Changes

The extending of the lease-loans (which was designed to be military equipment, rather than money), didn't occur until March 1941, and of course the US officially joined the Allies nine months later.  Essentially, apart from offering moral support the US had very little to do with the European conflict prior to the final months of 1940.  On 2nd September 1940, Roosevelt did defy the Neutrality Acts by passing the Destroyers for Bases Agreement.  That Agreement sold 50 American destroyers to Britain, the price being military base rights in Newfoundland and the British Caribbean islands, and is seen as being the point at which the US started to offer somewhat more substantial support to the Allies in the European war effort.

The extending of the lease-loans (which was designed to be military equipment, rather than money), didn't occur until March 1941, and of course the US officially joined the Allies nine months later.  Essentially, apart from offering moral support the US had very little to do with the European conflict prior to the final months of 1940.  On 2nd September 1940, Roosevelt did defy the Neutrality Acts by passing the Destroyers for Bases Agreement.  That Agreement sold 50 American destroyers to Britain, the price being military base rights in Newfoundland and the British Caribbean islands, and is seen as being the point at which the US started to offer somewhat more substantial support to the Allies in the European war effort.

As for military leadership and advice from the US, no, I'm afraid not, at least not prior to 1941.  Although FDR was in contact with Churchill while Churchill was Vice-Lord of the Admiralty, and later Prime Minister, such correspondance, where it touched upon the war, was in finding inventive ways for FDR to defy the common, economical,political and legislative hurdles that barred the US from extending aid to Britain.  The ability to extend military leadership and control to the UK was both legally impossible and militarily impossible for FDR.  The Neutrality Acts provided the legal impossibilities (FDR was only able to defy the Neutrality Acts by taking what would have been the donation of 50 Destroyers to the UK and turning it into 'sale'), and of course, if the US had provided military leadership prior to them officially declaring war on Germany, then this would have been deemed an Act of War by the Axis powers and would have esssentially boxed them into the position of having to declare war against the US, which, interestingly, is something that the European based Axis powers wanted to avoid.

As for military leadership and advice from the US, no, I'm afraid not, at least not prior to 1941.  Although FDR was in contact with Churchill while Churchill was Vice-Lord of the Admiralty, and later Prime Minister, such correspondance, where it touched upon the war, was in finding inventive ways for FDR to defy the common, economical,political and legislative hurdles that barred the US from extending aid to Britain.  The ability to extend military leadership and control to the UK was both legally impossible and militarily impossible for FDR.  The Neutrality Acts provided the legal impossibilities (FDR was only able to defy the Neutrality Acts by taking what would have been the donation of 50 Destroyers to the UK and turning it into 'sale'), and of course, if the US had provided military leadership prior to them officially declaring war on Germany, then this would have been deemed an Act of War by the Axis powers and would have esssentially boxed them into the position of having to declare war against the US, which, interestingly, is something that the European based Axis powers wanted to avoid.[[User:Ieuan|Ieuan]] 01:49 4/Nov/08