Talk:Paul Tibbets

Tragic that someone vandalized the page, I undid, then the vandal decided that I was vandalizing the page by undoing his changes. Prove, with cites, that he was a war criminal. Someone needs to lock this page...

I have enjoyed the use of wikipedia for some time now. I am gratful for the information that is made available to the public. I read the wikipedia biography of Gen Tibbets. I am disappointed in the statement that he is a mass murderer. Gen Tibbets was following orders. Japan forced the hand of the President with their decision to continue fighting a war they knew was lost. The President made a tactical decision that I believe was the right decision. More people died from bombs landed on Germany that on Japan. I also believe that the U.S. has the right to use whatever weapons in its diposal to deter an enemy or destroy one. LM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.160.108.237 (talk • contribs)

• That vandalism was added only moments ago. I have reverted. -N 23:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The statement in your article about no regret for the decesion to drop the atom bomb implies it was Tibbet's decision. Truman gave the order to drop the bomb and sealed the fate of the Japanies civilians and of Tibbets. Truman is dead. Tibbets is still alive and has to carry the burdin for all of us. Like most wariors from his generation I think Tibbets meant hell yes I would do it again if my country called. Can we take out that statement? Mike Franke, baby boomer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franke (talk • contribs) 09:53, October 24, 2005 (UTC)

I agree that Tibbets was following orders. However, I think that Tibbets personally felt that if it was his decision to make, he would have done this same. Considering the circumstances, I also think that Truman made the proper decision. This revisionist stuff about Hiroshima and Nagasaki being war crimes is a bunch of hooey (IMHO - I am also a baby boomer and the proud son of a WWII U.S. Army vet) --Rogerd 16:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

You two 'baby boomers' are a disgrace to humanity. (Son of a baby boomer and a former Marine) (Bjorn Tipling 03:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC))

I added the hell yeah comment to the article. While not a member of the military (yet), I'm going to be in the navy starting next week. How are they disgraces to humanity? While the use of atomic weapons on civilians is a horrible horrible act, it was completely justified by the abuses of the Japanese government all throughout southeast Asia and the threat they posed to America (Yes I know that violates wikipedia policy on america-centrism, bite me, and yes I know that our current government is no where near innocent either). To say that its a disgrace to humanity to be for the dropping of the bomb Bjorn, is to ignore the realities of the Imperial government of the time. (People fled until their feet BLED rather than face the Japanese army. They didn't do that with the Nazis even). Nardman1 22:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Re.: Justification- I'm a Babyboomer, too- a German one. I remember reading two Stories: In the first one, a twelve-year old Girl was send into one of the Gas-chambers in Auschwitz. She survived- and was send in a second, a third and a fourth time; she still survived. In the end, the SS-man in charge drew his Pistol and shot her. The second story was an account given by a Firefighter in Hamburg. He found a Woman and two Boys, about 11 or 12 Years old. Their charred Bodies had to be prised out of the Asphalt with a Pick-axe, since they had melted into it. Underneath the Womans Body, he found a Baby- about 2 months old. The Infant was dead, but completely unscathed, since the Mother had tried to shield it. What the two stories have in common are four dead children. A British Historian said a while ago that these kind of events could not be compared, since the Bomber-pilots first had to fly through the Anti-Aircraft-Fire. But if that would apply, you could also argue that the Nazis first had to conquer the Countries from which their Victims came. The simple reality is that the Allies had no Control over what their Enemies did- but they did have control over their own actions and decisions. To imply anything else would mean that they allowed their Enemies to influence their way of thinking. I would be extremely worried if that would prove to be the case- because it would mean that the Allies defeated Hitler and Tojo, only to then end up with the Ghosts of Tojo and Hitler sitting in Whitehall and in the Whitehouse. And what would the rest of us poor saps do about that- call the Ghost-busters? Joe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.71.72.238 (talk • contribs) 20:55, August 22, 2006 (UTC)

You can't justify this as "revenge" or "retribution", but in my opinion, and in the opinion of many experts (not all of them, however), this saved Allied and Japanese lives over the alternative, Operation Downfall. When you look at the Battle of Okinawa and the number of Japanese casualties, both civilian and military, and project it over a battle for the Japanese Home Islands, the number would be staggering. --rogerd 02:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

the placement of the Awards and Decorations is skewed by the photo. can that be fixed? i'm sure it can. i just don't know how. Kingturtle 03:55 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

Did that help? -- Zoe

In my browser (Explorer 6.00), Awards and Decorations and its first bullet are pushed to the middle by the image. The remaining bullets are below the image, and aligned to the left. Kingturtle 04:15 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

Huh. I'm using 6.0.2, and it looks okay to me. -- Zoe

Images are tricky darn things to place at the best of times. We seem to have a variety of proto-policies floating around here and there, but nothing definitive. (Which is quite possibly a good thing, as we need to leave room for experiment and adjustment to suit particular entries.) My rule of thumb is, if in doubt, find an image that Adrian has placed, and cut & paste my code from that. Adrian has specialised in this area and become very good at it. Tannin 04:44 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

I think it looks really good there, fills up the whitespace. Hephaestos 04:45 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. I think one of the problems is that sometimes the asterisk bullet-points wiki format goes on to photos or tables where text would not. Minor glitch? Usually can be worked around. -- Infrogmation 05:35 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

Another trouble is that that particular image is poorly cropped, which makes the image look imbalanced, and weighted...heavy...with that tiny head on top and that large plane below. Because of the imbalance within the image, I think it will be difficult to find the right way to place it in the article. I realize why the choice was made to use the photo, but I'd like to see a close up of Tibbets. Kingturtle 05:40 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

I agree, KT. That's one of the reasons I placed it down near the bottom of the entry, because it doesn't look quite so odd down there. One of those fool-the-eye things. Speaking in general, though, it's good to have some images that are not your boring standard head & shoulders, look-the-camera-in-the-eye, passport-photo type of things. Variety is the spice of like. Tannin