Two?
6 to eight on a Saturday night.
Full of iron and vitamins.
In the states maybe - here it's cheap fizzy gnat's piss.
Carlsberg Export Hof, a good Pilsner, couple of others...
USA in WWII
- Thread starter Atom
- Start date
6 to eight on a Saturday night.
Full of iron and vitamins.
Carlsberg Export Hof, a good Pilsner, couple of others...
Ah, youth - I don't get head rushes, I don't get drunk.
Guinness just tastes good and keeps the vocal chords lubricated while talking to friends all night.
So far this thread has not been very productive. Too many scintists on the board...who invarably know about Memes but absolutely NOTHING about the real world and...not much by Historians or History students....who know EVERYTHING about the World because it has a much broader scope.
I'm particularly sad to see the thread deteriate into a childish debate about Beer. I expect better off you lot.
LETS GET IT STRAIGHT
- A FEW FACTS FOR A CHANGE
Did the Americans do nice things and help the Brits between 1939 and Pearl Harbour? Yes.
Why? Because the Americans were our allies. Because they didnt' want to see us conquered. Who knows.
Was this nice of them? Yes.
Is the reason that they didn't declare war in support of the British because they were sure the Brits would win anyway? Unlikely , during 1940 civilian deaths from German bombing on mainland UK were between 3,000 and 5,000 a month. That's the equivalent number of civilian deaths as the World Trade Centre, but every month.
Did the Americans say, we will join the war to stop these deaths? No.
Did the Americans say, if Germany doesn't stop killing these civilians we will join the war? No
Could Germany have invaded and conquered mainland Britain at any stage? We'll never know now because they didn't.
However, did the Americans stand up unequivocally when this looked like a possiblility and say "If you invade Britain, we will wage war against you"? No.
Did Churchill send pleading, wheedling, demanding, requests over and over to FDR asking him to stand up and offer some public show of protection, etc? Yes, culminating in the Plancentia Bay meeting.
Was Churchills satisfied with the concord that came out that meeting? No, because it could be interpreted as the USA having a pop at Britain for having an empire, and it was certainly not the ringing support for Britain Churchill had hoped for.
Roy Jenkins P 666
"Between Churchill's return from the Atlantic meeting and the USA entry into the war there were 112 days. Despite the warmth and semi-commitment of Placentia Bay, it would be quite wrong to think of them as days of ineluctable steps in this direction. That was Churchill's hope and maybe belief, but it was not Roosevelt's settled desire. When Hopkins lunched with him in the Oval Office on Sunday 7 December and the first tentative news of . . Pearl Harbour becan to come in he recorded Roosevelt's reaction as follows: "The President discussed at some length his efforts to keep the country out of the war and his earnest desire to complete his administration without war, but that if this action of Japan's were true it would take the matter entirely out of his own hands, because the Japanese had made the decision for him."
Roy Jenkins, P 667
"Nevertheless Churchill saw no way of winning the war without full American participation. His 'give us the tools and we will finish the job' broadcast of 9 February 1941 was a piece of tactical phrasing and not hard dtruth. . . It was therefore a moment of unalloyed joy when he heard the news of Pearl Harbour. He was at Chequers, dining with Winant and Harriman (n.b. 2 important influential Americans who were having affairs, with his approval/knowledge?, with his daughter and his daughter-in-law). This was typical of the priority which he was giving to Anglo-American relations and the timing was convenient as things turned out . . . It contrasted with Roosevelt's greater cuation . . .which meant that America was not at war with Germany - or Italy - until four days later, when it was Berlin and Rome - not Washington - which took the initiative to involve the USA in the EUropean War."
.
Did the support being given by America to Britain prove that they were not willing to allow Britain to be conquered by the Nazis? I would argue no. It would have taken a declaration of war to do that, or, at least a clear public statement made by the Americans that they would declare war against the Nazis if they invaded Britain, similar to the commitment made by Britain to Poland at the start of the war. Here's a question for you . . why did the Americans not make such a public statement? Indeed, why did the Americans fail to make any kind of public statement of this nature, including after Churchill had stated that if Japan attacked America Britain would declare war against Japan within the hour. the USA did not reciprocate? Why was that?
If Americans - and others on here - are so adamant that the USA would not have allowed Germany to conquer Britain, tell me what makes you so adamant?)
I'm particularly sad to see the thread deteriate into a childish debate about Beer. I expect better off you lot.
LETS GET IT STRAIGHT
- A FEW FACTS FOR A CHANGE
Did the Americans do nice things and help the Brits between 1939 and Pearl Harbour? Yes.
Why? Because the Americans were our allies. Because they didnt' want to see us conquered. Who knows.
Was this nice of them? Yes.
Is the reason that they didn't declare war in support of the British because they were sure the Brits would win anyway? Unlikely , during 1940 civilian deaths from German bombing on mainland UK were between 3,000 and 5,000 a month. That's the equivalent number of civilian deaths as the World Trade Centre, but every month.
Did the Americans say, we will join the war to stop these deaths? No.
Did the Americans say, if Germany doesn't stop killing these civilians we will join the war? No
Could Germany have invaded and conquered mainland Britain at any stage? We'll never know now because they didn't.
However, did the Americans stand up unequivocally when this looked like a possiblility and say "If you invade Britain, we will wage war against you"? No.
Did Churchill send pleading, wheedling, demanding, requests over and over to FDR asking him to stand up and offer some public show of protection, etc? Yes, culminating in the Plancentia Bay meeting.
Was Churchills satisfied with the concord that came out that meeting? No, because it could be interpreted as the USA having a pop at Britain for having an empire, and it was certainly not the ringing support for Britain Churchill had hoped for.
Roy Jenkins P 666
"Between Churchill's return from the Atlantic meeting and the USA entry into the war there were 112 days. Despite the warmth and semi-commitment of Placentia Bay, it would be quite wrong to think of them as days of ineluctable steps in this direction. That was Churchill's hope and maybe belief, but it was not Roosevelt's settled desire. When Hopkins lunched with him in the Oval Office on Sunday 7 December and the first tentative news of . . Pearl Harbour becan to come in he recorded Roosevelt's reaction as follows: "The President discussed at some length his efforts to keep the country out of the war and his earnest desire to complete his administration without war, but that if this action of Japan's were true it would take the matter entirely out of his own hands, because the Japanese had made the decision for him."
Roy Jenkins, P 667
"Nevertheless Churchill saw no way of winning the war without full American participation. His 'give us the tools and we will finish the job' broadcast of 9 February 1941 was a piece of tactical phrasing and not hard dtruth. . . It was therefore a moment of unalloyed joy when he heard the news of Pearl Harbour. He was at Chequers, dining with Winant and Harriman (n.b. 2 important influential Americans who were having affairs, with his approval/knowledge?, with his daughter and his daughter-in-law). This was typical of the priority which he was giving to Anglo-American relations and the timing was convenient as things turned out . . . It contrasted with Roosevelt's greater cuation . . .which meant that America was not at war with Germany - or Italy - until four days later, when it was Berlin and Rome - not Washington - which took the initiative to involve the USA in the EUropean War."
.
Did the support being given by America to Britain prove that they were not willing to allow Britain to be conquered by the Nazis? I would argue no. It would have taken a declaration of war to do that, or, at least a clear public statement made by the Americans that they would declare war against the Nazis if they invaded Britain, similar to the commitment made by Britain to Poland at the start of the war. Here's a question for you . . why did the Americans not make such a public statement? Indeed, why did the Americans fail to make any kind of public statement of this nature, including after Churchill had stated that if Japan attacked America Britain would declare war against Japan within the hour. the USA did not reciprocate? Why was that?
If Americans - and others on here - are so adamant that the USA would not have allowed Germany to conquer Britain, tell me what makes you so adamant?)
what "nice" things would those be?
america wanted to stay out of the war.
we finally caved in and agreed to see armaments on a cash and carry method. we would sell you what you needed but you had to come and get the stuff you bought, we would not ship it to you.
only AFTER pearl harbor did this change.
in britains case we went a step further and agreed to "lend" britain the armaments of war so we could "lease" various bases and islands.
this was known as the lend/ lease act.
IF this is true it's only because germany would then have access to the royal navy. at that time she was the most powerful on the planet. something the americans DID NOT want in german hands.
we are talking about war here. you do not use the word "nice" when talking about war.
americas dealings with britain was purely strategic.
correct. it was called the battle of britain.
it's also the time the lend/ lease act was enacted.
we DID NOT give britain anything, she paid for everything she got from the US. the only exception between britain and the other countries is the various air bases that was leased to america. all other countries had to pay cash AND provide their own shippihg.
i believe that the only reason america went to war in europe was to clean up what was the aftermath of WW1. the causes of WW2 lay in the unfinished business of WW1.
without aid from america? it's a good question.
britain succeeded in moving her manufacturing, and her people, underground.
britains navy, the most powerful in the world, was scattered all across the globe protecting her vital supply lines.
germany could not invade as long as the RAF was still in the air.
germany got so desparate that she resorted to night raids and weapons such as the V-2. still, no matter what he tried, he could not knock the RAF from the skies.
i must confess that the british are a brave and valiant lot.
because americans wanted to stay out of the war.