Where is the US economy headed?

I imagine he's probably having a go at me. You can talk to him if you want, but he's one of those people for whom anglophobia is bred into the bone, you're not likely to get any sense out of him.

I wrote 'paralyzed by their equivalent fear & distaste for the USSR and a resurgent Germany' . That is clearly true and understandable. Do you have a better rationalization for the inaction of Britain & France in the period from 1934 to 1938? The subsequent non aggression treaty between these equally hateful foes, signed in 1939, confounded everyone, including Roosevelt.

I agree. It was a dig directed at Izzy, not you. (I suspect he is peeking).

No. I just gave up when it became clear that no argument would dent the prejudgments and complacency of those involved. Further efforts appeared pointless and unrewarding.

I happen to be an anglophile. I don't say that to curry favor and I admit my phile for anglos is declining proprotionately to the degree the UK is europeanizing itself.

In any case, I don't perceive georgeob1 to be an anglophobe (and certainly not a bigot for that matter), but then you would be more sensitive to such a thing which can either validate or invalidate your claim.

He and I are hardly A2K buddies, despite the often similar positions and opinions we express, and have had a run in or two, but I think you are making a large mistake ignoring him. That is if I am correct in assuming that you participate in this forum to hear intelligent expressions of opposing positions and/or to flesh out and test your own positions and opinions. Let's face it, there are not a lot of conservative voices in this forum and georgeob1's is one of the clearest. (That's enough peacemaking from me - as it hurts to even attempt it)

Obviously the US came to England's aid during WWII because it was in our interests, but a large part of that is the fact that we had and continue to have so many shared interests.

If I had been president during WWI, America would never have entered the fray, and if had held the office during WWII we would have entered sooner than we did, but that's neither here nor there.

Considering the fact that England was not just fretting while the US was pondering whether or not to get into the mix, I can appreciate why Brits might look even more fondly upon America if we came to the side of their nation earlier.

What I'm trying to understand is why any Brits might resent the fact that we were relatively late to the party.

If prior to WWII there were occassions when the UK dropped everything and came running to help us or (like it did with Iraq) joined us on day one in an effort to conquer, then I can understand why there might be a sense of faithlessness if not betrayal.

I could easily be wrong, but I don't think there is evidence that the US was always of a mind to go after Hitler, but intentionally held back on the slight chance that the Brits could handle him alone, or hoping that the Brits would weaken him before we joined in.

Just trying to understand the British perspective better.

One major point of interest that's being missed here is the simple fact that we were in the Great Depression through that period that influenced what the US did or didn't do.

It wasn't just the USA in the midst of the great depression.

I don't know if it's being missed, because I don't know if we've been discussing why the US didn't enter the fray earlier.

I'm sure you are right to suggest that it played a role in the decision making process though.

I'm just trying to determine if there is any rational reason why the countries that were at war with Germany before we joined the mix, might resent us for not coming to their aid sooner.

I don't think anyone resents the USA joining the war or when they did. I think what people resent is that after you joined and the war was over, it was the idea that it was solely the US that saved the day. This is a fairly common mantra repeated ad nauseam.

It was really the Russians that beat the Germans in the fierce tank wars.

Repeated because it is true, and because American never got the respect that we deserved for saving the free world.

I think it was joint effort fought on my fronts and through many battles.

Case in point.

Nobody but the US had the capacity to produce the war material in sufficient quantity to take on the Axis countries.

Alrighty then... Why didn't you fight it by yourselves? Perhaps that's why you started so many after the fact, to get the respect you so obviously needed...

What I do know (but perhaps my anglophilenism isn't deep enough)that people living in Norfolk, Suffolk, Lincolnshire have a different view, perhaps due to the massed appearance of maritime, transport, training and fighter squadrons stationed in their shires.

Have a different view of what?

What difference do the locations of current US bases in the UK have to do with the questions raised in the section of my post you have quoted?

I don't think that the map shows the current but those places where US-forces were stationed during WWII (and that's not only from my own personal knowledge of having visited those sites).

It has to do with it ... "over paid, over sexed and over here", you certainly know this saying about the US-forces in England.

With all due respect Ceili, you've made several sharp comments about the US being late to join in. Maybe they don't represent resentment on your part, but I don't know how you can fault anyone for arriving at that conclusion. And it appears clear from his comments that spendius has an issue with the timing of US entry into the war.

If as you suggest the resentment actually flows from the perception that Americans believe (and, more precisely, voice that belief) that the US, alone, won the war, that's understandable.

It's difficult to be certain about any alternative historical scenario but I think it’s safe to say that without the US fighting against Germany (and, let's not forget, simultaneously fighting against Japan) Hitler may well have conquered all of Europe and Russia as well, and so, to a large degree, it's accurate to say that the US saved the day.

However it would be flat out erroneous (not to mention offensive) to suggest that the contributions of the Allies towards defeating Germany were not, indeed, significant. It's also far less certain that in an alternative historical scenario, the US alone could have defeated Germany, while simultaneously being at war with Japan.

In any case, the facts are what they are and it is churlish for either "side" to diminish the contributions of the other.

Personally, I don't have a sense that any of the Allied nations have been ingrates relative to US contributions in WWII...except, of course, the French.

I think that for some Americans there is a sense that Europe should be more grateful to the United States, not simply because of any notion that we won the war, but because of a belief that we didn't have to fight in it; even after Germany declared war on us.

If we were discussing WWI, I would very much agree, but not as far as WWII.

Obviously, US interests would have been impacted by a Europe controlled by the Nazis, but not, I believe, to the extent that we needed to go to war with them. However, it was very unlikely that having conquered all of Europe and Russia, the Nazis would have been content to simply maintain that empire. I don't think it took oracles to see that eventually the Nazis and the US would become militarily entangled, and so it was certainly in our interests to meet them in Europe (with allies) before they could consolidate enormous power and butt heads with us in Canada or Mexico.

So we joined the Allies and fought and defeated Germany. It's the closest thing to a Good War I know and we should all be happy for the outcome and grateful for one another's contributions, while reserving our disdain for France, Italy, Spain and, to a lesser degree, Switzerland.

Whether the "Free World" is sufficiently grateful to us as respects the Cold War is another story.

OK - What difference does the location of wartime bases in the UK have to do with whether or not some Brits resent the fact that we were late in joining the war?

If you are suggesting there is some resentment from the folks in the UK who hosted US forces during the war, then I guess you could be right. I doubt the young women felt that way.

I remember a time some years after WWII when the UK was still in pretty poor economic shape. Women lined up in Picadilly Circus...