- 6,384
- 1,053
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
Whether or not it protected the U.S. it was an illegal act. Nothing changes that.Rightly or wrongly, the project was, at it's core designed to protect the US by ending the war, and therein lies the fundamental difference -If the US government had developed the project with the intent to drop the bombs over US soil for some shady, ulterior motive then you would have a point. But for this reason the Manhattan project should really be classed as a top secret military operation rather than a conspiracy ...hence why I specifically mentioned classified information.The Manhattan Project has actually been ranked the largest conspiracy in the United States. However, you are too caught up in the definition of "conspiracy" to realize that.
"An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors."
It is unlawful to create nuclear weapons in complete secrecy. It's smarter, of course, but it is not in the best interest. The government has protected itself from persecution with clauses, but that does not make the act unlawful. That is just the government being unjust. You and I could do the exact same thing, and probably be sentenced to death. It's an illegal act, which is a given. When you have the people who make the laws, who then break the same laws. It is an illegal act.
In addition, the government will ALWAYS be exempt from any laws. If a conspiracy was somehow discovered in the recent Boston attacks, what would happen to the government? Would anyone really go to jail, or be sentenced to death?
Not a single one of them would.
Same thing applies with the Manhattan Project. They did an unlawful act, in secrecy, and were not punished.
We exempt ourselves from worldwide organizations because we would get in more trouble than Osama Bin Laden with all of the war crimes we have committed. Including the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Was it legal or a war crime are different arguments. (which for the record, semantics and technicalities aside, I would basically agree with you on)
As for the Boston bombings, If some kind of government conspiracy were found to be true, I think it's fair to say there would be overwhelmingly serious repercussions for those involved.
Usually, most acts to protect ones self doesn't exactly need to be in secrecy, such as the large amount of propaganda. When the US created it's first air force we were not hush-hush about that.
The Manhattan Project was kept a secret because it was illegal. Britain, or any other country for that matter, would have attempted to stop the bombs production. Why? Because it is against international law.
Which is why the US never signs up for the international organizations, because we would be tried for war crimes. Starting with the Atomic Bomb.
Just because the government excludes itself from laws, does not mean the act is not unlawful. They are just playing unfair.
Which is why it is considered a conspiracy. Not just a secret operation. (However most conspiracies would be secret operations anyway.)