Hiroshima justified? (was Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and othermagnificent technological achievements)

Linda Terrell wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 16:26:36 UTC, RogerM
wrote:

"Col. RJ" wrote:


First off, **** you asshole. The women and children who were murdered
didn't have **** to with Pearl Harbor.

Secondly, your attitude is different from Osama Bin Laden's how,
exactly?

Maybe some day you American cowboy assholes will grow up and realize
there's more to life than having the biggest gun.


And the 3000 dead at WTC had what to do with Bin Laden? They had
invaded
his country how? They had fired on his family how?


Even if were to agree that the bombing of Hiroshima was wrong (I don't
know about today, but I know how I would have felt in 1945), what does
this have to do with the attack on the WTC? Does one wrong justify
another? The issue is that the Smithsonian's newest facility it about
aircraft history, not about the pros and cons of US military action.
The Enola Gay should be treated as other aircraft on display without
mention of the suffering and death caused by the bombings, nor mention
of the other side of the same argument.

The Enola Gay
should be treated as other aircraft on display without mention
of the suffering and death caused by the bombings, nor mention
of the other side of the same argument.

You mean so as to marvel at our own destructive capability
without reflection and a clear conscience.



Regards...

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote
The Enola Gay
should be treated as other aircraft on display without mention
of the suffering and death caused by the bombings, nor mention
of the other side of the same argument.

You mean so as to marvel at our own destructive capability
without reflection and a clear conscience.

Regards...

Yep, just like the automobile, which has killed more people in a week
than Atomic weapons ever did. Cars are beautiful, planes are beautiful,
and humans are expendable.

From: "Bjørnar Bolsøy" am

The Enola Gay
should be treated as other aircraft on display without mention
of the suffering and death caused by the bombings, nor mention
of the other side of the same argument.

You mean so as to marvel at our own destructive capability
without reflection and a clear conscience.



Regards...

No, just as a Roman gladius sword would be displayed as an artifact without
commentary as to its victims.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, returned

mrraveltay wrote in message ...
Linda Terrell wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 16:26:36 UTC, RogerM
wrote:

"Col. RJ" wrote:


First off, **** you asshole. The women and children who were murdered
didn't have **** to with Pearl Harbor.

Secondly, your attitude is different from Osama Bin Laden's how,
exactly?

Maybe some day you American cowboy assholes will grow up and realize
there's more to life than having the biggest gun.


And the 3000 dead at WTC had what to do with Bin Laden? They had
invaded
his country how? They had fired on his family how?


Even if were to agree that the bombing of Hiroshima was wrong (I don't
know about today, but I know how I would have felt in 1945), what does
this have to do with the attack on the WTC? Does one wrong justify
another? The issue is that the Smithsonian's newest facility it about
aircraft history, not about the pros and cons of US military action.
The Enola Gay should be treated as other aircraft on display without
mention of the suffering and death caused by the bombings, nor mention
of the other side of the same argument.

I completely agree. The problem today is too many museum exhibits are polticized.

(cave fish) wrote in
om:
mrraveltay wrote in message
...
Linda Terrell wrote:

Even if were to agree that the bombing of Hiroshima was wrong (I
don't know about today, but I know how I would have felt in 1945),
what does this have to do with the attack on the WTC? Does one wrong
justify another? The issue is that the Smithsonian's newest facility
it about aircraft history, not about the pros and cons of US military
action. The Enola Gay should be treated as other aircraft on display
without mention of the suffering and death caused by the bombings,
nor mention of the other side of the same argument.

I completely agree. The problem today is too many museum exhibits are
polticized.


The Enola Gay and what it represent is unique, it's not just
another B-29. It's not politics, or a battle of oppinions, an
unpresidented number of people died at the drop of a single, tiny bomb.

We have a responsibility to tell the story and provide the facts
whenever we can, when people come into the exhibition hall they
should be amply reminded of the horrible forces of a nuclear
weapon. To censor it out is an injustice IMO.



Regards...

There is a museum that exists in Albuquerque New Mexico - the US Atomic
Museum - where the history of (nuclear) weapons is displayed. I don't
remember seeing anything about the destructive levels of the weapons nor do
I REMEMBER seeing anything about the effects of usage on Japan (there are
shells of those weapons themselves on display as well as re-entry nose cones
from various current weapons.)

Oh, there is also a weapons museum not open to the public tracing the
developmental stages of nuclear weaponry from Manhattan to about 1970 or so
(but you need a security clearance and a need to know for entry there - not
in the same building)

"Bjørnar" wrote in message
...
(cave fish) wrote in
om:
mrraveltay wrote in message
...
Linda Terrell wrote:

Even if were to agree that the bombing of Hiroshima was wrong (I
don't know about today, but I know how I would have felt in 1945),
what does this have to do with the attack on the WTC? Does one wrong
justify another? The issue is that the Smithsonian's newest facility
it about aircraft history, not about the pros and cons of US military
action. The Enola Gay should be treated as other aircraft on display
without mention of the suffering and death caused by the bombings,
nor mention of the other side of the same argument.

I completely agree. The problem today is too many museum exhibits are
polticized.


The Enola Gay and what it represent is unique, it's not just
another B-29. It's not politics, or a battle of oppinions, an
unpresidented number of people died at the drop of a single, tiny bomb.

We have a responsibility to tell the story and provide the facts
whenever we can, when people come into the exhibition hall they
should be amply reminded of the horrible forces of a nuclear
weapon. To censor it out is an injustice IMO.



Regards...

"Bjørnar" wrote in message ...
(cave fish) wrote in
om:
mrraveltay wrote in message
...
Linda Terrell wrote:

Even if were to agree that the bombing of Hiroshima was wrong (I
don't know about today, but I know how I would have felt in 1945),
what does this have to do with the attack on the WTC? Does one wrong
justify another? The issue is that the Smithsonian's newest facility
it about aircraft history, not about the pros and cons of US military
action. The Enola Gay should be treated as other aircraft on display
without mention of the suffering and death caused by the bombings,
nor mention of the other side of the same argument.

I completely agree. The problem today is too many museum exhibits are
polticized.


The Enola Gay and what it represent is unique, it's not just
another B-29. It's not politics, or a battle of oppinions, an
unpresidented number of people died at the drop of a single, tiny bomb.

We have a responsibility to tell the story and provide the facts
whenever we can, when people come into the exhibition hall they
should be amply reminded of the horrible forces of a nuclear
weapon. To censor it out is an injustice IMO.


I agree, but that shouldn't be the main part of the exhibit. It's far
too grave and complex an issue to sum up with a written poster.
I think in some ways this Enola Gay exhibit is a reaction to the
Hiroshima exhibit some years ago which also neglected to put things in
context. In that cxhibit, Japan was victim, pure and simple. It didn't
explain what led to the war and why such drastic measures were taken,
justified or not.
It made it seem like poor hapless Japanese were nuked for no reason at
all.