August 9, 2025

Dystopic Newsletter

The Atomic Bomb 80 years later and A Nuclear Reactor on the Moon

80 years ago, the Manhattan Project gathered some of the world's greatest physicists, chemists, mathematicians, and engineers to create the world's first working atomic bomb (nuclear fission weapon). It had taken less than 3 years, starting in June 1942, to get to the point of having two functional weapons dubbed “Fat Man” and “Little Boy”

There would be little doubt that the U.S. would use this new super weapon to end the war with Japan if the Japanese did not capitulate. The decision was driven by the following factors:

• Casualties continuing the conventional war: After the horrific fighting in Iwo Jima in March of 1945, with 33,000 US causalities, followed by Okinawa in June, with over 49,000 US casualties, the only mission that remained was OPERATION DOWNFALL, the invasion of Japan. OPERATION DOWNFALL would have two phases. The first phase, Operation Olympic, would be the invasion of the southern island of Kyushu, planned for late 1945. The final phase, Operation Coronet, would be the invasion of the main island of Honshu near Tokyo, scheduled for the spring of 1946. A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated the costs at 1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities. The Japanese were expected to have equal or greater casualty rates. Read more HERE
• War Debt: “The immense economic pressures of the war and the desire to avoid even greater costs associated with a protracted fight were undoubtedly contributing factors in the decision to deploy these devastating weapons” - Hell To Pay , Operation DOWNFALL and the Invasion of Japan 1945-1947, D.M. Giagreco
• War Weariness: The U.S. public opinion in support of the war was waning. The frightening casualty reports from Iwo Jima and Okinawa had a serious impact on public opinion – the citizens wanted their loved ones home and safe – at any cost. The U.S also faced a manpower shortage, with action being taken to draft women should OPERATION DOWNFALL begin.
• GeoPolitics: US policymakers were also concerned about the extent of Soviet influence in the postwar settlement in Asia. By bringing about a rapid surrender, the US aimed to prevent the Soviet Union from gaining further territorial and political advantages in the region (read more HERE)

As we look back to the events of August 6^th and 9^th of 1945, some 80 years ago it is difficult from our modern perspective to understand the decision to use the atomic bomb. We simply lack the context, the perspective, of a nation that had already suffered 407,000 killed and 671,000 wounded. Overall, counting military and civilians, 70 to 85 million killed and likely twice as many wounded or injured worldwide

I’d like to share several perspectives on the 80^th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

1. The Atomic Timeline: the events of mid-1945 in words and pictures
2. The Decision Makers: President Truman & Army Air Force General Curtis LeMay in their own words
3. A Personal Perspective: My father, U.S. Navy Aviator John C. Struhsaker’s thoughts as a front-line fighter pilot in the Pacific during WW2.

The Atomic Timeline

July 16, 1945: The Gadget, the world’s first atomic test device, successfully detonates at the Trinity Site in Alamogordo Bombing and Gunnery Range, later renamed the White Sands Proving Ground.

July 26, 1945: Truman issues the Potsdam Declaration, warning Japan of incomprehensible destruction if they do not surrender

​

August 6, 1945: The Little Boy atomic bomb, designed in Los Alamos and fueled by enriched uranium from Oak Ridge, detonates over Hiroshima, Japan. The result: 140,000 are killed immediately or die shortly after from the effects of the atomic bomb. Note: some estimates reach as high as 200,000 killed.

​ ​

August 9, 1945: The Fat Man atomic bomb, designed in Los Alamos and fueled by plutonium from Hanford, detonates over Nagasaki, Japan. The original target city was Kokura, but the weather forced thet mission to the secondary target, Nagasaki. The result: 60,000 to 80,000 killed immediately and from the after effects of the atomic bomb. The Nagasaki casualties totaled slightly less than the firebombing of Tokyo earlier in March 1945

August 14, 1945: Japan announces their plan to surrender

​

September 2, 1945: The Japanese formally signed the Instrument of Surrender on September 2, 1945, officially ending the most deadly and destructive war in human history

The Decision Makers: Curtis LeMay and President Harry Truman

Curtis LeMay, the hard-nosed and hawkish Army Air Force General, presided over the strategic bombing of the Japanese homeland at the end of World War II, leading both the XX (20^th) and XXI (21^st) Bomber Commands. LeMay relieved Brigadier General Haywood S. Hansell after his failed high-level B-29 bombing campaign and switched to low-altitude nighttime incendiary attacks on Japanese cities, culminating in the Operation Meeting House, the March 1945 wide-scale firebombing of Tokyo, which resulted in 80K to 100K killed with damage on an equivalent scale as the atomic bombings Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The firebombing campaign would strike 67 Japanese cities. exceptionally destructive Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya, Kobe, Yokohama, and Kawasaki

By the time the atomic bombs were available to deploy, the only remaining untouched cities were Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, and Nagasaki. The ancient historical capital, Kyoto, was initially considered but removed from the list due to its cultural significance.

Curtis LeMay was tasked with the planning and execution of the atomic bombings of The Empire of Japan. He dis so in business like fashion. Throughout his life, he never once expressed any regrets as you can see from is own words ...

LeMay was self-aware of the degree of devastation his campaigns launched against the enemy when, later in life, he reflected:

Five days after Hiroshima, when the United States became the first, and only, nation to use nuclear weapons in the history of warfare and on, in fact, the very day it detonated a second and final bomb, over Nagasaki, President Truman bluntly defends his decision:

​
Truman's position on the use of the atomic bomb was bedrock: he never once doubted his decision.

Today, these statements seem harsh and callous. However, both men were facing a decision to order millions of their countrymen to invade Japan, and at least 1 million to become casualties. The cold-blooded calculus behind the decision was simply:

To save as many Americans as possible.

A Personal Perspective

In 1997, I took my first of what would be dozens of business trips to Japan. I had meetings in Tokyo, Yokohama, and Osaka. Along the way, I stopped at Hiroshima to visit the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum and to stand at ground zero. Hirosima is a sprawling modern city of 1.2 million. The only sign that Hiroshima had been subject to the world’s first atomic attack was the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park and iconic “Atomic Bomb Dome,” the Hiroshima Prefectural Industrial Promotion Hall.

As I toured the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, I couldn't help but feel moved by the collection of half-melted artifacts, slabs of concrete with “blast shadow” of people vaporized near ground zero, and the images of the destruction. I felt a combination of awe at the destructive power and disgust that an atomic weapon had to be used against a civilian population.

Those feelings were tempered by the personal losses of my family at the hands of the Japanese. My Uncle, Bill Green, an Army Air Force Bomber Navigator, was captured after a crash landing and beheaded by the Japanese in 1943. My father, a US Navy Aviator, was one of only two pilots in his original squadron to survive the war.

When I returned home, I visited my father. I wanted to tell him about what I had seen in Hiroshima. My father rarely talked about the war. While he was very proud to be a Naval Aviator, he had lost many good friends, including my uncle, and kept his thoughts and memories locked and buried.

When I explained what I had seen in Hiroshima and my mixed feelings about our use of atomic weapons, my father cut me off...

His words represented the thoughts of the 3 million Americans who served in the Pacific. At least a third of those 3 million military personnel would be dead if Japan were invaded.

We never spoke about the war again. My father died two years later.

I chronicled my family’s trials, tribulations, and losses across the naval battles of the South Pacific in three “Dystopic – Postcard from the South Pacific” newsletters. You can access them here:

• ​Dystopic - A Postcard from the South Pacific and World War 2 Battle Sites - Part 1​
• ​Dystopic - A Postcard from the South Pacific- Part 2 Guadalcanal
• ​Dystopic - The World after 100 Days of Trump and A Final Postcard from the South Pacific​

It is an unusual history, a father who at one time was hell bent on killing the Japanese, and a son who counted among his friends a number of Japanese. Since 1997, I have worked almost continuously with Japanese employees and customers. I have nothing but positive feelings toward Japan and its people, who have become one of our greatest allies.

Time truly heals all wounds.

Given the service and sacrifice of my family, it is no wonder that I have such a great passion for deterrence and the prevention of war. My Dystopic newsletters and my book, How the Hell Did We Get Here? serve as my outlet to constructively comment and educate anyone I can reach about the need to rebuild deterrence.

Eighty years have passed since that terrible week – may we be wise enough never to have such a week happen again in our history. It will be our complete undoing if we fail.

A Nuclear Reactor on the Moon

In support of a permanent manned base on the Moon, acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy issued a directive on Monday to appoint a new executive from NASA’s Exploration Mission Systems Development Directorate to lead a small team equivalent to 15 full-time engineers in developing a 100 kW lunar nuclear reactor.

This program will replace a 2022 NASA study contract with contractors Lockheed Martin, Westinghouse, and IX—a joint venture of Intuitive Machines and X-energy—to design 40kw reactors for the Moon. The effort was called FPS - Fission Surface Power

Why is a reactor on the moon? Solar power is simply not feasible…

A single day on the Moon, from sunrise to sunrise, lasts about 29.5 Earth days. This is because the Moon rotates on its axis in roughly the same amount of time it takes to orbit Earth. Consequently, the lunar day is divided into approximately 14.75 Earth days of daylight and 14.75 Earth days of darkness (learn more about Lunar Phases HERE)​

Operations analysis performed by NASA determined that 40KW is inadequate to operate the expected number of robotic harvesters that will process ice trapped in the lunar regolith. Separated from the regolith, lunar water will be broken down into hydrogen and oxygen, providing both oxygen for the lunar base and propellant for spacecraft/rocket propellant. The primary reason for returning to the moon is to create a self-sustaining space exploration economy, with the Moon, not the Earth, as the principal source of propellant and materials to construct spacecraft for Mars colonization and further resource harvesting in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.

If you’d like to know more about the future CIS-Lunar economy, here is a presentation I gave at the 2023 Small Satellite Symposium (HERE)

NASA now believes 100kW is required. If NASA intends to adhere to its published schedule of establishing a permanent manned presence on the Moon by 2030, as outlined in the Artemis Accords, it is no wonder Acting Director Duffy created a “tiger team” of engineers to accelerate the project.

The paper, "Weighing the Future: Strategic Options for U.S. Space Nuclear Leadership," lays out the options for deploying a nuclear reactor to the lunar surface. The paper suggests that it might cost $2 billion to build two demonstrator reactors in five years, through a highly focused joint commercial contractor effort with NASA. Duffy has taken the first step.

Building the reactor is not the challenge – there are now a number of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) that nuclear fission reactor vendors are gearing up to provide “green nuclear energy” to meet the power needs of all the AI datacenters that will be planned over the next decade. The major challenges for a reactor on the moon are:

• Safe transport of nuclear reactor to the moon … just imagine a launch failure raining down 6% uranium fuel rod material
• Thermal management of the reactor – the massive water cooling towers at terrestrial nuclear power plants are not feasible on the moon. The lack of atmosphere and water, will require large radiator structures to dissipate heat through radiation into space. The same radiated thermal reactor management will be needed for an interplanetary mission later in this century!

That’s a wrapfor this week …

Dystopic- The Technology Behind Today's News

Thank you for your readership and support. Please recommend Dystopic to friends and family who are interested, or just share this email. New Readers can sign up for Dystopic HERE​

If you have missed a Dystopic News letter, you can find select back copies HERE​

Finally, pick up a copy of my book:

How The Hell Did We Get Here? A Citizen's Guide to The New Cold War and Rebuilding of Deterrence

Available on Amazon USA HERE, Amazon Internationally (on your local Amazon page), or through Barnes & Noble and other major retailers online.

Follow Me on Social

​​​

​Unsubscribe | Update your profile | 113 Cherry St #92768, Seattle, WA 98104-2205

​