Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The British defeat in America -
Herc the Merc    5/29/2007 8:27:07 PM
Perhaps one of the few major wars lost by Britain and that too in its own territory with vast ties by blood. How is the American war potrayed in English history books-- a civil war, liberation war, anarchy???? Its perhaps odd that Britain lost America, one of its few territories that it had connections with in bloodline. Even Britain and India parted ways with a handshake and cup of tea. The Yanks broke the tea crates in Boston Harbor and had bloody good fight.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39   NEXT
Pseudonym       7/19/2007 8:14:00 AM
"Its an interesting war in that sense as the reasons for "civil" war shifted as part of the warmaking process. Keeping the union together was achieved by using emancipation as a supplementary tool of political opportunity (even though it was an issue in its own right)."

I would research Henry Clay as he was right in the thick of the tensions leading to the Civil War, and in fact help stalled its beginning.  (Not to mention he is an interesting figure in American History, look up the "Corrupt Bargain" if you want to see more)

The Missouri Compromise, The Nullification Crisis, and the Compromise of 1850 are all integral parts of the cause of war. among others.

To truly see how the war started you must ignore Lincoln and move backwards in time to the beginning of the inevitable split.  The sides were drawn up long before Lincoln was around.

"while on a spot of FS bashing (his claims about Napoleonic France) I came across this one.... Wacheren Campaign... 40000 Brits across to Holland on a waste of time....  "

I would hazard a guess they used less ships during this crossing.

I have a feeling you are right about taking them in smaller numbers on a few trips though, for both the crossing from Halifax and this one to Holland.
 
Quote    Reply

tigertony    Paul,don't act like Mrs Paul!   7/19/2007 9:35:13 PM




  What matter's Paul is that both sides of that Atlantic "Freed Them!".



 



  And there may have been some in America who called themselves an "Irish American" who paid US Dollars to kill English and Irish alike "But I am not one of them,nor are they would carry out such acts, and call themselves an American!". Oh and btw,the Ant had it coming,least i add some humor,instead of cave troll,lol!



 



                                                                             tigertony



 



                                                                 




that was the by product of the war.

you misrepresented the north's reasons for the war by claiming it was to free the slaves. (presumably you did know the real reasons as it is part of your own short history....   :-)  , possibly to put yourself on a morale highground for some reasons.....

simple fact is that the north did not want the south to leave the union and used force to stop them....

 

Paul


 Paul i think you forget that Mr Lincoln never owned a slave,nor did US Grant!. And despite your completly unfounded opinion "Most in the Union,or Northern States did not own themselves a slave either!. So to say that all those who had started that "Underground Railway" did not join the "North versus South" is to know "Nothing about America". Now why don't you stop taking that morale high ground and explain this about slavery
 
  http://www.heretical.com/British/hpuklogo.gif" width="30%" align=right border=0 valign="top">


http://www.heretical.com/British/facgirls.gif" width=533 align=center>



The Other Side of Slavery


Long before the first Europeans set foot in Africa, native kings and chieftains had traded in slaves. There were white captives held in African slave markets, people who had been kidnapped by pirates during raids on the coasts of England, Ireland and France. These slaves were very highly valued by North African chieftains. The gold mining industry on the Gold Coast, modern-day Ghana, was also a magnet for the African slave trade, which continued long after the European nations agreed to its abolition. White slaves were still held in North Africa as late as 1626.

Around the 1470's, the Portuguese began to play a middleman role in the slave trade, between the various African kingdoms. They imported slaves to the Gold Coast from Benin, Kongo and Angola. But after 1540 the Portuguese involvement was curtailed when the Songhai Empire of Western Sudan increased the number of slaves it could trade with the Gold Coast merchants. The desperate need for labour in the gold mines led the Fanti and Asant of the Gold Coast to acquire their slaves in exchange for gold.

The slave trade in Africa was dominated by strong states such as Akwamu and Oyu on the Gold Coast. The Ekba of Calaba controlled the marketing and trading networks of other areas of the continent, and the Aro trade

 
Quote    Reply

paul1970    Tigger   7/20/2007 4:10:43 AM

you are back to your British bashing.... must have gone to visit that Mel Gibson class for a refresher....
 
all I point out that your claim to have launched the war to free the slaves was wrong. if you actually belive that was the reason then you must have gone to a very strange school where they give you special glasses with those red lenses in them. emancipation came after the declarations for war and the reasons behind them.
 
I don't really care that Lincon didn't own slaves... nobody in Britain legally owned slaves in the 1860s because we outlawed it in 1807. the fact that the US was over 50 years behind Britain speaks for itself.
 
as for my knowledge of US history.... from your observations on the W1812 and now ACW... I seem to know more about the military aspects than you do.
 
Paul
 
 
Quote    Reply

tigertony    Paul,don't act like Mrs Paul!   7/20/2007 6:12:51 AM
  Paul i will let your own comments on this post prove all the points i need about that fine" British Education System".
 
  Yes it seem's to me the only thing your schools teach is "Bigot,Denial,Forget,and Pass The Buck!". ROTLMAO!
 
                                               Nuff Said ,and again ,ROTLMAO!
 
                                                                  tigertony
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       7/20/2007 8:21:23 AM

  Paul i will let your own comments on this post prove all the points i need about that fine" British Education System".

 

  Yes it seem's to me the only thing your schools teach is "Bigot,Denial,Forget,and Pass The Buck!". ROTLMAO!

 

                                               Nuff Said ,and again ,ROTLMAO!

 

                                                                  tigertony


kindly point out which of my comments prove any point relevent to the thread that you have made or anything about the British education system?
you are avoiding the simple facts that your posts on 1812 and now ACW were factually incorrect. when you cannot counter the truth you go off topic like when you diverted off about Ireland.... even there you showed you know sod all about their history as well and posted more anti British tosh after declaring that you couldn't find anything about Irish incursions on Britain.
 
I am very sorry that you cannot be bothered to check your facts before posting but I put that down to your overwhelming desire to spout your anti British biggoted drivel rather than get anywhere near the truth. if you are indeed as ignorant of the facts as your posts seem to indicate then I am doubly sorry for you and at a loss other than to point you towards a good library. a good starting point for anything military history would be the publisher Osprey where you will find topics covered from before 3000BC right up to the present.
 
but if you cannot be bothered to be factual or debate calmly then keep your biggoted views to yourself or take them to a forum more suited to them.
 
Paul
 
Quote    Reply

tigertony    Mrs Pauls Fish Sticks   7/20/2007 7:40:38 PM
  Hey Pauli funny that you have not actually posted 1 single post from any nation or source anywhere, yet continue to state your BS as the gospel of American or British history,now put up or shut up!
 
  Hey Pauli why did those Grey Dogs wish to leave the Union in the 1st place? Well now because of an ever growing movement in the Northern States to abolish slavery in the Union!. And Lincoln, who understood that a nation divided could not long stand, would of allowed slavery to preserve our nation!. However,those Grey Dogs knew that with the North pushing more and more to free those slaves, and having far more political pull and population "Slavery was soon to be doomed, and thus the Souths economy right along with it!". So you, as i already stated, better get your sorry bigoted butt back to school,period and end of story!. Only an idiot, who knows nothing of America at that time, would say that slavery had nothing to do with the American Civil War!. So you get 1st prize for "Idiot of the week!".
 
                                                                             Have A Nice Evening!
 
                                                                                   tigertony
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970    to Mel's whipping boy   7/23/2007 6:23:26 AM

  Hey Pauli funny that you have not actually posted 1 single post from any nation or source anywhere, yet continue to state your BS as the gospel of American or British history,now put up or shut up!

 

  Hey Pauli why did those Grey Dogs wish to leave the Union in the 1st place? Well now because of an ever growing movement in the Northern States to abolish slavery in the Union!. And Lincoln, who understood that a nation divided could not long stand, would of allowed slavery to preserve our nation!. However,those Grey Dogs knew that with the North pushing more and more to free those slaves, and having far more political pull and population "Slavery was soon to be doomed, and thus the Souths economy right along with it!". So you, as i already stated, better get your sorry bigoted butt back to school,period and end of story!. Only an idiot, who knows nothing of America at that time, would say that slavery had nothing to do with the American Civil War!. So you get 1st prize for "Idiot of the week!".

 

                                                                             Have A Nice Evening!

 

                                                                                   tigertony


what do you want posting? you are the prat who is making false statements...
 
W1812
  "Yep that's a good one!. I would suggest you study up on those Hessians and their inept commander!. And i doubt that the mighty British Empire took it lightly that they lost not once, but twice, against anyone!. All American's should be quite proud that our poor,frozen,and tiny peasent army and navy did something in Britains history never done before "Defeating them 2 times in less then a century, and replacing their dreams of empire with one far greater!""
 
I countered this and asked you to provide evidence of the US defeating Britian in the 1812 war... you of course had none so went off on your boggoted drivel.

ACW
  "Well now if i remember "The USA" and some men named "Lincoln and US Grant"  fought a "Civil War To Free Them!" and "The Mighty British Empire"  who "Had Already Built Theirs On The Back Of Those Slaves" almost sent ships to "Kill Those Men Who Freed Them!"."
 
I pointed out that this was not the reason the north made war and the reason why Britain nearly intervened ie the Trent affair . you then went off on biggoted drivel yet again...
 
 
I refer you to buying a book because getting your history from as Mel Gibson's madrassa is making you look like a right muppet.
 
 
and well done for abolishing slavery.... 50 years later than Europe but hey we are used to the US being late for important dates.
 
the US did not defeat Britain in the W1812 and the North did not go to war with the South to end slavery . not one person has backed you up on either of these things and I doubt you can find a reputable source to back up either claim.
 
the republicans opposed the expansion of slavery but the war was to stop secession not about freeing slaves..  if you want a good book on the ACW then try Professor James McPherson.
 
Paul
 
Quote    Reply

tigertony    Mrs Pauls beer battered fish   7/23/2007 6:08:05 PM
  Well now you have already been crowned "Idiot of the week" so i guess your continued biggotness is leaving us no choice but to nominate you this week as Monty Python's "Twit of the week" instead!. Oh and Pauli "The day you know more then me about real history,politics,or warfare, is the day i will shoot myself and end it all!". You really should try reading a book besides Mein Kampf, and then perhap's you would not burn all the rest,or appease Hitler, and sign papers declaring "Peace In Our Time". So again,enjoy your prize and nomination to "Twit of the week"
 
                                                                    Have A Nice Evening!
 
                                                                              tigertony
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       7/24/2007 4:47:08 AM

  Well now you have already been crowned "Idiot of the week" so i guess your continued biggotness is leaving us no choice but to nominate you this week as Monty Python's "Twit of the week" instead!. Oh and Pauli "The day you know more then me about real history,politics,or warfare, is the day i will shoot myself and end it all!". You really should try reading a book besides Mein Kampf, and then perhap's you would not burn all the rest,or appease Hitler, and sign papers declaring "Peace In Our Time". So again,enjoy your prize and nomination to "Twit of the week"

 

                                                                    Have A Nice Evening!

 

                                                                              tigertony



again.... you avoid the subject....
 
you made inaccurate comments on W1812 and ACW. you are avoiding this point. why? because you are not interested in the truth and are more interested in being a biggot? you were wrong on both these subjects. stay on topic.
 
you are now having a go at me... why (trying to shift the focus away from your own lack of facts or biggotry????) what are you actually accusing me of? and provide examples.
 
 I have never read Mein Kampf... presume you are having a go at British for not stopping Hitler.... so I point out that we decalred war in 1939 and the US did their best to stay out of it and were only forced in by Germany declaring war on you in dec 1941...
 
I don't know your level of knowledge on the rest of history, politics or warfare and can only base my estimate on your posts on this thread. here you are untruthful (ie post comments that are factually incorrect and do not aknowledge this once pointed out to you) and post inflamitory remarks that have nothing to do with the thread (your anti British biggorty, which you did sort of appologise for and then carried on doing it.... duh!!!). please point out where else you post????? so I can see if you do actually have any decent level of knowledge on the subjects and then we will know if you are an intelligent biggot or an ignorant biggot.
 
oh, do you need help loading your gun? best use a large calibre as there is a good chance that you will miss a vital organ if shooting yourself in the head.
 
 
Paul
 
 
Quote    Reply

tigertony    Mrs Pauls Deep Battered Fluke   7/24/2007 6:32:07 PM
 Well now let's see hear i said this below:
 
 "Hey Pauli why did those Grey Dogs wish to leave the Union in the 1st place? Well now because of an ever growing movement in the Northern States to abolish slavery in the Union!. And Lincoln, who understood that a nation divided could not long stand, would of allowed slavery to preserve our nation!. However,those Grey Dogs knew that with the North pushing more and more to free those slaves, and having far more political pull and population "Slavery was soon to be doomed, and thus the Souths economy right along with it!". So you, as i already stated, better get your sorry bigoted butt back to school,period and end of story!. Only an idiot, who knows nothing of America at that time, would say that slavery had nothing to do with the American Civil War!. So you get 1st prize for "Idiot of the week!".
 
 Now Mr Moore,or better known as Twit, said this:
 
 "and the North did not go to war with the South to end slavery . not one person has backed you up on either of these things and I doubt you can find a reputable source to back up either claim."
 
  Well now 1st Mr Python: Who attacked whom 1st? I guess you missed that in McPhersons book?
 
  Now since i asked you why the South wished to leave the North, and actually gave the real reasons for the attack on the Union,and you continue to preach the gospel of McPherson,i will attempt again to prove what i have already stated about you, and your lack of vision,use of biggotry,and complete incompetance of historical knowledge:
 
  

Declaration of Causes
of Seceding States


  • Georgia
  • Mississippi
  • South Carolina



  • Georgia

    [Copied by Justin Sanders from the Official Records, Ser IV, vol 1, pp. 81-85.]

    The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of t

  •  
    Quote    Reply
    PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39   NEXT



     Latest
     News
     
     Most
     Read
     
     Most
     Commented
     Hot
     Topics