The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of November 23rd through November 29th, we are reading the next 50 pages of No Ordinary Time by Doris Kearns Goodwin.

The sixth week's assignment is:

November 23 - November 29 ~~ Chapter 8 – 9 (190 - 240)
Chapter Eight – “Arsenal of Democracy” – page 190
Chapter Nine – “Business As Usual” – page 216

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This thread should only deal with this chapter and these pages. No spoilers, please.

Discussion on these sections will begin on November 23rd.

Welcome,

Bentley

TO SEE ALL PREVIOUS WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL








Doris Kearns Goodwin

This week's reading starts out with the chapter titled:

"Arsenal of Democracy"

The chapter begins around November 1940 when a new crisis is on the horizon: "Great Britain is on the verge of bankruptcy".

You have to love Eleanor Roosevelt when she was asked the question by John Gunther - "Just how does the President think?"

Her reply is astounding: "My dear Mr. Gunther, the President never thinks. He decides." Wouldn't you love this woman in your court?

The cash reserves of the British treasure, the US was told after the election, were no longer sufficient to pay for the munitions and supplies that Britain had ordered from the U.S - supplies needed now more than ever.

page 190

Germany has already conquered - Holland, Belgium, France, Czechoslovakia. Now if the US did not send supplies...Britain would be defeated in a matter of months. (paraphrased from page 190)

Now FDR had a real dilemma...(another big problem) - the Americans had had another bad experience with World War I and huge debts that the US was never repaid. Did they want to go down that same path again?

So what does FDR do in this time of need? He decides to go on a ten day sail!

What if our president today during a time of crisis when the world is falling around him and everyone was worried about a chief ally's survival; what if he decided to go on a ten day sail!!!!!

Recently, Obama was given a terrible time about going on a week's vacation to MV which basically became a non vacation by the end of the week.

But what if he and/or any other recent president decided to go on a 10 day sail and told his staff basically to use their imagination and come up with the answers in his absence?

What kind of field day do you think the press would have?

Absolutely Liz. (smile) - Bush was also given a hard time about just changing his venue and being at his ranch which may have been more relaxing for him.

But a ten day sail in the middle of this situation just seemed a little out of the ordinary. I think this shows the absolute high regard folks had for the President and the presidency. And the media itself is different too. I do not think that folks really questioned that much. They really wanted to believe the best; not the worst about everyone...these generations of folks must have been the very best kinds of people with all of the sacrifices they made and were willing to make.

Page 192:

I am not sure of the exact day of FDRs sail but on December 9th - a seaplane touched down somewhere around the Tuscaloosa and the President's flotilla. So he was still on his sail!

FDR had received desperate dispatches regarding the bombing of London, the House of Commons, Coventry, Birmingham, Bristol, war factories, more sinkings of vital merchant vessels and the death of Lord Lothian. And now a letter from Churchill. But FDR sailed on!

Churchill's letter though clearly true in some elements...was I found a bit cheeky. Especially since FDR was going against his own Congress, his own cabinet and war generals in most instances and even the American people to send supplies to the British people to help save Britain from certain disaster (supplies which would be needed by our own military if disaster stuck at home).

However, I have to say that FDR handled it with aplomb and tried to find a way out for the British which would help save them (without the supplies they would be doomed in a matter of months) (page 190) and also help them save face and not feel totally wiped out; not only physically but in spirit.

Harry Hopkins who loved FDR stated: "I didn't know for quite a while what he was thinking about if anything," Hopkins said later. "But then - I began to get the idea that he was refueling; the way he so often does when he seems to be resting and carefree. So I didn't ask him any questions. Then, one evening, he suddenly came out with it - the whole program. He didn't seem to have any clear idea how it could be done legally. But there wasn't a doubt in his mind that he'd find a way to do it." (page 193)

And that is my friends how the Lend-Lease program was born!

What did you think about the Lend-lease program? What did you feel were its strengths and its weaknesses? How did you feel about Roosevelt coming up with this unilaterally, and not discussing this with his aides or his staff nor reading up on it to understand its feasibility?

Doris Kearns Goodwin stated: "Roosevelt made up for the defects of an undisciplined mind with a profound ability to integrate a vast multitude of details into a larger pattern that gave shape and direction to the stream of events. "

And finally the President returned on December 16th, tanned, rested and in excellent humor.

I was struck by the fact that nowadays the opposition party would be asking how much this sail cost the American public. Remember the uproar about O taking M to NYC for a play.

Times are sure different.

Of course, I am of the opinion that the President has one of the most stressful jobs on the planet and needs some perks and needs to relax to be able to make the best kind of decisions.

Liz..take your time..there is no rush of any kind.

You make some excellent points. Being unilateral has its critics but being too inclusive sometimes means that it is hard to get things done and reach consensus.

I look forward to your thoughts (when you have time) about the Lend-lease program itself and any thing else you would want to discuss about the right balance in reaching consensus from your viewpoint. We are about a third through the book so I am sure that you are also developing some ideas about the pros and the cons of FDR's presidency and some sense of what he must have been like as a person. I include in that question anything you might want to post about Eleanor's style and personality.

No the glossary can have all of the documents you like added to it. Even the ones you added here. I think they are all pertinent. Thank you for alerting folks to spoilers..DWG has introduced the Lend-Lease program so it is timely.

Liz..I was looking at one of your documents and I was struck by this passage:

The Senate passed the $5.98 billion supplemental Lend-Lease bill on October 23, 1941, bringing the United States one step closer to direct involvement in World War II.

The Lend-Lease Act, approved by Congress in March 1941, gave President Roosevelt virtually unlimited authority to direct material aid such as ammunition, tanks, airplanes, trucks, and food to the war effort in Europe without violating the nation's official position of neutrality.

The United States formally entered the war in December 1941 following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Initially intended to help Great Britain, within months, the Lend-Lease program was expanded to include China and the Soviet Union. By the end of the war, the United States had extended $49,100,000,000 in Lend-Lease aid to more than 40 nations.

That last number is astounding. FDR must have been one influential guy. You know what I also was wondering: what kind of money that would amount to in today's dollars. It is astronomical.

It seems to have done the trick though.

When anybody gets a chance to look over the documents that Liz has posted, I am still interested to hear folks' opinions on these questions:

What did you think about the Lend-lease program? What did you feel were its strengths and its weaknesses? How did you feel about Roosevelt coming up with this unilaterally, and not discussing this with his aides or his staff nor reading up on it to understand its feasibility?

It is actually a pretty short document and very open ended.

Just read this week's chapters, and read through the comments up to now. Haven't had a chance to look through any of Liz's wonderful links, though. So more thoughts may come later after I peruse them.

As I read the chapters, the biggest thing that struck me about lend-lease was its marketability to the American public. FDR didn't pitch it to Congress, he pitched it to the Nation and then approached Congress. Goodwin says FDR used examples, like loaning your garden hose to your neighbor whose house is on fire, that really made sense to people (see page 194). Part of the advantage of the neighbor's-house-on-fire scenario is that people can imagine what might happen if you don't help your neighbor--your own house might catch fire. I think that is a point FDR wanted to carefully get across. The scenario also reinforced the concept of being neighborly friends with Britain. It also didn't waste any time debating the possibility of lasting peace with the Third Reich, which evidently some of the isolationists wanted.

The biggest strengths of Lend-lease is that it did the job, it gave Britain what it needed with the support of the American public. (And what a price, wow that figure is staggering.) As we see by the end of Chapter 9, though, it really put FDR and America in a tight position as far as delivering the lent items. You keep loaning your neighbor more and more hoses, and they keep getting burnt and half of them don't even make it to the fire. Tough, tough decisions to make. For all the weaknesses of the program, is there anything else that might have worked at all?

As far as FDR coming up with it unilaterally, I guess it depends on how one thinks he came up with it. If he was tossing it around in his mind for a month and just hiding it from people, I think it would have been good to toss it around with the great minds he had surrounded himself with. But I think it was more inspiration that came quickly, as he let his mind relax. Sure, he probably thought it through for a couple of days before letting it out. But that makes more sense to me.

Which leads to what Liz has been saying, let's let our Presidents take breaks! They need vacations, too. Maybe we should require them! Well, not necessarily require. But let's not lay on the guilt trips for every well-earned rest.

Liz wrote: "Bentley wrote: "And finally the President returned on December 16th, tanned, rested and in excellent humor. "

And so, his trip to ruminate was successful. In the end, he came up with a plan while ..."

Regarding FDRs sail I think it was a different time ö people did not expect immediate news on their Balcberrys etc - plus why be in town to face his opponents in Congress until he had his plan -

Hi Folks
So I am again behind all of you but note a couple of things about these chapters maybe noteworthy

1) Eleanors reference to the cardboard and corrugated metal housing in Abilene Texas in 1940 remined me of my impression on my first visit to 2) the, similar to Wilkie, patriotic plan put forth by ruther for arcraft production - trying to work with management at some expense of the unions
3) the two references of Goebbels commentaries - i think that Goebbels had been a leader in <<<<<4) the effect of the strike in 1940 at the Ford Rouge plant - the effect on Henry Ford - I htink that this plant was such a major accomplishemnt of industry whither or not one appreciates the political views of Ford

Vince wrote: "Liz wrote: "Bentley wrote: "And finally the President returned on December 16th, tanned, rested and in excellent humor. "

And so, his trip to ruminate was successful. In the end, he came up with..."

Yes, that is interesting about Lincoln...but you have to admit a walk in the woods was less trouble than the sail (smile).

Vince wrote: "Hi Folks
So I am again behind all of you but note a couple of things about these chapters maybe noteworthy

1) Eleanors reference to the cardboard and corrugated metal housing in Abilene Texas..."

Thank you Vince for those items...very interesting.

Bentley wrote: "...you have to admit a walk in the woods was less trouble than the sail (smile)."

The trouble is, either one would be harder now that it was at the time.

Vince wrote: "Hi Folks
So I am again behind all of you but note a couple of things about these chapters maybe noteworthy
...
3) the two references of Goebbels commentaries - i think that Goebbels had been a leader in <<<<<

I think you are right that Goebbels had amazing talent for manipulating and controlling peoples. Too bad he couldn't use his talents for marketing breakfast cereal instead of Nazism. He certainly knew the right buttons to push, and when and how to lead people down the garden path. Of course, it helped that there were methods for removing anyone who recognized his garden path for what it was.

I find those little tidbits from Goebbels especially illuminating into the German perspective. I think Goodwin does a nice balance. This book isn't about the German perspective or about the British or Russians, but those little views really put the American Homefront in perspective for those of us who didn't live it.

Elizabeth, I particularly liked the "marketing breakfast cereal part". (smile)

Re: Lend/Lease program


Bentley Post # 11
That last number is astounding. FDR must have been one influential guy. You know what I also was wondering: what kind of money that would amount to in today's dollars. It is astronomical.

-----------------------------------------------------

They paid the final payment a few years ago. Here are two articles.

Debts to the US
(2006) This week is a red-letter day in the history of the British Isles. The government of the United Kingdom will by the end of this year close a wartime chapter that started nearly 60 years ago. The British government will pay back to the United States the last installment of the loans taken by the then British government under Sir Winston Churchill at the height of the Second World War. Thus the chapter on money loaned by the United States to Britain during the second Great War will be formally closed. This last installment is a repayment of the US war loan taken out under a 1945 agreement and would be completed by December 31 of this year.

http://www.dart-creations.com/article...

----------------------------------------

What's a little debt between friends?

On 31 December, the UK will make a payment of about $83m (£45.5m) to the US and so discharge the last of its loans from World War II from its transatlantic ally.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/ma...

I asked the same thing Alias.

This is what I found with a converter: (and this is just for $100.00). It did not compute even to 2010 so it might have been even more.

Current data is only available till 2008. In 2008, $100.00 from 1942 is worth:

$1,320.88 using the Consumer Price Index
$1,084.29 using the GDP deflator
$2,615.38 using the value of consumer bundle
$2,494.17 using the unskilled wage
$3,950.17 using the nominal GDP per capita
$8,919.95 using the relative share of GDP

I am not sure which % you would like to use...it is either 13 times as much in value upwards to almost 90 times as much. So these were amazing numbers back then.

Alias, after reading the article regarding the British paying their debt. It is interesting to note that the United Stated discounted the goods and food and military equipment by 90%! The British were paying only 10% of the value of what they were given and/or what they were supplied. This was a very generous program considering that the entire World War I debt was forgiven. Can you imagine the value of what was given? And this was coming from a country which had gone through some massive hard times. The US was not even back on its feet after the depression when it lent this money.

Someone else figured out the value of what was borrowed and it was in the article that you posted. Here is the extract:

The point to be noted is that Hansard records of the British Parliament record that the last 3 payments were December 2004 - 145 Million USD, December 2005 - 142 Million USD and December 2006 - 83 Million USD. We can further glean from records that a total of 4.336 Trillion USD was borrowed comprising 3.75 Trillion USD Line of Credit and a Lend-Lease loan of 586 Million USD. Hansard is the traditional name for the printed transcripts of parliamentary debates in the Westminster system of government that is prevalent in the United Kingdom.

I do not know how our country did this. We had to be on the brink of financial devastation ourselves and to lend so much. FDR really extended a helping hand and Churchill and England are so fortunate that they had FDR to deal with. He was a person who would stick his neck out for others.

According to the same article one can see back in 1942 that the 10% value was much much less. And America gave the British a few years before anything needed to be paid back at all after the war and it was to be paid over 50 years but took longer because of downturns in England's economy.

Your article stated: "However the Americans were generous and goods already in Britain or in transit were sold to the UK government at a heavy discount of nearly 90%. This worked out to 10% of the value of the goods. Even this amount was paid in the form of a loan. By 1941, Britain was in a parlous financial state and Lend-Lease was eventually introduced.

The amount, together with a line of credit, was $4.34 billion with a 2% interest rate, originally intended to be paid back over 50 years beginning in 1950 in 50 annual installments.

I think these are amazing sums for FDR to be able to lend. Can you imagine asking for Congress to appropriate this kind of money now?

Yes, it is a large some of money.

I am not well versed in WWII, but these points come to mind.

1- Even though we were dealing with a decade long Depression ourselves, at least we weren't fighting a war on our soil. Britain was fighting the war on their soil. If we didn't give them the money and other things that they desperately needed it was only a matter of time before we were fighting the war on our soil. What would the cost to us be then? And if Britain did survive the war, since it was fought on their soil, they would have massive rebuilding to do. And if we didn't win the war, the money spent or lent would matter not at all.

2- When a country goes to war, it always costs billions if not trillions. In this case we did get back 10%. And in the process kept the war off our mainland and helped an ally. In the long view, not a bad deal. But you are right, we don't seem to take the long view on many topics.

3- Sometimes it's not the money or cost that matters, it is the cause that matters most.
-------------------------------
Bentley wrote: FDR really extended a helping hand and Churchill and England are so fortunate that they had FDR to deal with.
-------------------------------

When I read, The Defining Moment by Jonathan Alter, I really got the sense that FDR was a genuine hero. If not for him, it seems quite reasonable to think the U.S. might not exist as we know it today.

The Defining Moment: FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope--Jonathan Alter

Alias..I of course understand the premise with which FDR lent the equipment. It was of course the right thing to do. But you had asked about the value of these loans in today's numbers. I think unfortunately when a country is suffering they turn inward and in today's climate I still suspect that appropriating these kinds of sums would run into resistance. I think the power of FDR is shown in what he was able to get people to do.

Bentley wrote in post #26:
But you had asked about the value of these loans in today's numbers

--------------

I thought you had asked in post #11. lol :) That is why I posted the two articles.

I didn't mean to imply that you didn't understand FDR's reasons or thought that it was wrong.

Sorry for any confusion my post may have caused.

-----------------------
Bentley wrote post #26:
I think unfortunately when a country is suffering they turn inward and in today's climate I still suspect that appropriating these kinds of sums would run into resistance. I think the power of FDR is shown in what he was able to get people to do.
-------------------

That is very true. I guess we will have to agree to agree ! :)

I was being just hypothetical...I am delighted that you posted both articles. As moderator, I pose questions to get at both sides of an issue or a decision. I never thought your post added any confusion at all; I thought you were posting them as a clarification. When I read what you had posted and the articles; I found the answer. Of course, that is probably what most of us suspected; but it did reinforce our suspicions.

I now realize you retyped my hypothetical question in your previous post. Normally, I simply hit reply under the message that I am replying too and the poster's words are in italics. I can see now that you actually took the time to retype everything. What a nice gesture.

Alias Reader wrote: "Bentley wrote in post #26:
But you had asked about the value of these loans in today's numbers

--------------

I thought you had asked in post #11. lol :) That is why I posted the two artic..."

Alias...just an after thought:

Alias..one thing that might help out tremendously (I thought of telling you this as an after thought) is for you to use the reply button under the message that you are responding to. That way my words or my post would be highlighted at the top in italics and then you could post your own thoughts below.

It would then look like messages 6, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20 etc. I use the reply button if I am about to quote or spell out a specific reference that somebody else wrote.

That might avoid confusion moving forward. It will also save you considerable time retyping. But I understand that sometimes the specific sentence you might be referring to might not show up when you do this.

I am just amazed that you are reading and catching up like you have which is terrific. It just shows that anyone in the group can start a book at any time and benefit from the threads and catch up.

Bentley wrote post #29: That might avoid confusion moving forward..."

-----------------------

Will do on the italics. :)

Great Alias Reader...that is the ticket.

I read chapter 8 last night. Here are just a few random thoughts I had on it.

(page 191) I was stunned to read that "of the first million men selected for the draft, almost 40 % were found physically unfit for military service." I guess it shows, at least in part, the great toll the Depression had on the population.

(page 195) I knew that the majority didn't want to get involved in the war but was surprised to read the Gallop poll number was 88% opposed. I didn't think you could get 88% of the people to agree on anything !

Page 198-199 I literally laughed out loud when reading about Mrs. Nesbitt. That she served the president what ever she felt like without regard to his preferences was too funny. I loved the line about the broccoli when she was told he didn't like it. "Fix it anyhow,. He should like it." And the notion that the president would clip cereal ads and their prices for her to see, and she would ignore him, was really quite unbelievable. :)
This section was a nice reprieve from the Great Depression and War.

Page 202. I couldn't help but put this under the title of "some things never change"
Eleanor wrote about the Rep. party, "we are Republicans first. We represent you here in Congress not as citizens of the U.S. in a period of crisis, but as members of a political party which seeks primarily to promote its own partisan interests."
No Profiles in Courage here. :(

In a way it is heartening to see that this is not a new phenomenon. So there is hope for us to survive this partisan nonsense. But where is the current Willkie ?

page 203 "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"
It seems that we are operating on the opposite theory today. It is all about fear and scaring the public witless. I don't know if it 24/7 TV or what. Sad. I don't know if others find themselves doing this too, but as I read I can't help comparing it to our current times.

Page 210 This was the first that I read about Joe Kennedy being the first witness to testify against the lend/lease bill. Interesting. From the little I've read of Joe Kennedy he was not a nice man. He certainly could learn a thing or two from Willkie.

Page 212 Once again Charles Lindbergh is presented in a not very complementary light. I need to read a small bio of him. Clearly my limited perception of him is way off base.

Page 212 I love Churchill's way with words.
"he was a crumbling lighthouse from which there shone the beams that led great fleets to harbour."
Simply beautiful.

Page 213. Someone hear posted that they really started to like Willkie after reading NOT. I agree. It is so rare to read of a politician putting personal partisan political aside. I loved his line on page 214. "He was elected President. He is My President now."

Page 214. Churchill said of Hopkins he is "a godsend that he should be at the White House." The more I read of FDR I feel that he was a godsend, too.

A side note, sometime ago I was at the main branch of my local library and noted there is a book of the complete 31 fireside chats. Here is the info if anyone is interested.

FDR's Fireside Chats (Paperback)
Description ~ Russell D. Buhite (Editor), David W. Levy (Editor)

The first complete collection of FDR's historic conversations with the American people, this volume contains the entire texts of the 31 "fireside chats" that Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered over the radio during his 13 years as president, and with which he reassured and mobilized millions of listeners.

------------------------------------------------
Product Details
Paperback: 352 pages
Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics); Reprint edition (December 1, 1993)

FDR's Fireside Chats - David W. Levy

Onward to chapter 9.

Yes, I was surprised by that high percentage of unfit males too. No food, poor nutrition must have really taken its toll.

88% is a very high percentage number for a poll. I think that shows that America was more homogenized then..similar backgrounds, similar experiences, similar cultural attributes, similar life goals.

Mrs. Nesbitt sounds like such a character - like my favorite old waitresses from my favorite old pizzeria.

Some things Alias remain the same for the Republican party...my apologies to those Republicans out there.

There are major similarities to our current times and they have not gone unnoticed.

Joe Kennedy's problems stem from his unbridled ambition. When he did not get far enough with it; he saddled his sons with the same cross to bear.

Lindbergh I have more of a problem with.

Yes, we have the on line version of the Fireside chats posted on the FDR thread...but how nice to actually have a wonderful book about them.

Don't you have to love Churchill..I know I do. (smile).

I too love the line you quoted:

"he was a crumbling lighthouse from which there shone the beams that led great fleets to harbour."

I wish the opposing party and others could be so gracious and so warm hearted to President Obama to say as Wilkie did:

He was elected President. He is My President now."

There are quite a few who will not use the title Mr. President when even talking about him. Such a shame in our country.

Great careful and detailed reading. I love your comments and all of the details Alias. Continue in the same fashion. Wonderful.

Bentley wrote: "Great careful and detailed reading...."
-----------------------

Some think I am a bit of a nut when they see my books. Some people like pristine books, but I am in the other camp. I love marginalia and personalizing my books. I underline, highlight, write definitions and comments in the margins. I've used highlighters and colored pen and pencils. Frequently I will also write notes. This also makes me slow down and focus. When it is a library book, my notes can get quite out of control ! I always have a dictionary at my side and a one volume encyclopedia. I also have a Timeline book that also help keep things in context. Though it does take me longer to read a book as I am apt to get lost on some tangent with these reference books. But that is half the fun of reading, imo.

The Timetables of History: A Horizontal Linkage of People and EventsBernard Grun


A few friends whom I have loaned books to get a real kick out of it.

For me, I do it because it helps me to focus my thoughts and organize my thinking on the topic. I also frequently write notes for the same purpose. Mostly in the vain hope that it will help my memory. lol.

Just last night on NPR I heard an essay by one person lamenting that with the new E-Readers, though the e-reader owner can still create marginalia, it is limited to just that user. His/her thoughts that are contained in all that marginalia will be a thing of the past when we won't be loaning books to friends or getting books at used book stores. I know people love the new devises, but I sure hope in my life time paper books will still be dominant. The experience of browsing bookshelves in the library or book store is a terrific way to spend some time.

Thanks for the comments on my post. I see we are on the same page, thinking wise. :)

Goodness Alias...you seem quite organized and quite the academic researcher. I am almost the same I am afraid.

That Timetables book looks rather interesting. It is always a good idea to find out when in the scheme of things an event happened, a person lived, an idea hatched, etc.

I have a kindle but it really is mainly for travel and for when my eyes are a bit tired. I do love the smell and feel of paper and my house is living testament to my love of books with book cases everywhere.

Yes we are Alias and I do love your comments, ideas and recommendations.

Bentley

I have enjoyed immensely reading the commentaries.

Alias Reader's mention of Joseph Kennedy reminded me of something I read in Jean Edward Smith's FDR that showed, I thought, how committed FDR was to getting ships, etc, into the possession of those governments FDR thought needed the materials.


“Joseph P. Kennedy, perhaps an unlikely source, testifies to FDR’s decisiveness during the war. Kennedy was then assistant manager of Bethlehem Steel’s Fore River shipyard in Quincy, Mass.

At the request of the Navy Dept, the Fore River yard had constructed two battleships for Argentina. The ships were ready, but the Argentine govt. was unable to pay, and Charles Schwab, the legendary chairman of Bethlehem, refused to release them.

FDR requested a meeting, and Schwab sent Kennedy to Washington in his place.

F received K cordially. ‘Don’t worry about the matter,’ he said reassuringly. ‘The State Dept. will collect the money.’

K said that wasn’t good enough. Mr. Schwab would not release the ships until they were paid for.

‘That’s absurd,” FDR replied. He and K sparred for a few rounds, and then R had his guest escorted to the door. He had been happy to meet K, he said, but the Navy wanted the ships released immediately.

Again K declined.

When K reported the conversation to Schwab, they agreed to ignore R’s demands, and the battleships remained securely berthed in Quincy.

Less than a week later, four Navy tugboats nosed into the Fore River yard, loaded to the gunwales with combat-ready marines. As startled shipyard workers looked on, the marines took possession of the vessels at bayonet point and towed them into the harbor, where Argentine crews waited to receive them.

A chastened K stood by helpless. “R was the hardest trader I’d ever run up against,’ he said later. ‘I was so disappointed I broke down and cried’” (144-45).



(I'm a margin writer/note-taker, too.)

An exceptional story Adelle. Thank you for posting it. This is actually quite impressive of FDR..I did not think he liked confrontation that much.

Bentley, I suspect that it why the story made such an impression on me: My take, too, is that FDR didn't like confrontation.

(Although, I he didn't push his point with Kennedy.
Smile. He sent the marines. They're OK with confrontation.)

When the marines arrived, the point was made and well established. Smile. I loved the story.

Wow ! That is a great story, Adele. Thanks for typing it out. After reading that I think I will definitely have to add the Jean Edward Smith book on FDR to my Towering TBR list.