Talk:Neutrality Acts of the 1930s

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations: United Nations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 31, 2015 and August 31, 2020.

Untitled

Maybe someone can find some interest about this text in French: http://www.histoforum.org/histoforums/5/aff.php?nummsg=3906

The Neutrality Act in Modern Contexts

This article seems to dwell on the context of WWII, but portions of this law currently remain in force. The article 2007 Laotian coup d'état conspiracy allegation cites an alleged violation of the Neutrality Act and directs the reader to this article, but here is no relevant information. I think a section in this article should be dedicated to describing the implications of the Neutrality Act in its current form.--72.155.121.7 (talk) 13:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Don Black (white nationalist) was also convicted under the "Neutrality Act" in 1981. A link goes to this article, but as the other editor says, there's nothing here abuot the current law. Will Beback talk 19:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's now a section about the continued use of the Neutrality Act. AxelBoldt (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bricker Amendment

Ugly Ugly Ugly bad and bougie

invocation?

Could someone tell me when, if ever, were these acts first invoked against Germany?

Thank you very much Neutrality act 04:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something Missing?

The article refers to the "loopholes in the 1935 act". But there's no reference to a 1935 act. MrG 4.225.208.30 22:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about the 1935 act?

This article doesn't even mention the Neutrality Act of 1935. It only mentions 1936, 1937, 1939. Someone should add any info they know about the 1935 act to the article. Noneforall (talk) 01:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 1935 act is now covered. AxelBoldt (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Politics?

The article should describe the politics of the matter. Did the Republicans or the Democrats generally favor these acts? Did Roosevelt sign them willingly or grudgingly? AxelBoldt (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is now covered in the Background section. AxelBoldt (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was Roosevelt free to ignore the Neutrality acts?

Our article states:

In each case, the acts provided for the president to invoke them by finding that a state of war existed in a particular instance. This provided a loophole that President Franklin D. Roosevelt carefully exploited to ensure that US allies overseas were not unduly penalized by the acts.

In the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Article "international relations", subsection "The return of U.S. isolationism" I read

The effect of these acts, however, was to preclude American aid to Abyssinia, Spain, and China, and thus hurt the victims of aggression more than the aggressors.

Further our articles states:

When Japan invaded China in July 1937, starting the Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945), President Roosevelt chose not to invoke the Neutrality Acts by declining to identify the fighting as a state of war. In so doing, he ensured that China's efforts to defend itself would not be hindered by the legislation.

I read in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Article "international relations", subsection "Japan's aggression in China":

But Roosevelt was prevented by the Neutrality acts from aiding China even after the sinking of U.S. and British gunboats on the Yangtze.

While I don't know anything about the topic, it appears to me that our coverage substantially disagrees with that of EB. AxelBoldt (talk) 03:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think these issues have now been sorted out. AxelBoldt (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Allies

"fearing that they would restrict the administration's options to support the country's allies"

The implication that France and Great Britian were the US's allies in the 30's is not something I think I've read before.

I was not aware that the United States of America had any meaningful alliances during the nineteen thirties, or of any figure saying that Western European countries were allies. This wording has to change. 67.167.2.58 (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed "allies" to "friendly nations". AxelBoldt (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Act of 1936

I'm not an expert, but didn't the Neutrality Act of 1936 cancel out the Neutrality Act of 1935, allowing the U.S. to sell weapons to waring countries but only if they were bought with cash ("cash-and-carry")?

Randtherocketman (talk) 04:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)randy[reply]

Cash-and-carry was introduced by the 1937 act. AxelBoldt (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Act of 1939

-Neutrality Act of 1939-

I'm just a high school student but I noticed that in the section titled, Neutrality Act of 1939, it is states that, "In September, after the invasion of Poland in 1939, Germany had invaded Great Britain. When France had subsequently declared war on Germany, Roosevelt invoked the provisions of the Neutrality Act but came before Congress and lamented that the Neutrality Acts may give passive aid to an aggressor.[6]"

I didn't believe this is correct. So I followed the link to the cited source, http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-urges-repeal-of-neutrality-act-embargo-provisions, this did not mention, "Germany invad[ing] Great Britain." as described.

I would appreciate it if someone took a look at that and edit it if necessary. --Login-error23 (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! you have a sharp eye and I fixed the problem. Rjensen (talk) 01:27, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I'm happy its been resolved. --Login-error23 (talk) 02:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i've got no time to add references or anything, but here's a link to claim for my most recent edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/6391ff/pisspiggranddad_the_punkrock_florist_who_fought/dfsplx9/

you can find him here too:

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/31228125/wanted-n-fort-myers-man-turned-isis-fighter-shares-story

Cavanan (talk) 02:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteers

What was the status of Americans who went to fight for foreign governments overseas? This is all about arms.2601:647:5800:7D80:9835:2A6A:D000:E762 (talk) 03:08, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]