Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Wonder how hard it would be to just move it to...Iowa?
Which is probably where it should be anyway.
Set it up in some sort of drydock then tourists could see it in its entirety and not just above the waterline
Dred, they could never get it there. Missouri put up a good fight trying to get their namesake anchored in St. Louis. Problem was, they couldnt get her up the Mississippi. Even during the wettest season they'd have had sandbars to worry about. And while dredging could have handled alot of that, if they could have overcome the environmental arguments, she just wouldnt fit under the bridges. In the end, the biggest winner for Pearl Harbor's argument to claim her was that they already had a harbor designed for ships of that size. I'm glad they did though. The volunteers they get from Pearl help tremendously in the upkeep. St Louis would have had a hard time doing nearly so much of the work that has been done to restore her. Besides, I think the ship where the Japanese signed the surrender that ended WWII belongs in the Pacific. She'll stand guard over those who died on Dec. 7th, 1941. The Arizona Memorial and the Missouri together symbolize the beginning and the end of the war for us, all in one spot. Having a home where she is not only wanted, but that can afford to take care of her has made all the difference. Thats the only thing i worry about with the Iowa going to Stockton. Can they really afford it? In SF they have help from the Navy, if necessary. What do they have in Stockton besides space? I'm glad they want to give her a home, but she's a high maintenance lady.