Re: Economic Warfare--Trade embargo 1940

v1313w@xxxxxxxxx wrote:


You can't be serious. You say that as if it was the US who was determined
to force Germany to abide by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, as if
it were the US that was threatening Germany not to expand into
Czechoslovakia and Poland, as if it were the US who finally stop up to Nazi
aggression and declared war when it really was not in a position to stop
them.

These points don't have anything to do with Britain's economic
postition in May - Dec. 1940 (which is the period I'm most interested
with.) These points don't have anything to do with the USA's economic
position.

It was not clear from your post that you were limiting the discussion to
that time frame. At that time, the US had shown very little interest in
getting involved in a European war. While it was basically opposed to the
Nazis, it would have preferred to have let England fight them on its own.


Do you seriously think that if Britain had "come to terms" ..... read
'surrendered" to Germany, the the US would have been in a position to keep
Britain out of North Africa or the Middle East?

The USA doesn't want Britain to come to term with Germany like France
came to term with Germany, or Norway came to term, or Denmark, or
Belgium, or the Netherlands, or Poland.

Of course not, since they seem to have preferred to have Britain be their
proxy army against Germany.


You missed the point that I'm claiming. I'm claiming that in no way
can Britain lead the USA into dropping its hostility towards Germany.


That is another point that you disguised too well. In fact, you gave the
impression of a situation so different from what I picture that is seemed
inconceivable. While you are now claiming that there was no way that
Britain could have lead the USA into dropping its hostility toward Germany,
I would suggest that Britain was doing its best to get the US to be
hostile.

In other words, the USA is powerful and completely independ of
Britain. The USA green lights, yellow lights, and red lights in its
own right on crucial matters of trade, politics, finance, on other
matters. Absolutely, the USA is interested in a strong Britain. At
least the President is and so is the PM of Canada.

The US was a potentially powerful force with a great industrial power, but
it was not prepared for war at the time. It was scrambling to train new
men and get new arms and equipment even as it finally entered the war. I
would suggest that the US administration was more interested in jockeying
for position against the European powers, and letting France and Germany
duke it out amongst themselves was more appealing to them than to jump to
the aid of Britain.


I don't think the USA by Dec. 1940 is worried about Vichy becoming a
large and important Axis military partner, and by Dec. 1940 the USA is
not worried about Britain becoming an ally of Germany militarily. If
Britain decides to drop out, the USA will not be building up Britain
and not working to make things happen for it, but the USA will
continue with its hostilies against Germany.

If the US was not prepared to go to war to assist its French and British
allies against Nazi Germany, do you really think that it would be prepared
to go across to Europe and fight Germany on its own? If England had
dropped out of the fight against nazi Germany, there would have been
nothing to stop it. The US knew that at the time. It did everything it
could to avoid getting involved in the war. It was pushing the limits of
its neutrality to supply Britain. The while idea behind the Lend Lease
program was not to save Britain per say but to provide arms and equipment
to other countries where they could be used to protect US interests.

.