and religious leaders. Even today, the United States would not want what happened to the Japanese during World War II to happen today, so we need to be proactively aware on the happenings in other countries. The activities of other countries should be of great interest to us for they can both directly and indirectly affect the world we live in.
    To end, the importance of the many perspectives portrayed in Bomb: The Race to Build-And Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, is not lost on our minds. We understand that Sheinkin wanted us to experience the tragedy, hope, and heartbreak of those involved with the atomic bomb in order to better understand the world we live in today.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great job covering the different perspectives of the use of weapons of mass destruction. I agree that the scientists were both nervous and excited about the development of the nuclear bomb. It was an exciting new area of science that they got to be the first to explore. But as you noted it lead to a horrifying result on Japan and its people. Another thing to note about the science of the atomic bomb is that the research led to the development of nuclear energy from nuclear power plants that are still in use today. It also lead to research into radiation therapy, like chemotherapy, for cancer. When I was about your age, my dad had to wear an eye patch with radiation for 6 weeks to treat a melanoma (form of cancer) in his eye and he is cancer free today.
    I like how you compared Truman’s reaction to the bomb drop to the scientists’ reaction. It seems from the book that the scientists had thought that maybe all they had to do was build the bomb and the war was over. They hoped they wouldn’t of had to use it. Truman was very pleased that they had won the war but he had no idea what havoc it caused to the Japanese people. I wonder if he had been able to see the results of the bomb first hand, would he have been so pleased.
    You do a thorough job explaining how terrible the impact of the bomb was for the Japanese people. As you point out even though it was the emperor of Japan’s fault the Japanese people were involved in the war it wasn’t the emperor that was affected.
    Again, I think you covered the different perspectives well and have learned that in war it can be very hard to call one side “good” and one side “evil”. War is ugly and the cost are high, and even if the “good” side wins there can be many evil side effects from their victory.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Once again we thank you for your response. We didn't know that all of those things such as radiation plants and chemo treatment came from the idea of the bomb. It is important to think about all the lives that were saved with the science of the atomic bomb along with the lives that were lost.

    If Truman was in the plane dropping the bomb, we feel that he would have the basic human emotion of empathy for dropping the bomb on Japan. But as the president of the United States during a war, he needed to have the interest of his people at the forefront of his decisions.

    It is possible that the president tried to either emotionally or mentally affect the emperor by getting his people involved and destroying one of his cities to get him to surrender.

    We look forward to your response on blog five.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Blog #5 Group #5

    Paige, Korbin, Katlynn, and I would like to again thank you for the time you took out of your day to help us become better writers. We enjoyed blogging with you.

    Steve Sheinkin was correct; mass destruction exists today and affects people still. Mass destruction is now part of our lives whether we like it or not, because it is not going to simply cease to exist. The way Sheinkin portrayed the greatest triumph, and fall of humanity, showed how each matter can affect us still today. In the book, Bomb: The Race To Build-and Steal-The World’s Most Dangerous Weapon, Sheinkin explicitly stated on page 236, “Scientific American in 2010 looked at the probable impact of a ‘small’ nuclear war, one in which India and Pakistan each dropped 50 atomic bombs. The scientist concluded that the explosions would ignite massive fire storms, sending enormous amounts of dust and smoke into the atmosphere. This would block some of the sun’s light from reaching the earth, making the planet colder and darker - for about ten years. Farming would collapse, and people all over the globe would starve to death.” This textual evidence backs up our claim by describing that mass destruction is ludicrously deadly, and affects everyone on the planet. One decision can determine the lives of everyone, and the way we choose to regulate it, is a completely different story. Sheinkin implicitly stated that bombs could either start wars, they could end them, or quite possibly start a whole new beginning, or end… All in all, the threat of nuclear war should be handled with the most care.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I like your thoughtful reply. You are right that a nuclear war could be the end of our species. It is scary stuff. When Steve Sheinkin says, “it’s a story with no end in sight. And, like it or not, you’re in it.” He is talking about the continued threat of nuclear war. Like you pointed out, even a small war could have a major impact on our entire planet. Our president just went to North Korea to have a meeting about their nuclear program after it was discovered they were rebuilding a uranium refining plant. The story does continue, and we all have a part in it. I try to cast my vote to determine how we deal with other countries and you learn from past experiences to help you make smart decisions when you are adults. I am glad that I got to participate in this activity with you all and I have enjoyed reading your posts and responses. Thank you for letting me be a part of this awesome educational experience.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Once again, Katlynn, Korbin, Paige, and I would like to thank you for your reply on our blog. It really helped and taught new things we didn’t know before. We understand that we all have a part in this nuclear war and that’s that. So, we know how important it is to know what is going on in the world. Due to the things the media has said in the past about President Trump, we don’t think a lot of the students in our school keep up with what President Trump is doing these days even though it is very important they do. It is also very important for us to know what is currently happening in other countries; for all we know, North Korea could have been using that refinery to make more bombs to pose a threat to other countries.
    Kaylynn, Korbin, Paige, and I enjoyed working with you. It was great hearing someone's opinion and informing us on how we can improve our craft and teaching us all the important things that are really happening in this world today. We all hope that you do this next year so that the next students have as much of a great experience as we did.

    ReplyDelete