Given, back in 1941, he actively considered taking possession of the Crown Jewels and Magna Carta in exchange for Lend-Lease, the answer must surely be: very possibly, yes
Powerful insights Ed, thank you,. 'History rhymes' and all that...and all our materials need vast energy readily available to activate and maintain these structures.
In these accelerated times turbo with AI, the question might be asked about the replacement 'Empire', as it was to become, and how it will negotiate its own subordination? Not perhaps in this term of office, but the next might face more force majeure than it can cope with?
I am reminded this is a 'one-off' period, (remember the far-seeing Fred Hoyle?), which has become a geological event, what with the ransacking of resources and the biosphere at global scale.
One might say Complex World, rather than Material World?
PS I am reminded also that the fate of a large number of young men is briefly on hold again on the battlefields round Kursk at this moment. It seems reasonable to conclude their deaths would be the last throw in an unwinnable war?
Interesting, I must admit I wasn’t aware of this history before now, but I still think there is some gulf between FDR or Truman’s actions here and what Trump has been doing over the past few weeks.
As you note, lend lease was very generous, and FDR pushed for it at a time when America was much less interventionist in general. FDR went against political headwinds to provide aid for Britain, whereas Trump is going against political headwinds to extort Ukraine (and cut off military aid) . As I understand it, FDR gave much more while asking for much less in return.
As for Article VI, are we really to believe that Britain would have held on to its empire in its absence?
You also compare Trump to Truman, and mention how he cut off lend-lease when he took office. But surely the fact Truman did so only after the war was over is hugely significant here. And if we’re going to talk about Truman and aid to war torn countries, I think it is extremely bizarre to omit the Marshall Plan from that discussion. Did that aid not account for something like 3-5% of US GDP at the time? Far higher than the less than the % Trump and Musk have been slashing ever since they got into office.
Burma, now known as Myanmar, has been embroiled in an ethnic civil war for an extended period, leading to a humanitarian crisis of immense proportions. Over a million Rohingya refugees have been forced to seek shelter in Bangladesh, resulting in one of the world's largest refugee camps. This dire situation demands bold and innovative solutions to address the ongoing suffering and displacement.
In response to this crisis, I had proposed that Bangladesh consider a strategic intervention by invading the western part of Myanmar to establish an independent nation for the Rohingya people. In exchange for this action, Bangladesh could negotiate a shared claim to the natural gas reserves within the newly formed territory. This proposal was met with the assertion that such a move could not comply with international law, especially violating the UN's stance on unilateral secession (which Bangladesh had already violated in the past).
While this plan may seem audacious, it might be considered less radical due to the precedent set by the recent Trump administration.
Moreover, it is unlikely that other nations would strongly oppose an intervention that aims to curtail the territorial control of a regime responsible for such egregious human rights violations.
Also there was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyers-for-bases_deal
Thanks for this history lesson ! Your book is excellent, everyone should read it.
Powerful insights Ed, thank you,. 'History rhymes' and all that...and all our materials need vast energy readily available to activate and maintain these structures.
In these accelerated times turbo with AI, the question might be asked about the replacement 'Empire', as it was to become, and how it will negotiate its own subordination? Not perhaps in this term of office, but the next might face more force majeure than it can cope with?
I am reminded this is a 'one-off' period, (remember the far-seeing Fred Hoyle?), which has become a geological event, what with the ransacking of resources and the biosphere at global scale.
One might say Complex World, rather than Material World?
PS I am reminded also that the fate of a large number of young men is briefly on hold again on the battlefields round Kursk at this moment. It seems reasonable to conclude their deaths would be the last throw in an unwinnable war?
Interesting, I must admit I wasn’t aware of this history before now, but I still think there is some gulf between FDR or Truman’s actions here and what Trump has been doing over the past few weeks.
As you note, lend lease was very generous, and FDR pushed for it at a time when America was much less interventionist in general. FDR went against political headwinds to provide aid for Britain, whereas Trump is going against political headwinds to extort Ukraine (and cut off military aid) . As I understand it, FDR gave much more while asking for much less in return.
As for Article VI, are we really to believe that Britain would have held on to its empire in its absence?
You also compare Trump to Truman, and mention how he cut off lend-lease when he took office. But surely the fact Truman did so only after the war was over is hugely significant here. And if we’re going to talk about Truman and aid to war torn countries, I think it is extremely bizarre to omit the Marshall Plan from that discussion. Did that aid not account for something like 3-5% of US GDP at the time? Far higher than the less than the % Trump and Musk have been slashing ever since they got into office.
Burma, now known as Myanmar, has been embroiled in an ethnic civil war for an extended period, leading to a humanitarian crisis of immense proportions. Over a million Rohingya refugees have been forced to seek shelter in Bangladesh, resulting in one of the world's largest refugee camps. This dire situation demands bold and innovative solutions to address the ongoing suffering and displacement.
In response to this crisis, I had proposed that Bangladesh consider a strategic intervention by invading the western part of Myanmar to establish an independent nation for the Rohingya people. In exchange for this action, Bangladesh could negotiate a shared claim to the natural gas reserves within the newly formed territory. This proposal was met with the assertion that such a move could not comply with international law, especially violating the UN's stance on unilateral secession (which Bangladesh had already violated in the past).
While this plan may seem audacious, it might be considered less radical due to the precedent set by the recent Trump administration.
Moreover, it is unlikely that other nations would strongly oppose an intervention that aims to curtail the territorial control of a regime responsible for such egregious human rights violations.
Excellent, very interesting, thank you