In 1940, would you have been opposed or supportive of Lend-Lease?

[Dennis Donovan]

I was just reading Sarge Shriver's bio on Wikipedia and it said he was a member of "America First Committee". That got me to thinking: Which position would "I" have supported? Would I have followed Roosevelt's lead and support aid to England or would I have opposed such policies, not as an isolationist, but as a pacifist (fearing such peripheral support would drag us into the European conflict)?

On edit, I changed the question from being and "American Firster" to "opposed to Lend-Lease."

[SheilaT]

1. How can I possibly know what I would

have felt back then? I'd like to think I would have supported it, but I'd have been quite a different person, especially if I'd been the age then that I am now. Which is 62. What if I were 15? Or 27? Or 42?

There should have been a "Too little information to guess" choice.

[northoftheborder]

3. would I have???

Sometimes I wonder would I have been a Tory, or a supporter of George Washington? Would I have been daring enough to throw in with this risky, radical group with a poor chance of winning, who would likely been executed and/or prisoned if they lost? Would it have depended upon my station in life, my assets, and where they originated? Interesting to think about in hindsight.

I realize this is off topic of question poll, sorry.

[jakeXT]

2. Why only England?

A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $759 billion at 2008 prices) worth of supplies were shipped: $31.4 billion to Britain, $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France and $1.6 billion to China. Reverse Lend Lease comprised services (like rent on air bases) that went to the U.S. totaled $7.8 billion, of which $6.8 billion came from the British and the Commonwealth. The terms of the agreement provided that the material was to be used until time for their return or destruction. (Supplies after the termination date were sold to Britain at a discount, for £1.075 billion, using long-term loans from the U.S.) Canada operated a similar program that sent $4.7 billion in supplies to Britain and the Soviet Union.<2>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

[yurbud]

4. we have no enemy today comparable to Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union

Our stated enemy has no navy, no air force unless they buy a plane ticket, and no ability to take and hold territory in the United States, or any country for that matter outside of chaotic near non-states like Afghanistan, Somalia, or Sudan.

That kind of threat can be neutralized with good intelligence work, some drones, and actually going after the states that fund them, not using terrorism as an excuse to beat up and rob whoever we choose.

[cowcommander]

5. Yes, I would have opposed it

War is a shitty thing, and not knowing what the Nazis and Japanese were really doing, I'd have opposed it and would have rather seen America mind its own business than get involved in wars that didn't directly involve us.

The military-industrial complex that WW2 left us has fucked over our country so much more than it's actually helped, it's a sad legacy of WW2 that still haunts us to this day. When I look at history, I see imperialism as a disease that infects and rots nations until only a rotting husk is left, then it jumps to another nation to repeat the cycle all over again. We may have helped defeat the Nazi and Japanese empires, but we were infected with the imperialism disease as a result.

[Harry Monroe]

6. No one can answer this question honestly, because we are a product of our environment and times

It's one thing to say in 2010, knowing now what you know, that you would support or oppose it. It's entirely another to say what you would have believed in in 1940, had you actually been living in those times without the media saturation or internet that is so pervasive nowdays. Your answer would be based on what you were exposed to at the time, and the environment you grew up in. All this would have a role in influencing your belief system in 1940.

[David__77]

7. Chamberlain fucked things up.

It's hard to say. Britain was trying to egg on the Germans into attacking eastward. I would have opposed Britain for that reason. As soon as Churchill ascended, things started to change. But in the period between Munich and entry of the Soviet Union into the war, I honestly cannot say what my position would have been. I probably would have taken the Soviet position, to be honest.

[RB TexLa]

8. We had already done enough for that island