\ -16- \ enlarge our opportunities? Can we transpose what appears to be an immediate crisis into a long-term problem, which presumably would permit the application of more varied and better—considered correctives than the pitifully few and inadequate measures which seem available at the moment? It is precisely in order to answer such questions that we turn our attention to the effect of the bomb on the character of war. We know in advance that war, ° if it occurs, will be very different from what it was in the past, but what we want to kmow is: how different, and in what ways? A study of those questions should help us to discover the conditions which will govern the pursuit.of wofld security in the future and the feasibility of proposed measures for furthering that pursuit. At any rate, we know that it is not the mere existence of ‘the weapon but rather its effects on the traditional pattern of war which will paragraph a few specific conclusions concerning the bomb which have evolved as of that date: "We recognize that the application of recent scientific discoveries to the methods and practice of war has placed at the disposal of mankind means of military destruction hitherto unknown, against which there can be no adequate/ defense, and in the employment of which no single nation can in fact have a monopoly." This observation, it would seem, is one upon which all reasonable people would now be agreed. But it should be noted that of the three propositions presented in it the first is either a gross understatement or meaningless, the second has in fact been challenged bypersons in high military authority, and the . third, while generally admitted to be true, has nevertheless been the subject of violently clashing interpretations. In any case, the statement does not furnish a sufficient array of postulates for the kind of analysis we wish to pursue. It is therefore necessary to start out afresh and examine the various features of the bomb, its production, and its use which are of military