America\u27s quest for security and the hydrogen bomb controversy

Theoretically, the hydrogen bomb controversy is an instance of terminological tension and resolution; it reveals the identifications and values which were used to justify the early escalation of the nuclear arms race. Thus, the purpose of this study is to explore the hydrogen bomb controversy in order to illumine the case both as a significant historical decision and as one moment in America\u27s ongoing quest to preserve freedom. The primary research question of the study then is What terms guided the competing sides of the hydrogen bomb controversy? A close textual analysis of the hydrogen bomb controversy was performed within an archetypal framework. The study asserts that the hydrogen bomb controversy is best understood as a terminological quest. Rhetorical analysis of the quest\u27s stages reveals the values and identifications which constrained decision and action at the time. Those identifications and values are contextualized within the strains of American discourse in order to explain their strategic function. From this analysis, Edward Teller emerges as the hero of the quest for security. His struggle to make the hydrogen bomb a reality against powerful opposing forces is the quest\u27s substance. J. Robert Oppenheimer is the quest\u27s villain. Textual analysis suggests that Teller\u27s pragmatic mysticism fit America\u27s overall identifications during the immediate post-World War II era. Oppenheimer\u27s idealistic terminology challenged traditional identifications. Oppenheimer, for the most part, rejected Cold War rhetoric and the policies which it justified. Given Oppenheimer\u27s overwhelming political influence at the time, his symbolic orientation was perceived as a threat. He was removed from government service through a personnel security hearing. Teller\u27s more acceptable orientation to Science and Security was celebrated in the mass media. His terminology was reaffirmed