The most tasteless and insensitive museum exhibit ever.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
How so, Agathon?
There are memorial museums for holocaust victims and all else.
What about the U.S.S. Arizona?

Those are fine by me, in fact they are the best sort of war museums.

This is different: the aircraft is on display and there is only mentioned that it bombed Hiroshima. No mention of the victims, no mention of the horror of nuclear weapons, nothing.

You can see why they'd be peeved.

[David Floyd]

This is different: the aircraft is on display and there is only mentioned that it bombed Hiroshima. No mention of the victims, no mention of the horror of nuclear weapons, nothing.

What, you mean someone is actually trying to separate history from emotional appeals and value judgements?

Good!

[Boris Godunov]

The Enola Gay isn't a nuclear weapon, it's a plane.

[Kropotkin]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
i have a problem with people pretending that japan's rape of nanjing or its brutal occupation of korea somehow makes the civilians blameless, when the country was totally militarized and the civilians themselves were complicit in the behavior of the military.

So, a supporter of the concept of collective guilt. How interesting, another thing that ought be be put in a museum.

[Q Classic]

So, a supporter of the concept of collective guilt. How interesting, another thing that ought be be put in a museum.

when the japanese stop pretending to be the sole victims of what happened in the first half of the century, maybe i'll change my tune.

[Kropotkin]

And what exactly does that have to do with a couple of a-bomb survivors protesting against an exhibition and being accused for things they had little, if anything, to do with by a number of ignorant bastards??

[Boris Godunov]

Q, If you're okay being on that level, that's up to you, but I think it's sad.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

with all due respect im not sure everyone agrees with that statement.

Hiroshima in fact killed fewer people than the firebombing of Tokyo. There was a gradual coarsening of attitude toward civilian deaths on the part of the allies, that started in august 1939. The notion of setting apart Hiroshima is largely due to 2 facts
1. The later construction of larger nuclear weapons capable of destroying all human life - something not entirely foreseeable in 1945.

That is what makes it the supreme horror. There isn't really very much good that can be said about nuclear annihilation. Wars were plenty bad up until then, but this is the first time that it became clear that the whole planet could go up in smoke and that it would all be over.

As Oppenheimer said, "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds." That should stand as the single most important quotation of the 20th century.

2. The fact that making Hiroshima, rather than Auschwitz, or the Gulag, the supreme horror of the modern age fitted well with the ideological agendas of certain people during the cold war.

Those were terrible things, but really not that new in human history. Genghis Khan ravaged his way across a continent and put whole cities to the sword. That's awful stuff, but it's less awful than a weapon which will decimate all life and poison the very substance of the world.

I don't object to war museums, I enjoy visiting them. Anyone who likes doing so would find me an enthusiastic companion. However, I think that such a powerfully symbolic aircraft, one that means so much to people for all sorts of horrible reasons, should be the centre of an exhibit that speaks to the terrible suffering and death caused by, and frankly the utter immorality of, nuclear weapons.

There was nothing glorious about that mission. It represents a profound failure of reason on all sides. I don't blame Tibbets and the others who were just doing their job, and I'm not sure I even blame Truman, even though I am not convinced of the military value of the bombing. We should all look at Hiroshima as one place where, for one reason or another, things truly went to ****.

Every one of us should do everything within our power to prevent something like Hiroshima ever happening again. If it takes showing people pictures of charred bodies, that is a small price to pay. This has nothing to do with being on the left or on the right, you have to be alive or not croaking from radiation poisoning for that to matter.

[Agathon]

And another thing. If you say that using nuclear weapons on people is a mere value judgement that has no place in history, then what's the point of history other than being "pretty". If we don't use it to understand our mistakes and illuminate our sense of what really matters and our sense of human folly, then I see no point in it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Agathon
And another thing. If you say that using nuclear weapons on people is a mere value judgement that has no place in history, then what's the point of history other than being "pretty". If we don't use it to understand our mistakes and illuminate our sense of what really matters and our sense of human folly, then I see no point in it.

I agree that a debate on values about hiroshima is appropriate. I dont think merely citing the casualty figures does that, and i dont know that Air and Space is the place for a full discussion of nuclear war, etc.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Agathon



Those were terrible things, but really not that new in human history. Genghis Khan ravaged his way across a continent and put whole cities to the sword. That's awful stuff, but it's less awful than a weapon which will decimate all life and poison the very substance of the world.

In fact there is a large school of thought that says that for quite a number of reason the holocaust was a Novum in history and not simply an extension of historical atrocities. However this is not the place for that discussion.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

I agree that a debate on values about hiroshima is appropriate. I dont think merely citing the casualty figures does that, and i dont know that Air and Space is the place for a full discussion of nuclear war, etc.

If they'd put some other B-29 there it wouldn't have been an issue.

Or better still, a Northrop P-61 "Black Widow" - one of the coolest planes ever made.


I'm sorry I ranted. I really hate nuclear weapons. Been reading too much Bertrand Russell I think.

[Q Classic]

And what exactly does that have to do with a couple of a-bomb survivors protesting against an exhibition and being accused for things they had little, if anything, to do with by a number of ignorant bastards??

it doesn't. that was a response to a different question posed above.

Q, If you're okay being on that level, that's up to you, but I think it's sad.

i don't have any ill will towards the japanese. i just refuse to humor them when they act like they were the only ones hurt by the war.

am i opposed to nuclear weapons? yes. do i think that what happened in those two cities should never be done again? of course. should i for some reason hold those victims up above others who suffered and died during the same time period simply because they weren't vaporized in an atomic flash?

[Sarxis]

From the article:

"We would not mind the plane going on display if they showed the tragedy they caused," said Ms Tomonaga, a Red Cross nurse at the time of the bombing.

Don't they mean the tragedy prevented? Stopping Japan from commiting Seppuku on the sword of the inevitable US invasion?

Even after the two bombs were dropped, there was an attempted coup by some of Japan's military to continue the war.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Anun Ik Oba
From the article:


Don't they mean the tragedy prevented? Stopping Japan from commiting Seppuku on the sword of the inevitable US invasion?

Even after the two bombs were dropped, there was an attempted coup by some of Japan's military to continue the war.

This is debatable. Japan was finished long before the bombings.

[yavoon]

yah really why should important pieces of history be in museums.

IT MIGHT OFFEND SOMEONE!

[Kropotkin]

Good point yavoon. The complete dismantling of the internet will start in 5,....4,....3,....2,....1 seconds.

Have a nice day!

[Sarxis]

I don't have any sources off hand, but from what I've gleaned from historical accounts, Japan was anything but a dead horse at the end of the war. Of course not as strong as initially, but well able to do a last-stand defense of the mainland, and possibly some pacific territories as well.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by yavoon
yah really why should important pieces of history be in museums.

IT MIGHT OFFEND SOMEONE!

Which isn't even an issue, so why say it? Or didn't you read the thread?

[Ned]

The problem with the display is that it presents a post-war revision of history that was fabricated to protect the reputation of Truman. The display is a travesty.

[Sprayber]

God, I fear for the future if we ever have to fight a war such as that again. I'm glad the war was fought by that generation instead of this one. We would have lost.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Which isn't even an issue, so why say it? Or didn't you read the thread?

u mean did I read all the spiraling argument? no. I read the main post. what in my post made u think Ir ead the entire thread?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by yavoon
u mean did I read all the spiraling argument? no. I read the main post. what in my post made u think Ir ead the entire thread?

Um, I didn't think you had read the whole thread, which is why I made the comment.

But even from the beginning, the issue hasn't been whether or not such things should be displayed, but how they should be displayed.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Um, I didn't think you had read the whole thread, which is why I made the comment.

But even from the beginning, the issue hasn't been whether or not such things should be displayed, but how they should be displayed.

u might wna re read the main post again.

I know u carry around a lot of baggage in assumptions w/ u but this is more imrpessive than most of ur leaps.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by yavoon
u might wna re read the main post again.

I know u carry around a lot of baggage in assumptions w/ u but this is more imrpessive than most of ur leaps.

From the article:

Survivors are disappointed the plane is being displayed with no reference to casualty figures at Hiroshima.

"We would not mind the plane going on display if they showed the tragedy they caused," said Ms Tomonaga, a Red Cross nurse at the time of the bombing.

From the thread starter's very next post:

All they needed to do was make some mention of the civilian victims - but there is nothing. The US is supposed to be a friend of Japan.

Now, who's making leaps and assumptions? Oh oh oh, I believe it's you. Next time, read, dear.

[Ming]

Would you two just CHILL!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




From the article:



From the thread starter's very next post:



Now, who's making leaps and assumptions? Oh oh oh, I believe it's you. Next time, read, dear.

I didnt read the next post. and thats all they want? a placard saying # of dead and injured? I dont think thats unreasonable. sure add the # of killed.

but sufficed to say that leaving out the # of dead doesn't cause me an uproar and seeing as its a very important part of history. it is definitely not the worst or most offensive exhibit ever.

[Q Classic]

why are we protesting the messenger, anyway? the enola gay was there to deliver the weapon.

isn't it the weapon, and any exhibit about it, that should contain the images of destruction?

[Kropotkin]

They planned to, but some moron blow up the bomb.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Agathon


This is debatable. Japan was finished long before the bombings.

No, its not debatable. In recent years the Japanese government has released much of their end of war documentation and paperwork. The History Channel aired a series analyzing some of the info. The most amazing thing I discovered from it was that the two atomic bombs had no impact on the Japanese decision to fight to the death. Their ministry simply readjusted their timetable on when the entire Japanese populace would become extinct and the number of American soldiers they would kill in the process.

The actual event that caused the Japanese to surrender was the declaration of war on Japan by Russia. They considered Russia their ally and Russia declared war because they were afraid America would occupy all of Japan after Russia saw the results of the two Atomic bombs.