Health Reform Plan Paper Research Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Health Reform Plan - Research Paper Example When Clinton administration took office, it did not prioritize health reform per se because it fashioned the supposedly reform to fit their political agenda. The task force, which was constituted to construct the policy, was made up of over 30 working groups with over 500 participants (Yankelovich, 1995). What Clinton and his adviser failed to know was that congress is a political body whose profession is only to make the most politically viable policies, but not policies for public significance. This way, the resultant policy was not inclined to benefit ordinary citizens because the political reality is that healthcare benefits represent income to few players, who benefit from the health industry and whose interest is to ensure that policies favour them. Therefore, the politician and the reform body mistook good policy for good politics by creating a bill which was fit for political mileage rather than political process. Moreover, the Clinton administration did not appreciate the need for a national strategy to sell the plan to the people. Medical coverage would have been a source of anxiety for all Americans as well as voters (Yankelovich, 1995). Failure to involve Americans resulted to what is referred to as human error. One angle of the human error lies in the fact that with 84 per cent of Americans holding health insurance, they were deeply afraid of losing their benefits (Toner, 1993). As a result, whenever the public was interviewed concerning their satisfaction on the old health coverage, most of them rated the services as either ‘very good’ or ‘good’, and this made it very hard to reform the system. Democrats have been avoiding the repeat of the idea following the reform debacle, and this attitude has been a foremost impediment to change.There are several recommendations for president Obama based on the failure of this reform. First, there is no fact in the idea that health reform is not inevitable in the United States

Construction contracts Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Construction contracts - Essay Example In the NEC3, this section defines all the terms that can or will be used to negotiate the contract. The NEC3 defines the Accepted Program as the one that supersedes all existing programs and is the Program identified in the Contract Data currently accepted by the Project Manager. Completion is defined as the period when the Contractor has finished all tasks as specified must be completed by the Completion Date according to the Works Information and has corrected Defects that can prevent the Employer from using the works or Others from doing their work. Completion Date is defined as the date on the Contract for completed works and the Contact Date is the date the contract was created. A Defect is any part of the Works that does not coincide with the Works Information or any part of the Works designed by the Contractor that does not comply with applicable laws or the design accepted by the Project Manager. The NEC3 defines the Fee as the sum of the amounts calculated by applying the subcontracted fee percentage to the Defined Cost of subcontracted work and the direct fee percentage to the Defined Cost of other work. Others are considered to be any people or organizations that are not the Employer, Project Manager, Supervisor, Adjudicator, or Contractor or an employee Subcontractor or supplier to the Contractor and NEC3 considers Parties to mean The Employer and the Contractor. Subcontractors are considered to be any person(s) or organizations that have a contractual agreement with the Contractor to perform duties that may include installing or constructing parts of the Works, providing services needed to enable the contractor to Provide the Works, or supply the Plant and Materials fabricated specifically for the Works. 1. Claims, proceedings, compensation and costs payable due to use of the Site by or for the purpose of the works, negligence, breach of legal obligations or interference of the legal right

Ameren UE-Missouri and Illinois Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Ameren UE-Missouri and Illinois - Research Paper Example The paper "Ameren UE-Missouri and Illinois" concerns the Ameren Corporation. Last 1997, Ameren was born when the Union Electric Company of St. Louis, Missouri merged with its neighboring investor-owned public utility, CIPSCO Inc. which is the holding company of Central Illinois Public Service Company. Due to this merger, Ameren was able to widen its geographic scope and became one of the nation’s largest utility holding companies. It is now the parent company of UE and CIPSCO Inc. that primarily serve the people of Missouri, Illinois and Iowa. Ameren is traded in the New York Stock Exchange under the NYSE ticker symbol, AEE. Ameren Missouri is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri and Ameren Illinois is based in Peoria, III, and its current president and CEO is Thomas R. Voss. On the other hand, Ameren has a 0% insider ownership and 58% institutional ownership. Aside from being the largest electricity provider in Illinois and Missouri, Ameren is also a natural gas and oil distr ibutor, an operator of nuclear and hydroelectric power plants, merchant power production and other energy-related services. The company is held as one of the â€Å"nation’s largest investor-owned electric and gas utilities† serving â€Å"2.4 million electric and nearly one million natural gas customers around a 64,000-square-mile are of Illinois and Missouri†. Before UE and CIPSCO had decided to merge, the two utility companies were already having their owned holding companies and energy facilities. In order for them to be well-prepared.... The merged has been successful in terms of demand stability, profitability and sales revenue; however, because of several factors such as weather conditions, economic situation, state and federal regulation, high fuel costs, etc., the demand had declined. For the fiscal year for 2010, Ameren’s sales are $7.64 billion with a 1-year sales growth of 7.73%. Furthermore, its total net income has declined from $612.00 million in 2009 to $139.00 million in 2010 with a 1-year net income growth of -77.29% (see figure 1). Figure 1: Revenue vs. Net Income and Cash Flow from Operations Source: â€Å"Ameren Corporation† As forecasted, Ameren will still manage to attain a relatively stable and growing net profitability and revenue for the coming years despite of unstable economic situation (see figure 2). Figure 2: Income Statement Evolution Source: â€Å"Ameren CRP† In addition, it is projected that by 2012, the company’s annual sales will have a growth rate of 1.25% a nd its earnings per share during the 2nd and the 3rd quarter of 2011 will increase to $1.14 per share (â€Å"Ameren Corp†). This achievement is attributed to the company’s â€Å"improved plant operations, a focus on cost management, rate relief in Missouri, a recovering economy boosting industrial sales and installation of emissions reduction equipment (scrubbers) at its generation plants† (â€Å"Ameren Corporation (AEE-NYSE† 2). Ameren’s Stock Price (2006-2010) Source: â€Å"Ameren Corp† The chart above indicates the stock price performance of Ameren from 2006 to 2010. As seen in the chart, the stock performance is declining from +5.26% in 2006 to -48.44% in 2008 and to +1.79% in 2010 with a 5-year change of -44.76%. For five years, the historical growth rates of Ameren sales

Abstinence Only vs. Comprehensive Education in Teen Pregnancy Essay

Abstinence Only vs. Comprehensive Education in Teen Pregnancy - Essay Example According to studies that were aimed at providing scientific evidence for evaluation and decision making with regard to preventing teenage pregnancy for the whole nation; it was concluded by specialists that the sex education in teen pregnancy approach is efficient and effective in curbing teenage pregnancy as compared to abstinence only. The relationship between sex education, teen pregnancy and birth rates need to be taught to the teens if the situation is to be salvaged (Stanger-Hall and Hall, 2011). Consequently, other critical influences like socio-economic status, education, cultural activities, and access to contraceptives through Medicaid waivers should be critically analyzed. However, this is not taken into consideration across the nation; the emphasis are on abstinence laws rather than sex education. The teen pregnancy, abortion and birth data significantly shows that higher levels of abstinence education strongly culminates into higher levels of abstinence character hence resulting into decreased pregnancies among teenagers (Stanger-Hall and Hall, 2011). In the same line of argument, other factors as earlier mentioned impact severely on teenage pregnancy. For instance educational attainment, Ethnic composition, and socio-economic status have a hand in either alleviating or aggravating the situation. Medicaid waivers for family planning have been found to significantly reduce unplanned pregnancies especially among low income women and among teenagers (Stanger-Hall and Hall, 2011). Through comprehensive research and analysis it has been established that although elaborate sex education in the US has resulted in lower teen pregnancy rates, these rates are still high as compared to teen pregnancy levels in Europe. This is mainly associated with poor laws and policies that do not advocate for sex and STD education to

IKEA's Global Strategy - Furnishing the World Essay

IKEA's Global Strategy - Furnishing the World - Essay Example The entrance of IKEA into Germany has been unbeaten because of low prices of IKEA’s products. Although Germany was a mature market and various established retailers were attracting the major consumer segments, still IKEA enlarged the market and changed the competitive position because even the established retailers adopted the formula of IKEA in their own operations. In Germany, unlike traditional retail stores, IKEA introduced lean organizational strategies through which it enhanced responsibilities and freedom of employees. These strategies energized employees by increasing their motivation level. Canadian market was also a mature market, however, IKEA through its full advertising campaign, positive word-of-mouth and newly recruited local suppliers, energized Canadian market and successfully established its position. Moreover, in Canada, lean organizational practices were welcomed. In the huge and mature market of U.S. IKEA established it position by catering to the local ta ste and tapping into local expertise through franchising, acquisitions and joint venture. Therefore, IKEA’s practices insisted the competitors to reconsider their pricing strategies, advertising strategies, product features and management styles. It has analyzed from case study, that most of the markets which IKEA has targeted, word-of-mouth remained the best effective advertising strategy of the company however, in the U.S. market more focused media-advertising was required. IKEA through its TV advertising campaign touched the personality, life style and emotions of people and encouraged the sales of company. Through this campaign IKEA actually changed the furniture buying behavior of the consumers in the United States. The series of eight TV advertising spots was featured in such a way that every consumer in the U.S. could associate himself/herself with one of the series. Therefore, after this campaign, consumers started buying furniture not only to furnish their living space but as a matter of their lifestyle, personality and emotions. The campaign benefited IKEA because other companies in the U.S. were spending huge in advertising to stay in the business, whereas, by changing the behavior of consumers towards furniture, IKEA grew its customer base.     

Fourth Amendment Exceptions Summary Essay Example for Free

Fourth Amendment Exceptions Summary Essay The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution requires that no search or seizure shall be carried out unless a warrant has been issued. The exceptions are: searches with consent, frisks, plain feel/plain view, incident to arrest, automobile exceptions, exigent circumstances and open fields, abandoned property and public place exceptions (Harr, Hess, 2006, p. 219). Consent to search any property must be given by t actual owners or, as set forth in the United States v Matlock (1974) by a person in charge of that property. If, for instance more than one person owns a property, only one of those individuals must give consent. There are exceptions to that rule as well. Only commonly shared areas of that property may be searched (Harr,Hess, 2006). Take for instance a family living in an apartment which comprises of a husband, wife and sister to the man. The sister would give consent for common areas, such as the living room, den, kitchen, and bathroom, to be searched and she cannot give consent to allowing the bedroom of the brother and sister in-law to be searched. The husband, on the other hand, could consent to having the bedroom searched because it is there joint bedroom and is not off-limits to him. Other conditions on the searches incident to arrest exception include the use of force, the search of other individuals with the arrested individual, searching the vehicle of an arrest person, contemporaneousness and inventory searches if a government agent has probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime without a warrant because in the time it would take to get a warrant, the car, driver and contraband or evidence could be long gone (Harr, Hess, 2006. p. 231). The 1981 case of Robbins v. California saw the justifications for searching without a warrant. Those specifications include that the mobility of vehicles produce exigent circumstances.

Overview Of The Enola Gay Controversy History Essay

Overview Of The Enola Gay Controversy History Essay The term History Wars was coined in the United States in 1994  [1]  . It was based on the controversy over how history should be represented for the decision of dropping an atomic bomb on Japan when the Smithsonians National Air and Space Museum drafted an exhibit entitled The Crossroads: The End of World War II, the Atomic Bomb and the Cold War around the refurbished Enola Gay to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the war in 1995. This controversy centred around the failed 1995 Smithsonian National Air and Space Museums exhibit of the Enola Gay, which intended to examine intersection the end of World War II beginning with the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Along that process, various stakeholders in the representation of this historical event were embroiled including Smithsonian curators, veterans such as the Air Force Association and the American Legion, members of the United States Congress, academic historians, media, American public and even the Japanese. As early as in 1988, Smithsonians National Air and Space Museum (NASM) announced that they would display the Enola Gay as part of an interpretive exhibit on the end of World War II and the origins of the Cold War  [2]  . This announcement brought the museum into contact with a variety of interested groups. As the scripts developed, the exhibit had set off a heated controversy concerning national ideologies, the collective memory of self-victimization, and contestation over historical knowledge. The story of the Smithsonian and the Enola Gay reflected a larger battle in America over academic goals, cultural superiority, sacrifices, heroic effort and how should American remember their past.  [3]   This essay explores the ways in which the Enola Gay debate was fought out primarily in the American public media and in congressional hearings about history and memory. It will focuses on various predicaments in an attempts to produce a nations single and definitive public history and memory shared commonly and objectively by a nation. The Enola Gay controversy or some might called it the Smithsonian atomic bomb exhibit debates sparks a History Wars in American public. In fact, any attempts to produce or exhibit narratives about the past will always spark a controversy and incites various arguments and struggles over historical truth. This essay furthermore attempts to situate The Enola Gay debates within the larger context of the condition of the knowledge that describes those who were involved in this polemic. The Enola Gay controversy was not really about facts, nor was it about which side represented the facts more accurately. Rather, it centred on questions about for whom, for what objectives, and for whose community the event need to be remembered. The difference between the two different factions did not actually portray whether one side distorted the facts more than the other, although there were a number of events that which conservative politicians and veterans deliberately refused to acknowledge the existence of certain information, records and archives materials. Although those who involved in this debate be it veterans, Air Force Association, American Legion, news editors, conservative politicians, academic historians, Smithsonian curators and American public agreed that the main objective of the exhibit is to commemorate the important mission that led America to victory, there will always be different approaches on how to portray American as a saviour of the world and to acknow ledged the United States as the nation that ends the war. The conflation of the history wars with rhetoric of educational over the exhibit escalates during the development of the script. The exhibition main objectives were to showcase the plane that had dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima to end the war.  [4]  The script would have taken visitors through five sections moving from victory in Europe through the nuclear proliferation of the Cold War.  [5]  Along with the script preparation, gradually there are contradiction and different perspectives among the groups involved. The heated discussion of the initial script became public when the Air Force Association accused Smithsonian curators of politicizing the script.  [6]  These debates between veterans and curators foreshadowed a two-year struggle over plans for the exhibition. Veterans insist that the bomb had ended the war and thus prevented further loss of American soldiers lives, while academic historians and curators believed the other way round. The contradiction of the story which is one of a weapon that brought peace and victory and the other side weapon that brought destruction and terrify the world had created different views to American public  [7]  . Martin Harwit, the Smithsonians director, along with his curators, had held numerous discussions with veterans, academic historians and other interested groups in preparing the script of the exhibit.  [8]  During the preparation of the script and long before the official opening exhibition which is planned in August 1995, criticism on this exhibition increased largely due to the alleged political correctness and historical accurate polemic. There was an intense pressure against the Smithsonian from the veterans especially from the American Legion and the Air Force Association in developing the script. The Smithsonian wanted to tell a narrative purely based on the factual historical event while veterans insist on the portrayal of the struggling American troops, their heroic action that eventually fought to end the war and how the bomb could save approximately hundred thousand lives of American soldiers  [9]  . Tom Crouch, Chairman of the Institute of the Aeronautic Department at the Smithsonian Institute, already getting fed up with the continuous unresolved debates over the objectives of the exhibit, had asked this very important question in his memo to Harwit: whether the museum was producing an exhibit that was intended to make veterans feel goods or an exhibition that will lead our visitors to think about the consequences of the atomic bombing of Japan? Frankly, I dont think we can do both  [10]  . Veterans boasted that they had a number of powerful lobbying groups in Congress and they have the strength in number. They claimed that they have public backing and the American is always behind them. Their claim is true; on 27 August 1994, twenty four Congressmen sent a letter to the Smithsonian calling the exhibition as anti-American and a historically narrow, revisionist view of the Enola Gays mission  [11]  . When the veterans felt that they were going to be portrayed unfairly in the exhibition, they began to react and gather the support from those who felt the same way they did and started to interfere in the Smithsonian script. Veterans organization had a very high expectation that the exhibition would provide enough balanced historical context so that the reason to drop the bomb were justified enough or at least reasonable, legitimate and might be a necessary to avoid unbalance inference that will equal the bombing with more tragic incident such as holocaust. The politicians were also jumped into the bandwagon in support of the veterans resistance. Newt Gingrich, a Republican leader in House of Representative said that American had been tired and sick of being told by some so called historians that they ought to be ashamed of their country in the way they end the war  [12]  . In the following month, the Senate adopted Senate Resolution 257 which stated: . . . any exhibit by the National Air and Space Museum with respect to the Enola Gay should reflect appropriate sensitivity toward the men and women who faithfully and selflessly served, and should avoid impugning the memory of those who gave their lives for  [13]  . The Smithsonian is being criticized from all corners, from those who consider the exhibition as revisionist which is critical of the American History Wars to those who accuse the curators and the historians of staging and exaggerating which glorifies the decision of dropping the bomb. The curators and historians wanted the exhibition to be devoted solely to the justifications in using such a weapon and the task of the curators is to educate people, not to spread some kind of propaganda. Curators have not always been comfortable creating exhibits to celebrate technological prowess, devastating impact, losses of lives and wartime sacrifices. The curators saw the chance to display the Enola Gay as an opportunity to bring to a wider audience the issue of the consequences of the devastating impact for using such a terrible weapon and helping visitors to have better understanding the meaning and implication of the decisions and events that have shaped the subsequent history of the twentiet h century. The veterans accused the Smithsonian in denying the justification to drop the bomb at that time by questioning the morality and motives of President Trumans decision to end the war soonest possible  [14]  . On the veterans point of view, the decision is just a noble thing to be made which is to save as many American lives possible and to end the war immediately. As the script developed, both parties seem to be at loggerheads. The Smithsonian refusal to change the script infuriates the veterans. The American Legion insists that the script inferred that America was somehow in the wrong and her loyal airmen somehow criminal  [15]  . The congressmen step into the debate sided with the veterans and accusing the Smithsonian as a blatant betrayal of American history, biased and anti-American  [16]  . According to veterans, the script was a politically rigged program that made the Japanese in World War II look like victims instead of aggressors, and showed Americans as ruthless i nvaders, driven by racism and revenge.  [17]   Veterans reacted strongly to any Smithsonian attempt to remember the bombing that questioned the good war. They heavily criticized the progress of the script and particularly disturbed by the scripts suggestion that there were element of US aggression and imperialism even in what had been described as the most just and sacred of American wars ever fought.  [18]  While the curators wanted the public to interpret the consequences of the terrifying weapon and the horror of the war, veterans wanted the exhibit to commemorate the sacrifices they made to end the war. Their complaints reflected a perception that the curators and historians refusal to restructured the script as what the veterans wanted was seen as slap in the face of all Americans, including our courageous fallen, who fought from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo Bay.50 Bob Dole, a war veteran and a Republican Presidential candidate, told the American Legionnaires during the speech in Labor Day added that a generation of historians were in fact tend to be intellectual elites who seem embarrassed by America51. Charles B. Sweeney, the pilot who dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, heavily criticized the curators and described it as an assault on our language and history by the elimination of accurate and descriptive words.52 The media also inflames the controversy by bringing the exhibition into disrepute. A day after the exhibition were cancelled, the editorial of the Washington Post wrote : It is important to be clear about what happened at the Smithsonian. It is not, as some have it, that benighted advocates of a special interest or right-wing point of view brought historical power to bear to crush and distort the historical truth. Quite to the contrary, narrow-minded representatives of a special-interest and revisionist point of view attempted to use their inside track to appropriate and hollow out a historical event that large numbers of Americans alive at that time and engaged in the war had witnessed and understood in a very different and authentic way  [19]  . The main problem is to decide who the decision maker in this exhibition is. Curators is just doing their job and they have the right to interpret the past based solely on their scholarly credentials and other primary resources such as archives, historical records, photographs, interviews, bibliographies and also advised from academic historians. In contrast, the veterans claimed that they too have the rights to portrayed the exhibition based on their personal and wartime experience. As far as the veterans concerned, their criticism is not solely against the suffering of the Japanese people due to the dropping of the bomb, but they call for more balance and the completeness of the story rather than for accuracy or fidelity to what happened in fact. Apart from contrary belief that veterans were at all time against the historical accuracy, veterans greatly appreciated the curators effort to portray the exhibition as much attractive as ever but they wanted them to be displayed more on the Americans favour rather than Japanese one. As a whole, all parties came into agreement that they wanted to make this exhibition a success. Everybody involves in the controversy over the exhibition seems to agree that the decision to drop the bomb will resulted various interpretation but it is clear that the decision made in 1945 will be viewed differently as in present day. The veterans came into agreement that the exhibition should tell another side of the story about Enola Gay so that the balanced display would allow visitors to make their own judgement about what happened, how and why. The Enola Gay controversy clearly demonstrates that one cannot effectively seek proper representation in a national public sphere solely by claiming to possess knowledge that is solidly based on factual authenticity. To differentiate between factual history and imaginary commemoration is problematic precisely because it can prove debilitating when trying to prevail over those who adhere to opposed understanding of history. Moreover, as observed in the Smithsonian dispute, to rationalize the demand for the representation in the public sphere by opposing ones legitimacy on factual authenticity alone may unwittingly help perpetuate the myth that the subaltern history is more accurate than mainstream history. As The American Legions national commander, William M. Detweiller declared in November 1994: More than anything else, our disagreements centre on the estimate numbers of lived saved by the use of atomic weapons in 1945. Does it matter? To the museum and the historians, it seems to be of great importance in determining the morality of President Trumans decision. To the American Legion, it matters less, if at all.  [20]   In truth, to all concerned, it mattered a great deal. In the end, everyone believed that memory and history had been abused, and the controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit became a useful symbol for all sides in the history wars going in America. Controversies over museum exhibition clearly demonstrate that political correctness has displaced historical accuracy over issues of humanities, race and history itself.  [21]   If this is true, then the controversy accompanying this fiftieth anniversary marked a dark spot in Americas collective memory, when latent struggles came to the surface about which histories needed to be remembered or forgotten. These are not just academic questions, because public memories are also forms of cultural practice. Scholars should therefore attend to the ways historians, curators, the media, and ordinary citizens participated in the creation of the symbolic repertoires that made up the Enola Gay dispute. For the veterans, the exhibition will display not only the historical memories of the American veterans but also at their sense of personal and national identity. They wanted the exhibition to reflect their past glory and to portray themselves as the saviour of America who risks their lives in order to bring peace to America and the entire world. The exhibit floundered when pressure from conservative politicians and veterans groups denounced it and Congress threatened to cut the museums funding  [22]  . In the end, after the exhibit had finally been cancelled, Harwit admitted that his curators were defeated by veterans organizations whose summed membership stands six million strong.  [23]   The history wars have a negative influence not because they encourage public debate about historical matters, thereby removing control of them from the authority who really in the know about the subject matters. History is unceasingly controversial because it provides so much of the substance for the ways a society defines itself and considers what it wants to be. The history wars, though unnerving and nasty, offer the public an opportunity to talk with historians and about how history is written, how research has changed in recent decades, and how arguments about the past illustrates the future. History does matter, and it is important for American at the end of the twentieth century to understand how the recent history wars have unfolded, how these struggles are connected to earlier arguments over interpreting the past and what does it tell us of current state of present society. This controversy became a new battle in a war over American culture life and the exhibition is a new ex perience for American public especially in the way the debates were fought between various sides. History Wars are not only occurred or debated in America alone, but in other countries as well. Around the world, various History Wars have sparked over museum exhibits, national commemoration, public anniversaries, history textbooks, usage of jargon and parades.5 Where ever there are past event, there will be History Wars sparked by that particular event. In the past twenty years, there are debates about events that happened in the past. These debates all exhibit the same characteristics: the same obsessive collective pronouns and terminology, as well as the same parochialism and national preoccupations. Such example was a tragic event of infamous holocaust that still been debated until today by different party. There will always be a group of history revisionist, left wing or far-right denial that will keep on debating the truth about events that happened in the past. The debates on History Wars are not restricted in the western society but it also being debated everywhere. In the Far East during the Sino-Japanese War in 1937, the Japanese Army committed atrocities against the inhabitant of Nanking which will be remembered in history as The Rape of Nanking. The Japanese aggression caused the massacre of more than 260,000 Nanking civilian  [24]  and the Japanese government refusal to confess their past aggression and apologizing their atrocities infuriates the Chinese Government and its people. In the Japanese textbook, there were nothing being mention about their atrocities in the past and refusal had been condemned by China and other nations  [25]  . In Australia, History Wars represent an ongoing conflict between conservative, leftist groups, politicians and academic historians over the early white settlements and the behaviour of Australias settlers in regard to the indigenous peoples. The History Wars have also been an integral feature of the cultural war conflicts in Australia of recent years and of the consequent attacks on the academic historian publicly. The politician, journalists and revisionist and academic historians try to interpret issues about treatment of Australias indigenous people, the stolen generations, Black Armband view and others  [26]  . Such questions dominate the History Wars; in this case a Smithsonian lengthy politicised and polarised debate that have raged over years. Such dispute show how issue on nations past has become in US, as academic historians, curators, veterans, politicians and media find themselves increasingly entangled in a heated public debate. It was a paradox where while school children in US found that the subject of American history is being too boring  [27]  , the perspective wasnt shared by the people of the older age, in fact it seems more fraught than ever, in this case at least in this Smithsonian debate. As Richard H. Kohn, professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said that the cancellation of the original Enola Gay exhibition may constitute the worst tragedy to befall the public presentation of history in the United States in a generation .  [28]  In my opinion, this exhibit is a major opportunity to inform not only the American people but to all m ankind about war and its consequences and the tragedy of the cancellation was a great loss.