Question

1. Official U.S. government policy when war broke out in Europe in 1939 was:

(a) Support for the Allied Powers
(b) Support for the Axis powers
(c) Recognition of the policy of the United Nations
(d) Neutrality

Answer 1

It's kind of a grey area as far as I'm concerned, because it was roughly around the time we were supplying the Allies, breaking out Neutrality.

Answer 2

None of the answers you have given are satisfactory.

Let me explain:

In 1939, FDR signed into law a third round of Neutrality Laws (after the 1935 and 1937 ones). This new set of laws was made to theoritacally stay neutral but actually gave an advantage to U.S. Allies as they could buy weapons and goods from the U.S. will enemies could not. So it is hard to define it as true Neutrality although officially it was. It is often referred to by historians as the 'arsenal of democracy'.

It might be worth saying that in 1939 the U.N. did not exist.

Answer 3

"(Roosevelt) prevailed over the isolationists and on November 4 the Neutrality Act of 1939 was passed, allowing for arms trade with belligerent nations on a cash and carry basis, thus in effect ending the arms embargo." (Wikipedia)

Which in my minds means that it ended. However, later in the article it talks about how 'official' neutrality ended in 1941 with the Lend-Lease Act. Thoughts?

Answer 4

Yes: as I said the 1939 Neutrality Laws were a two way process. Officially it kept the United States out of the war and therefore by definition Neutral, and on the other hand it allowed for passive participation and intervention. But this intervention was not aimed at the conflict in Europe. The 1939 Neutrality Laws, and the bias for American allies, was actually meant for China to fight off the Japanese forces.

Furthermore, one thing that Wikipedia will not explain is the on going battle between the isolationists and the internationalist in the interwar years. FDR had always been internationalist but after the Great Depression he had to turn he attention towards domestic policy. After 1936 and a series of unpopular political moves he lost Congress to the republicans and lost his political base support. He was facing a bi-partisan opposition to any intervention. This isolationism was very popular as Gallup Polls showed in 1937, 90% of Americans were for staying out of conflict rather than promoting peace.

But several elements of the political landscape were conscious that actions had to be taken to quell the conflicts abroad. A Senate resolution in 1938 voted to stop economic treaties with Japan. The Stimson Doctrine clearly condemned the actions of the Japanese in Manchuria. FDR invited the King and Queen of England in 1938 to create a sentiment of sympathy for the European situation. And his Quarantine Speech made in 1937, which although being vague, clearly laid out that isolationism was not an option.

So it is a grey picture if you are seeking a nuanced answered. However, if you are only concerned with the official position: You can safely say Neutral...