How to display Enola Gay and the Bomb

[JDK]

Aaaand breathe....

If we would of had todays great thinkers back in 1945 there would be alot more dead Americans.

People today are no better or worse than people then - we have a great opportunity to see bravery and stupidity and war today; we just don't seem to be able to win the peace, somehow.

As the British airline BOAC flew a chap called Nils Bhor out of Sweden in the middle of the war in the un-pressurised bomb bay of a de Havilland Mosquito to get him to America, as well as a lot of British and European research to get the bomb into the Allies hands, there's always more facts that, say, a Swede, Norwegian and a Briton might like to see presented. Without the international co-operation, it would've taken a lot longer to happen. Them's facts too, but are they critical facts?

The fact is during a war people will die. All of todays thinking won't change the past nor should our plaques at museums.

Small wager. The placard at the Canadian War Museum is the first (and only) time I've seen the details of how nasty shrapnel was as a slow as well as a fast killer. Where are the plaques at the museums showing the deaths aircraft can and have cause? I don't see 'em. There's taboos - and how much noise and insults people throw around doesn't hide that there's bits that are true and uncomfortable.

If you think your view of (say) the American Civil War or the American War of Independence is the same as that of people 60 years after those events, I'm afraid you are in for a surprise. But why check? You know what you know, and your right. (Ooops, sarcasm, sorry.) Such certainty is enviable - it's just the foundations that are rotten.

What about the internment of Japanese Americans, Australians and Canadians in 1941-5? A complete over-reaction by these states, and a stupid 'own goal' but usually glossed over in the histories. Those are facts too.

F.Y.I. God was on our side during the war!

S'funny, that's what Hitler knew, too. 'Gott Straffe England'...

And as you dragged religion into it, it's worth recalling that in 1955 Oppenheimer,the director of the Manhattan project said: "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds." - a quote from Indian scripture. That too is a fact, as are his and Teller and Tibbits' and Leonard Cheshire's recollections and stances at the time and later. Learning about these adds something to the understanding of the dropping of the bomb. Ignoring it is fine, but why cherish ignorance?

I can accept your views and understanding, but there's more to be said too. I'm not degenerating those who were involved - all of them, and I don't see it as impossible, just in common humanity, to feel sorry for all those swept up into the maelstrom of W.W.II while at the same time seeing the use of bombing and the atomic bombs as a necessary and effective decision. I'm interested in learning more about it - sometimes that changes the perspective, sometimes it doesn't.

I'm disappointed in the need by some to rant and rave and name call - it just shows a lack of comfort or security...

Just some thoughts, no shades of grey, just learning, and appreciating a respectful debate...

(Having a very nice day, too. It's lovely and warm, about to have a long cool one. You have a nice day also! )

[JDK]

If you think that we need to tell both sides of a story about each airplane in a museum, that would take alot of space, space that can better be used to house more airplanes.

Them's called 'hangars'. More aeroplanes (sorry airplanes) is good. I like that. But museums don't see it that way - it's not what a museum, rather than a hangar is for. (Don't blame me, please, it's just the way it is!)

The fact that the curators need to tell the story in French as well as English adds another challenge to the job. Made you think?

No no no no no! No French at Udvar-Hazy! My final answer!!!!

Awww shucks. It's got cool accents and everything! (My favourite multi-lingual display panels story is the Amsterdam Maritime Museum. There were short sections in English and German, and a loooong bit in Dutch. The Dutch bit was going into a lot more detail about how the Dutch beat the British on a regular basis, and they just didn't see they should translate it into English, for some reason. Dunno what they were saying about the Germans. )

I don't know if we will ever agree, but I think we can all say that we are happy that it is restored, and on display. Maybe it iso ne of those things that just menas something different to each person.

ABSOLUTELY. And I look forward to seeing it one day, and all them other neat airplanes there. Great restorations too. Respect.

[mustangdriver]

Hey Bill, I am not real sure of itmyself, I have just started learning abou tit myself, but they were working on something. I will let you know what I find out.

[CH2Tdriver]

As if B-29's weren't controversial enough.....I found this on AvWeb this morning, apparently theres some flak over the "new-build" ME262's

Me-262 -- The Dark Side Of A Legendary Aircraft
When a lovingly crafted Messerschmitt Me 262 replica built in the U.S. was shipped to Germany to fly in an air show last summer, the event stirred up memories -- and they weren't all positive ones. The airplane itself might be an engineering marvel and a joy to fly, but an Austrian journalist, writing for the Jerusalem Post, recalls its dark human history. "Almost all the Me 262s that actually went into service with the Luftwaffe were built in one of the most horrendous concentration camps of the Nazi regime," writes Anshel Pfeffer. "The fact that an unknown number of slave laborers, estimated at between 35,000 and 50,000, were murdered or died of malnutrition, disease, freezing and work accidents while building the Me 262 ... goes unmentioned," he says. Pfeffer talks to survivors of the Gusen prison camp, who were forced to work on the airplanes, and were starved and mistreated. The camp was liberated by U.S. soldiers in May 1945.

[retroaviation]

Of course, you could display the Enola Gay outside.....you know, like Doc.

"Three million dollars and we could be flying in a year".......

Gary

[Stephanie]

For all of you that, to this point, have contributed to this thread, thank you. I really found it to be quite the interesting thread to read this morning and thought that the contributors were well spoken and thoughtful. I enjoy being able to read all of the varied opionions that everyone brings to the table. It's no wonder I like WIX so well.

[mustangdriver]

You are 100% correct Steph. This thread is a good example of why this place is cool. We all have different thoughts on the subject, displayed them, and though sometimes it gets heated, it is always respectful.

[rwdfresno]

I think rwdfresno's last post illustrates the fallacy of his own position that you can just "state the facts" and avoid politics or interpretation. There are an infinite number of facts to be stated about anything. You have to choose some. The selection you make will result in a "slant."

Ok, you make a good point and have convinced me to reconsider my opinion. In a museum that is paid for by $.01 of American tax dollars should be distinctly SLANTED towards being patriotic towards the United States. We won, hence we are right. If the Japanese or Germans wanted to have museums that are sympathetic towards them they should have won the war.

[k5083]

I think rwdfresno's last post illustrates the fallacy of his own position that you can just "state the facts" and avoid politics or interpretation. There are an infinite number of facts to be stated about anything. You have to choose some. The selection you make will result in a "slant."

Ok, you make a good point and have convinced me to reconsider my opinion. In a museum that is paid for by $.01 of American tax dollars should be distinctly SLANTED towards being patriotic towards the United States. We won, hence we are right. If the Japanese or Germans wanted to have museums that are sympathetic towards them they should have won the war.

Great! Now we just need to work on your definition of the word "patriotic". Some folks think that patriotism involves striving to make your country better, not just declaring that it is already the best.

Personally I don't have that much use for the word, because you can wrap the flag around just about any position if you look at it the right way.

August

[rwdfresno]

Great! Now we just need to work on your definition of the word "patriotic". Some folks think that patriotism involves striving to make your country better, not just declaring that it is already the best.

Personally I don't have that much use for the word, because you can wrap the flag around just about any position if you look at it the right way.

This is one of the big problems with liberalism. It seeks to take the exception and turn it into the rule. It seeks to redefine "normal" and "moral" by applying the "logic" of consensus. If there is not 100% consensus among everyone (including those who committed the genocide) that genocide is bad then well you better show both sides of the story. Of course, it only works when it is in the favor of liberalism (which means not in the favor of capitalism or the USA). If half of all climatologists believe that global warming is caused by human influence than by gosh you better not question that "proven fact."

[gnome]

Walking into this from far, far away ... just a few observations

re. Enola Gay

Enola Gay is not "an" airplane. It is THE tool that delivered the world's first atomic bomb in anger. That is the story that the Smithsonian is giving us. Who (other than us airplane freaks) gives a toss how fast it was or anything like that?

Imagine if you will Dad and son wandering through the halls. "Hey Dad, look at that" "Yeah, that's a B-29" "Wow, it's big" "Hey Dad, look at that over there" They wander off.

Alternatively. "Hey Dad, look at that" "That's Enola Gay" "Enola Gay?" "Yep, that plane dropped the world's first atomic bomb on Japan" "Holy ****! Really? Tell me about that Dad"

re. Bomber Command in the Canadian WM Museum

Read this by Lt Col Eric Ash USAF
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airc ... 99/ash.htm

He points out that Strategic Bombing had two aims, one is physical damage, the other is morale. And it works both ways, damage done vs attacker losses, the morale boost of a successful raid and morale boost or depression for the defenders. For example, the Dams Raid caused negligible damage, cost the attackers dearly (8 of 19 lost) but was a huge morale boost for England and her allies. So it was a success.

He also makes the point that light or half-hearted attacks only serve to increase the morale of the defenders. Stiffens their resolve. Think of all the stories about the Blitz on London etc. The Poms got well p'd off! Only if you dish out massive overkill will you weaken the resolve/morale of the defenders.

This is what RAF Bomber Command (or Portal or Harris depending on your view) set out to do. It was a deliberate intent to overkill, to defeat German morale. The Wind vs Whirlwind speech etc. Hamburg, Dresden etc. were deliberate. So was the dropping of the atom bombs.

IMHO this is what should be taught. It was a war and we set out to hammer the b's. We don't apologise. And yes it was awful, horrific. We know that, we did it. That's war. War is hell. We recommend you, the viewer, don't start a war.

Don

EDIT ... What's with all this PC bovine excrement? I did not type "war is heck". I typed a word like shell.

[k5083]

Pretty good article.

Ash is correct in stating that no bombing campaign, including the fire-bombings of Germany and Japan or the A-bombs, has ever had the effect on enemy morale that the proponents of strategic bombing have hoped and predicted, even with "massive overkill". As he says, and most historians agree, the will of the Germans and Japanese civilians was never broken but, on the contrary, strengthened by the bombing, just as that of the British was strenthened by the Blitz. Human beings of all nations have shown an incredible and uplifting ability to draw strength from adversity. If someone nuked New York, do you think that the survivors would cringe and beg for surrender? No -- like people everywhere, they'd fight back all the harder. The theory that wide-area terror bombing can "defeat" enemy morale has now been discredited, as Ash appears to concede (although he ends up offering a proposal for some kind of surgical-strike terror targeting that I don't quite understand; from his examples, I think his use of "morale" in this context is misplaced and he is really just talking about attacks that convince an enemy's leaders to reevaluate their tactical position). I believe you misinterpret the article in respect of what it says about WWII bombing.

August

[Bill Greenwood]

Guys and Stephanie; I didn't think it would be this hard. All I was saying: 1st Enola Gay should be displayed. (most seem to agree) 2nd We should not ignore the Bomb, it is important from historic, scientific, military, standpoints At Least.. 3rd The story of dropping the Bomb should be addressed strightforward; It is Not the story of Nanking or Bataan, or of how barbaric the Japanese were. It is Not the story of U S is always right, or how patriotic we are now or were then. A Lanc display could talk about the Dambusters, or night bombing: but it doesn't need to go into the Nazi death camps because they aren't Directly part of the story. The Lanc story should certainly talk about the skip bombs, not ignore them, and also the Tall Boy bombs. The Enola story should cover the atomic bomb, how it was made, where it was used and the results including the civilian casualties and later radiation deaths, and perhaps the Japanese surrender. Japanese war criminals, atrocites are part of the war story, but Not Directly part of Enola. The Spirit display does not need to go into the Americans murdering Japanese prisoners that Lindberg wrote about. It is part of his life story, but not directly related to that plane. The moral or tactical question of using the Bomb is of vital importance and interesting, but does not need to be part of the plane's display. That question does not depend directly on how barbaric Japanese soldiers were, rather was the Bomb the only solution, and is moral to drop it on civilians? Personally I wish they had dropped it on the Emperor, not just innocent kids. A top museum could even have a separate display on the atomic bomb and its development and questions of use; but it doesn't need to be part of the plane. For all those who are so sure and so proud of what we did, why are you upset that a display would include the casualties from use of this weapon?

[rwdfresno]

As he says, and most historians agree, the will of the Germans and Japanese civilians was never broken but, on the contrary, strengthened by the bombing

I guess we never should have bombed Germany or Japan and just sent them a "Sorry if we hurt your feelings" card then they would have just given up. Before you make another post let me get out my shovel and hip-boots.

In the short term attacks may energize the population (example: Pearl Harbor, Example 911, Example Battle of Britain) however long term Strategic or even out and out carpet bombing demoralizes your enemy (example: Japan surrendered after months of fire bombing and 2 nukes) You can psychoanalyze all you want but the fact remains that a few megatons of TNT dropped on Japan and a couple of well placed nukes ended the war). Your argument works well as long as you ignore the fact that we won the war. I have the feeling that you think that anything that this country does in a war is immoral and you consider every side but the USA first.

[mustangdriver]

I like the way Bockscar is on display. It says "The plane that ended the war'. That is all that is needed. I have no problem saying look this weapon was bad, but people will take that and run with it, like they do by saying the U.S. was wrong for dropping it. Will the Zero display tell the story about the Japanese pretending that peace could be achieved while the strike force was already bound for Pearl harbor? Will the Zero display have the story of how it was popular for the zero pilots to shoot unarmed pilots in parachutes? Or how they strafed women and children at Pearl Harbor? Let's face a very unpleasant fact for some. The bomb might have been a very unpleasant way to end the war, but you can't compare them to what the Japanese did to people. They have no and I mean NO right to be offended by the display of a B-29. Col. Tibbets says that he saved lives by dropping that bomb.