Images (15)
Document
| id |
id
75849577
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 157/9/53 - Wire VI - p.1
Q. (We were really quite intent?), because we weren't so much worried as to what they were
going to do right away, as to what was within the realm of the possible for the Germans,
and what they might consider within the realm of the possible for the Germans over a period
of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years. Did it look as though the Germans might, once more, try
to
-
alone - get a dominand position in the world.
Q. How broad a fant front were you asked for these questions?
Q. I am not quite sure I follow what you mean.
Q. What range of data, and what kinds of knowledge, were readily available. - when have you
got to think of questions of that kind. I an thinking of what you say that, on some criteria
(Joe McGrath ?)
or other, you can presumably - that the(demecratic ?) position
was (approach ?) of
the all-important factor. Now, the point you had decided it was important factor - you had
facilities for immediately mobilizing your own information.
Q. I think we had - we never felt any lack of information, because the research and
intelligence group, after all, is a great big outfit. I think they are the largest section
of
the State Department. As I remember, they have 7 or 8 hundred people in the research
and intelligence group, and they are very good, and they have got access to every type of
information
for study on this.
TRUMAN
Confused.
ARCHIVES S. 'NATIONAL RECORDS AND
is SERVICE"
Q. of information, but there was some question of what you regarded as relevant.
of Yes, I think the basic questions are always those of setting up what things are really
significant, and what things are minor details - what is the heart of the issue. And then,
what data can you really absorb, and synthesize into a judgement on these things.
Q. And you sor' t of have rule of thumb, common sense criteria for deciding?
Q. Well, Paul, it's much too complex to put into any formula. They just argue these
things back and forth, back and forth, and eventually you come to a consensus that this is
much more important than that, and here is where the real issues lie, and this is the way
it looks, and this is what we are going to operate on.
Q. A sort of a dialectic analysis, with different points of view in the group expressed,
and bickering back and forth to get all the relevant points out, and more or less of a "
Relations
belongs_to
belongs_to