Well, we all make mistakes, and I certainly will try to find the correct quotation, it might take time, though.
You got the correct quotation anything outside the "" isn't a quotation, I think you made a mistake there my good fellow, but we all make them I guess.
As for whether it was a plan or not, instituting export controls and setting out a deliberately policy of limiting Britsih dollar reserves shows clearly that it was.
Then there is one basic question I would like you to answer. Any date, at which we can even agree to disagree, is probably in the far future, but perhaps we can at least temporarily settle where we disagree most.
No, I'm already there.
You can believe what you like on the subject, it doesn't change the facts one way or another.
Try this Time article from the period (September 22nd 1941)
Here.
"The agreement was published as a White Paper, in which the British promised to limit their export business during World War II to the minimum necessary to continue the war effort."
Now for the US that make sense, their export business was gravy, Britain's export business however was what financed the country.
"The agreement was based on the principle that the British must maintain about two-thirds of normal export trade in order to get vital foreign exchange to buy materials unobtainable in the U.S."
"Yet British industries, which have already absorbed some shrewd body blows, will now have to take more punishment under the agreement. Example: no British paint firm may now offer in any world market any paint which contains zinc (imported from the U.S.). Last week a paint company which had done business in England for 120 years closed up."
Just put in "lend lease whitepaper export" into goggle and you will find plenty of evidence that it existed.
Then it just becomes a question of what the intention behind it was, which you will probably conclude was simple altruism and fair play.
But of course that clashes with the direct limitation of Britain's ability to accrue dollars as FDR agreed with the treasury (including setting a hard limit in the document) and forcing trade to the US through lend lease (thus forcing Britain to get more through lend lease and thus be hamstrung in exporting more categories of goods).
A Are you only objecting to Lend - Lease because it supposedly contained clauses that expressly forbid British exports?
There is nothing supposedly about it.
They were outlined in a White paper and send in a memorandum to the Americans by the British that
1. that lend-lease supplies had not been used in export production, and would not be used, except when complete physical segregation was impossible: the principle of substitution would then apply.
2. that in the future, as in the past, the principle of substitution would apply to similar materials, as well as to lend-lease materials.
3. that, as regards materials which were scarce in the United States, restrictions of increased stringency and very precise definition28 would be enforced upon British exporters.
The OLLA (Office Lend lease Administration, a US government organisation) then set up it's own operation 'for policing observance of the terms of the White Paper'.
I do not know to which extend this possibility B has happened historically, but it is certainly a plausible explanation for declining British exports.
Yes it would be partial explanation but once again we are taken back to the facts, that will avail themselves to you should you actually read something on the subject, that the Britsih were forced to give the US veto over their export system and the British were forced to export through reverse lend lease to the US so that Britain couldn't accrue too much in the way of Dollar reserves.
If you object to Lend - Lease because of A, fair enough (supposing A is true).
I object to A only in so much that it was ill considered and later ignored to paint the US as white knight, they were perfectly free to act as discourtesy to their allies as they wished as long as it isn't claimed otherwise.
As for B, I'm afraid the persecution angle is unfounded and those aren't my sentiments.