Monday, November 06, 2006

Europe, the Lend Lease Act, and Gratitude

In the comments on yesterday’s post, Rob Spear had this to say about Europe:

Americans absolutely should not do anything beyond giving support for the European nations undergoing this crisis. Part of the problem in Europe is a lack of national self-love caused by their liberation by the Americans from the Nazis. Europe would be a psychologically far healthier place if the Nazis had taken over, then been chucked out by resistance movements a generation or so later, after falling into decadence. The idea that your nation is so feeble it can only survive due to the benevolence of the kindly American super-power is not conducive to healthy patriotism.

Yorkshireminer offered this response (I have adjusted the punctuation and amended his typos; I hope he doesn’t mind):

Lend LeaseI think it is about time I debunked a few myths. I am an amateur historian, somewhat of an obsession of mine. I have no formal qualifications; I do not need them, nor even want them.

I left school on my 15th birthday and went to work down the coal mines in Yorkshire the following Monday. I can’t let a day go by without having to read. Nearly fifty years later I have my own library — a somewhat pretentious word. I have my own room filled with my books, a good comfortable chair, a stool to plonk my feet on, a good reading lamp, and a small side table where occasionally reposes a cut glass whiskey glass full to the top with a good single Scottish Malt Whiskey.
- - - - - - - - - -
Some Americans seem to be under the delusion that they paid for all the war, not only materially but also in blood, and the rest of us Europeans should be grateful. As an Englishman, when I put all the facts in the balance, I take my hat off to you, and say thank you, America; without you we couldn’t have won the war. I say it also with a sense of deep affection for your country, but let us look at the facts. When we the British stood with our backs to the wall after the evacuation of Dunkirk in 1940 we had only the R.A.F. and a somewhat antiquated navy to defend ourselves with. Everything that we needed for our defence that we couldn’t produce ourselves had to be paid for in cash.

When the war started we transferred all our gold reserves to the Sun Assurance building in Canada. We used this gold to pay for our imports until these ran out, and when these ran out we had to liquidise all the assets the British had accumulated in America. These, by the way, were sold off at fire-sale prices — it was a buyers’ market; we were so desperate. The Americans even checked that we were not hiding anything from them — they even insisted that the last £50,000,000 in gold be transferred to America in a British Battleship from Cape Town when we were fighting for our lives, and needed every ship we had.

Have you ever wondered why America had such a large percentage of the world’s gold reserves sitting in fort Knox after the war? Now you know.

When we were literally bankrupt, the Lend Lease Act was passed. It wasn’t as most American think, a one-way street, that America paid the bill and the rest of the world got a free ride. It was certainly a two-way street for the British. While America provided £13,500,000,000 in lend lease the British provided £4,500,000,000. While in absolute terms America paid more, in relative terms the British paid the lion’s share. 1% of America’s gross national product was dedicated exclusively to lend lease; 15% of the British gross national product was devoted to lend lease, and the economy was distorted accordingly.

Another thing Americans should know is that machine tools were explicitly exempt in the Lend Lease Act. It was impossible for the British economy to modernise during the war. The capital stock of Britain was being degraded by bombs and overuse, and it was to cost Britain dearly — and also America — when the British economy collapsed during the winter of 1947, and America had to take over the obligations to certain countries in the Middle East.

Have you ever wondered why the British got out of Palestine so quickly in 1948? Now you know. Another fact you might like to know: when Marshall aid was offered to Europe, the goods bought had to be shipped in American ships, shipping that had been allocated to America to produce under the Lend Lease Act. It could just have well been allocated to Britain but it wasn’t. The British lost out there, when we needed as much foreign currency we could get to pay for the loan we had contracted with America to pay our way after they arbitrarily cut off lend lease after VJ day.

After the war Lord Keynes (if you don’t know who he was, google him) made an account of who had paid what and to whom during the war. It turns out that among the Allies Britain had paid 53%, while America had paid 47% of the total costs .

Rob, you might think that after this I am a rabid anti-American, but I am not. The reasons are twofold: while I might disagree what America does, I always feel that they are done for the right reason; there is a sense of common decency behind their motives; they might get it wrong but it is done for the right reasons.

The other reason is purely emotional: I was born in the middle of that bloody conflict and most of the male members of my family were up at the sharp end. My uncle died the night I was born flying Lancaster bombers over Germany, and another died at Anzio. We had very little and I remember very little of what was going on.

I have two distinct memories: one is the soldiers from our village coming back, and we had a parade. The other is my Mum receiving bottles of cod liver oil and concentrated orange juice. The cod liver oil was a gift from Canada, for which I am eternally grateful, the concentrated orange juice a gift from Florida. Can you imagine what it is like to be bribed with a teaspoon of concentrated Florida orange juice, when you are four or five, after you have ingested a teaspoon of cod liver oil, when the only fruit you have ever seen or tasted has been perhaps an apple or a pear?

For that pure transitory experience I will always be in America’s debt. I say thank you, America. But, Rob, please don’t get up and crow.
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In Rob Spear’s defense: I doubt that he was thinking about the British when he made his comment. France is more likely what came to mind, with its quick surrender, its collaboration under Vichy, and its notorious ingratitude under de Gaulle after the war.

But I can understand what Yorkshireminer is talking about. When I was in Yorkshire, twenty years after the time he describes, Britain was still depleted and austere from the effects of the war.

Everyone was so much poorer than what I was used to. Even middle-class respectable people had to get by on a tenth of what I, as a pampered and privileged post-war Yank baby-boomer, took for granted.

As I studied British history in a British grammar school, I learned the same things that Yorkshireminer is describing. British wartime leaders knew what they were giving up by choosing to fight the Axis. They could have made a sweet deal with Hitler and consigned the rest of Europe to take its chances under the jackboot.

Instead, Churchill (and Chamberlain, too) chose to do what was right, to do the only decent and honorable thing that could be done under the circumstances. They realized what was at stake, that Britain was likely to be destroyed economically, and that the Empire would have to be relinquished, but they did it anyway.

For that they deserve the gratitude, not just of America, but of the entire free world. For all practical purposes, the United States inherited the British Empire. And, despite the humiliation of living under the evil hegemony of American corporate capitalism, few people would prefer to pledge allegiance to the heirs of Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo (not to mention Stalin).

Britain gave us the Anglosphere, which is all that stands between civilization and the murderous barbarism of the Great Islamic Jihad.

There are many arguments British and Americans can get into, and many bones we have to pick with one another. But it behooves all who claim English as a native language to remember that we began all this together, and we are in it together still.

And from this are our lives writ large
From the beach at Dunkirk
To Pickett’s Charge
And it’s hard to go back
After coming this far
Down the road


      —Al Stewart, from “Three Mules”

25 comments:

Heroic Dreamer said...

I think Britain's greatest export is her philosophical rejection of the common adage "might is right" and insistence, instead, on justice and fairness, law and order. She exported to all of her colonies traditions and institutions which support these ideals, and it is my great good fortune to have been born in a former colony, America and to enjoy - largely thanks to these exported traditions and institutions - peace and prosperity.

mike said...

When I read Rob Spear's comment I was thinking of France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Italy...but not the UK. Perhaps this is foolish in the age of the EU but, I don't think of the UK as part of "Europe". I think of the UK as...the UK.

Ypp said...

And to be honest, Russians defeated more than half of German troops. Of course, their position was not a principal one, but they fought and it matters.

Lilburnes Ghost said...

Dont write England off just yet. England and the West are one and the same. I can tell you from personal experience, theres an English fire burning under all this crap that hasnt, and never can be extinguished. If our fathers took three hundred years of the Norman Yoke, and broke them; saw the flags of the Spanish Armada, and waved them away again; peopled the New Worlds of America, Canada, and Australia, and left the finest traditions of individual liberty and representative government everywhere they went on the globe; defeated European absolutist ideologies not once, not twice, but three times in two hundred years; if our fathers managed all that, are we really so degenerate, in only sixty years, as to hand the West to the bloody muslims? A bunch of desert-loving, woman-hating, camel-riding savages? Not while there's an Englishman still breathing. No chance.
England has saved herself by her exertions, and will, i trust, save Europe by her example. Once again.

Lilburnes Ghost said...

As for the whole UK-EU situation, I can tell you that here on the ground I dont know a single person who thinks of themselves as European or the UK as a part of Europe. The EU is a joke, something to laugh at, if it merits a mention at all. As Churchill once said to De Gaulle, 'if the choice is between you and the sea, we will always choose the sea.' May that remain the case. Whatever you hear of the BBC or national press, whatever you may think, the relationship between the UK and the US will always mean more to the ordinary people of this country than any other. The elites hate the US for the same reasons they hate the white working classes of my country: both share ambitions for personal betterment, don't know their place, have a love of personal independence, limited government, patriotism and the aggression necessary to safeguard freedom... I could go on! The wartime financial arrangements may have bankrupted Britain; certain sections of American society may have relished the prospect; but where in the world, when the British Empire withdrew, was better off fifty years later? How much did the US benefit from what anti-British, anti-colonial policies it may have pursued? And, without the concerted efforts of both allies, along with all the others who bled to save Europe, what would the world look like now? Worth remembering. For the West, the choice is simple. Remember what our peoples have acheived when working together for the greater good against the tyranny that threatened Europe. Stand together, or fall seperately.

David S. said...

Ok, I hate to be the guy who says this, but I feel it must be said. I hope people don't think I'm trying to detract from this post, because I agree with much of what it's trying to say. Not only that, but I am going to sound like one of the anti-war folk from that time, and I entirely agree with our involvement.
But the fact is, in the strictest sense, it wasn't our war. We could have, in reality, just let Europe and the UK fall to the dogs. We almost did, in fact, until Pearl Harbor. And if we had handled Pearl Harbor like we've handled 9/11 (that is, poorly), engagement would not have been inevitable.
Of course Britain took a hit from the war. It took a huge hit, a massive hit, far greater than the US - who actually benefitted in the end in every possible sense. But that only makes sense, since they were the country being attacked, not us. Terrible comparison ahead: It would be like saying that Kuwait did more for the Gulf war than the US, because they took a greater hit economically and militarily. Of course they did; they were our ally, and we helped them out. What do you expect?
That being said, the war would have been at least temporarily lost if it weren't for the UK's incredible spirit, tenacity, and strength of will, spearheaded by Churchill. Heck, maybe it would have been lost if Churchill wasn't elected. The English people lived through hell, and came out on top, and if my generation had a tenth the character that generation did, our current enemies would all be cowering in caves right now just like Osama, and I would have no fear of the coming crisis.
I also wholeheartedly agree that the US and UK have to stand together, that the UK has a far greater fight left in them than the rest of Europe combined, and that the US/UK alliance shall never be broken so long as I live. Indeed, I think of the UK as more than an ally: I think of them as a brother. And if/when this thing comes down to it, I would gladly give my life for the Union Jack as well as the Stars and Stripes.
But I firmly believe the US deserves all the credit it gets for the war. And Russia, evil empire that they are, (woops...i mean WERE...) deserves more credit than they usually get.

OTOH, to be blunt, ten Communists are not worth a single Brit, not by a long shot.

'Cept the 'elites,' that is. That's a solid 1:1 ratio.

Cato said...

David S is exactly right. It wasn't our war. We could have ignored it - and many wanted to. Our ocean buffer meant a whole lot more back then than it does today. We helped in Europe push back Hitler, mostly to help the British. We lost nearly half a million men in the war. Sure it was far less than Great Britain lost, as a percentage of population, but both lost far less than the Soviet Union - adna gain, the war was not an existential struggle for us.

And militarily, the US dominated the western front in Europe. Great Britain had done a magnificent job of resisting against incredible odds, but it took the Yanks, and their blood, treasure, industrial might and tactical skill, to actually roll Hitler's forces back.

Lend-lease and the Marshall plan undoubtedly benefitted some Americn businessman, but they also took a lot of money out of the pockets of ordinary American citizens, yet they were politically popular.

Finally, the post-war privations of Britain and Europe were not due to any US depredations, so much as the result of the tremendous physical losses of capital and manpower suffered during the war, and the rush to socialist management by British and European post-war governments. This effect was much lessened in the US, which stayed relatively economically "liberal".

Zonka said...

And don't forget that it was only this year, 61 years after the conclusion of World War II, that Britain finally will complete its repayment of monetary debt, from the lend-lease agreement, to the USA. (on December 31, 2006)...

See: BBC: 1945 war debt to US 'almost paid', from Wed. May 3, 2006

jquestel said...

good song from Al but Pickett was on the wrong side...

Baron Bodissey said...

jquestel --

That, sir, is a matter of opinion. Here in the Sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia there are alternative points of view...

Pickett got a Federal fort named after him in Blackstone, Virginia. Meade got a Federal fort named after him in Odenton, Maryland. Funny about that.

eatyourbeans said...

I can't get too worked up over WW2. Oncologically speaking, to kill off the malignancy we just about killed off everything good as well. The upshot is the walking corpse that is Europe today. A remark by a cynical old uncle, a D-Day vet, about why the Germans were such wusses. "Because we killed all the brave ones".

Pat said...

I don't think you Americans owe the English anything. Australians know the truth of fighting England's wars (from the Boer throught to WWII) - disaster and disloyalty follows.

Churchill blithely dismissed Australia as not worth worrying about as the Japanese were on our doorstep and our men were in Europe fighting to save - England!

The Americans won the war in the Pacific (for which Australians are indebted) and the Russians won the war in Europe. The English 'gloriously' lost just about every battle they fought.

The poms are a pack of perennial whingers who wouldn't give a damn about you if the situation were reversed. Save your tears.

Wally Ballou said...

Thanks, Pat. That's a point of view not often heard over here. I am pro-British by nature, but I recognize that British foreign policy has always been fundamentally ruthless. We could do with a little more of that spirit of realism, but that's another story. We may have saved Australia and New Zealand to stop the Japs and to preserve American dominance in the Pacific, but our feelings of kinship with the Aussies was a big part of our motivation, too. And the price your folk would have paid if the Japanese had succeeded is too terrible to imagine.

There's a great scene in the WWII movie - "The Man Who Never Was" - where an English officer is talking to the man whose son's body the MI folk want to use as a decoy:

Lieutenant Commander Ewen Montagu: I can assure you that this is an opportunity for your son to do a great thing for England.
The Father: My son, sir, was a Scotsman. Very proud of it.
Lieutenant Commander Ewen Montagu: I beg your pardon?
The Father: Never mind. We're used to that. You English always talk about England when you mean Britain.

Gryffilion said...

Not to try to draw a line in the sand and start choosing sides...but the British didn't "gloriously lose" every battle they were in.

First case: The Battle of El Alamein. The British Eighth Army under Bernard Montgomery (and formerly Claude Auchinleck) blunted the German advance into Egypt and took control of the Suez Canal and Middle Eastern oil fields, marking the end of Axis expansion in Africa.

Second case: The 11th British Army Group, which held fast against the Japanese invasion in Burma from 1944-45, with the assistance of American air forces.

As an avid student of WW2, I am by no means ignorant of the peril Australia was in during Japan's expansion into the Pacific. I remember reading an article about an Australian ship that was attacked by A6M Zero fighters. The illustration still stands out in my mind: a dying Australian machine-gunner, barely able to stand, firing at an oncoming Japanese plane while his blood spills freely over the listing deck.

I am also keenly aware of the opinion the Aussies hold the "bleedin' pommie bastids" in. But we shouldn't write off the Brits' accomplishments during the part of the War when America was only just starting to get involved. They set the stage for a larger Allied victory, and for that we owe them credit.

MikeZ said...

It's a good thing to be reminded that things are never all black or all white. My hat's off to you, Yorkshireman. You're following in the footsteps of our own Eric Hoffer. Just because one works hard, doesn't mean he can't read a lot, and just because one reads a lot, doesn't mean he can't work hard.

Some of what I know about postwar Britan comes from the book "84 Charing Cross Road". I recommend it.

Pat said...

I certainly don't intend to denigrate the efforts of the "British" I only add my voice to give a little perspective on the subject and to back up Rob Spear's initial comments.

And you will note I didn't criticise the British I criticised the English as Wally Ballou humorously notes. The two (British and English) are often incorrectly conflated as you have done here Gryffilion.

The British Eighth Army was in fact constituted of Australians, Indians, Canadians, Kiwis, South Africans, Rhodesians, Scots...and English. The Battle of El Alamein I and II was one of the Australian 9th Division's finest hours after the Siege of Tobruk.

The 11th British Army Group was constituted of the the British Fourteenth Army which again contained men from all over the Commonwealth and the Ceylon Army (now Sri Lanka).

So, I'm not bagging the British I'm saying that the English owe a massive debt of gratitude not just to the Yanks but the entire Commonwealth. Something which they very, very, very often forget. British victories aren't English victories. Dunkirk was English (glorious defeat and withdrawal). Operation Market Garden (captured in the film A Bridge too Far) is another typically English inspired British defeat which Montgomery described as "90% successful". I like the Dutch analysis of the operation: "My country can never again afford the luxury of another Montgomery success." Replace Montgomery with English and there you have it.

The English owe us more than we owe them, especially you Americans.

mustard said...

Gryffilion said...

Not to try to draw a line in the sand and start choosing sides...but the British didn't "gloriously lose" every battle they were in.

First case: The Battle of El Alamein. The British Eighth Army under Bernard Montgomery (and formerly Claude Auchinleck) blunted the German advance into Egypt and took control of the Suez Canal and Middle Eastern oil fields, marking the end of Axis expansion in Africa.

Second case: The 11th British Army Group, which held fast against the Japanese invasion in Burma from 1944-45, with the assistance of American air forces.

As someone who describes himself as 'an avid student of WW2', that is a profoundly ignorant statement.

It was a Commonwealth Army, lead by Montgomery and designated the 8th Army.

Burma was also fought with the help of many other nations, in particular India (I guess whether was a nation during WW2 is debateable), but they certainly were not British.

The British only ever fought as a complete Army up until Dunkirk (sorry you lost badly). All your operations after this on land were fought with the help of other nations.

As an Australian it is extremely offensive to state that El Alamein was British victory, when Australians disproportionably conducted much of the heavy fighting, which was shown by the fact we had the highest percentage casualties of the battle. You don't need to take my word for it:

Churchill in his book the 'The Second World War' said,

'the magnificent drive towards the coast by the Australians, achieved by ceaseless bitter fighting, swung the whole battle in favour of the British.

Montgomery's Chief of Staff, Sir Francis de Guingand said in Operation Victory of the Australian thrust towards the coast:

'I think this area saw the most determined and savage fighting of the campaign. No quarter was given, and the Australians fought some of the finest German troops in well-prepared positions to a standstill, and by their action did a great deal to win the battle of El Alamein.'

General Montgomery sent this message to General Morshead (Australian Commonder):

'I want to congratulate you on the magnificent work your Division has done on the right part of the line. Your men are absolutely splendid and the part they have played is beyond all praise.'

One of the reasons that Churchill was furious that the Australian left the Middle East was primarily, because he knew he was losing some of the best Divisions of the entire Allied army, at a time when the outcome of the war was far from certain. One of most highly regarded British military historians (head of Military History at Sandhurst), regards the Australians at the best soldiers of the war at a Divisional level and New Zeelanders as the best Soldiers at Battalion Level - on both sides of the war. These views were also echoed by Rommel, following his encounters with both countries' soldiers in North Africa.

The following was even said long after the Australians left the European Theatre, Major-General Freddie de Guingand, Chief of Staff, Allied Land-force Headquarters Europe, D-Day, 1944.

"My God, I wish we had [the] 9th Australian Division with us this morning."

It is not my desire to particularly even pick on the British, American ignorance is also quite pronounced.

How many Americans know that the majority of MacCarthur's land forces were Australians, up until as late as even 1944. That the first Kamikaze attacks were suffered by Australian ships protecting Americans or even that the Australian Navy was at Okinawa.

It is very common that when Americans & British begin discussing the Second World War, they state again and again they were the only ones involved in Europe and American won the Pacific, or that Britain was ‘alone’ until America came along.

Don't forget the little countries, Canada, New Zeeland, South Africa, Australia, many other African Nations, India. Individually our efforts may not look like much. But when combined we made huge third force.

Look at my nation Australia,

The first defeat of the Fascist Italy - Australian 6th Division - Battle of Bardia.

The first Defeat of Vichy France - Australian 7th Division - Syria.

The first defeat of the German Biltzkreig - Australian Ninth Division - Seige of Tobruk.

The first outright Defeat of the Japanese Imperial Army - Australian soldiers at the Battle of Milne Bay.

The British Field Marshal Sir William Slim (Commander in Burma), who had no part in the battle, said:

Australian troops had, at Milne Bay, inflicted on the Japanese their first undoubted defeat on land. Some of us may forget that, of all the allies, it was the Australians who first broke the invincibility of the Japanese army.

mustard said...

'One of most highly regarded British military historians (head of Military History at Sandhurst),'

With regards to my above post I forget to mention that the historian's name is John Keegan. He has published many books, which are all highly rated on Amazon.

Terry Crane said...

To make it clear: US contribution was not liberation of Europe from Nazis, but prevention of Europe takeover by advancing Soviets.

Pat said...

Terry Crane is correct IMO. German casualties on the Eastern Front were approx 90%. Not to mention the severe degradation inflicted upon Nazi military industrial output.

Which doesn't belittle Western Allied efforts in Europe but again puts them in context. The race was on to stop a Soviet advance beyond Berlin and into Western Europe. It's too bad we didn't act on Patton's suggestion and smash the USSR when we could have. But, that's history!

Gryffilion said...

Mustard--

"As someone who describes himself as 'an avid student of WW2', that is a profoundly ignorant statement."

I think both the Baron and Dymphna will attest that my studies of WW2, while by no means complete, are extemely avid AND passionate. My lack of knowledge of the battle of El Alamein is simply due to my focus on the American part in the war, not the Commonwealth parts.

I have to say I'm a little surprised at the vehemence of your comment. Was I not pro-Aussie enough? Did I need to down a case of Foster's and chunder in the old Pacific Sea before you'd take me seriously?

My intention was merely to counter what seemed to be a "F*** the Poms" attitude that was creeping its way onto this post, not to pound the doubtless doughty and brave Indian, Burmese, African, Australian, New Zealand, etc., etc. members of the British Commonwealth forces.

Pat said...

There you go again Gryfflion, now an Oz stereotype. We drink Coopers and spew in the back of taxis, sheesh. We certainly don't mess up our pristine beaches.

However, you have accurately perceived a "F*** the Poms" attitude but this is merely a reflection of a conclusion based on experience which we are trying to impart for the benefit of this board.

Any vehemence is only a result of actually, literally, being f***ed by the Poms for the best part of our history. It is not directed at you personally.

By the way, as an example of who the English are today you should check out their cricket team sent to retain the Ashes. It is a laugh - the English World XI.

mustard said...

gryffilion --

'I have to say I'm a little surprised at the vehemence of your comment.'

Look if I offended you, I apologise. You are entitled to your opinion. I am sure you have a fairly sound knowledge of WW2, which would be far in excess of the ordinary man, especially on matters pertaining to the US involvement.

But you should really wonder what it looks like from our side. Imagine if I stated to you:

'No, you are wrong. The English Army had many campaigns that defeated the Germans single handedly. I should know as I studied the Second World War. Let me give you some examples:

1. The English D-Day Landings, their losses on Omaha Beach were extrordinary.

2. Operation Market Garden, that was carried out soley with English Paratroopers and they did amazing things.

3. The German Bombing Campaign - the English did all the day operations and they were especially dangerous.'

You would probably not react as patiently as I did, given your fairly flippant remarks in response. We do get fairly annoyed in Australia, by our portrayal of WW2 (which is none), as we should be recognised; especially by people who should know better.

I apologise again for any offence.

Gryffilion said...

....Will it help my case at all if I told you two I read Barry McKenzie and say "Stone the crows, I'm so shikker I can't crack a fat!" when I've had a skinful of heavy? (I actually do. Ask my roommates.)

TonyGuitar said...

America Misses

Americans avoid facing and understanding the problem at our peril.

The fundamentalist march is gaining strength and it is a complex headache to deal with.

The American people have chosen to not deal with the problem, but rather to look the other way and hope for the best.

The majority of the American people do not realize the true and urgent nature of the common thread running through the Taliban, Hezbollah, al Quaeda, the Muqtada al Sadr killing squads of Sadr City Iraq, and Hamas.

Americans fail to see the peril clearly because the Media has managed to avoid joining the dots so that no clear picture of understanding is generally available.

This is a time when all free nations should be joining with the EU and Nato to restrain Iran from its Islamofascist take-over of the Middle East.

If the radical Mullahs , [ not the citizens], of Iran are allowed to take over Iraq and build their world Centre of Terrorism from that base, just as Osama bin Laden declared, our military conflicts will become desperately massive.

Pulling out of Afghanistan and Iraq would condemn millions of people who hoped for a free and civilized life to massive torture and death. Citizens of Iran also had hopes of a modern way of life but can not speak out now without losing their heads.

Today we seem to be repeating history under similar storm clouds of war to those overhead in 1938 before our struggle against Hitler. = TG

Americans = N. Americans Canadians included.