50 destroyers for bases deal

Exactly my point! Other "middle powers" as you label them are not nearly so fortunate in having neighbors who are as friendly and benign as the US, thus they are required to maintain respectable naval and military forces for national defense. Canada resides under the US nuclear shield and is also protected by our conventional forces, so is not required to, and does not maintain credible armed forces proportionate to the territory being protected. Now, you may not like that fact, but it's indisputable.

Your implication that the US maintains it's military in order to "bully others" as opposed to helping other countries is flat out insulting. If that was not your intention, say so.

And as Slipdigit has pointed out, you have made allegations about the condition and usefulness of the 50 US destroyers that were transferred to Britain in 1940. These allegations have been challenged and you still haven't provided any references to back up your remarks. At this point, I feel your credibility is seriously in question.

 

I hope no one is holding their breath LOL.

 

Can I say how frustrated I am that all the general work done by other Canadians on the Forum to present facts regarding Canadian contributions and efforts in World War II to educate those who wanted the information (including other Canadians who aren't always that informed either) are being undone by belligerence and the totally unnecessary animosity that is being generated????!!!! And yes, I am disappointed in a couple of the Rogues who are reacting and perpetuating the nonsense on more than this thread. Leave discussions regarding post war ideologies to the Free Fire Zone or discussions regarding "My Country Right or Wrong" to that area of the Forum so that people read it if they choose to, not because they were interested in the original thread topic.

Can we just leave the off topic discussion alone and leave it that Canada and the US while both democratic countries occupying large land areas of the North American continent have very different post-WW II military ideologies partially as the result of their differing population size and the types of territory they occupy? The only thing I can say about this threads US/British/Canadian bickering is that it is quite representive of what was occurring within the highest ranks of the military and political hierarchy during the Second World War and back then lives were affected not someone's feelings.

On a point made earlier re the Dew Line, I have a personal connection aside from my father's military involvement in Ft. Nelson in the 1950s. My connection is that my aftergrad party in the late 70s (yes you can now calculate my age) took place on what was formerly a radar station north of Ft.McMuray. The myths we were told was that there was US military equipment still buried beneath it as potential supplies. The Cold War was still on then. Anyways, now I digress.......

 

Michelle said it all.

 

Thanks Otto.

 

I read all the posts, and how it drifted "off topic". Since I live in Montana I have had a close and wonderful relationship with my Canadian neighbors for my entire 58 years of life. I too am always amazed at what my fellow Americans don't know about Canada. The reverse is as true. Unfortunately the largest proportion of Amerian citizens look at Canada as America's attic even though it is the second largest nation (after Russia) in land mass on the globe. What I cannot believe is how many times people forget all the "good stuff" that is in AN ATTIC!

But, to get back onto the subject here is a little known or talked about section of the "old destroyers for bases". That had been proposed much, MUCH earlier by Churchill, but FDR couldn't sell it to Congress until late in 1940! And then only with a little "proviso" which kept Congress from stalling and tabling the proposition, and it was a straight up payment in gold bullion.

That little "gold bullion" proviso had to be agreed upon by Great Britain in Sept. of 1940, since the US Congress wouldn't approve the proposed bill until the gold was assured for delivery. In response the Heavy Cruiser Louisville (CA-28) was dispatched to Simonstown South Africa and eventually loaded up with the British gold reserves still held there.

It departed Simonstown for New York with $148,342,212. 55 worth of British gold in mid-January 1941. And that value was set at America's standard per ounce level, not global trading value. Wasn't that $32 per ounce? About two months later the bill was passed, pretty "quick" when one considers the Congress of America both then and now!

And while the four-piper destroyers were getting older, slightly under 3/4 of the four stack "flush-deckers" were commissioned after 1919 (actually in the twenties), and they were mothballed shortly afterwards as the military budgets were slashed. So while they were "older" they weren't "worn out rust buckets" since they served in active duty for little time. A great many of the "50" served through the war years, and some were even given to other allied nations post war. I think the Soviets got some, as did Greece as I recall.

 

Greetings to all from trinidad. To answer one of the earlier questions re closures of these bases I can confirm that the last US base, the NAS at Chaguaramas, Trinidad was handed over in 1967. The last CO was Capt R C Coats. Post war, all the bases went into maintenance mode except of course Chaguaramas on account of the Missile tracking Station. In 1988, the US Government officially relinquished all claims to the bases. The 1st US Service Contingent to land were - you guessed it, the Marines. Their CO was Major David A Stafford (New York).
I have quite a bit of data on the different bases here in Trinidad and am trying to do a precis so as not to overburden with too much data. Also data on the U Boat war in the Caribbean. Perhaps a new thread? But don't know how to quite go about it. A little help/advice please. regards