Enola Gay exhibit omits mention of Hiroshima bombing

[Atlant]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/11/02/MNG8T2OFD31.DTL

Enola Gay exhibit omits mention of Hiroshima bombing
Many want Smithsonian to note A-bomb role

Elizabeth Olson, New York Times

Washington -- When officials at the Smithsonian Institution unveiled a new home for the World War II bomber the Enola Gay in August, they had hoped to avoid the kind of controversy that had previously plagued efforts to exhibit the airplane that carried the first atomic bomb.

Not likely. Now a group of scholars, writers, activists and others have signed a petition criticizing the exhibit for labeling the Enola Gay as "the largest and most technologically advanced airplane for its time" without mentioning that the Boeing B-29 dropped the bomb on Hiroshima.

"You wouldn't display a slave ship solely as a model of technological advancement," said David Nasaw, a cultural historian at the City University of New York Graduate Center, and one of more than 100 signers of the petition. "It would be offensive not to put it in context."

Peter J. Kuznick, the director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, who initiated the petition along with members of the anti- war group Peace Action, emphasized that they were not opposed to the display. "It is essential that the plane be displayed," Kuznick said, "but it must include discussions about the decision to drop the bomb."

<more>

[RC]

1. It's history! It happened.

Lay it out the way it happened. What is wrong about people knowing?

How's the saying go; "Those who don't know history are bound to repeat it."

[Wwagsthedog]

4. The people who don't know history are unfortunately in charge

Lets see. In US history, it took the USA until 1900 to kill most of the Native Americans and Mexicans. Then we moved our killing machine to the Philipines and Vietnam to name our biggest misguided military ventures of the 20th century. Now we have decided Afghanistan and Iraq need our form of succor. Check the polls to see how mindless our support of war is. History? What history? Sadly, most Americans haven't a clue. If they did, we would be an enlightened nation instead of a bloodthirsty one.

end of rant.

[vernon_nackulus]

8. That's exactly why...

...conservatives say liberals hate America. Unfortunately, what you said is all true. When do we start learning from our own mistakes?

[lostnfound]

99. Well said n/t

[DrBB]

2. MiniPax,MiniLuv, MiniTruth

Here we have this plane to display, this B-29. Why this one? Dunno. Can't say. Nice plane, though, huh?

How about NOT displaying it then? Can't do that either. Must display it, just can't say why.

We are the shining beacon of truth and liberty to the world. They hate us for our freedoms.

Perhaps they will admire us for our big mute bomber. Our big bomber with the nice gag tied over its mouth. They will say, gee, what a nice bomber. We will say, You want fries with that?

[librechik]

3. WTF???!!!

Why do they think that plane was even important enough to archive then? Why even have an exhibit?

Do these pod people even have a brain?

[UpInArms]

5. more historical revisionism

occurring before our eyes -

remember when monkeyboy said we had 150 years of great relations with Japan?

now this....

enough already of the spinning!

[alwynsw]

61. More PC gone amok tha revisionism

this debate started in 1991. The original exhibit was worded in such a way that it left the impression that the U.S. fired the first salvo in WWII.

Leaving the A bomb out is a compromise.

It's history. It happened. We need to remember it all.

BTW: Some may see an irony in this. Paul Tibbets, at last report drives a Camry. Heard an NPR interview with him a couple of years ago.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

6. i saw it when it was in pieces

at the smithsonian warehouse in suitland, md several years ago.
no wings attached just the fusilage lying on the floor. i was amazed how small it actually was. it was weird standing next to it and looking into the cockpit.

[karlschneider]

7. Jeezus, then why the hell would they.....oh never mind...

too busy trying to get my lower jaw back up off the floor...

:eyes:

[Rose Siding]

9. "lie of omission"

On a scale so huge as to be unimaginable.

[dArKeR]

10. If this doesn't prove our GOP media/Bush government is a fascist regime

then our country is ready to crumble!

[Ellen Forradalom]

11. In other news, a new John Lennon exhibit

makes no mention of the Beatles.

[karlschneider]

12. I guess we'll have to take down that pesky VietNam memorial wall too...

and now I must go outside and frighten the neighborhood.

[Judi Lynn]

13. The only reason I've ever recognized the name of that plane

is because of its connection to the bombing of Hiroshima.

It is astonishing to think there's even one person anywhere who would consider trying to seperate its actual function in history from its simple physical characteristics.

[jody]

14. The Enola Gay and the decision to use our atomic bombs are proper

historical items. It is stupid however for historians et al to play "what if" games in second guessing Truman. In context and given available estimates of allied casualties, I believe most who criticize Truman, if they had the right stuff to be elected President, would have made the same decision Truman made.

The other 99.999999999999999% are just blowing smoke.

[bpilgrim]

18. no informed military leaders in theater at that time agree

they thought it wasn't neceassary and with the benifit of hindsight i agree.

http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. Damn nice of you

And, of course, Truman needed YOUR OK. Lol.

It was the right thing to do at the time. It ended the war. The resulting peace created a Japan freed from its imperialist and expansionist past and made that nation strong and democratic. It saved tons of lives of Americans and prevented an invasion and eventual devastation of the Japanese mainland.

Truman made a tough choice. Truman made the right choice.

Now, you made your statement. I made mine. In deference to the gigabytes of data we could now waste and the time it would take to do so, let's leave it at that.

I will say, they should simply say in the exhibit that this is the plane that dropped the bomb. Mention the other bomb dropping and how Japan surrendered afterward. Anything else is open to massive politics.

[bpilgrim]

21. how generous of you

http://www.lukefisher.com/can-walk.wav

at least i provide links ;->

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. Good job

:)

[Muddleoftheroad]

31. A better link

Here is one of the endless DU discussions on this topic that elaborates both support and opposition to the bombing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=337703

[knowledgeispower]

43. So would it be okay for someone to nuke the U.S.?

I mean, our government clearly has some rather imperialist notions that are dangerous to the rest of the world. So if, say, Russia were to nuke a part of the United States to send the message that our government's dreams of empire are not okay, would that be a good move in your book?

I didn't think so. Same difference.

[DeathvadeR]

52. Real men use their hands.

The Bomb is/was a pussy ass move.

[mikehiggins]

25. Interesting quotes

I seem to recall some Japanese historians disagreeing with that point of view. It seemed that the military was prepared for hand-to-hand, door to door fighting to protect the Emperor, even though he had no wish to continue the war by that point.

The nukes gave him the excuse he needed to overrule the generals and sue for peace.

Anyone familiar with those citations? This isn't a topic I'm usually involved in discussing so they are not ready to hand.

[bpilgrim]

32. the japanese were ready to fight on till their one condition was met

the institution of emperor continue to be recognized as the symbolic head of the japanese.

once we agreed to that, the war ended.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

35. I thought we weren't going to do this

But I will respond in kind.

The Japanese surrendered after having two nukes dropped on them. To say they surrendered ONLY because "their one condition was met" is silly. You can't say they did one thing while taking it out of the context of the greater situation was: their nation had been blasted to bits by the air and was clearly going to be more so if they didn't surrender.

[bpilgrim]

37. to summarize...

we NUKED a defenseless, trying to surrender nation's cities filled with innocent civilians, men women and children TWICE against the advice of all informed military leaders in theater who thought it unnecessary.

the tragic irony of the propaganda that continues to this very day that there is a grain of truth to it just the opposite of what it claims though...

most thought to save lives we should accept japans one condition to surrender in the spring early summer of 45 to SAVE LIVES.

after running out of nukes we finally did and history proves it to be a wise decision to not touch the emperor and allow the institution to continue.

now i know you continue to buy into the idea that it was 'ok' to use WMD on a defeated nations innocent civilians even during these days of terrorism and that i don't expect you to change your mind anytime soon but please don't expect me be silent about this very important topic.

peace

(edited spelling)

[bpilgrim]

38. MUSHROOM CLOUDS

XX-39 CLIMAX, part of Operation Upshot/Knothole, was a 61 kiloton device fired June 4, 1953 at the Nevada Test Site.



more...
http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/photos&films/atm.htm

Nuclear Weapons Test Film Descriptions

0800012 - Operation Ivy, Parts 1 and 2 - "The island of Elugelab is missing!" President Eisenhower heard this short report on the Mike shot in Operation Ivy from Gordon Dean, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. Mike was the first full-fledged hydrogen bomb to be tested.

The island where the device was detonated was vaporized. The hole Mike left was big enough to accommodate several pentagon-size buildings and deep enough to hold the Empire State Building. Mike's yield was an incredible 10.4 megatons, signaling the expansion of the nuclear arsenal from fission to fusion, the same process that occurs in the Sun.

The detonation of the Mike device was the climax of an intense debate over what would be the nation's correct response to the startling news in 1949 that the Soviet Union had detonated a nuclear weapon. Many wanted the U.S. to develop the means to produce and field a large number of fission bombs of varying yields which could be used for tactical purposes. Others believed that the country should institute a crash program like the Manhattan Project to develop a Super weapon based on the idea of forcing together or fusing light atoms with a fissile device to produce enormous amounts of energy.

After a bitter fight among scientific, government and military officials, the President opted for a crash program to demonstrate the Super bomb, now called a hydrogen or thermonuclear weapon. Many designs were evaluated and rejected until the Mike proposal came along. This concept involved the cooling of hydrogen fuel to a liquid form, near absolute zero, and fusing the hydrogen nuclei into helium using the atomic bomb as a trigger.

The Mike device was a 22-foot-long, 5-foot-diameter cylinder housing canisters of liquid hydrogen fuel. These canisters were surrounded by the atomic trigger. The Mike shot occurred on October 31, 1952, and as scientists watched from 40 miles away as the mushroom cloud rose into the stratosphere, the second generation of nuclear weapons was born.

Mike was followed on November 15, 1952, by the King shot, the largest fission device ever tested. It was an implosion bomb, but with an advanced warhead that enabled it to produce 500 kilotons of power.

http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/photos&films/0800012/ivy_mike.mpg
more...

HELLFIRE

psst... pass the word

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

39. To summarize

We nuked a nation that had not surrendered and, while trying to work out a better deal for itself, continued to wage war. There is no such concept as, "trying to surrender." They were offered unconditional surrender and didn't take it. Until you surrender and stop fighting, you are still at war. A war, in this case, that they not only started, but that they waged with an inhuman and vile ferocity against soldier and civilian alike.

Leaders in the field OFTEN don't have the whole grasp of what's going on. In our system, the buck stops at the desk of the president. Harry Truman made the decision and, fortunately, history has proven him correct. It worked out best for all concerned.

Japan's reluctance to surrender was costing lives and would have continued to do so. Further, given the Japanese military's reluctance to surrender (so strong that Japan had to make discreet surrender inquiries for fear of its own military), there remains no guarantee that the military would have given up in any other scenario. Even after the pounding by not one, but TWO nukes, the Japanese military nearly staged a coup.

No, history proves that the COLLECTION of actions worked. You can't remove dropping the nukes from that collection, much as you would like to try.

As for the rest, Japan started the war and killed its share of the Axis millions. We eneded the war because they wouldn't do so.

Now I heartily encourage all to go to the other link. Otherwise, you and I might as well simply cut and paste our previous posts.

[bpilgrim]

41. we NUKED a DEFEATED NATION'S INOCENT CIVILIAN POPULATION

:nuke: :nuke:

TWICE

not to mention TRYING TO SURRENDER.

now i am just stating FACTS you on the other hand seem to be trying to limit debate.

and i will add that former Secretary of War Henry Stimson noted in his diary the advantages of using the atomic bomb during the war in order to deal more effectively with the Soviet Union afterward and in his autobiography published a year later -- on the option of ending the war just as quickly, without using the atomic bomb, by modifying the demand for unconditional surrender. 'It is possible, in the light of the final surrender,' Stimson wrote in On Active Service in Peace and War, 'that a clearer and earlier exposition of American willingness to retain the Emperor would have produced an earlier ending to the war.'

more...
http://blogs.salon.com/0002551/2003/11/03.html#a492

some will NEVER admit to ANY of americans crimes no matter how HORRID nor OBVIOUS.

hiroshima is the second most horrid word in the american lexicon succeeded only by NAGASAKI - kurt vonnegut

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

42. LOL

Like a dog with a bone. You just won't let go. You won't accept the reality that it was needed, nor will you accept that Monday Morning Quarterbacking isn't really running a team.

As for the Vonnegut quote, he has to sell books, he didn't have to actually run a nation at war.

[bpilgrim]

45. you find that FUNNY

:crazy:

as for Vonnegut he was one of the ones who witnessed the suffering of EVERYONE under the decisions of POWERFUL MEN.

peace

[Forkboy]

50. Kind of emphasizes what you're dealing with BP

sad,pathetic and scary all at once.

[Muddleoftheroad]

53. No, I find your attitude funny

You persist in this argument nearly 60 years after the fact. You persist in this argument despite hundreds of posts on both sides here.

[bpilgrim]

56. my 'attitude'

whatever...

i am just stating FACTS that haven't been disputed and i encourage all to research them.

thank GORE he 'invented' the internet :bounce:

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

64. Dispute

Well, the problem truly is your conclusion. You conclude, based on yout THEORIES about what MIGHT have happened, that dropping the bombs should have been avoided. But that's all you have are theories. I have reality. Reality worked. Damn well actually.

[RapidCreek]

104. So you ARE suggesting that the murder of civilians is ok, then.

Gotcha chief. Guess we should have nuked Iraq then....and saved ourselves all this damn trouble.

RC

[Muddleoftheroad]

106. Civilians

Every major nation in WWII fought a TOTAL war. That means they went after more than just military targets, they went after the means of production. Both sites supported Japanese military with production, support and bases. I think it was Nagasaki that served as the launching point for the Japanese invasion of Midway.

[knowledgeispower]

46. I'm glad you are able to laugh at the deaths of a 1/2 million japanese

I mean, if you can't laught at that, what can you laugh at?

[Muddleoftheroad]

54. Not laughing at death at all

Laughing at the persistence of one poster to endlessly battle out this argument.

[bpilgrim]

59. Laughing at persistence

said the hair to the tortoise.

truth is persistent

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. You aren't encouraging truth

You encouraging fantasy.

[Sapphocrat]

85. I'll give you some truth, Muddle...

...and I'll make you a deal:

If your town ever gets nuked and mine doesn't, you have an open invitation to my house, where you and I can discuss the "rightness" or "wrongness" of the A-bomb's swift, inarguable conclusion to conflict.

That is, if you can hold up your end of the conversation while the flesh slides off your bones like that of an overcooked chicken.

Did you bother to read the blog entry bpilgrim posted? You can ignore all the speculation about what might have happened without the A-bomb; I really don't care if you think the bomb was the only way to end the war, and I'm not interested in debating that point with you.

Instead, I want you to consider whether or not the estimated 30,000 to 50,000 American lives "saved" by nuking Hiroshima was worth the instant incineration of 200,000 human beings, and a lifetime of grief, night terrors, fused fingers, genetic mutations, and a smorgasbord of cancers for another half-million or so.

I wonder if you can put yourself in the place of the 13-year-old who held his classmate as he died. Imagine throwing yourself into a river to make the burning stop -- when it won't stop. Put your mother -- or wife or sister -- in place of the woman on the streetcar who nursed her baby throughout the day until he died, and who will go to her own death believing her child "sucked the poison right out" of her body to save his mother's life.

Or would the suffering of American service personnel sent into Hiroshima or Nagasaki mean more to you? Ask Norm Duncan if it was worth the cost. Or Roger Brisso. In fact, ask 300,000 Duncans and Brissos exposed to fallout, whether they were sent to post-war Japan or merely sacrificed as "collateral damage" on American soil during our journey toward creation of the Doomsday Machine.

Set some time aside to read Harvey Wasserman & Norm Solomon's Killing Our Own. The whole book is online, right here.

And then ask yourself: What price glory?

[Muddleoftheroad]

92. No glory, just an end to something we didn't begin

War sucks. When you make war people die. The Japanese and their Axis buddies made war like it had never been done before. It wasn't just the scale, dwarfing even WWI, it was the widescale barbarism, using modern techniques to apply monstrous behavior more common in the Middle Ages.

I have read bpilgrim's posts till they run out my ears. This is not the first time for this endless debate nor, I fear, will it be our last. I'm sure he must feel he is sounding the clarion call and revealing some sort of great evil. He posts paint him as naive and that kind of naivete is not just foolish, it is dangerous. The world has been dangerous since day one. It is only more so today. People who advocate peace at all costs are the most dangerous people in the world next to dictators.

Now, I don't agree with your premise that only 30,000 to 50,000 American lives were saved. I think the number likely a lot higher based on the battle on Iwo Jima. (According to the info I found on the battle, in 36 days of fighting there were 25,851 U.S. casualties (1 in 3 were killed or wounded). Of these, 6,825 American boys were killed. Virtually all 22,000 Japanese perished.) Now multiply that for Japan itself and see if you don't get higher than 30,000 to 50,000 dead.

Even if that is the number of lives "saved," it ignores additional casualties which are usually multiples of those killed in combat. On Iwo, they were almost three times as many wounded as killed. And that is kind of battle where minor injuries often went unreported because soldiers kept on fighting. So even by your estimate we are looking at 120,000 to 200,000 American casualties.

That said, I would have dropped the bomb in a heartbeat if it saved that many AMERICAN lives in a war. That, my friend, is the job of the president and the job of the leader of any nation -- to protect his or her people. If Truman had not done that, he would have been impeached, jailed and probably worse. I feel the need to remind you that we didn't start that war, Japan did. We didn't commit a parade of war crimes that stretched across the Pacific and into Asia. Japan did.

At the very end, they were still trying to have things THEIR way. Guess what, it's not their choice. They lost the war. And they were lucky as hell we used the bomb and ended it when we did. Otherwise Japan would have ended up like Germany -- split down the middle between American and Russian zones.

Were the bombings horrible? Absolutely. They should be. Maybe they were sufficiently horrible that no one will ever do them again. We can all only hope. Can I imagine that kind of horror. Thank God, no.

So now you want to blame Truman for the aftereffects when no one understood them then? Come on. Hindsight is only 20-20, even you can't expect more than that.

What price glory? Glory is for books or schoolboys. The only glory in war is winning and surviving. The glory of World War II is that the Americans, English, French, Russians, et al who went to war against the greatest danger the world has ever known succeeded. Many of them even lived to return home and try to rebuild their shattered lives.

No glory, just freedom. That's always worth it.

[Forkboy]

60. Of course you keep responding

does that make your persistence funny?

[Muddleoftheroad]

66. Look back in this thread

I did my part to stop this in its tracks before it got started. I listed the link to the old debate and let it go. But as bpilgrim throws out his propaganda, I will work to deflate it.

[Forkboy]

71. Your persistence is amusing

[number6]

96. so you find nuking people funny

are you really GWB ????

[knowledgeispower]

44. No, no, no...don't you get it?

We nuked Japan twice to bring on world peace, remember? It sure makes a lot of sense, and in hindsight was 100% as advertised!

[knowledgeispower]

49. this reminds me of a painting i once saw

some will NEVER admit to ANY of americans crimes no matter how HORRID nor OBVIOUS.

I think it is particularly fitting for this argument since Muddleoftheroad's image thing is that of Martin Luther King, because it was at an art exhibit titled "the spirit of Martin" where I saw this painting. It showed a group of zombie looking citizens with blindfolds over their eyes and blood all over their clothes stumbling through a wasteland of bones and blood. The title of this piece? "My country, right or wrong"

[bpilgrim]

51. wow

how striking :wow:

muddle is giving words to the painting you describe

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

55. My country was right in this case

Ask a few survivors of Nanking or the Bataan Death March about the Japanese and THEIR attitude toward surrender. Without the nukes, it is unlikely they would have done so. Even with the nukes, there was strong support in the Japanese military for a coup.

My country is not always right. My own racial history is far and away enough proof there.

[bpilgrim]

58. says you

and a smaller and smaller american MINORITY once they learn the FACTS of the situation.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

67. Says history

It worked, deal with it.

[bpilgrim]

70. then WHY is the SMITHSONIAN hiding it?

if it is so clear cut and decided :shrug:

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

74. So they can avoid controversy

And being assaulted endlessly by all sides of the political perspective.

[bpilgrim]

76. so they run from controversy

just like a corporation, but they can't avoid it.

persistant things facts...

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

77. I'm OK with the term 'run'

Simply put, since the Smithsonian relies on contributions and funding, ANY controversy hurts it. Invariably, it loses out because one group or another will be seen as winning out.

[RapidCreek]

105. then why display the plane at all?

Your argument lacks merit....as the planes display has indeed sparked the very controversy you claim it is so important for the Smithsonian to avoid.

RC

[Muddleoftheroad]

107. They have to

They are just being idiots about it. They should have, as has been recommended here, come up with a brief statement and left it at that.

[Beaker]

78. Not completely.

It seems to me that they could have arranged an un-announced off-shore "demonstration" for the japanese people & military...If they still weren't satisfied, we could have blown the top off of Mt. Fuji, or something...

Another part of the reason they chose slaughter instead, was to send a message to the soviet union- that we had'em, and we weren't afraid to use'em.

[Muddleoftheroad]

83. No

We had two bombs, that was it. Even one didn't work. It took two bombs to convince the Japanese to surrender.

[number6]

97. exactly RIGHT !!!!!

:nuke: :nuke:

[TankLV]

72. Have to agree w/Muddle on this one.

(I am shocked, too!)

A couple "small" facts here:

1) They had to drop 2 (TWO) nukes on 'em. Still wouldn't surrender after the one nuke.

2) Japan was ACTIVELY at war with the world at the time, not in any way shape or form a "defenseless" nation "trying to surrender".

3) Japan was only DAYS away from nuking San Francisco thanx to German scientists rushing the parts, knowledge and techonology in the immediate aftermath of the German surrender.

The entire world is lucky we did it 1st.

[Beaker]

79. Do you have documentation to back up your third point?

I had never heard that Japan was working on nukes as well, let alone being "DAYS" away from Hiroshima-ing San Francisco...If it's true, it would kinda make all those "peace ceremonies" & anti-nuclear what-not festivals they always seem to have at the original GroundZero just a wee-bit hypocritical, wouldn't it?

[TankLV]

81. It was just announced a couple weeks ago.

Freedom of information stuff - declassified german documents from Hitler's regime.

Was on NPR and a couple other outlets.

Sorry, don't have a direct link.

I was as surprised as anyone.

And it was about 5 days, not 1,000 or 2,000.

It was THAT close!

I can't believe that many people believe in the fantasy about the "Peace loving Japanese people", especially in light of all the wsr atrocities committed and documented that ONLY the Japanese committed.

To think they didn't have a hard-on to beet us in developing and using nukes is childish wishful thinking at best. A definite "blame America first" crowd mentality at least in this particular case.

Can't say the same about amerikkka of today, ruled by this gang of criminals, tho.

Agree with the rest of the posters, that to omit this "bit" ("bit"?!) of fact in the exhibit (about the use of this particular plane) is simply astounding.

[bpilgrim]

86. please

and how would they have delivered this weapon... let me guess an unmanned balsa wood craft, maybe :shrug:

peace

[TankLV]

94. "Please" indeed.

Last time I checked, they seemed to have had a pretty decent and capable airforce at the time. A lot better than ours for a long time. Even our military has commented on how advanced their aircraft were. Only need a couple planes to traverse the pacific, just like we did.

And just why did the 2nd bomb produce a much greater explosion that our experts could predict? Aside for the fact that this was never done before, could we have hit their infant nuke arsenal? Hmmmmmmmm?

And Japan is alone among the fascist regimes of the world that has yet to even ADMIT let alone come to terms with the crimes they perpetrated on humanity. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Their "history" books conveniently have large gaps concerning that period in time. And us "horrible americans" have let them get away with this! THAT is simply INEXCUSABLE! Even Germans know full well the extent and awfulness of what they themselves allowed their government to do in their name.

[bpilgrim]

98. no one had a plane that could fly the pacific

and by that time they had no airforce.

and no that isn't why the yeild was greater than expected it was becaused we had miscalculated the reaction in that bomb which was DIFFERENT than the first.

as far as the last point i can point to our own history books as well.

how many of our children learn the truth about vietnam, sa, dresden, tokyo, hiroshima.

not that that has ANYTHING to do with the TERRORISM we dropped on japan, twice.

peace

[TankLV]

108. You are wrong - then how the hell did flights get to Hawaii to begin with?

Planes flew the pacific. Japan's reached the US. Island hopping was a well-accepted practice. The damn ENOLA GAY flew the Pacific.

I read about all the issues you stated in MY history books - the Japanese don't have ANY references to their wartime part. None. Nada. Zip.

But go ahead, continue to BLAME AMERICA FIRST!

To equate wartime acts with terrorism shows you're lack of perspective or understanding of the situation.

I am done trying to educate you. Go believe your fantasy. Japan good. America bad.

And you wonder why dems are losing the battle for the minds of the american citizenry.

[Beaker]

80. This article would seem to disagree with you-

Unless of course, by "DAYS" you meant somewhere around 1000-2000 "DAYS"...

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/nuke/

Nuclear Weapons Program
In the fall of 1940, the Japanese army concluded that constructing an atomic bomb was indeed feasible. The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, or Rikken, was assigned the project under the direction of Yoshio Nishina. The Japanese Navy was also diligently working to create its own "superbomb" under a project was dubbed F-Go, headed by Bunsaku Arakatsu at the end of World War II. The F-Go program began at Kyoto in 1942. However, the military commitment wasn't backed with adequate resources, and the Japanese effort to an atomic bomb had made little progress by the end of the war.

Japan's nuclear efforts were disrupted in April 1945 when a B-29 raid damaged Nishina's thermal diffusion separation apparatus. Some reports claim the Japanese subsequently moved their atomic operations Konan . The Japanese may have used this facility at for making small quantities of heavy water. The Japanese plant was captured by Soviet troops at war's end, and some reports claim that the output of the Hungnam plant was collected every other month by Soviet submarines.


There are indications that Japan had a more sizable program than is commonly understood, and that there was close cooperation among the Axis powers, including a secretive exchange of war materiel. The German submarine U-234, which surrendered to US forces in May 1945, was found to be carrying 560 kilograms of Uranium oxide destined for Japan's own atomic program. The oxide contained about 3.5 kilograms of the isotope U-235, which would have been about a fifth of the total U-235 needed to make one bomb. After Japan surrendered on 15 August 1945, the occupying US Army found five Japanese cyclotrons, which could be used to separate fissionable material from ordinary uranium. The Americans smashed the cyclotrons and dumped them into Tokyo Harbor...

[happyslug]

84. Don't believe it, Japan perferred Surrender to Russian Occupation

Most US Military personal did not believe Japan would surrender till the Russians came into the conflict. The Russians entered the day after we dropped the first bomb (and had almost reached the Pacific by September 1, 1945).

The only hope for a Japanese "Victory" in 1945 was to play the US against the USSR. Japan understood our great fear of Communisn (they had the same fear) thus they hoped that the US would "forgive" Japan if Japan would offer to help fight the USSR (or in the alternative if the US did not give the Japanese what they wanted the Japanese could approach the USSR in an alliance for the USSR could provide the two things Japan needed to fight, Pilots and fuel).

The US military knew that as long as they was a possiblity of a fight between the US and the USSR, Japan would not surrender. This was the key fact preventing Japan from surrendering NOT anything about saving the Emperor (or even the Atomic Bombing, which was more of an excuse for the Japanese to Surrender then a Reason).

The Russian intervention of August 15, 1945 shown that the USSR and the US were NOT going to go to war with each other. This also meant that Russian troops would be in reach of the Japanese Main Islands by no later than the End of September 1945. The Japanese also knew that by September 1945 the only thing the could stop the Russians was the US 7th Fleet.

The only opposition to the Military clique ruling Japan during the 1930s and 1940s were the Communists, with the Japanese Communist leader in Moscow ready to go back to Japan and lead the Japanese Communist Party. The Ruling Clique of Japan feared that more than having American Occupation so they surrendered (Even abandoning Korea to the Russians so to better protect the Main Islands).

Thus the Atomic bombing has been a convienet excuse since 1945 for Japan's Surrender both to the US (to show A-bombs work) and to Japan (To show that they were victims). The aim of the Bomb was as an excuse for the Japanese to use if they wanted to (and to show the Russians we had the Atomic Bamb and not afraid to use it). The A-bombing was more aimed at Moscow than Toyko and lets us not forget that.

[bpilgrim]

88. with one condition

then the japanese surrendered even after the second bomb was dropped many in the military wanted to fight on.

many may dismiss the signifigance of the emperor to the japanese here but that doesn't change the fact that it remains as an istitution in japan to this very day.

and yes it has always been symbolic and never really held any real power in japan for centuries.

we nuked japan to stop russia, they invaded the next day, the japanese still didn't surrender, we did it again with our last one, and still the japanese didn't surrender until their condition was met.

imagine hitler being let go after the war... you can't. but you don't have to imagine with the emperor of japan since it is FACT.

we should have accepted the advice of all informed military leaders in theater at the time who suggested we accept japans one condition to SAVE LIVES.

history has proven them to be right and wise.

just THINK how many lives could have been saved on BOTH sides if we would have followed it earlier :shrug:

:hi:

peace

[Atlant]

28. The Smithsonian is playing the NPR game.

"My god this is a hot potato!"

"Okay, let's ignore all the nasty bits and hope that appeases
the Reich Wing."

Obviously, SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE isn't so sure that nuking
Japan was the right thing or there'd be no controversy about
stating the simple historical fact that this was (along with
"Bock's Car") one of the two planes that did it.

Atlant

[MaineDem]

15. This is just plain stupid!

I remember seeing "Boch's Car", the B-29 that carried the bomb to Nagasaki, at the AF Museum at Wright-Patterson and I'm sure its mission was mentioned. Hell, that's the only reason these 2 planes are on display.

This really does surprise me.

[Jonte_1979]

16. That's like having an exhibition on the Apollo program

...with no mention of the moon landing of '69.

[nolabels]

48. How does the flag flutter when there is no wind on the Moon?

http://www.apollo-hoax.co.uk/flag_waving.html

I tell you, the federal government of the US must be staging comedy like no other at this time :bounce:

[ogminlo]

17. What a crock...

I saw the Enola Gay exhibit years ago, the plane was in pieces. It isn't even a complete aircraft. How can they claim it is supposed to be anything other than our monument to the A-bomb? There are complete examples of B-29s out there... If you want to show how great our boys at Boeing were doing in the early 40s, why not show a complete plane? Enola Gay killed 100s of thousands of civilians; it has no other distiction. Other B-29s set sustained flight records after the war, among other distictions. Enola Gay dropped the bomb.

It should be noted, Boxcar, the B-29 that dropped the Nagasaki bomb is on display at Wright-Patterson AFB Museum in Dayton, OH. Or it was when I was last there... There were mockups of the bombs themselves! There was a whole exhibit to our glorious atomic "achievements".

[Braden]

19. that would be as if they ommitted mention of Orbit

from the Space Exhibits.

NASM is one of my favorite places, and I am a little shocked that they would chicken out so badly.

We dropped two atomic bombs. the only two ever used in "battle" in the history of this planet. At least have the stones to deal with it.

Without the Bombing the B-29 would be likely less well known than the B-24 Liberator.

[Atlant]

29. People might figure out that those two nukes were "WMD".

They might even figure out that WE were the ones who
used them, and on two targets where we killed mostly civilians
(even though there were certainly military objectives there as
well).

They might even figure out that we are the only country
so far to ever have used nuclear weapons.

And then they might start to question why we are pulling out
of anti-nuke treaties at the same time as we're trying to de-
nukify Iraq.

Nope, can't have that. Just re-write history instead. The FOX-
anesthetized rubes'll never figure it out.

Atlant

[Bozita]

22. We'll tell the children that the Enola Gay dropped tons of flowers...

...on cheering crowds of Japanese citizens marking the end of WWII.

And they all lived happily ever after.

Amen.

[evworldeditor]

23. Most technologically advanced?

While the B-29 was a remarkable piece of technology for its time, I think the statement that it was the most technologically advanced ignores the fact that about the time it was being made operational, so was the Me-262 in Germany. If I were voting for most technologically advanced, I'd have to cast my vote for the Me-262 with its twin turbojet engines and more than 500 mph operational speed, at least 50% faster than the B-29.

The Germans had quite a number of exotic advanced aircraft concepts in various stages of development that were quantum leaps beyond the B-29, which was the technological end of the line for piston engine aircraft, the end of the line being the B-36.

[Atlant]

30. If they're re-writing history, why not go all the way, ehh? (NT)

[Forkboy]

26. people people people!!

why all the concern over such a small event like a nuclear blast that killed thousands? From the way some of you are acting you'd think it was a big event or something!

[Judi Lynn]

27. I hope everyone has read the history leading up to Pearl Harbor

It's amazing how little even people from the generation which fought in that war actually took the time to learn for themselves, in order to understand what was happening. Many simply swallowed everything they heard, without taking time to think anything over, or question what they heard.



http://www.gensuikin.org/english/photo.html

[knowledgeispower]

47. But...but...we had to make the world safe for freedom and democracy!

So that we could then work as hard as possible to undermine those very two things if they weren't in accordance with the interests of our nation's elite ruling class. It all makes perfect sense, right?

[Screaming Lord Byron]

33. Facts are unpleasant, myths better.

[salin]

34. welcome to DU!

:hi:

Why bother with unpleasant facts... looks like the Administration's practice of omission (eg contradictory intel.) = new fact/reality is filtering down. But to the Smithsonian? How disappointing.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

36. Thank you. Long time lurker, first time caller.

[joshcryer]

40. Yep, which is why hemp is 'other' on practically everything pre '01.

That is, 1901.

Can't let reality exist.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

57. Nothing to see here, people. Move along!

Look, over there, an exhibit on how evil arab people are!

[ElementaryPenguin]

62. Jaw slamming on the floor! Are you fucking kidding me??!!

This nation is going absolutely insane!!

[Forkboy]

63. This nation is going absolutely insane!!

I fear it's a short trip.

[0rganism]

82. You should have seen the outrage over using "Gay" in the exhibit title!

Gays in the military? No way!

[lostnfound]

100. Hmm, a conservative dilemna..rename it Enola Perversity?

We need to put some BiBle belt politician up to the task of purging the word 'gay' from history. Can't have kids admiring the finest peace of technology of its time thinking the thing is a monument to homosexuality, right? We history-purgers have challenges you know. ;)

[0rganism]

102. Well, they can't rename it "Enola Abomination"

That would be a bit too suggestive, if you know what I mean.

[tom_paine]

68. The Sovietization of Amerika continues apace...

"The struggle is a light one now as we are able to employ all the means of the state. Radio and press are at our disposal."
--Josef Goebbels, 1933

History is just a succession of repetitions, isn't it?

I'm glad we have this twilight for who knows how longer? Be thankful for every day before the other shoe...hell the whole damned shoestore...drops.

[RaulGroom]

69. Is the exhibit titled : A Plane From Some War or Something?

How do you have an Enola Gay exhibit and not mention the A-bomb? That was, like, the Enola Gay's big deal, you know? They should have a museum with all exhibits like this.

Apollo 11 Lander - Most Gold Foil ever Assembled in One Place

Spirit of St. Louis - Largest Vehicle Ever Built by Two Brothers from North Carolina

etc...

[RobinA]

73. I Was Just There

I didn't know there was any controversy, but I did see the Enola Gay and did notice that it didn't mention that bomb. I'm like, wah.... Then I thought maybe I had the wrong airplane. Then I figured it WAS the right airplane why else would it be there. It was seriously strange.

Can't they just state the facts if everybody can't agree? "Used to drop the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima." I mean, no one's arguing that we didn't drop the bomb, are they?

[tom_paine]

75. Give it time, the Busheviks will take us there

We are heading to Orwell Country.

[0rganism]

103. AFAICT, we're already in Orwell country

The Smithsonian: preserving history through concealment, for the greater ignorance of all.

Glorious!

Someone ought to make an Orwell-brand cigarette, for this trip through scenic doublespeak.

[Chants]

87. The RW is more upset about the omission than the left

If you think conservatives are behind the Smithsonian's omission, you have absolutely no idea how a conservative mind works.

Clue: Conservatives are blaming the left for the omission.

[bpilgrim]

89. probably citeing it as another CLEAR example of PCism gone MAD

:evilgrin:

peace

[Chants]

93. That's exactly what they are saying

[Muddleoftheroad]

95. Wonder why they think that?

nt

[lostnfound]

101. I think FEAR of conservatives is behind the omission

From what I've seen at other types of exhibits in my 60's/70's youth, most curators would have put a few posterboards stating the facts of how the mission was carried out, another couple putting it in the context of the war, highlighting the commonly-taught history of Truman making the decision in order to save lives, and just one more saying that the decision continues to be the subject of some debate over whether the bombs were necessary to end the war or not.

It's the conservatives who would now complain about the word 'controversy' being anywhere in the exhibit, because they can't handle 'ambiguity'. These days, the conservatives MUST have their world couched in terms of 'US savior of all, standing for freedom and democracy', sanitized from the germs of liberalism. Anything deviating is lambasted as revisionist history by the likes of Michele Malkin on down to the Astroturf letter writers.

The liberals would generally be satisfied with such a 'balanced' approach -- even though it never raises the moree important questions such as whether Truman was motivated by a desire to demonstrate new technology to the world, or some other extraneous reason. The liberals, being more willing to tolerate ambiguity, don't push for an exhibit that is as strongly hostile to the opposing viewpoint -- such as an exhibit that views it through the eyes of dissenting historians.

[mumon]

90. "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

That's so weird... "So what did they do with the plane???"

Maybe they had good first class service?

geez...

[mumon]

91. You know, in the Tokyo National Museum

they have an exhibit of the balloon bombs they used and sent over to the Pacific NW. And they're labelled as such.

[skippysmom]

109. This controversy is an old one

Read Mike Wallace's essay "The Battle of the Enola Gay" in his book "Mickey Mouse History." It details how the NASM's attempts to put the Enola Gay into a larger context and provoke some of the questions talked about above were derailed by veterans' groups and Gingrich Repukes.

[RadioFlyer]

110. Full text of exhibit...

This thread got me looking around, and the Chron, reprinting the NY Times, didn't get all the info. I found this on AVweb.com, a website devoted to all things aviation:

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/145-full.html#185997

"Although a New York Times report widely published in the media this week said the exhibit text glorifies the airplane "without mentioning that it dropped the bomb on Hiroshima," the text in fact states: "On August 6, 1945, this Martin-built B-29-45-MO dropped the first atomic weapon used in combat on Hiroshima, Japan." The petition, online at the Web site of Peace Action, does not in fact claim that Hiroshima is not mentioned, but says the exhibit emphasizes the airplane's technological achievement and is "devoid of historical context." The Smithsonian's explanatory placard text reads in full:

"Boeing B-29 Superfortress Enola Gay -- Boeing's B-29 Superfortress was the most sophisticated propeller-driven bomber of World War II, and the first bomber to house its crew in pressurized compartments. Although designed to fight in the European theater, the B-29 found its niche on the other side of the globe. In the Pacific, B-29s delivered a variety of aerial weapons: conventional bombs, incendiary bombs, mines, and two nuclear weapons. -- On August 6, 1945, this Martin-built B-29-45-MO dropped the first atomic weapon used in combat on Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later, Bockscar (on display at the U.S. Air Force Museum near Dayton, Ohio) dropped a second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, Japan. Enola Gay flew as the advance weather reconnaissance aircraft that day. A third B-29, The Great Artiste, flew as an observation aircraft on both missions."

An exhibit at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum from 1995 to 1998 included parts of the Enola Gay fuselage, and drew widespread protest from several quarters. The exhibit was revised several times before finally going on display. The new exhibit will be the first time the airplane has been on display fully restored and completely assembled.

end quote)