Seems like "Enola Gay" was caught in a revisionist storm... AGAIN!!

The notion that the war would have ended quickly, merely
because the Japanese had clearly lost it, is nonsensical. The
Japanese had clearly lost the war by late 1943, the Germans
in early 1944. The war continued nevertheless well into 1945
on both fronts. Humans simply are not that rational.

Reading the radiograms that were coming into and going out of Spaatz's
headquarters in August 1945 is an amazing experience. The lads on
Tinian were preparing to drop the third bomb, gearing up to get the
Canadian Tiger Force and Jimmy Doolittle's 8th Air Force onto Okinawa,
and getting Boeing to modify the B-29 to hold a Grand Slam (whatever;
I can never keep them straight) under each wing -- at the same time
that they were trying to figure out how to put the first occupation
force into Tokyo.

Same feeling to read the debates of the Japanese war cabinet.

The war was running on autopilot by that time.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Today's Washington Post has more on the exhibit. It does in fact include
the statment: "On August 6, 1945, this Martin-built B0-29-45-MO dropped the
first atomic bomb used in combat on Hiroshima, Japan."

Yes, it does begin to seem that the display is more reasonable than
earlier portrayed.

Even the protestors (they include Gar Alperovitz, whom the Post
hilariously describes as an economist--he's the revisionist historian
of Hiroshima as war crime) seem to be backing off their original
statement:

"Kuznick said yesterday that the committee strongly objects to the
museum showing the plane as a technological achievement while omitting
more of its historical context, including the controversies leading up
to the bombing and the casualties."

In other words, it doesn't say what he wants it to say.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

From: "Emmanuel Gustin"

Has a professorship of 'political
economy', whatever that is, at some university.

The University of Maryland is not "some university."


Chris Mark

ost (Chris Mark) wrote in message ...
From: "Emmanuel Gustin"

Has a professorship of 'political
economy', whatever that is, at some university.

The University of Maryland is not "some university."


Chris Mark

True; all evidence currently indicates it is a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their "expertise" into whatever
field they so choose at that moment.

Brooks

rom: brooksvmi@yah

True; all evidence currently indicates it is a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their "expertise" into whatever
field they so choose at that moment.


Any examples?


Chris Mark

ost (Chris Mark) wrote in message ...
rom: brooksvmi@yah

True; all evidence currently indicates it is a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their "expertise" into whatever
field they so choose at that moment.


Any examples?

The gent mentioned and one who sometimes contributes to this NG (amongst others).

Brooks



Chris Mark

Even the protestors (they include Gar Alperovitz, whom the Post
hilariously describes as an economist--he's the revisionist historian
of Hiroshima as war crime) seem to be backing off their original

AFAIK he IS an economist. Has a professorship of 'political
economy', whatever that is, at some university.

Anyone who knows the name Gar Alperovitz, with the possible exception
of his mail-carrier and milkman, knows him as the author of books and
articles about Hiroshima. A newspaper that would describe him as an
economist would also characterize Albert Einstein as a Princeton
professor, or George W. Bush as the former owner of the Texas Rangers.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

True; all evidence currently indicates it is a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their "expertise" into whatever
field they so choose at that moment.


Any examples?

Gar Alperovitz?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

rom: brooksvmi

True; all evidence currently indicates it is a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their "expertise" into whatever
field they so choose at that moment.

Any examples?

The gent mentioned

If you mean Gar Alperovitz, I take it that you disagree with his views on the
atomic bombings. Fair enough. So do I. But I don't think that is sufficient
"evidence" to damn the University of Maryland as "a veritable hotbed of
professors who enjoy exaggerating their 'expertise' into whatever field they so
choose at that moment." That's more a description of every university
everywhere. Or people in bars. Or people in newsgroups.

My point, which seems to have been lost, is that the University of Maryland is
not merely "some" university, so insignificant that its name is not worth
mentioning. It's at least as worthy of mention as, say, the University of
Antwerp.




Chris Mark

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 14:47:10 +1100, David Bromage
wrote:

Emmanuel Gustin wrote:
The logical approach seems to be to make Enola Gay the centrepiece
of an exhibition dealing with the end of the war in the Pacific.

That's what NASM wanted to do in 1995. The Smithsonian argued at the
time that it presented the context in which the decision to drop the
bomb was made and the historical significance of its use. Anyone who has
been to the Smithsonian will know it is a serious research institution
which presents facts rather than opinions.

Well, while I while bow to the reputation of the Institution at large,
I stumble when I visit the Air & Space Museum. I walked through in
2000 with a friend, eager to show some of the aviation history that I
was involved in. I found WW I dioramas with biplane fighters and WW II
historic tactical aircraft from the European Theater and the Pacific.
I found research vehicles and satellite launch platforms, manned
capsules and rockets. But I didn't find a single tactical century
series aircraft. Oh sure, there was a white and blue NASA NF-104, but
there wasn't an F-100 or a 105 or an F-4 or an A-6 or an F-8. As far
as I could tell from NASM, the entire ten years of war in Southeast
Asia had never occurred.

Is this revisionism or am I just biased?

Hopefully the new facility, outside the beltway will allow some truths
to be revealed.