Lend-Lease Act

[BigSteamers]

Provided an excuse for the Allied invasion of the Middle East. Perhaps it was not initially designed to allow this invasion to happen but why pass it up? I often find that the subject of the invasion played down in history texts, such as my old college history text.

EDIT: It is also quite interesting to not that the Lend-Lease Act was the forerunner to the Marshall Plan.

[lostmyface]

you are right, in american textbooks very little is mentioned about the war in north africa/middel east. i think this is done in a effort to hide how we redrew the lines for our own benefit after 1945, an again in 1949.

another thing that is significant about the lend lease act is that it put most of the allied nations into debt shortly after the war. great britian did not pay off all of her war debts till 2006, nearly 60 years after the war had ended. how do you think that debt affected foreign policy?

[Cliche Guevara]

Could you be more clear as to how the lending of massive resources resources to various allied countries in exchange for military bases, caused (or was a reason) for the allies to invade Africa?

Do you mean that with newly replenished resources they now had the logistics to invade Africa? Forgive me if I'm wrong I have just read up on the matter. To me it seems as if it was crucial step towards ending America's non involvement policy, and yes as a precursor to the Marshall Plan.

It seems to me it was just a way for America (who before the bombing of pearl harbor) to assist in the war by sending supplies as opposed to troops.

[Azure]

Guys, I think he's referring to the Persian Corridor, the route in which lend-lease supples traveled to reach the Soviet Union. The route passed through the Iraqi port of Basra and an Iranian port whose name escapes me, through an overland passage in Iran, to the Soviet Union. Allied control of this route was crucial to the American aid reaching the Soviet Union, and in a sense could have used as a pretext for the Middle Eastern theater.

If that is in fact what he's saying, the theory neglects the fact that:

1- There were substantial Italian forces in the area, Tunisia and Libya/parts of Egypt all being part of the Italian "empire".

2- The allies suspected that Germany was planning an invasion of the Middle East, in particular the neutral Turkey, and prepared for the Middle East to become one of the larger theaters of war. The German invasion of course, never panned out.

3- After quickly defeating the Italians, the Allied forces, under Wavell, pulled out of Libya, in order to defend Greece from invading Axis troops. After the defense of Greece was unsuccessful, the troops were moved back to Northern Africa, but by this time the Afrika Korps had already entrenched in the region.

4- As important as aid reaching the Soviets would turn out to be, no such pretext would be needed for invasion; Iraq was already long since a stronghold of Nazi forces and sentiment. Any possible invasion in the works could have used the removal of Nazi forces as justification, which was the case, during the Iraq war.