I honestly think it's a mix of those 2 options. The way I read into the actual man's quotes is that he was sort of trying to have it both ways. He and his team really did believe in the development of this entity, from a purist perspective: the push for scientific development is necessary to achieve greater knowledge, and it's an effort free from any political, ethical, or social leanings. But he also knew the directive: this was to be used against the Nazis if/when given the chance. That was an evil he (anyone) could excuse weaponizing against.

After the European front was over, he still pushed straight towards the Trinity test—without question, he wanted to be known as a god-tier name in theoretical physics, and if "father of the atomic bomb" turned out to be the way, I don't think he'd have a problem with it. But I also think he allowed his idealism/intellectualizing about scientific possibility to blind him; he forgot that politicians don't give a damn about achievements in quantum physics. They won't understand what you give them, but they'll use it in their perpetual ego contests as long as you tell them it's functional. To a scientist, I'd imagine that's the ugliest thing anyone could do with their creation.

I really appreciate you reading & commenting!