[Hottentot]

An interesting question. The first and obvious answer that springs to my mind is: "of course history should be preserved! what kind of question is that?"

Then again, we are not talking just about history, we are talking about an investment. Investments cost time and money, which are both finite. If it is preserved, someone has to preserve it. Someone has to pay for its upkeep, someone has to invest time in taking care of it.

And while it's nice for us foreign tourists to come there, take photos with our fancy cameras and be all "Ooo, aaa" while staring it, we are still talking about the French heritage and French investment here. I can understand why some would rather use the time and money to preserve the French heritage instead of what an occupying country once build there.

Then again, preservering heritage is history, and history should not be just happy things. We can't just "erase" the part that the Atlantic wall represents, it just doesn't work that way in history. Personally I'd say, that a compromise would be ethically the best choice here. Preserve part of the wall in some vital place, but don't overdo it. Instead document the rest of it otherwise, with photos and with research for example.

Two cents from a heritage student.