More Truman
Prompted by Fr. Bill's reflections on Truman and the atomic bomb, a brief reflection of my own on our thirty-third chief executive:
In Potsdam to confer with Stalin and Churchill, on July 16, 1945, Harry Truman, president, by then, for just fourteen-and-a-half weeks, decided to take a look at Berlin, just over a dozen miles from Potsdam.
Truman's motorcade toured the city for roughly an hour. It passed not one building that remained intact. On Unter den Linden, the great boulevard, laid out in the seventeenth century, that ran from the baroque palace of the kings of Prussia to the Brandenburg Gate, rubble lay two stories high.
What caused such devastation? In 363 bombing missions over Berlin between, from June 1940 to March 1945, the American and British air forces had dropped some 465,000 tons of explosives. Then the Red Army had arrived. From April 20 until the city surrendered on May 2, the Soviets kept up a continuous barrage from some 40,000 artillery pieces, pouring in more explosive tonnage than the Americans and British had dropped. One megaton--the equivalent of one million tons of TNT. That represents a rough but plausible estimate of the explosive force the German capital had absorbed.
"The most sorrowful sight I ever saw," Truman noted in his diary. "I thought of Carthage, Baalbeck, Jerusalem, Rome, Atlantis, Peking, Babylon [and] Ninevah...."
Just before he set off for Berlin, Truman learned that evening, the United States had successfully tested the first atomic device, which had exploded in the desert of New Mexico with a force of about 21 kilotons. The tens of thousands of bombs the American and British air forces had dropped and the two million shells the Red Army had launched--all could now be replaced with a mere four dozen bombs. And before Truman left office, the United States had detonated the first thermonuclear device or hydrogen bomb. The device had exploded with a force of more than ten megatons. A single device, in other words, had proven more than ten times more destructive than all the explosives the Allies had rained down on Berlin throughout the War.
Harry Truman, a man without a college education, a man who early in life had spent several years running a family farm on which the principal source of power was mules--Harry Truman led the country in the dangerous new world of the Cold War. And? He stood up to Stalin, setting in place the policy of containment that would guide American policy for more than four decades.
Truman's economic policies I find, broadly speaking, a mess--a mere continuation of the confused federal interventions of the New Deal. But the federal government was still so small that his policies did little harm. And in foreign policy--well, the achievement of that plucky little man from Missouri is simply staggering. Churchill told Truman he did more than any other man of his time to save our civilization.
As usual, Churchill was right.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Dec '10
Re: More Truman
To nit pick: the Trinity test was about 21 kilotons, not 21,000 kilotons. But I'm sure it was just a typo.
More importantly, the A bombs dropped on Japan totalled less than 50 kilotons. Way more ordinance was dropped over time in the war. The actual destruction caused only appears worse because it happened in a single explosion. The bomb was merely efficient, not evil.
Edited on Aug 5, 2011 at 9:51pmMay '10
Re: More Truman
Mr. Robinson's comments capture so much in a succinct manner. Let me just add that Truman made his way under much domestic criticism and unpopularity (The famous 1948 newspaper photo exuberance wasn't for nothing!). Through accomplishments great and dubious I admire Truman for sticking to his principles, even though it meant he wouldn't live to see them fully appreciated. Overall, we were fortunate to have him for such a time as that.
May '10
Re: More Truman
For his direction of war efforts, I thank him.
But FDR was a tyrant. If Truman's domestic policies were half as bad, then let's just call it even and do Truman the favor of forgetting him.
Thanks for the history, Peter.
Jun '10
Re: More Truman
I think Truman had a difficult hand dealt to him. Who wouldn't have taken the job if asked? He also was far better than the Communist Wallace who preceded him as VP. Who could have guessed that FDR would die so soon? (Well, actually, people who were close to FDR could have -- he was called a corpse.)
I think that Truman did well enough in Potsdam. After all, FDR was a real megalomaniac who kept him (and most of his cabinet) in the dark about the most crucial issues of the war and the diplomatic efforts going on. The reality of the Russian situation at that point in the war is that the Russians won the war and Truman knew it. They couldnt' have done it without the Western Allies but they won the war -- the war that they had been guilty of starting almost as much as Hitler. (Why did England not hold Russia equally guilty with Germany? I've always wanted that little detail explained.)
Difficult hand for Truman. On-the-job training for presidency in -- as the Cold War proved to be -- the most crucial time in the history of this country. This pathetic Democratic Party.
Edited on Aug 5, 2011 at 11:00pmRe: More Truman
The King Prawn: To nit pick: the Trinity test was about 21 kilotons, not 21,000 kilotons. But I'm sure it was just a typo.
More importantly, the A bombs dropped on Japan totalled less than 50 kilotons. Way more ordinance was dropped over time in the war. The actual destruction caused only appears worse because it happened in a single explosion. The bomb was merely efficient, not evil. · Aug 5 at 9:40pm
Edited on Aug 05 at 09:51 pm
Thanks for catching the typo, which I've corrected. And you're quite right about the bombs. The ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki came in at about 21 kilotons each. But by then Berlin alone had absorbed about a megaton's worth of explosives, or almost 50 times as much man-made destructive power as either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
Sep '10
Re: More Truman
What a difference between Democrat presidents then and now. Then: a non college educated man who knew deep down in his soul the goodness of America and how American power could be used to affect the balance between right and wrong. Now: An over-college-educated man who believes America is no better than say Cuba and can't even bring himself to finish even the little wars he started I.e. Qaddafi. Truman: a man from from the heartland with a good heart and a steel spine. Obama: an invertebrate from Hawaii.
May '10
Re: More Truman
I'll continue my obsessive nit-picking over Truman with this simple one-word question: Atlantis?
I fully agree that Truman made the right call to drop the bombs, and this comes from someone with a deep fondness for Japan and its people. However, I have to venture Churchill was simply being kind and friendly in his assessment of Truman.
May '11
Re: More Truman
Much of Truman's success was derived from his respect for the military and from following the advice of General George Marshall. Several years ago I attended a lecture series at the Citadel featuring lectures on the 10 greatest American generals and was stunned that George Marshall did not make the list.
Edited on Aug 6, 2011 at 7:19amMay '10
Re: More Truman
Spoken like a man who's in the process of writing a book about the Cold War.
I wonder how much both the willingness to use the bomb and the mere demonstration of its force established the credibility of Truman, and the US in general, in the early stages of the Containment era.
Dec '10
Re: More Truman
POTUS 43’s commencement speech in ‘06 consisted of a paean to the Truman (D). Future historians will determine the two men’s congruence and parallels.
Re: More Truman
Scott Reusser:
I wonder how much both the willingness to use the bomb and the mere demonstration of its force established the credibility of Truman, and the US in general, in the early stages of the Containment era. · Aug 6 at 7:33am
Very good point. And the answer is, a lot.
May '10
Re: More Truman
Peter Robinson
Scott Reusser:
I wonder how much both the willingness to use the bomb and the mere demonstration of its force established the credibility of Truman, and the US in general, in the early stages of the Containment era. · Aug 6 at 7:33am
Very good point. And the answer is, a lot. · Aug 6 at 1:08pm
Peter is certainly in a better position to speak to Truman's personal credibility, but I'd agree with the overall conclusion. I think one would be foolish to argue that our nuclear arsenal wasn't in the front of the Soviets' mind when we drew a circle around Turkey and Greece and told the Soviets not to even think about it.
May '10
Re: More Truman
I remember reading that, right after the war, some prominent Republicans were critical of Truman's decision to drop the bomb on moral grounds.
Jun '11
Re: More Truman
Thanks Peter for the history. Conservative Episcopalian ...great contrast.
My favorite story of Truman and the debate about dropping the bomb is when a reporter asked him afterward if he was willing to go to Japan. In essence, the question was did he have doubt.
He said something to the effect, "Yeah I'll go but I'm not going to go over there and kiss their ass".