You're absolutely right. I was wrong here. The real point I should've addressed is not this tangential one but that the fact of the omission doesn't reduce the

You're absolutely right. I was wrong here. The real point I should've addressed is not this tangential one but that the fact of the omission doesn't reduce the value of Rhode's telling of story of the atomic bomb at all. This HN post's existence is due to the book covering Oppenheimer which is currently a hot topic but the book is so much more than that.