Sevtember 18, 1958

Dr, John Wheeler
Department of Physics
Princeton University
Princeton, BR, J.

Dear Dr, Wheeler:

My conscience still pricks me somewhat for heving bowed out of your
study group laet summer, but in retrospect I think thie we 4 sound de-
cision, from the standpoint both of my usefulnese and capacity. Conceivably
I might have played some role in lisbon between biologics) and physical
sciences; the particular areas of biological warfare metheds you indicated
would have been far out of my ken, and I am sure you could enlist someone
far better, Z have to wlah your mecting wis reasonably euccessfitl, and,
while I am not a little preocoupled by arrangesents for moving to Stanford
Zi hope I may be able to be of some help in this vital area in some other
way,

Thinking very crudely and guessing breadly abaut the eantext of your
disounssion, 4t surprised ue that you should be too deeply involved in what
might be called ‘alternative ultimte weapons,' Hoat ef the technical-strateric
probleca would seom to be centered on the problem of delivery, and if we
can deliver a thernenuclear weapon (or be able to threaten te) $+ 4+ not
obvious viet would be gained by having alternative warheads, In turn, lactsing
any defense against thie weapon, thore seers Little profit in coneentreting
too mich effart in caloulating defenses against alternative forms of attack,
ineluding the b&cterlologioal and neurological agents. This is predicated an
the overall stratery of ready retalia as the main defense, and it seeus
unerguable that the certainty of dalivery de the main problen,

It fis alse obvious, say from the Roskefeller 3rosa, report, that the
strategy and tactice of } @ warfare poss loss straightforward (not necessarily
more difficult) problems, and I would hope that the attention of scientifie
talonts could also be directed to thease less spestacular, lesa ‘advanced’
areas, where serious issues may well be decided during the next several years,
For this raasen, 1t would disturd me profoundly if there were not a proup
condtinting an amelyeis of the functions of the infantryuan, for exarple, vith
a view to pereolving which of theses Aunctions wight be expanded or replaced
by autozata, In your phone conversation you implied that you mew nothing
along these inca,
 

The sugcrestion be crudely naive, and 44+ is based on no personal
experience, but do” MM think we lask the technology to devine a ‘strafing
machine’ that might enlarge the effectiveness of an infantryman menyfold,
if not replace him altogether? The haming devises thet contro] 1 guided
miseile should be able to be adapted to puide a rifle, or ita equivalent,
The most difficult problem might be recognition, not so much as between
friend or foe, as perhaps between foe vs, neutral or captured, which sould
give some meaning to an automatonatie ocoeupation of territory’, I aa not

nr te write a paper now on the design of auch a machine, or what ites

echnique of locomotion, armament, defense, recognition ard contre, ought
to be, but I would be greatly disturbed if the acientific advisory groups
were so prececupied with advanaed projects there were no roem for so homely
an item, Before going any further, wo need advice on juet whet the infantry-
man'é functions are, vhen boiled down to easentials, And eo sex for the
other combat. fimetions lilely to be involved in ‘Limited warfare’,

Yours aincorely,

Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics