Take a look at 1940. Destroyers for bases [incidentally relieving the Brits of garrisoning those bases]], lend lease, dividing the Atlantic with the Brits into two defense zones, convoying ships for Britain in the U.S zone, tracking and radioing U-boat positions to the Brits, depth charging German U-boats. The last four [at least] made the U.S a co-belligerent under international law]. And the co-pilot of the British PBY that spotted BISMARCK on the 26th of May had an American co-pilot.
By the time in 1941 German U-boats sank at least one U.S destroyer, the REUBEN JAMES [and maybe two or three], while they were engaged in anti-submarine ops, there was no great outrage in the U.S populace, because what was happening in the North Atlantic was common knowledge. Raeder had been urging Hitler to declare war for over a year by then.
Agreed.
The Roosevelt administration denied details of today's report, but not it's basic idea -- that the US would eventually come to the allies' side.
So the US claim of "neutrality" was a technicality at best, but one in which Hitler to some extent participated -- i.e., by ordering his U-boat commanders not to sink American ships.
Still, it's obvious from "today's" Nazi propaganda that they don't believe this technicality will remain in effect forever.
Even in early 1940, Nazis considered the US, if not an immediate enemy, a certain future one.
And all of this well before Hitler has invaded Scandinavia, or Western & Southern Europe, Russia, the Baltics or Africa.
So my question remains: why did the thought of eventually going to war against the US (and Russia!) not give the Nazis pause to think before embarking on their conquests?