Eisenhowers Future Theater of War

Dominique Awis
January 5, 2017
Abstract
Your abstract.

1
1.1

Chapter 1: Sputnik
Congressional Preparedness Subcommittee

Senator Johnson sat presiding over the Congressional Preparedness Subcommittee at 10 am on

a chilly Washington, DC morning along with Senators Johnson, Kefauver, Stennis, Symington,
Saltonstall, and Flanders as well as members of the Congresss special council. The group sat with
members of the Armed Services Committee.
"Please come to order," Senator Johnson said.
Senator Johnson would be presiding over a hearing called, "Inquiry into Satellite and Missile
Programs" on the November afternoon almost two months after the Soviets launched Sputnik in
1957.
Senator Johnson continued, "We are here today to inquire into the facts on the state of the
Nations security. Our country is disturbed over the tremendous military and scientific achievement
of Russia. Our people have believed that in the field of scientific weapons and in technology and
science, that we were well ahead of Russia. "
The room was quiet. "With the launching of Sputniks I and II, and with the information at
hand of Russias strength, our supremacy and even our equality has been challenged. We must
meet this challenge quickly and effectively in all its aspects," Johnson reported.
Johnson remembers looking up at the night sky and seeing Sputnik and feeling distressed that
the US was not first in science and technology, in space. [1] He began collecting information shortly
from the Pentagon after Sputniks launch and assembled a list of witnesses to hear from to prepare
a Congressional hearing on national defense and US science and technological security. His hope
was to create a record to sort out all the media hype about satellites and guided missiles.
Johnson continued, "There are a few things I wish to make clear about the committees attitude.
It would appear that we have slipped dangerously behind the Soviet Union in some very important
fields. But the committee is not rendering any final judgments in advance of the evidence, on why
we slipped or what should be done about it. Our goal is to find out what is to be done. We will
not reach that goal by wandering up any blind alleys of partisanship. I suppose that all of us,
being human, have some ideas on steps that should be taken. But the committee judgment will
represent a meeting of the minds after all the facts are available, and this committees judgment
will represent an effort to make a contribution to the defense of our Nation. The facts that I
learned so far give me no cause for comfort..."
Johnson called for unity between Democrats and Republicans. He brought up Pearl Harbor.
"There were just Americans anxious to roll up their sleeves to close ranks and to wade into the
enemy," he said.
Johnson called the first witness, Dr. Edward Teller, known as the Father of the H-Bomb, now
a professor at University of California Radiation Laboratory. Mr. Weisl was first to question
the witness. "Will you please tell us, Dr. Teller, briefly, what your relationship to atomic and
thermonuclear weapons has been since your arrival to this country?" Dr. Teller gave a brief
summary of his travels to different laboratories and his eventual tenure at University of California.
"Have you participated very actively in the development of the hydrogen bomb?" Mr Weisl
asked. "I have, yes, sir," Dr. Teller responded. Senator Johnson interrupted, "Senator Symington
is having trouble seeing the witness because of the photographers, and we have had a request to ask
1

them to take their pictures and then move along." Johnson shooed the audience of photographers
to the side.
Mr Weisl asked Dr. Teller about the relationship between fissionable and thermonuclear longrange missiles. Dr. Teller told of ballistic missiles, long-range missiles could shoot 1,500 to 5,000
feet, however the missiles werent much for accuracy therefore the larger the explosive the greater
the accuracy.
Mr. Weisl was concerned about accuracy, and asked Dr. Teller about "clean bombs" that is,
bombs that are powerful enough to cause a powerful explosion that hits on target, rather than a
long-range missile that requires a huge explosion to barely hit a target. Dr. Teller told Mr. Weisl
such weapons require significant testing.
The questioning continued. Dr. Teller testified that Sputnik required a rocketry, a rocket motor,
a guidance system, propulsion; and he discussed how these systems relate to ballistic missiles. If
rocket technology could be adapted...
Mr. Weisl got to the heat of the argument: "Then you believe that the Russians have an
intercontinental ballistic missile at this time? " Dr. Teller responded that he did not know if the
Russians had adapted rocketry technology to their ballistic missiles. The room was quiet; Mr.
Weisl pressed Dr. Teller. "Dr. Teller, what must the Russians have in their long-range guided
missile, in addition to their ability to put a satellite in outer space, in order to hit a target?"
Dr. Teller told Mr. Weisl about the problem of reentry when a rocket comes up the velocity that
is inevitable on the come down would be a high speed and be a problem. Dr. Teller told the
committee it was a problem the Russians could probably solve.
Mr. Weisl spoke, "Dr. Teller, why do you believe we are behind the Russians in the development
of the long-range missile?" Dr. Teller told the committee the US is behind in ballistics and the
Russian rocket technology is proof the US is behind. Dr. Weisl and Dr. Teller spoke for several
minutes and discussed how Russian scientists lead a good life and how Russian society uses science
very practically in everyday life.
Dr. Teller changed the subject. "Shall I tell you why I want to go to the moon?" he joked.
Mr. Weisl laughed, "Yes, sir."
Dr. Teller told of the scientific advancement going to the Moon or Mars would hold. Mr. Weisl
was more concerned again about Russia and asked Dr. Teller if he thought the Russians would see
the Moon as a military endeavor and if the US would find it practical militarily to go to the Moon.
"My imagination is not good enough for that," Dr. Teller responded. The committee discussed
assorted topics with Dr. Teller before calling its next witness to give testimony.
The Subcommittee met again the next day and discussed Russia science programs, its economy,
use ballistic missiles, and then Project Vanguard.
Project Vanguard was a project lead by Director, Dr. John Hagen who also served as a
member of the National Science Foundation. Dr. Hagen would be the Subcommittees next
witness. Dr. Hagen discussed Project Vanguard and how it was first a science experiment lead
by the Department of Defense to launch a satellite for the International Geophysical Year (IGY).
The Department of Defense had already done work in atmospheres and the Aerobees and Viking
rockets needed to launch the satellites needed to be built at the Naval Research Laboratory. The
IGY would last from July 1957 to December 1958. Dr. Hagan described the Viking rocket and the
orbit and the space-to-Earth communications of the satellite to the Subcommittee. The satellite
uses radio waves to communicate with a ground station. Dr. Hagen reiterated the project was
supposed to be off the ground by the end of the IGY.
Mr. Vance asked if the project could be hurried, and Dr. Hagen said there were funding
limitations, that ballistic missiles were of a higher priority and the Vanguard satellite program was
a secondary priority classification.
Mr.Vance asked, "[Without limitations] do you think that you could have gotten it up ahead
of Sputnik I?" Dr. Hagen responded at first hesitantly than responded, "I think that we probably
would have come very close to the same time, if not ahead of it." It was after this questioning
Congress had the information it needed to boost the Vanguard project from a low priority science
project to a higher security national defense project. Johnson called the committee to order and
decided an executive session was needed to meet in the Armed Services Committee Room to hear
the Director of Central Intelligence, Mr. Allen Dulles. Johnson settled the press, "At the conclusion
of his testimony I will meet with the press and tell them anything that I may be able to as a result
of that testimony...Dr. Hagen, we thank you for indulging us. Counsel, will you proceed with the
examination of the witness?"

Dr. Hagen continued to discuss the scientific benefits of the Vanguard Project. Later, Mr.
Vance asked Dr. Hagen about the military benefits of Project Vanguard. "...satellites, close-in
satellites, can certainly beexcellent aids to navigation. Within the Navy we, have this navigation
problem. The problem is not confined of course to the Navy but we are very aware of it. Close-in
satellites can help in navigation. They could also help in such things as television relays.
"What are they," Dr. Vance asked. Dr. Hagen continued, "You can place a satellite in an
orbit some 22,000 miles or so above the earth, at which time it has a period of just 1 day. So you
could place it over the United States, for example, and if you instrumented it as a television relay
station, you could feed television programs into the satellite and have them rebroadcast to cover
the whole of the United States with one transmitter. This is an obvious thing which will be done
some day and it certainly has its military advantages."
Dr. Vance then asked Dr. Hagen about Russian satellites. Dr. Hagen described Sputnik, and
described the "decay" process in which satellites are dragged down by the atmosphere and lose
orbit and burn up in the atmostphere "just as the meteor does," Hagen described.
Dr. Hagen discussed the Russian satellite Sputnik with the council and described the kind of
propulsion needed to launch the satellite. Senator Johnson was concerned if the American Viking
rocket could support such as satellite and Dr. Hagen was not sure, "we were comparing potatoes
and peas here when we compare with they are doing with our Vanguard experiment, because our
rocketry for this is not a military rocket, and we should not draw conclusions about our military
capabilities in this comparison." Dr. Hagen continued to describe the physics of the Vanguard
project and images were included in the Congressional record.
Senator Johnson thanked Dr. Hagen for his testimony and the Subcommittee hearing ended
about 4 pm that November day. The next few days the Subcommittee would hear testimony
on ballistics and guided missiles with witnesses from the Department of Defense, the Army and
the Armys Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) including testimony from Dr. Wernher von Braun,
Director of Development Operations Division at the ABMA.
Dr. Werhner von Braun was a man in his mid forties; he had short brown hair, wrinkles on
his face from decades studying rocket physics. He sometimes wore glasses. Von Braun was long
influenced by the science fiction works of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells and got his start in rocketry
working for the German Army working in the ballistic missile division. [2] He was formerly apart of
Hitlers "rocket team" and built V-2 bombers that used slave labor from a concentration camp in
Mittelwerk. [2] He stood before Congress that Wednesday afternoon and prepared to be questioned
about his work for the ABMA and the USs status on rocket development. Mr. Weisl began, "Dr.
von Braun, you are associated in the German use of the V-2. Will you tell the committee briefly
just what your association with the V-2 was?"
Von Braun responded, "The V-2 was the outgrowth of liquid fuel rocket developments that
had been going on in Germany since 1930. In 1930, still as a student, I became associated with
the German Society for Space Travel. We built some rather primitive liquid-fuel rockets under the
auspices of this society."
"How old were you at that time, Doctor?" Mr. Weisl asked. "Eighteen," Von Braun replied.
Von Braun began, "In 1932, about 2 years later, the German Army became interested in our
work, but was ready to support us only with the stipulation that we would move behind the fence
of an army facility. This is how I became affiliated with the German Army. Under the auspices
of the army we first built two smaller liquid fuel rockets, and by 1936 this project had progressed
so well that the German Army, jointly with the German Air Force, decided to establish a rocket
center on the Baltic Sea, which became the Rocket Center of Peenemuende, and it was there that
the V-2 rocket was developed. The actual development work on the V-2 began in early 1940. The
first flight tests were made in the spring of 1942, but were unsuccessful. In October 1942, the first
successful flight of the V-2 was made. In September 1944, the V-2 went into military operation."
Mr. Weisl asked, "Dr. von Braun will you tell the committee briefly how you managed to
escape from the Russians as they were approaching Peenemuende?" Von Braun testified about
how the Russian Army was approaching from the East and him and his comrades could hear the
artillery fire at night. "It was very obvious to me and my associates that the war was lost..." he
said. The group decided to go west

Figure 1: Vanguard Launching Vehicle as part of Congressional Record from Hagen testimony.

Figure 2: Scientific Earth Satellite via U.S. Naval Research Laboratory as part of Congressional
Record from Hagen testimony.

Technocracy

2.1

Soviet Union

2.2

United States

References
[1] J. M. Logsdon, The Decision to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and the National Interest. The
MIT Press, 1970.
[2] M. S. Center, Dr. wernher von braun. https://history.msfc.nasa.gov/vonbraun/bio.
html. [Online; accessed 49-January-2016].