It seems like there's two parts to your disapproval.
1. Effort is expended that could be allocated towards helping the poor, hungry, and sick. (Money being an abstraction layer over "effort"). This is immoral.
This is also true of every leisure activity and many jobs including the creation of art, music, and literature. You may wish to argue against all of those things but "all leisure is sin" will find little support, as most people want there to be something to enjoy in life.
2. Because this plane was created for war it is a dirty, ugly thing that should be discarded.
That's a matter of personal opinion. Some people will agree, but there are reasons not to. Just off the top of my head:
* Preserving this preserves a historical artifact. Keeping this plane in flying condition enables people today to see what it was like in use. It is important both as a part of cultural history (the cold war) and technical history (as an engineering development)
* There is beauty in a well-built machine. Jet aircraft are awe-inspiring in general. A fighter is built not only to carry weapons but for great speed and maneuverability. Disarmed, it still has an appeal far greater than a Gulfstream. It is like comparing an F1 car to a Toyota Camry. The latter is a lot more practical, but the former was built to do the extreme.
* It's a fighter, not a gas chamber. It's a weapon specifically designed to fight other warplanes and to get shot back at. Somebody flying a plane like this in a war is a target as often as they are an aggressor. It might have kept the guy flying it alive under fire.
I don't think somebody restoring and flying this plane takes any human lives. There is the opportunity cost argument -- you could've used that money/effort to save lives instead -- but again, you gotta condemn basically every form of leisure to go that route. That doesn't work.
1. Effort is expended that could be allocated towards helping the poor, hungry, and sick. (Money being an abstraction layer over "effort"). This is immoral.
This is also true of every leisure activity and many jobs including the creation of art, music, and literature. You may wish to argue against all of those things but "all leisure is sin" will find little support, as most people want there to be something to enjoy in life.
2. Because this plane was created for war it is a dirty, ugly thing that should be discarded.
That's a matter of personal opinion. Some people will agree, but there are reasons not to. Just off the top of my head:
* Preserving this preserves a historical artifact. Keeping this plane in flying condition enables people today to see what it was like in use. It is important both as a part of cultural history (the cold war) and technical history (as an engineering development)
* There is beauty in a well-built machine. Jet aircraft are awe-inspiring in general. A fighter is built not only to carry weapons but for great speed and maneuverability. Disarmed, it still has an appeal far greater than a Gulfstream. It is like comparing an F1 car to a Toyota Camry. The latter is a lot more practical, but the former was built to do the extreme.
* It's a fighter, not a gas chamber. It's a weapon specifically designed to fight other warplanes and to get shot back at. Somebody flying a plane like this in a war is a target as often as they are an aggressor. It might have kept the guy flying it alive under fire.