DOCSLIB.ORG

DUCK and COVER Study Seemed to Uncover Another Layer of Com‐ Examinations of the Foreign Policies of Presi‐ Plexity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DUCK and COVER Study Seemed to Uncover Another Layer of Com‐ Examinations of the Foreign Policies of Presi‐ Plexity David L. Snead. The Gaither Committee, Eisenhower, and the Cold War. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1999. x + 286 pp. $50.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8142-5005-1. Reviewed by Richard H. Immerman Published on H-Diplo (November, 2000) DUCK and COVER study seemed to uncover another layer of com‐ Examinations of the foreign policies of Presi‐ plexity. The impulse to dig deeper can be irre‐ dent Dwight D. Eisenhower -- revisionist, postrevi‐ sistible, especially for younger scholars. And then sionist, whatever-ist -- have over the past several there is the impetus generated by the implosion of decades consumed an ever-expanding proportion the former Soviet Union. Even if produced by of the available book-shelf space of historians of ahistorical thinking, the disconnect between reve‐ U.S. foreign relations and international history. lations about Soviet feebleness and images of Recently, these examinations have increasingly fo‐ American school children engaged in duck and cused on assessments of national security policy cover exercises begs explication. Can we make writ large, a sub-sub-field which of course in‐ sense of the 1950s? cludes although is not limited to defense policy No doubt all these considerations influenced and nuclear strategy.[1] As always, in substantial David Snead's decision to write The Gaither Com‐ part the progressive release of pertinent archives mittee, Eisenhower, and the Cold War. Because explains this greater attention to security ques‐ this study originated as his dissertation, Snead's tions. But I think there is much more to it. Be‐ two initial reasons were almost certainly: 1) not‐ cause examining the formulation of national secu‐ withstanding the significance previous scholars rity policy requires assessing the advising and de‐ have attributed to the Gaither Report in terms of cision-making apparatus, this "genre" addresses the nuclear policy and civil defense programs of the ambiguous relationship between process and both Eisenhower and Kennedy, an archivally- product in the Eisenhower administration that be‐ based study of its production and consequences devils both historians and political scientists -- remained to be written; and 2) it was now possi‐ and frequently divides them. Likewise, whereas ble to access the archives in order to write this security policy in the 1950s once appeared so in‐ study. Snead makes explicit, however, that he also flexible compared to what followed, each new had more conceptual purposes. First, he hoped to H-Net Reviews provide additional evidence of the intricacies and Gaither report by identifying way stations leading effectiveness of Eisenhower's advisory process, up to the Commission's establishment. This order particularly by underscoring the president's for‐ is too tall to fill. mal inclusion of civilian experts. Secondly, Snead The valuable contribution of this book begins sought to demonstrate that, despite something to emerge with the second chapter. From here on akin to the conventional wisdom, the Gaither Re‐ Snead carefully and systematically presents the port did in fact have a significant impact on Eisen‐ immediate antecedents to the establishment of hower's nuclear policy. Snead achieves his initial the Gaither committee, discusses in unparalleled goals more successfully than his conceptual ones. detail its membership and recommendations Snead stumbles a bit at the start by introduc‐ (documentation on its deliberations remain inac‐ ing his subject in a background chapter entitled cessible), and explicitly assesses the consequences "Eisenhower's Core Values and Decision-Making and implications of its report. By doing so, Snead Systems." Not only does this chapter present ma‐ adds an important dimension to the ever-more terial that will be extremely familiar to virtually complete narrative concerning the controversy any reader of a book with this title, the effort to over the "Missile Gap" and the evolution of nucle‐ compress so much time and information into so ar strategy and security policy under Kennedy few pages produces distortions and even misin‐ and Johnson. [2] formation. Precisely what Snead defines as a "core The basic outlines of the story are readily value" remains obscure, and his tendency to con‐ summarized. By the start of Eisenhower's second flate Eisenhower's "core values" with what the Na‐ term in office, his administration's emphasis on tional Security Council (a monolith?) "believed" the role of nuclear weapons as the most effective exacerbates this ambiguity. In this regard Eisen‐ deterrent to Soviet adventurism and, consequent‐ hower's strategic thinking, in fundamental re‐ ly, the world's best hope for avoiding general war spects surely derived from his "core values," re‐ while promoting security had been subject to in‐ ceives short shrift. To continue in this vein, the tense criticism. Members of Congress and the mil‐ significant attention Snead pays to the Project So‐ itary, journalists, scholars, and others charged larium juxtaposed with his truncated discussion Eisenhower (or more often than not the presi‐ of the exercise itself and exaggerated estimate of dent's lightning rod, Secretary of State John Foster its role in the formulation of NSC 162/2 distorts Dulles) with an unconscionable failure to appreci‐ both the policy-making and decision-making ate adequately the strategic challenges of the nu‐ process (a distinction that Snead neglects to clear age, thereby exposing the United States to draw). By glossing over the production and adop‐ the risk of both attack and blackmail even as the tion of NSC 149/2 (Basic National Security Policies vulnerability of U.S. allies and neutrals increased. and Programs in Relation to Their Costs), Snead In at least partial response, Eisenhower set up in both sacrifices an opportunity to assess the influ‐ the spring of 1957 a panel of civilian experts to ex‐ ence of Eisenhower's fscal conservatism on secu‐ amine the adequacy of the existing civil defense rity policy (which in my opinion he overstates) programs. James Killian, MIT president and a and neglects a precedent-setting use of civilian ad‐ member of the recently established Science Advi‐ visors, a phenomenon central to this examination. sory Committee, recommended that H. Rowan What Snead attempts to accomplish in this brief Gaither, Jr., a leading light at the RAND Corpora‐ chapter, in short, is to encapsulate Eisenhower's tion and Ford Foundation, head up the panel. "core values," describe the administration's poli‐ Gaither apparently received authority to select cy- and decision-making processes, and to provide the soon-to-be-called Gaither committee's mem‐ the historical context necessary to evaluate the 2 H-Net Reviews bership. Among those he chose were Killian, nental defense programs as inadequate. Their in‐ Robert Sprague, William Foster, James Doolittle, adequacy placed America's population in grave George Lincoln, and Paul Nitze. Lincoln and Nitze danger of annihilation. No less imperiled were ultimately did most of the report's writing. America's strategic forces, and thus the second While none of the above committee members strike capability on which effective deterrence de‐ will be strangers to most readers of Snead's book, pended. Accordingly, the report urged that the ad‐ the short biographies of each that he provides are ministration immediately undertake programs to nevertheless useful. What he does not provide, strengthen America's defensive and offensive ca‐ however, is an evaluation of the process and crite‐ pabilities. Specifically, the United States must en‐ ria used to select them. This oversight is unfortu‐ large its nuclear missile and delivery systems, en‐ nate, because it bears directly on the outcome. hance its ability to wage "limited war," reorganize Snead may be right, although frankly I have my its defense establishment, and fnance the con‐ suspicions, that "As a group they [members of the struction of a comprehensive network of civilian committee] did not enter the Gaither study with a fall-out shelters. No expense should be spared. set agenda. ." He is certainly right when he The estimated cost of implementing the report's writes in his next sentence that they ". did share recommendations between 1959 and 1963 was a concern for U.S. national security that went be‐ close to $45 billion. This was a price America yond their support for Eisenhower or his poli‐ could and should pay; its very survival hung in cies." (p.11) In fact, phrased less euphemistically, the balance. the Gaither committee was composed overwhelm‐ The report became public a little more than a ingly of alarmist critics of the Eisenhower admin‐ month later. The headline of Chalmers Robert's istration who considered his policies and pro‐ front-page story in the Washington Post on De‐ grams complacent and penurious to the point of cember 20, 1958 read, "SECRET REPORT SEES U.S. folly. Within this environment they could operate IN GRAVE PERIL." (p.139). Snead, who underplays in the absence of virtually any buffers. politics throughout this study, neglects to mention Hence, at least in hindsight it was highly pre‐ that it was Roberts who received during the Dien‐ dictable not only that the committee would ex‐ bienphu crisis of 1954 the "leak" that credited the ceed its mandate, but also that its conclusions and Democrats for "The Day We Didn't go to War." recommendations would rapidly leak to the pub‐ Still, it takes little effort to connect the Gaither Re‐ lic. Nitze, the primary author of the report, ar‐ port to allegations of a Missile Gap during the gued from the inception that the ". Gaither com‐ 1960 campaign to the victorious Democrats' mili‐ mittee [should] view its report as a unique oppor‐ tary programs which provided substance to tunity to offer an alternative national security Kennedy's promise to "bear any burden." strategy to the president's policies." (p.113) As fate Snead's evident perseverance in locating would have it in light of its members' predisposi‐ archival material is impressive.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Radiation and Radioactivity Quantified? Do You Think of These “People” When I Say RADIATION? Do You Think of These Things As Well?
    Welcome To RadTown USA •Click to Explore RadTown USA • Click on any location in RadTown USA and find out about radiation sources or uses at that location. The Alpha, Beta, Gammas of Nuclear Education March 2nd, 2014 Fundamentals of Ionizing Radiation Debra N Thrall, PhD Executive Director Albert I Pierce Foundation Radiation Fundamentals What is radiation? Where does it come from? How does it interact with matter? What is radioactivity? What are fission and fusion? How are radiation and radioactivity quantified? Do you think of these “people” when I say RADIATION? Do you think of these things as well? • Food • Space • Utilities • Consumer Products • Medicine Brief History of the Atom • 500 BC Democritus Atom • Long time (Romans Dark Ages) • 1808 AD Dalton Plum Pudding • 1911 Rutherford Nucleus • 1913 Bohr Orbits • 1920’s Many People Quantum Mechanics Rutherford’s Gold Foil Experiment The Design 1. Bombard positively charged alpha particles into thin gold foil. 2. Use fluorescent screen to detect particles as they exit the gold foil. 3. Use angle of deflection to determine interior of the atom. So, What is an Atom? • Atoms are made up of protons, neutrons & electrons • Protons: + charge p+ • Neutrons: no charge n0 • Electrons: - charge e- • Atoms want to have a stable energy level • This translates to having no net charge • # protons = # electrons Mass of an Atom • Masses • Proton: 1.000000 amu • Neutron: 1.000000 amu • Electron: 0.000549 amu (Translates to 1.2 lbs/1 ton ~ a kitten on an elephant!) • The mass of an atom is approximately
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Defense and Homeland Security: a Short History of National Preparedness Efforts
    Civil Defense and Homeland Security: A Short History of National Preparedness Efforts September 2006 Homeland Security National Preparedness Task Force 1 Civil Defense and Homeland Security: A Short History of National Preparedness Efforts September 2006 Homeland Security National Preparedness Task Force 2 ABOUT THIS REPORT This report is the result of a requirement by the Director of the Department of Homeland Security’s National Preparedness Task Force to examine the history of national preparedness efforts in the United States. The report provides a concise and accessible historical overview of U.S. national preparedness efforts since World War I, identifying and analyzing key policy efforts, drivers of change, and lessons learned. While the report provides much critical information, it is not meant to be a substitute for more comprehensive historical and analytical treatments. It is hoped that the report will be an informative and useful resource for policymakers, those individuals interested in the history of what is today known as homeland security, and homeland security stakeholders responsible for the development and implementation of effective national preparedness policies and programs. 3 Introduction the Nation’s diverse communities, be carefully planned, capable of quickly providing From the air raid warning and plane spotting pertinent information to the populace about activities of the Office of Civil Defense in the imminent threats, and able to convey risk 1940s, to the Duck and Cover film strips and without creating unnecessary alarm. backyard shelters of the 1950s, to today’s all- hazards preparedness programs led by the The following narrative identifies some of the Department of Homeland Security, Federal key trends, drivers of change, and lessons strategies to enhance the nation’s learned in the history of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads of Technical Information
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2018 Nuclear Spaces: Simulations of Nuclear Warfare in Film, by the Numbers, and on the Atomic Battlefield Donald J. Kinney Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES NUCLEAR SPACES: SIMULATIONS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE IN FILM, BY THE NUMBERS, AND ON THE ATOMIC BATTLEFIELD By DONALD J KINNEY A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 Donald J. Kinney defended this dissertation on October 15, 2018. The members of the supervisory committee were: Ronald E. Doel Professor Directing Dissertation Joseph R. Hellweg University Representative Jonathan A. Grant Committee Member Kristine C. Harper Committee Member Guenter Kurt Piehler Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For Morgan, Nala, Sebastian, Eliza, John, James, and Annette, who all took their turns on watch as I worked. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the members of my committee, Kris Harper, Jonathan Grant, Kurt Piehler, and Joseph Hellweg. I would especially like to thank Ron Doel, without whom none of this would have been possible. It has been a very long road since that afternoon in Powell's City of Books, but Ron made certain that I did not despair. Thank you. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract..............................................................................................................................................................vii 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government, and Entertainment Culture Formedamerica's Understanding of the Atom
    DUCK AND COVER: HOW PRINT MEDIA, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, AND ENTERTAINMENT CULTURE FORMEDAMERICA’S UNDERSTANDING OF THE ATOM BOMB A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts By Daniel Patrick Wright B.A., University of Cincinnati, 2013 2015 Wright State University WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL May 5, 2015 I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION BY Daniel Patrick Wright ENTITLED Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government and Entertainment Culture Formed America’s Understanding of the Atom Bomb BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Arts ________________________________ Jonathan Winkler, Thesis Director ________________________________ Carol Herringer, Chair History Department Committee on College of Liberal Arts Final Examination ________________________________ Drew Swanson, Ph.D. ________________________________ Nancy Garner, Ph.D. ________________________________ Robert E. W. Fyffe, Ph.D. Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School ABSTRACT Wright, Daniel Patrick. M.A. Department of History, Wright State University, 2015. Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government and Entertainment Culture Formed America’s Understanding of the Atom Bomb This research project will explore an overview of the different subsections of American post-war society that contributed to the American “atomic reality” in hopes of revealing how and why the American understanding of atomic weapons did not slowly evolve over the course of a generation, but instead materialize rapidly in the years following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By analyzing government sources and programs, print media sources such as newspapers and magazines, and the American entertainment culture of the 1940s and 1950s, this research project will answer exactly why and how the American public arrived at its understanding of the atom bomb.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Emergencies and Disasters
    Overview of New Castle County Floods Winter Storms Homeland Security Hazards and Disasters Know what to expect: Recommended Actions by Threat Level Family Preparations •Research the flood hazards in your area. New Castle County is vulnerable to a wide range of (www.fema.gov or www.nccde.org •Have heavy blankets on hand. GREEN=LOW natural hazards, includingincluding flooding, tornadoes, “Hurricane and Flood Safe”, link to tropical storms, hurricanes, winter storms, and •Ensure that each family member has a warm •Take steps to protect your identity. earthquakes. Their occurrence is natural and inevi- NFIP site) coat, gloves or mittens, and insulated •Report suspicious activity to the local police. table, and there is little we can do to control their water resistant boots. •If it has been raining hard for several hours, or (NCC Police: (302) 573-2800) or force and intensity. NCC is also vulnerable to a steadily for several days, be alert to the •Check on any elderly neighbors or family. 1-800-FORCE-12 Terrorism Tip Line variety of human-caused hazards, including chemi- possibility of a flood. (in locations such as cal releases, spills or explosions associated with small streams, creeks and roadways) •Consult a doctor regarding flu shots for •Take first aid and CPR classes. the fixed storage or mobile transport of hazardous family members. •Prepare a 72-hour family emergency supply kit materials. In today’s world, we must also consider •Listen to local radio and TV stations for flood •Prepare a 72-hour family emergency supply kit and plan. human-caused hazards, such as technological acci- information.
    [Show full text]
  • Bob Farquhar
    1 2 Created by Bob Farquhar For and dedicated to my grandchildren, their children, and all humanity. This is Copyright material 3 Table of Contents Preface 4 Conclusions 6 Gadget 8 Making Bombs Tick 15 ‘Little Boy’ 25 ‘Fat Man’ 40 Effectiveness 49 Death By Radiation 52 Crossroads 55 Atomic Bomb Targets 66 Acheson–Lilienthal Report & Baruch Plan 68 The Tests 71 Guinea Pigs 92 Atomic Animals 96 Downwinders 100 The H-Bomb 109 Nukes in Space 119 Going Underground 124 Leaks and Vents 132 Turning Swords Into Plowshares 135 Nuclear Detonations by Other Countries 147 Cessation of Testing 159 Building Bombs 161 Delivering Bombs 178 Strategic Bombers 181 Nuclear Capable Tactical Aircraft 188 Missiles and MIRV’s 193 Naval Delivery 211 Stand-Off & Cruise Missiles 219 U.S. Nuclear Arsenal 229 Enduring Stockpile 246 Nuclear Treaties 251 Duck and Cover 255 Let’s Nuke Des Moines! 265 Conclusion 270 Lest We Forget 274 The Beginning or The End? 280 Update: 7/1/12 Copyright © 2012 rbf 4 Preface 5 Hey there, I’m Ralph. That’s my dog Spot over there. Welcome to the not-so-wonderful world of nuclear weaponry. This book is a journey from 1945 when the first atomic bomb was detonated in the New Mexico desert to where we are today. It’s an interesting and sometimes bizarre journey. It can also be horribly frightening. Today, there are enough nuclear weapons to destroy the civilized world several times over. Over 23,000. “Enough to make the rubble bounce,” Winston Churchill said. The United States alone has over 10,000 warheads in what’s called the ‘enduring stockpile.’ In my time, we took care of things Mano-a-Mano.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Nuclear Weapons Alexander Glaser Wws556d Princeton University February 12, 2007
    Effects of Nuclear Weapons Alexander Glaser WWS556d Princeton University February 12, 2007 S. Glasstone and P. J. Dolan The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, Third Edition U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 1977 1 Nuclear Weapon Tests USA Russia U.K. France China Total Atmo- 1945-63 1949-62 1952-58 1960-74 1964-80 528 spheric 215 219 21 50 23 Under- 1951-92 1961-90 1962-91 1961-96 1969-96 1517 ground 815 496 24 160 22 Total 1030 715 45 210 45 2045 India (1974, 1998): 1 + 5 Pakistan (1998): ca. 6 North Korea (2006): 1 2 3 Introduction / Overview 4 Burst Types • Air burst • High-altitude burst (above 100,000 ft) • Underwater burst • Underground burst • Surface burst In the following: primary focus on (medium-altitude) air bursts (fireball above surface, weak coupling into ground) 5 Effects of a Nuclear Explosion Typical distribution of energy released • Thermal radiation (including light) (35%) • Blast (pressure shock wave) (50%) • Nuclear radiation (prompt and delayed) (15%) 6 Effects of a Nuclear Explosion Sequence of events, Part I FIREBALL starts to form in less than a millionth of a second after explosion several tens of million of degrees: transformation of all matter into gas/plasma thermal radiation as x-rays, absorbed by the surrounding atmosphere for 1 Mt explosion : 440 ft in one millisecond, 5,700 ft in 10 seconds after one minute: cooled, no longer visible radiation Formation of the fireball triggers the destructive effects of the nuclear explosion 7 Trinity Test July 16, 1945 Shock front Fireball Mach front Dirt cloud
    [Show full text]
  • Policymaking, Environmental Science, and the Nuclear Complex, 1945-1960
    Splitting Atoms, Fracturing Landscapes: Policymaking, Environmental Science, and the Nuclear Complex, 1945-1960 BY ©2013 Neil Shafer Oatsvall Submitted to the graduate degree program in History and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. _________________________ Chairperson Sheyda Jahanbani _________________________ Gregory Cushman _________________________ Johannes Feddema _________________________ Sara Gregg _________________________ Theodore Wilson Date Defended: 7 December 2012 The Dissertation Committee for Neil Shafer Oatsvall certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Splitting Atoms, Fracturing Landscapes: Policymaking, Environmental Science, and the Nuclear Complex, 1945-1960 ________________________________ Chairperson Sheyda Jahanbani Date approved: 2 April 2013 ii ABSTRACT Neil S. Oatsvall, Ph.D. Department of History, May 2013 University of Kansas “Splitting Atoms, Fracturing Landscapes: Policymaking, Environmental Science, and the Nuclear Complex, 1945-1960” examines the implications of an expansive nuclear culture in the postwar United States. This dissertation probes the intersection of Cold War policymaking, environmental science, and the nuclear complex—a shorthand way of discussing the sum set of all nuclear technologies in conjunction with the societal structures and ideologies necessary to implement such technology. Studying a unified nuclear complex corrects for the limitations associated with studying all nuclear technologies as separate entities, something that has created fractured understandings of how splitting the atom affected both natural and human systems. This dissertation shows how U.S. policymakers in the early Cold War interacted with the environment and sought to fulfill their charge to protect the United States and its people while still attempting to ensure future national prosperity.
    [Show full text]
  • Alert Today, Alive Tomorrow Living with the Atomic Bomb, 1945 – 1965
    Alert Today, Alive Tomorrow Living with the Atomic Bomb, 1945 – 1965 Alert Today, Alive Tomorrow explores how Americans experienced the atomic threat as part of their daily lives from 1945 to 1965. The exhibition focuses on how media messages in print, on the radio, in film, and in popular mass‐culture objects like toys conveyed a climate of heightened preparedness and fear that became an integral part of Cold War life through the early 1960s. Alert Today starts at the moment when Americans first learned of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan on August 6, 1945. The exhibition then leads visitors through three chronological displays and four main thematic sections to show how civil defense publications, household objects, books and magazines, toys, and scientific equipment all changed over the course of twenty years in response to the changing political and technological threats of the Atomic Age. The messages were inescapable. While images like Bert the Turtle and pamphlets announcing “6 Survival Secrets” to an atomic attack may seem naïve or futile to us, Alert Today asks audiences to take a step back in time and understand how thoroughly the culture of atomic awareness permeated every aspect of life during the 1950s. How would we respond today if a similar set of concerns so dominated every arena of our lives —at home, at school, in the community, and even at play? These docent notes follow the order of the chronological and thematic areas of Alert Today, Alive Tomorrow. You may wish to combine this material with a reading of the exhibition script (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln High School Air-Raid Drill, 1950
    Lincoln High School Air-Raid Drill, 1950 By Mel Junghans, Oregon Journal Collection This photograph originally appeared in the Oregon Journal as an illustration for an article by Dan Flanagan, titled “Portland Schools Map Air Raid Precautions.” The air raid drills were the result of a request by John F. Griffith, assistant superintendent of Portland public schools, who requested that each school establish and practice air raid plans. During the drills, students were organized by classroom and were led by their respective teachers. On August 29, 1949, Americans lost their short-lived status as the world’s only nation with nuclear weapons when the Soviet Union successfully detonated an atomic bomb. U.S-Soviet relations had already become antagonistic as a result of the Soviet blockade of Berlin and expansion into Poland and Eastern Europe. In the United States, the fear of nuclear attack spurred some communities to begin preparing for the worst. In 1951, Congress created the Federal Civil Defense Administration, giving it the responsibility to help communities help protect themselves. Public schools quickly became a favored location for civil defense education programs since they were already integrated with local communities. Air raid drills became common place in schools across America, particularly after the 1951 release of the now-iconic film, Duck and Cover. With the help of the upbeat cartoon character, Bert the Turtle, Duck and Cover advised children to take cover at the first flash of a nuclear blast or first sound of a warning siren. In order to be “protected” children were encouraged to “duck to avoid the things flying through the air,” and then “cover to keep from getting cut or even badly burned.” School children were also encouraged to wear metal identification tags, so that in the event of a nuclear attack, their bodies would be able to be identified by survivors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nuclear Power Industry After Chernobyl and Fukushima
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont Scripps Faculty Publications and Research Scripps Faculty Scholarship 12-25-2011 Science with a Skew: The ucleN ar Power Industry after Chernobyl and Fukushima Gayle Greene Scripps College Recommended Citation Greene, Gayle. "Science with a Skew: The ucleN ar Power Industry after Chernobyl and Fukushima,” The Asia-Pacific ourJ nal: Japan Focus Vol 10 Issue 1 (3), 2011. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Scripps Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scripps Faculty Publications and Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 10 | Issue 1 | Number 3 | Dec 25, 2011 Science with a Skew: The Nuclear Power Industry After Chernobyl and Fukushima ゆがんだ科学−−チェルノブイリ・フク シマの後の原子力発電産業 Japanese translation available http://peacephilosophy.blogspot.com/2012/03/gayle-greene-nu clear-power-industry.html Gayle Greene Science with a Skew: The Nuclear disinformation” and “wholly counterfactual Power Industry After Chernobyl and accounts…widely believed by otherwise sensible people,” states the 2010-2011 World Fukushima Japanese translation is Nuclear Industry Status Report by Worldwatch available Institute.3 What is less well understood is the (http://peacephilosophy.blogspot.co nature of the “evidence” that gives the nuclear m/2012/03/gayle-greene-nuclear- industry its mandate, Cold War science which, power-industry.html). with its reassurances about low-dose radiation risk, is being used to quiet alarms about Gayle Greene Fukushima and to stonewall new evidence that would call a halt to the industry.
    [Show full text]
  • “Duck and Cover” (Civil Defense) Teacher Page
    9 “Duck and Cover” (Civil Defense) Teacher Page Overview: In the years following World War II, the United States enjoyed a nuclear monopoly. However, in the late 1940s, the Soviet Union also developed nuclear weapons, and a long arms race ensued. As each side built more and deadlier weapons, the United States government found itself trying to assure citizens that a nuclear war was not only winnable, but survivable. Thousands of Americans built fallout shelters, thinking that going underground would protect them, and schoolchildren were required to participate in drills to “sharpen” their skills in “ducking and covering” when the bombs fell. Objectives: Students will: view and analyze a Civil Defense video speculate on the impact such films would have had on American schoolchildren and American society make inferences about the role of Civil Defense in American society Web Site Used in this Lesson: Direct students to the “Gallery” page at the Propaganda Critic site (http://www.propagandacritic.com/gallery) and ask them to click on the “Duck and Cover” video. (Note: In order to access the video, Real Player must be installed on the computer and a sound card must be installed. Links for a “broadband” (network) connection as well as a “dial-up” connection are available. Test the site prior to starting the lesson to ensure that you can access the site and that the video is playable.) Strategies: Introduce the lesson by giving a quick overview of how Civil Defense worked. The Cold War Era Civil Defense Museum site (http://www.civildefensemuseum.com/) is a good resource for understanding the basic idea of the duties of Civil Defense.
    [Show full text]