When you have concerns that your life might be in danger it is usually not a good idea to seek advice from complete strangers on an internet forum.

I really wanted to be there with my dad, but...
M
fmr LCDR, MC, USNR 1/74... (dad was a CAPT USAAC in War II 12/41...)
Following Seas to all!

Well said, wandrlst.

I visited the WW2 Memorial 3-4 times in May. There were scads of sightseers there every time I went, once as early as 6:30AM when I was out for a walk! The visitors to this memorial were reverent and teary, lots of 70 and 80-somethings who obviously made a great effort to be there. I was very sad that my dad and my father-in-law did not live long enough to see this.

I am no architect, but I do not understand all the hysteria over obstruction of sight lines. As I stood at the top of the steps at the Lincoln Memorial and looked down the mall towards they Capitol I can truly say that the WW2 Memorial did not detract from the view in any way; it enhanced it. Only my humble opinion.

Thankyou Wandrist, very well said. This memorial was way overdue and so was the thanks of this nation. I wish all of you could attend reunions and listen to the stories of what the WWII vets went through. Maybe you would be more appreciative of the memorials importance and location.

As a Korean War vet, I attended the dedication of our memorial and marched in the parade the next day. It was a very emotional two days but I walked away feeling proud of my small contribution of serving on a destroyer along the east coast of Korea.

It has been very moving to be a part of the veterans recognition in DC this Memorial weekend from the WWII Memorial dedication to Rolling Thunder, a large number of vets who arrived in DC by motorcycle. One of the memorable times was seeing my father and other elderly veterans sitting down in a tent to share and document their war experiences and stories with volunteers from the Veterans History Project created in Oct. 2000 by the American Folklife Center in the Library of Congress. jor, bonniebroad, TxTravelPro, mikemo, ronkala, you might find this of interest: They are collecting and preserving stories and documentation from veterans of WWI, WWII, Korean, Vietnam,and Persian Gulf Wars. For more info, look at www.loc.gov/vets. Those who were active in the military service may even find info on others who served with them from the contributors list.

BTW, the news on TV this morning reports that critics of the design and placement of the WWII Memorial "have been silenced" as veterans and visitors alike felt the memorial was striking and appropriate in its recognition of WWII vets and its contribution to the National Mall. It really is beautiful and is a place that can be actively enjoyed by visitors for years to come with its development around a fountain and the generous seating provided inside the memorial's area.

Why is it that criticizing the architectural value of the WWII Memorial is equated by so many small-minded sloppy thinkers with somehow underappreciating WWII veterans??? Buckeyemom, I don't usually get into slagging matches with specific individuals on this board, but I think your remarks are way out of line.

Both my parents served in WWII (and I'm a VietNam vet) and while they supported a monument, they weren't too encouraged by what they saw during construction, but figured construction sites being what they are, it couldn't really be judged at that time. I'll be in DC next weekend to see it myself if plans work out.

I'm sure neither of my folks would consider critism of a monument to be critism of them as WWII veterans. I can say that a "tribute" they are both much more concerned about is not one of marble, concrete and pools, but one of maintaining services at Veterans' Hospitals throughout the US, something our present government seems hell-bent on "downsizing", even while in the process of an increase of war-time veterans, yet a benefit promised to them 60 years ago.

Tickets were/are only for the dedication, right? I won't need any next weekend, will I?

tickets were just for the dedication service for crowd control purposes. it's on the mall and is completely open.

i haven't seen it in person yet (still almost 2 weeks away from my trip), but CNN has a great panoramic view available at http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2004/sum...t.exclude.html (hope that works).

Since I haven't seen it, I don't wanna chime in on my opinion, not that it matters, and certainly even less so considering what's done is done, but I agree with both sides, it's quite beautiful and tasteful, but judging by what I see on CNN, the Freedom Wall does block the view of the Lincoln Memorial from the ground, whereas the side facing the Washington Monument is open. It would have been nice to have the circle open on both sides, so the view still goes on for as long as it did. I'd also be a bit concerned about the traditional view from the opposite end of the reflecting pool looking towards the monument, I guess that all obviously changed now too.

Anyway, not to get involved in the debate here, but all the people who attacked other people for judging their views need to take a step back. Nobody here said there should not be a WWII memorial. Even Blacktie said there should be something more meaningful to it, such as a building/museum.

Just that coupled with someone else's comment about the vietnam memorial being 'small and insignificant' in another thread (which it's obviously so not, it's probably the most poignant for my money) leads me to wonder why people confuse massive objects with meaning. Something doesn't have to be huge and gaudy to pay homage to whatever. The WWII memorial is far from gaudy of course, but it does in all fairness mar the tradition and openness of the Mall. My only real reservations about it is what influence it will have on future monument placement and design.