ok u ww2 lovers i need help! :S

thanks. so i have some q's i dont really know and need help with.
Was the US right in not declaring war when France and Britain did? At that point was the war any less America's responsibility?

What were some of the hardships faced by ordinary American's on the home front during ww2?

 

You must remember that the US wasn't a member of the League of Nations, and hadn't ratified the Treaty of Versailles. It was the treaty which recognized the borders of Poland, Czechoslovokia, and Yugoslavia. I believe it also recognized the borders of the three Baltic states and Finland too.

America wasn't required nor expected to come to the aid (even if ineffective) of any of those states. France wasn't going to follow Britain's lead until Chamberlain committed the British Expeditionary Force to landing on French soil and helping defend France on European soil.

So yes, at that point it was much less America's responsibility and we were knee deep in isolationists, and had effected neutrality acts which keep the US from doing anything unless it was physically attacked by a foreign power. We were disturbed, and wary of the Third Reich (see Ambasador Dodd's memos to FDR from the mid thirties), but could do little legally to curb its aggressive stances and actions.

On the "homefront" the hardships are more easily found by using the seach funtion here and typing in American home-front (or something of the sort). Rationing (of all types) would be a good place to start looking.

 

Great Britain and France had given undertakings to Poland to come to its aid if its territorial integrety was threatened -the Germans having already ceased Memel in March 1939 and were likely to cease the Danzig corridor had these guarentees not been made.

The U.S. had not involved itself so why should they declair war.

~Steve

 

yes ,it was wrong for america to not help aid her allies britain (troop aid)usa only join the war cause america was threaten and britain join the war to help other nations.
america was just thinking about them selves and no bady else,and the war was americas responsibity aswell as europeans countries.

britain did not have to help france and the rest of europe,britain could have just waited for there own benifet,stock up there army and equitment and just let the smaller nations do all the hard work and wait until the germans got real tied,this would have suited the brits down to the ground.
but no,the brits step in at the start to help a country at need for heilp.

Yes,america did help by suplying ships and equitment but when britain beg for america to jion,america turn it's back not good at all.

america population was founded by europens moslty from england (france plus more) and from africa nations (african american).
both european and africa land was threaten and yet america just stood there1 what's this about america's "brother in arms" i think not"!

before i get mocked by usa members,i do realised that america did supply ships and equitment to the british ,so america did some little good.

 

Heidi,

To what end? America did not have an army at 1940. There was no weapons, no men, no public support.

Politics is the art of the possible. Make no mistake here about FDR's desire to intervene the global conflict. He viewed fascist Germany and Japan as a threat of the first order to the peace of the world, and did everything possible to steer the US towards a military confrontation with the Axis powers. As a democratically elected national leader, FDR was beholden to the public and it was not his place to impose a war on the people when they had no desire to fight. America was not ready for action.

 

you quoted:"americia was not raedy for action" -so was not britain and still manage to fight off germany.

you quoted:"fdr was beholden to the public and it was not his place to impose a war on the people when they had no desire to fight"
-when does ever america or any other government listen to the public?
the american government and fdr was only using the public as an excuse too not to fight in ww2.

i'm saying all this with all thee recspect towards you mr triple c,please don't chow down on me.

 

Hm. FDR was voted into office. At his second term things weren't looking very good for him as he and the Congress were at a deadlock over the New Deal, economic recovery had stalled, and his critics were accusing him of dragging America into war--which he was, intentionally. The Americans did not want to fight, had no standing obligation to any of the nations of Europe as Britain or France had, and many Americans still see this new war as a dispute between imperialist powers--so why get involved?

Great Britain, be it said, had been concerned with the rise of Nazi Germany even under Chamberlain and did not neglect their armies to the extend the Americans had in the interwar period. Polland's army was bigger than America's.

 

American history, culture, and attitudes were much different before and after WW2. Historically American had been since 1776, relatively isolationist. Being defended by two Oceans with weak or non-hostile nations on both borders did not hurt this attutde either. Except for the Mexican war of 1848, Until WW1, most foreign American military involvement was relatively short in duration, involved small numbers of troops and resources and either had limited goals or were defensive in nature. Remember the USA was founded by people fleeing European oppression and there had historically been much effort given by congress and the President to avoiding "foreign entanglements" and it took alot to get the US involved in foreign wars.

WW1 was no different, there was little enthusiasm among Americans for getting involved in what was seen as yet another "European conflict". it took German attacks on American shipping for the US to come into the war and when we did so, we did it reluctantly and so American troops and weapons did not appear in large numbers in Europe until 1917. The Tzarist Russians in the East had already surrendered to the Germans, thus freeing up a million German troops to send west, and victory for the Kaisers army seemed to be assured. American Marines, troops and supplies helped turn the tide and appeared just in time, as without them the British and the French might well have lost.

(An entire French division - 12,000+ men - got tired of seeing their troops slaughtered in senseless attacks and actually mutinied, but were eventually brought back under control by a combination of a few selective executions and a betterment of conditions for the army. The whole thing was hushed up by the French to prevent the army from collapse. Source: Victory and Deceit: deception and Trickery in War by Jim Dunnigan)

WW1 was the first war involving slaughter on a world wide scale, thanks to horrific new weapons like the machine gun, fast firing artillery and poison gas. There were enough American troops involved to come back and spread the word of the horrors of modern warfare and this combined with the (still unchanged) American isolationist attitude was enough to create very strong anti-war sentiments in the US right up until 1941.

When Hitler and the Japanese began their plans for conquest, even the fall of France was not considered enough to provoke America into fighting for Europe. Hitler was well aware of American industrial capabilities (although he thought Americans were too "mongrelized" to make good soldiers) and he went far out of his way to avoid provoking war with the US. This strategy went a long way to keeping the US out of the European war (other then sending the British and Russians American goods vie lend-lease.) It took Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and Hitler's subsequent (and very foolish) declaration of war on the US soon after until America was in the war for real.

The concept of America acting as "world policemen" is something that is unique to american history and only came about after ww2. In 1945 there were only two superpowers left from all that destruction, the US and the Soviets. The US alone among all the nations of the world came out stronger then before, with a first class military, unsurpassed (and intact) industrial capacity, and the strongest economy of any nation in world history. Russia had suffered 20 million dead but even so was now the most powerful nation in Europe, the Chinese were poor but with the japanese crushed, were now the most powerful military power in Asia, but were still fighting amongst themselves and would eventually be taken over by the Communists in 1948.

After 1945 the war against the Nazis seemingly overnight became a war against "communist aggression". The Axis were defeated and gone but were instantly replaced as "the enemy" of the west by Communist Russian and China. With Germany and Italy now our allies, but still rebuilding from WW2 along with the British (there was meat rationing in Britain until 1960), the US had to take over the role of world protector in Europe and Asia. And that is why it seems some people seem to think every problem in every part of the globe is somehow America's problem too. (Contrast that with the typical American isolationist attitude in the 1930's discussed earlier.)

 

It would have been wrong (and contrary to principles of international law such as the law of neutrality) for The US to involve itself in what was essentially Europe's business in 1939.

The US was NOT allied with Britain, France, Poland, or any other European country in 1939.

The US had NOT given "assurances" or any form of promise to assist Poland, or any other European country, prior to the German attack on Poland.

EVERY country in the world, including Britain, France, Poland, and Germany acts ONLY in it's own self interest. Governments would be derelict in their legal duties to their own citizens if they did not do so.

In 1939, the Roosevelt administration perceived Nazism as a threat to the US and the western democracies, and was busy trying to convince the US public of the truth of this matter. But in reality, Germany had not overtly or directly threatened any legitimate US interests and had not committed any act that could be seen, from the US perspective, as an act of war. The US had no causes belli to declare war on Germany.

Britain, acting in what was perceived as it's own best interests, had given assurances to France that it would assist France in any war with Germany, and had also given assurances that it would come to Poland's aid if Poland was attacked by Germany. Therefore Britain was morally and ethically obligated to declare war on Germany, when Germany attacked Poland. Despite Britain's assurances to Poland, Britain rendered no direct assistance to Poland when it was attacked by Germany; the only thing Britain could do was declare war. After the war, Britain ignored Poland's pleas for help and forgot the fact that Britain had guaranteed Poland's independence. Britain was, as all nations do, looking out for it's own best interests.

The United States realized that Germany was a threat to the US, and took steps to guarantee that Britain would not be defeated, as a British defeat would expose the US to an even greater threat. But it was not in the US best interests to declare war on Germany until that country directly threatened the US. This did not happen until Germany declared war on the US in December, 1941. For over a year before that, the US had been bending neutrality laws to the limit to aid Britain and was already in an undeclared naval war with Germany in the Atlantic. The United States, most emphatically, DID NOT turn it's back on Britain at any time.

The United States is populated by people with origins from around the world; France and Britain are represented among these nations, but so are Germany, Italy, Japan, China, Africa, India, and dozens of other cultures and countries. No one can expect the US to base it's foreign policy decions on favoring one or another of these nations. In fact, if the US were to do so, logic would have dictated that America remain neutral throughout the entire war.

No one wants to "mock" you, but it is appropriate to point out some facts of which you seem to be blissfully unaware. America's contribution in WW II went far beyond simply supplying the implements of war. Americans shed their blood to resolve a crises that should have been prevented by firm European diplomacy and European military pressure (as opposed to appeasement), before it reached the stage of open warfare. The US was careful in the interwar years to mind it's own business and not take sides in European squabbles; this proved to be a mistake, but one made with the best of intentions. To say the US "did some little good" in WW II is an astounding misstatement of the truth.

 

In the US, the government listens to the public once every four years.

Roosevelt knew the US Public didn't want to go to war in 1939, and he knew he was facing a very uncertain election in 1940. He also realized that if he went too far towards involving the US in a European war, he would no longer be part of the government after the 1940 election.

Roosevelt very much wanted to declare war on Germany in 1939; he wasn't using public opinion as an "excuse" to remain neutral. But he was bound by the constraints of the US political system, and US laws which required the US to stay neutral. I don't know if you realize it, but the President of the US cannot declare war; only the US Congress has that power, and they face reelection every two years!

 

Well said Devilsadvocate, it is sometimes difficult to explain to non-American citizens just how complicated our national ethnic make-up is. While it is true that British and Northern European immigrants made up the bulk of our citizenry at the outbreak of WW2, we also contained Italians, peoples from the Levant, the Caribbean, South and Central America, the mid-east, the African continent, the far east, the Philippines, numerous UK Commonwealth and Dominion nations, and that is not counting our own indigenous Native AmerIndian population.

And virtually every religious grouping known to man.

 

Hey Heidi,

I think you are making opinions on this by looking thru modern glasses. The USA was a very differant country back then. In most respects it truly lived up to the view of being a republic of true democracy. And it's people were wholesome and lived with a simple phylosophy. It was the rest of the world governments that were complicated and confused.

And that is why the USA saved the world back then. And that is probably why we can look back at it and make our opinions good and bad. Sadly, in my humble opinion, the USA in modern times has joined the ranks of Europe and the rest of the world goverments. Which is to govern in a complicated and often confusing manner.

 

It was actually the Zimmermand letter that was the final straw. Germany conspired with Mexico to attack the USA from the south with the promise of reclaiming lands the USA supposedly stole from Mexico.

 

Heidi

This attachment shows appoximately 150 tanks of the 1st armoured Divison in June 1941, there were a total of about 400 tanks in the U.S. forces at that time. One of the reasons this photo was taken was that it almost correctly matches the number of tanks available in 1939 including the 8 1st class Medium tanks medium M2 available on September 3rd 1939.
The only good thing was that the ordnance had spent much of it time developing components that could be rapidly adapted for war use.
View attachment 6072

The air force was in a similar situation and the Navy was better off but was short of Destroyers and Personnel. No doubt other members who are more naval and aircraft orientated might fill in any gaps.

Steve

 

Indeed. Seems we heeded some good advice for quite awhile:

 

Heidi,
What is your WWII name anyway? Heidi or Hiedi?

When the USA finally came to the assistance of Britain, most Brits were not all that happy with us. Consider what they said of the Americans:
"Over-paid, Over-sexed, and Over-here".
Most soldiers who were there rather would have stayed home, as per many veterans I have talked to!

(BTW, English is not my native language either. You are doing fine!)

Kuuk.

 

my name is heidi.

yes,i have heard abuot that saying too. i think what britain wanted was americe to join the war but not to live in britain. (probelry feeling a bit timedated).