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
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7009|UK
Ok so all of these points are from the book "What If?" it looks at multiple points in the history and see what would have happened if very minor changes had happened, a lot of them count on luck, e.g. Fog allowing Washington to escape to Manhattan.

The following was written by Thomas Fleming, a distinguished author, ex-chairman of the American Revolution Round Table and former President of the American Centre of P.E.N, an international writer’s organisation. So please don’t give me crap saying what is below is rubbish or anti American. I have edited out some parts because I don’t want to type up all 30 pages of this essay.

“What if Samuel Adams had gotten his way after the Boston Massacre?

Basically what happened here is Sam Adams convinced a mob of 400 men that if they attacked the British soldiers in Boston that it would "terrify the royal army into a humiliating evacuation". What actually happened was the British shot at the mob when attacked a soldier knocking him down with a club, 5 dead 6 injured.

Now Sam Adams wanted to use this event to denounce the royal forces as murderers. How ever the political state back then would have meant that other colonies would see this as proof that Boston was in the hands of an anarchist mob thus excusing the British from resorting to these measures to restore order. Fortunately for Boston Sam’s cousin, John Adams saw that this would happen and because no lawyer would stand for the soldiers being afraid of being killed by the mob stood as lawyer for the soldiers on trial for murder. He got the soldiers off and managed to gain the support of people in other states as “worthy of their support”.

If John hadn’t done this there might never have been a Boston Tea Party.

What if the British plan had worked at Bunker Hill?

Two months later the embryo war could have gone either way at Bunker Hill. The mythical version of this battle has the British marching stupidly up the hill to get blasted by American marksmen. In fact the British had a sophisticated battle plan that could have ended the war if they had been able to execute it.

The field commander, Major General William Howe intended to outflank the exposed for on Breed’s Hill by sending a column of crack light infantry up the beach on the shore of the Mystic River and sealing off the narrow neck of the Charlestown Peninsula, trapping the Americans like insects in a bottle. Simultaneously, the other half of the British army was to assault the weakened American lines around Cambridge, where the rebels had most of their powder and ammunition.

Fortunately for the future of the yet unborn United States, Colonel John Stark, commander of the new Hampshire regiment spotted the deserted beach as a potentially fatal flaw of the American position. He ordered 200 of the best men there and took personal command of them. When Howe saw this checkmate, he asked the British admiral on the Boston station to send a sloop up the river to scatter Stark’s men with a few rounds of grapeshot. The admiral demurred, saying he had no charts of the river.

This ended in disaster for the British forces. If the British admiral had the energy or the brains to chart the river or if John Stark had failed to spot the importance of that beach Bunker Hill would have been a very different story.”

As you can see from these first two of Thirteen events the who future was based on the decisions of 1 or 2 people and anything can happen to change someone’s mind, as I am sure many of you have experienced before.
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6939|NJ
Yeah but Washington is not a state which means it's not part of the United STATES of America.. It's a district so it doesn't count anyway.
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6793|Southeastern USA
:p
SuperSlowYo
slow as you go
+124|6803|Canaduhhh.. West Toast
does it really matter... bottom line is we get along pretty decently now... i mean we even managed to sort out the whole 54'40 or fight ordeal...
USARANGER01
Member
+35|6891|America

ELITE-UK wrote:

If i remember, the usa nearly lost, britain was fighting wars all over the world and where bound to lose somewhere, i would say we kicked the americans ass for a while then we just gotten beat.
I also herd from videos n such when americans say 'we beat you guys before, we can do it again' HA! yeah right your having a laugh.
um....every heard of:
-B2 stealth bomber?
-f-22 Raptor?
-MOAB?
-Delta Force?
-Little Bird?
-"The Nightstalkers"?
-M1A2 Abrams?
-Navy SEALS?
-Spector Gunships?

i could continue the list, but i dont wanna spend all day typing
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|6928|United States of America
In response to the first post, I've known about the War of 1812 for quite some time. I did some research on it though which says the war is overshadowed in England by the other important Napoleonic Wars. It is supposed to be remembered less-so than across the pond than in the North American present countries affected.
SuperSlowYo
slow as you go
+124|6803|Canaduhhh.. West Toast

USARANGER01 wrote:

ELITE-UK wrote:

If i remember, the usa nearly lost, britain was fighting wars all over the world and where bound to lose somewhere, i would say we kicked the americans ass for a while then we just gotten beat.
I also herd from videos n such when americans say 'we beat you guys before, we can do it again' HA! yeah right your having a laugh.
um....every heard of:
-B2 stealth bomber?
-f-22 Raptor?
-MOAB?
-Delta Force?
-Little Bird?
-"The Nightstalkers"?
-M1A2 Abrams?
-Navy SEALS?
-Spector Gunships?

i could continue the list, but i dont wanna spend all day typing
sophistaced technology doesnt always help... havin a hard time stoppin the nonsense in iraq and ya got all that tech workin hard over there... i mean sure you could turn our nation to rubble but then what? no one to oppress lol
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6950|67.222.138.85
@ bester, Wars are not always won in black or white. Britain did hold American territory at the time the treaty was signed, so why did she give it up? Because she could not afford to hold it, and knew that it was pointless because of American naval superiority in the Great Lakes. America may also have not been able to gain territory, but would not have started the war based solely on territory, that was more of a side effect. impressment was the main issue. That may not have been achieved entirely through military force, but I'm trying to say that both countries were satisfied with the outcome.

@USARANGER01, don't be an arrogant ass, your not helping the U.S. debaters here.

And to all who have come on this thread with spam recently, this is in debate and serious talk, don't be silly, and spell out all your words instead of writing 'u'.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6825|SE London

USARANGER01 wrote:

ELITE-UK wrote:

If i remember, the usa nearly lost, britain was fighting wars all over the world and where bound to lose somewhere, i would say we kicked the americans ass for a while then we just gotten beat.
I also herd from videos n such when americans say 'we beat you guys before, we can do it again' HA! yeah right your having a laugh.
um....every heard of:
-B2 stealth bomber?
-f-22 Raptor?
-MOAB?
-Delta Force?
-Little Bird?
-"The Nightstalkers"?
-M1A2 Abrams?
-Navy SEALS?
-Spector Gunships?

i could continue the list, but i dont wanna spend all day typing
Of course the UK couldn't beat the US in a war in this day and age, to even suggest they could is idiotic.

However, I don't know what you're bragging about with your list of American tech.
The Challenger 2 is more than a match for the M1A2 (holds all the important records).
The Typhoon is - in direct air to air combat terms - at least on a par with the F-22 and is MUCH cheaper(Also the RAF have more Typhoons than the USAF have F-22s 230 compared to 180).
The SAS are better than the Navy SEALs.

*edit* Spector Gunships are great though.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2006-08-07 11:58:57)

Not
Great success!
+216|6820|Chandler, AZ

James-m wrote:

plastic_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
very well said lol
Right on. Good game.

Now fast forward 300 years.

Ok, tiny island.

Just "yankin" your chain.
plastic_budgie
Member
+114|6994|England : East Yorkshire
2 words " monty Python "
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6825|SE London

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

@ bester, Wars are not always won in black or white. Britain did hold American territory at the time the treaty was signed, so why did she give it up? Because she could not afford to hold it, and knew that it was pointless because of American naval superiority in the Great Lakes. America may also have not been able to gain territory, but would not have started the war based solely on territory, that was more of a side effect. impressment was the main issue. That may not have been achieved entirely through military force, but I'm trying to say that both countries were satisfied with the outcome.

@USARANGER01, don't be an arrogant ass, your not helping the U.S. debaters here.

And to all who have come on this thread with spam recently, this is in debate and serious talk, don't be silly, and spell out all your words instead of writing 'u'.
That is all quite true and the war would never even have happened if news of the recent British policy changes had reached America before war was declared. I appreciate your arguments, which, for the most part have been quite sensible - and we only seem to disagree on a few very minor points.

I am glad to see you have not been making the classic mistake of thinking the British were driven out of America while trying to recolonise it. The other big mistake is that the British called for a peace treaty, which they didn't, it was resolved by both sides - which is a good thing. All in all it ended quite amicably and we've got on quite well ever since.

I believe the war was all a bit of a mistake and after it had started neither country wanted to finish it - The British because it was costing them lots of money - The Americans because they had their main objectives satisfied before the war even began (even if they didn't know it) and invading Canada was secondary and wasn't going to happen, as well as knowing the British army was free of it's European commitments and would  come and smash them if the British defeats got too embarassing (British Army in US approx. 10'000 - British Army total strength almost 500'000).

Although I still believe on a technical level at least, the British won the war.
It did the Americans more good than the British though, because the British were expected to win it.
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6793|Southeastern USA
chuck norris
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6950|67.222.138.85

Bertster7 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

@ bester, Wars are not always won in black or white. Britain did hold American territory at the time the treaty was signed, so why did she give it up? Because she could not afford to hold it, and knew that it was pointless because of American naval superiority in the Great Lakes. America may also have not been able to gain territory, but would not have started the war based solely on territory, that was more of a side effect. impressment was the main issue. That may not have been achieved entirely through military force, but I'm trying to say that both countries were satisfied with the outcome.

@USARANGER01, don't be an arrogant ass, your not helping the U.S. debaters here.

And to all who have come on this thread with spam recently, this is in debate and serious talk, don't be silly, and spell out all your words instead of writing 'u'.
That is all quite true and the war would never even have happened if news of the recent British policy changes had reached America before war was declared. I appreciate your arguments, which, for the most part have been quite sensible - and we only seem to disagree on a few very minor points.

I am glad to see you have not been making the classic mistake of thinking the British were driven out of America while trying to recolonise it. The other big mistake is that the British called for a peace treaty, which they didn't, it was resolved by both sides - which is a good thing. All in all it ended quite amicably and we've got on quite well ever since.

I believe the war was all a bit of a mistake and after it had started neither country wanted to finish it - The British because it was costing them lots of money - The Americans because they had their main objectives satisfied before the war even began (even if they didn't know it) and invading Canada was secondary and wasn't going to happen, as well as knowing the British army was free of it's European commitments and would  come and smash them if the British defeats got too embarassing (British Army in US approx. 10'000 - British Army total strength almost 500'000).

Although I still believe on a technical level at least, the British won the war.
It did the Americans more good than the British though, because the British were expected to win it.
And on that note I think we've reached a pretty good understanding. Nice debating with you.
Widow_Warrior
Member
+7|6731|SOUTH ENGLAND
Sean Connery A.k.a  James 007 Bond
Sgt. Sergio Bennet 3rd
Member
+169|6989|Mexico City
Well,
USA once invaded Mexico and was kicked back, thats why the word GRINGO exits (GREEN-GO).
But they invaded back with McDonalds, Burger King, Wal-Mart, etc...
SuperSlowYo
slow as you go
+124|6803|Canaduhhh.. West Toast
Pancho Villa and his pot smokin banditos
CLEVERLITTLETROJAN
I killed you,you just don't know it yet
+18|6857|birmingham,uk
ok let me put it simple i hope the usa keep being a all big and badass like you 1t to be because at the end of the day it comes down to the army you got and the usa has got a big army and all the good guns but to get that you got to pay for it and guess what you are you are getting taxed to high hell and back so you keep paying all that money/tax just so you can say usa rule

o and btw ENGLAND RULES
Widow_Warrior
Member
+7|6731|SOUTH ENGLAND

CLEVERLITTLETROJAN wrote:

ok let me put it simple i hope the usa keep being a all big and badass like you 1t to be because at the end of the day it comes down to the army you got and the usa has got a big army and all the good guns but to get that you got to pay for it and guess what you are you are getting taxed to high hell and back so you keep paying all that money/tax just so you can say usa rule

o and btw ENGLAND RULES
HELL YEAH .... WHAT HE ^^ SAID
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6950|67.222.138.85

CLEVERLITTLETROJAN wrote:

ok let me put it simple i hope the usa keep being a all big and badass like you 1t to be because at the end of the day it comes down to the army you got and the usa has got a big army and all the good guns but to get that you got to pay for it and guess what you are you are getting taxed to high hell and back so you keep paying all that money/tax just so you can say usa rule

o and btw ENGLAND RULES
Not a single period, no capitalization, nothing to do with the posted topic, highly provacative, and ignorant to boot. Please people, this is debate and serious talk, go over to BF2 - Chatter for this stuff.
xGBlitzkrieg
The Lazy Genius
+14|6779|USA, CA

Flecco wrote:

I've seen so many Americans on this forum bring up the war of independance and they are quite proud of it. With reason I suppose. It also seems that many of you think that the US of A would have won the war without French support and/or if the British weren't already fighting another war at the time. So I just wanted to point out that the British army along with the Canadian militia burned down Washington D.C. This was after an American president thought that invading Canada might be a smart thing to do. Is the War of 1812 taught in the US of A? Is it widely known that the US of A has been invaded before?
We won our independence with the help of the French, Without them it wouldn't have been possible to finish the battle, however the american  people fought the majority of the war with very little help from anyone, and then the french showed up just in time to give the British armies a final push and ended the conflict.  Before we gained our independence we were british territory with british citzens and they fought back not the US of A it wasn't a country till after the conflict was over! So you are all wrong you got beat by your own damn people, becuase the monarchy (The worst way to run a country) who kept everyone pissed off at something, or someone! You just remeber this whoever wins the conflict writes the history and thats why there is so much that will never be agreed upon.

Anyway how does the arson that took place in D.C in 1812 have anything to do with the war of independence?
Now i do believe that was a good way to keep our new found country in check!

On the topic about our army and the money it takes to fund it! The average american will never bare the brunt of of our current debt, its familes like mine the upper and middle classes  that will pay for it. We have funded this country for as long as it has exsisted and the  lower middle and lower class will hopefully never get a major increase in taxes! I will always be in the highest tax bracket and will gladly support the funding of this country!

The current tax brackets of USA
Lower
    * 10%: from $0 to $7,550
    * 15%: from $7,551 to $30,650
Middle
    * 25%: from $30,651 to $74,200
    * 28%: from $74,201 to $154,800
Upper
    * 33%: from $154,801 to $336,550
    * 35%: $336,551 and above
Stags
Member
+26|6899
Hmm... noticing how this topic has gotten off topic, I decided not to read it all.  I am sure that many people have stated that others need to read more about history from all view points before making their opinion.

The burning of Washington D.C. only occured because the defence of Washington was done very poorly.  Although we do have to remember that the British army afterwards was torn apart by a storm.  One soldier wrote that is seemed like the hand of god had come down to earth.

Also, the US invasion of Canada was done horribly, the communication broke down.  Taking into account what the British had there, it would have been a loss for them.

We have the battle of baltimore, inwhich the British thought it would be another Washington D.C. but met well defended positions and a very organized defence.

In addition, we have to remember that the War of 1812 was in large part of British and French (although the French backed down after the XYZ Affair) interferring w/ our merchant ships.

Then there are the sea battles, American Frigets where the best of their class, they couldn't take on the British Ships of the Line but against any ship comprable to their size they would win.

Finally, we must remember that the burning of the nations capital doesn't mean that you have defeated that nation.  It doesn't work that way, although that was the prevailing thought that people believe.  If it is anything about Americans is that you can burn our capital down or destroy our pride and joy but that doesn't mean we will stop fighting.  The War of 1812 was a dumb war for the British (yes they invaded first, caputing fort in the north, Fort Detriot being one of them), they already had too much on their hands.  Also, the French wanted our help, but we said no because were currenlty fighting the British.

~~~In war never fight to many battles at once~~~ Also, never fight the same enemy to many times, for they'll learn your tactics~~~
Widow_Warrior
Member
+7|6731|SOUTH ENGLAND
Im Surprised The French Helped Anyone , As They Are Known For Being Cowards
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6793|Southeastern USA

Widow_Warrior wrote:

Im Surprised The French Helped Anyone , As They Are Known For Being Cowards
can't wait to go and ask for directions to the surrender museum
manitobapaintballa
Member
+32|6862

USARANGER01 wrote:

hey, um, does anyone remember when britian was getting their asses kicked in WWII then we came in and saved them?? and u cant say u were doing good by urself, because almost every single piece of military equiptment u had during the battle of britian, and almost all the food and supplies u had was comming directually from us
no britan was in a tight spot but america didn't rescue em you didn't join till you got slaped in the face by japan yes you did help but don't go and say that you did most of the work

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard