UK Historians, did Belgium give England 600 million to finance WW2 against Hitler?

Question

In a recently circulating email, I read the following. I am an American living in Belgium, and want to research this further. Please comment, with references that I can check later. Thanks..............

''''Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the
donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England, that was actually the property of Belgium, given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler (a little known fact).
Actually, Belgium surrendered on one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day just to prove they could. Britain had already been holding out for two years in the face of staggering losses and the near decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and...'''

Answer 1

First of all some facts about the war in Belgium :
The Belgiums held out 18 days and the Germans said afterwards that the Belgian army did a good fight (especially the forts around Liége and the Belgian artillerie gave the Germans some things to think about).
Only the airports around Brussels were bombed (I think there is confussion with Rotterdam (in the Netherlands).
Britain was at that moment less than 1 year in war with Germany and the Battle of Britain had still to come.

About the Belgian donations to help Britain :
Britain was not bankrupt but the Belgians did help the UK.
All Belgian Gold reserves were evacuated to France and Britain. Germany looted the gold that was send to France since this was not evacuated in time by the French due to the rapid advance of the Germans. It must be said that the French paid back the lost gold to the Belgians after the war since it was in their custody.

The rest was send to Canada were it was lend to Britain to help the war effort (see Source). REMARK : the source only mention repayment and NOT of ANY INTERESTS to be paid ! The Belgians owned a lot to the British in WW1 and in 1940, so they did not even think about asking interests to be paid by their brothers in arms. If Britain lost the war the liberation of Belgium became impossible and all the Belgian gold would have been of no use, so lending it to a friend at the most generous conditions possible was the best solution.

Also important was :
- ALL material that the Belgians used for equipment of the Belgian armed forces that escaped and fought with the Britains was payed CASH. Few countries that escaped to England could do this.
- a big quantity of uranium was evacuated to UK and US which made possibly the first A-bomb. If it had fallen in German hands maybe history would have been otherwise.
- All minerals and diamonds coming from the Congo where sold to the allies at almost cost price to the allies. Even the US was not that generous. This contribution is less known but it was vital for the war effort.

Answer 2

I don't know where this comes from but this are many different facts that are mixed together.
1 - Brussels is never bomb by the Germans to make the Belgium army surrender. The only regions that where bombed where around Brussel and that where the airports ( Melsbroek, Grimbergen, Evere )
This is happened in the Netherlands at Rotterdam so that the dutch army was forced to surrender
2 - there was a gold transport from the national bank of Belgium to England. This was under the protection of the rijkswacht and the gold wasn't donated to the UK as far that I know
3 - Belgium only surrender after 18 days not 1 like is said here
4 - there where many other country's that evacuate there gold to the UK like the Netherlands
5 - England was in the second half of 1940 buying material in America with cash so there weren't bankrupt it was later on that the lent/ lease was development to prevent the UK going bankrupt

Answer 3

some historic corrections / clarifications are necessary. #a million. The GOP grow to be the anti-conflict occasion lower back contained in the previous due 1930's and early 1940's. FDR grow to be attempting to get the rustic waiting for conflict as frivolously as he might desire to devoid of the remarkable-wing going nuts. #2. Hitler actually declared conflict on us until eventually now we began protection rigidity action against him. #3. Stalin killed extra human beings than anybody guy in historic past and we did next to no longer something to him. previous all that, can somebody answer me this; how is struggling with a conflict in Iraq meant to ensure that we should not be attacked right here at abode? is this no longer a "international conflict on terror"? And if it does shop us secure, why did it no longer shop the British human beings of London secure during the July 7 terrorist bombings?!? you comprehend, the comparable Britian this is 2nd purely to the U. S. in numbers of troops in Iraq. And by way of the way, there are literally politically average, non-liberal human beings who've served their united states of america in uniform and are antagonistic to the conflict in Iraq. i'm only one.

Answer 4

No this is not true although Britain didn't have much money because they were in the thick of the war they didn't declare bankruptcy.

Answer 5

no,i've never heard of it.