Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, the Brits asked for the treaty, proving my point. If they were not losing and/or wanted their resources directed elsewhere, why would they have asked for a treaty? The U.S. never asked for a treaty, and was ready and willing to keep fighting.
Poll
How many Americans know of the burning of Washington D.C.?
| Yes, you do know about the event. | 75% | 75% - 109 | ||||
| No, you didn't know. | 24% | 24% - 35 | ||||
| Total: 144 | ||||||
Can you imagine if the usa and britain went to war? Im damn sure we would lose but we'd take so many of them down with us. I mean when i was on my radio course in Bovington, we were shown the dvd 'we were soldiers' right. The instructors said this is exactly what not to do in a battle. I.e. giving details about troop movements and directions etc. Also stories of radio silence being broken in the 1st gulf war. We would lose, but only because of numbers. Troop class, well, id say we beat you there america. Level of professionalism.. hmmm id say we also beat you there aswell. Also, america does have better hardware than the U.K i will admit that.
Not sure what you mean but troop class, and would argue level of professionalism, (I bet yours would be the same if you had as many people), though I'm not really sure that we have better equipment, just more stuff and greater numbers. I agree and think the U.S. would win, but with severe losses. I'm sure they would take out at least a few carriers, very nasty. That would be something I never hope to see.James-m wrote:
Can you imagine if the usa and britain went to war? Im damn sure we would lose but we'd take so many of them down with us. I mean when i was on my radio course in Bovington, we were shown the dvd 'we were soldiers' right. The instructors said this is exactly what not to do in a battle. I.e. giving details about troop movements and directions etc. Also stories of radio silence being broken in the 1st gulf war. We would lose, but only because of numbers. Troop class, well, id say we beat you there america. Level of professionalism.. hmmm id say we also beat you there aswell. Also, america does have better hardware than the U.K i will admit that.
all events of the history, are like what would happen if nazis didnt attacked russia, if spain and france won in trafalgar ... there are little things in the history that could end wars with a different result. so if they won, they won and just it.
Flaming, I said land invasion. Anyways, this went waaaaaay off topic. Is this war taught in the schools in the US of A now? I would think it is but I could be wrong.
Oh, Esteban is right on the invasion of Iraq during WW1. It isn't revisionist history, it's facts that are very hard to dig up (the British government of the time buried them) but if you look you can find them. Berlin-Bahgdhad railway was the cause of WW1. The US and UK wont go to war against each other. No point in arguing about it.
By the results of the poll, looks like many know of it. Then again, most of the people who come to this forum have a decent education (most, Ikarti may or may not, I can never really tell...).
Oh, Esteban is right on the invasion of Iraq during WW1. It isn't revisionist history, it's facts that are very hard to dig up (the British government of the time buried them) but if you look you can find them. Berlin-Bahgdhad railway was the cause of WW1. The US and UK wont go to war against each other. No point in arguing about it.
By the results of the poll, looks like many know of it. Then again, most of the people who come to this forum have a decent education (most, Ikarti may or may not, I can never really tell...).
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
who cares, this is a pointless flame thread, I jerk plenty of ppl around in concern to their home nation once in a while but most take it for what it is and realize it's just a good poking, and as long as no one attempts to imply that i fucked my cousin I take it the same way, why is it that ppl like those certain residents of oxford have such an inferiority complex that they have to make lame attempts at "tommies rule, yanks drool" childish bullshit at least 3 times a week on here
That's not invading.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, the Brits asked for the treaty, proving my point. If they were not losing and/or wanted their resources directed elsewhere, why would they have asked for a treaty? The U.S. never asked for a treaty, and was ready and willing to keep fighting.Flecco wrote:
Nope, Brits asked for the treaty.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If I remember correctly I think it was repelled, and I know the US won a series of naval battles as well. The US didn't sit on their duffs asking Britain to sign a treaty.
Pearl Harbour was bombed, the mainland of the US of A wasn't invaded by Japan at any stage in the war. I do believe Canada asked for independence, just as Australia did.
What do you term as an invasion? Japan violated U.S. airspace without permission, I'd say that's invading.
To invade you need to conquer, that's just attacking.
The Americans technically lost the war of 1812, they started it and didn't achieve any of their original goals. Their invasion was repelled by the British - I don't see what's hard to understand here. The British were involved in more important wars and didn't really care about the US, so they pulled out and got on with more important matters as soon as the American invasion was thwarted, but before they left they marched on DC and burnt it to the ground in retaliation.
I don't get why Americans brag about the war of 1812, they lost - it seems like a stupid thing to do.Wikipedia wrote:
The War of 1812 (in Britain, the American War of 1812 to 1815), was fought between the United States and the British Empire from 1812 to 1815, on land in North America and at sea. The United States, which declared war and attacked British colonies and shipping first, ended the war without gaining any territory, its invasion of British North America having been defeated by British, Canadian and aboriginal forces; however, the British ceased the sovereignty violations, to which the United States had objected, two days prior to the start of the war.
Yes the topic is taught in U.S. schools, or at least where I'm from.
Urrrggghhh!kr@cker wrote:
i fucked my cousin
First, I would say anyone coming closer than you want them too with legal backup saying they shouldn't be there if you don't want them too is an invasion, but I am perfectly willing to accept your definition.Bertster7 wrote:
That's not invading.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Yeah, the Brits asked for the treaty, proving my point. If they were not losing and/or wanted their resources directed elsewhere, why would they have asked for a treaty? The U.S. never asked for a treaty, and was ready and willing to keep fighting.Flecco wrote:
Nope, Brits asked for the treaty.
Pearl Harbour was bombed, the mainland of the US of A wasn't invaded by Japan at any stage in the war. I do believe Canada asked for independence, just as Australia did.
What do you term as an invasion? Japan violated U.S. airspace without permission, I'd say that's invading.
To invade you need to conquer, that's just attacking.
The Americans technically lost the war of 1812, they started it and didn't achieve any of their original goals. Their invasion was repelled by the British - I don't see what's hard to understand here. The British were involved in more important wars and didn't really care about the US, so they pulled out and got on with more important matters as soon as the American invasion was thwarted, but before they left they marched on DC and burnt it to the ground in retaliation.I don't get why Americans brag about the war of 1812, they lost - it seems like a stupid thing to do.Wikipedia wrote:
The War of 1812 (in Britain, the American War of 1812 to 1815), was fought between the United States and the British Empire from 1812 to 1815, on land in North America and at sea. The United States, which declared war and attacked British colonies and shipping first, ended the war without gaining any territory, its invasion of British North America having been defeated by British, Canadian and aboriginal forces; however, the British ceased the sovereignty violations, to which the United States had objected, two days prior to the start of the war.
Second, what goals did the U.S. have in the war? As far as I know, to stop British soldiers from impressing U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy against their will. I wasn't aware that the whole point was to gain territory, that being a side effect that did fail. We made the British go away and leave us alone, wasn't that the point?
The Americans had no navy, and a small army. They did not think that Britain would come to aid Canada (although here in the US I was always taught that the canadians were the agrresors). We tried to take Montreal I believe, and were immediately beaten back. With no real opposing force stopping them, the British / Canadian soldiers marched on washington, burning most of it. More useless junk happened, and a treaty was signed. The end.
Not only did we lose, we attacked a damn city from the bottom of a cliff! How stupid do you have to be?!
dude she's hotBertster7 wrote:
Urrrggghhh!kr@cker wrote:
i fucked my cousin
Why is everyone so fixed on Canada? The most important battles, barring the mess in Washington, were naval battles.Ben>You wrote:
The Americans had no navy, and a small army. They did not think that Britain would come to aid Canada (although here in the US I was always taught that the canadians were the agrresors). We tried to take Montreal I believe, and were immediately beaten back. With no real opposing force stopping them, the British / Canadian soldiers marched on washington, burning most of it. More useless junk happened, and a treaty was signed. The end.
lolkr@cker wrote:
dude she's hotBertster7 wrote:
Urrrggghhh!kr@cker wrote:
i fucked my cousin
these being the "violations of sovereignty" i was referring toFlaming_Maniac wrote:
Second, what goals did the U.S. have in the war? As far as I know, to stop British soldiers from impressing U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy against their will. ....................
We made the British go away and leave us alone, wasn't that the point?
edit: and yes, the naval battles were the point, since the embargoes and thievery of US trading vessels on the part of England were what started it
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-08-07 07:40:31)
That's what I was thinking. You asked for it Kracker...Bertster7 wrote:
Urrrggghhh!kr@cker wrote:
i fucked my cousin
Thanks for a definite answer Flaming. @ Bertster, I have never seen an American boast about the War of 1812. Oh, for the record incase Kracker got the wrong idea I'm from Australia, not England (miserable weather there). Pity the Rum Rebellion isn't covered in schools in Oz, because that is my idea of a revolt. Or the Eureka Stockade. In Australia we aren't exactly taught much about our past (or where I come from we aren't).
EDIT
I've got my answer, you lot can argue all you want. Nice to see that some people around the world are taught their history. Where I live we have to teach ourselves (remote Australia, crap schooling system).
Last edited by Flecco (2006-08-07 07:43:36)
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Yes, and I knew what "violations of sovereignty" you were referring to were, I just didn't want to type out that mouthful.kr@cker wrote:
these being the "violations of sovereignty" i was referring toFlaming_Maniac wrote:
Second, what goals did the U.S. have in the war? As far as I know, to stop British soldiers from impressing U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy against their will. ....................
We made the British go away and leave us alone, wasn't that the point?
edit: and yes, the naval battles were the point, since the embargoes and thievery of US trading vessels on the part of England were what started it
I just can't see why everyone is fixated on Canada when that really wasn't even the point.
The embargoes were lifted before the war was declared, it's just that the US president hadn't heard about it by that time.kr@cker wrote:
these being the "violations of sovereignty" i was referring toFlaming_Maniac wrote:
Second, what goals did the U.S. have in the war? As far as I know, to stop British soldiers from impressing U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy against their will. ....................
We made the British go away and leave us alone, wasn't that the point?
edit: and yes, the naval battles were the point, since the embargoes and thievery of US trading vessels on the part of England were what started it
The trading vessels that you are refering to were 'stolen' under these embargoes, since they were lifted before the war began they cannot really be counted amongst the achievements of the war, can they?
Would you trust a country that had been kidnapping your citizens and putting them in their armed services when they said they'd stop?Bertster7 wrote:
The embargoes were lifted before the war was declared, it's just that the US president hadn't heard about it by that time.kr@cker wrote:
these being the "violations of sovereignty" i was referring toFlaming_Maniac wrote:
Second, what goals did the U.S. have in the war? As far as I know, to stop British soldiers from impressing U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy against their will. ....................
We made the British go away and leave us alone, wasn't that the point?
edit: and yes, the naval battles were the point, since the embargoes and thievery of US trading vessels on the part of England were what started it
The trading vessels that you are refering to were 'stolen' under these embargoes, since they were lifted before the war began they cannot really be counted amongst the achievements of the war, can they?
I have.Flecco wrote:
That's what I was thinking. You asked for it Kracker...Bertster7 wrote:
Urrrggghhh!kr@cker wrote:
i fucked my cousin
Thanks for a definite answer Flaming. @ Bertster, I have never seen an American boast about the War of 1812.
ATG wrote:
Britian was a world superpower and they got there arses handed to them twice here by the states with a fraction of the population.
Colonies? 1776 Britian FAIL
States? 1812 Britian FAIL
And thats the United States to you.
England owns seen the size of us we conquered nearly half the world and even America for one stage . but remember england is only a tiny island and to be able to have done this is a massive achievement
very well said lolplastic_budgie wrote:
England owns seen the size of us we conquered nearly half the world and even America for one stage . but remember england is only a tiny island and to be able to have done this is a massive achievement
They did stop. Trust was not even an issue as the Americans hadn't even heard of the cessation, the embargoes had been officially ended, they were over.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Would you trust a country that had been kidnapping your citizens and putting them in their armed services when they said they'd stop?Bertster7 wrote:
The embargoes were lifted before the war was declared, it's just that the US president hadn't heard about it by that time.kr@cker wrote:
these being the "violations of sovereignty" i was referring to
edit: and yes, the naval battles were the point, since the embargoes and thievery of US trading vessels on the part of England were what started it
The trading vessels that you are refering to were 'stolen' under these embargoes, since they were lifted before the war began they cannot really be counted amongst the achievements of the war, can they?
Towards the end of the war, at which point you seem to think the British were losing, the British had just triumphed over Napoleon (a dangerous adversary, not like the US) and sent reinforcements to the Navy, who then won every engagement they were involved in. More troops had been freed up to go and fight the US, but they couldn't be bothered. So they burnt down your capital and went home. I've never heard anything about the Americans marching on London.
You lost - face it.
Its true Austrlaian history syllabus sucks major balls (I went to one of the top public schools in Australia, so its not just remote Australia, but it is probably worse for you), So no one pays any attention to history in school and has to find out things themselfs. Its all about womens rights and when voting and shit came around. All the boring, we already have equal rights, trash which makes you do noting but fall asleep. The above topics were all covered and more but never in detail, more of a brief overview before they try and tell us some crap about "womens role in the war". I DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT WOMENS ROLE IN THE WAR, I want to know about the fucking war itself. (no offence to women but come on it really isnt an important subject)Flecco wrote:
Pity the Rum Rebellion isn't covered in schools in Oz, because that is my idea of a revolt. Or the Eureka Stockade. In Australia we aren't exactly taught much about our past (or where I come from we aren't).
EDIT
I've got my answer, you lot can argue all you want. Nice to see that some people around the world are taught their history. Where I live we have to teach ourselves (remote Australia, crap schooling system).
Last edited by DrunkFace (2006-08-07 08:17:46)