Posted on 08/05/2005 4:04:08 PM PDT by Michael Goldsberry
CHANTILLY, Va. and a loaded weight of 140,000 pounds (63,500 kilograms) dominates a hangar filled with historic military and civil aircraft, ranging from a Japanese kamikaze plane to the first passenger jet to the supersonic Concorde.
Air Force veteran Greg Culpepper, 55, a tourist from North Carolina, said he had no doubt that President Harry Truman did the right thing 60 years ago.
"If it hadn't been for Truman dropping that bomb, just think of how many Americans would have been killed if we had had to invade," he said.
"We're a peace-loving people and we don't want war, but if push comes to shove, you gotta do what you gotta do," said Culpepper, who served in Thailand during the Vietnam War.
The Enola Gay's 10,000-pound (4,500 kg) uranium 235 bomb instantly killed about 78,000 people and the bombing had claimed about 140,000 lives by the end of 1945.
Florida dentist Robert Gleiber, an amateur World War II historian and collector of Enola Gay memorabilia, said Japan's civilian losses were regrettable but had to be weighed against the alternative of a bloody invasion of that country.
"Truman was responsible for saving hundreds of thousands or even millions of lives both Japanese and American," he said. "The Japanese were fanatics and they were going to fight to the last man."
The views of randomly chosen visitors to Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Virginia squared with a Gallup Poll of 1,010 adults released this week.
The telephone poll showed that 57 percent approved of the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while 38 percent said they disapproved. Gallup said the new poll numbers changed only slightly from 1995, when 59 percent said they approved and 38 percent voiced disapproval.
San Francisco high school student Chelsea Gelbart, 14, on a guided tour with her family, broke ranks with her American elders on the wisdom of using atomic bombs against Japan.
"Even though it was a war, it was a disaster and not something to be proud of with the death toll so high," she said. Gelbart said the United States should have demonstrated the bomb over the ocean to convince Japan to surrender.
The Smithsonian began restoring what was a rotting Enola Gay in the 1980s and planned to feature it an exhibition in 1995 to mark the 50th anniversary of the war's end.
But the display was canceled after a firestorm of criticism from veterans and members of Congress, who argued that Smithsonian historians had revised history to portray Japan as the victim and U.S. soldiers in a negative light.
Not only had I been alive then I would have supported the decision, but today it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see some other choice targets nuked.
For God's sake, don't anyone ping 1stFreedom.
Likewise.
NEWS FLASH: Survey shows most Americans don't regret that we won WWII! D'ya think?
I wonder if any enterprising journalist will ask General Paul Tibbetts what he thinks. He's 90 years old.
The Legacy Media is shocked and disheartened that a half
century of government school brainwashing has failed to
create the desired groupthink outcome.
But they'll continue asking every year or so around A-day,
just to check. This is a key question in following the
re-education of America.
Gee..just like 911.....we were blindsided on 7 Dec 1941..
Gee..just like 911.....we were blindsided on 7 Dec 1941..
Most likely killed 200,000 Japanese, and saved the lives of 2 million Japanese (and a bunch of our soldiers, airmen, marines, and sailors).
Trouble with the modern liberal mind is it can't wrap itself all of the way around that idea.
My Dad was a 19 year old Marine, wounded on Okinawa, but healed up at Honolulu. Ready to go back to regular duty.
The bombs definitely saved him and many others from the grip of months (or years) fighting Japanese fanatics on their main islands.
Studs is even older then General Tibbets!
"Even though it was a war, it was a disaster and not something to be proud of with the death toll so high," she said. Gelbart said the United States should have demonstrated the bomb over the ocean to convince Japan to surrender."
This girl is going to be a great liberal dem. What ... I'm speechless....
The US accepts a conditional surrender? Could the Japanese have really stood up against the Russians or Communist Chinese without the American occupation and the protection the American military provided.
A conventional invasion? Not only would an invasion have cost many thousands of American lives but it would have killed many thousands of Japanese, including civilians, sent to stop them. And any occupation without a surrender would have been much messier. See also the next item, which would also come into play.
Waiting? The Russians declared war on the Japanese at roughly the same time that the atomic bombs fell on Japan. The Russians actually took 4 small islands from the Japanese that they still haven't gotten back (a little known fact in the US but a very big deal in Japan -- they still don't have a formal peace accord because of it). Had the war gone on for months or years longer, there should be little doubt that the Russians would have invaded Hokkaido and perhaps other main Japanese islands. That would have left Japan as another country split after the war like Korea, Vietnam, or Germany.
The quick surrender (which took the two bombs to achieve) and largely benevolent American occupation was the best outcome Japan could have hoped for. No scenario would have been as good for Japan, either.
"Even though it was a war, it was a disaster and not something to be proud of with the death toll so high," she said. Gelbart said the United States should have demonstrated the bomb over the ocean to convince Japan to surrender.
---
I have heard this one before. Of course, the person who says it usually can't explain why we had to bomb Hiroshima AND Nagasaki. If the Japanese had surrendered after the first bomb, then the argument above might have held water.
It was tragic that the United States had to do it, but it was necessary. Japan wouldn't drop out of the war. Truman had no good choices, and this was the best option available to him.
I think the Smithsonian is in unfriendly hands.
My dear departed Dad was stationed in the army in the Aleutians just before the end of the war. He had no doubt that the A-bomb spared many of his buddies and perhaps him from a bloody invasion of the Japanese mainland. Since he was right there at the time, I've always deferred to his judgement of the decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.