Guest Peeves Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) http://ca.news.yahoo.com/war-1812-important-because-kept-u-government-snooki-090017088.html "A new survey suggests Canadians and Americans have vastly divergent attitudes towards the border war that broke out in 1812 and bumbled along for three years." Fortunately we burnt their capitol House and saved our beavers. Icon added for AW... Edited February 15, 2012 by Peeves Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Fortunately we burnt their capitol House and saved our beavers. I was under the impression the British burnt down the Capitol House Quote
Guest Peeves Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I was under the impression the British burnt down the Capitol House I consider myself a distant relative. It was my bic that they flicked... Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I was under the impression the British burnt down the Capitol House Not and once of Limey or Frog in this one, I'm guessing. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest American Woman Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/war-1812-important-because-kept-u-government-snooki-090017088.html "A new survey suggests Canadians and Americans have vastly divergent attitudes towards the border war that broke out in 1812 and bumbled along for three years." Fortunately we burnt their capitol House and saved our beavers. The U.S. never wanted your beavers - that wasn't the objective of the war. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 As mentioned, popular opinion aside, this war was a draw. However, it did set off warning bells in London that the border needed to be fixed and peaceful. Canada couldn't handle another invasion. That it took another 50+ years to get serious about this was typical complacency...taking almost 2 years after the US Civil War to 'make' Canada. The huge, restless Union Army was ideal for manifesting a destiny or two, it seems. Our natives were LUCKY. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) Didn't this start because U.S was selling weapons to both Britain & France during the Napoleanic Wars? Thus turning the British against them Edited February 13, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Guest American Woman Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 As mentioned, popular opinion aside, this war was a draw. However, it did set off warning bells in London that the border needed to be fixed and peaceful. Canada couldn't handle another invasion. That it took another 50+ years to get serious about this was typical complacency...taking almost 2 years after the US Civil War to 'make' Canada. The huge, restless Union Army was ideal for manifesting a destiny or two, it seems. Our natives were LUCKY. It was a draw - everyone ended up with what they started out with; yet it was successful for the U.S. in that the objectives were met - the interference the U.S. faced in trade ended after the war (though whether or not that was a result of the war in debatable), the Britain ceased to take American sailors prisoner and released those they had taken, and the British no longer supported the Indians in the wars in our Northwest frontier. The war wasn't about taking land, but about asserting our sovereignty and independence. So the objective of the U.S. wasn't to annex Canadian land and the objective of the British wasn't to reclaim the colonies. Everyone ended up with what they started with, so it was a draw in that sense - but as I said, the U.S. objectives were realized after the war. Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 the Britain ceased to take American sailors prisoner and released those they had taken Wasn't the smartest idea for U.S to stab Britain in the back and do business with it's main enemy France That is why they were taking American sailors hostage... and I don't blame them Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Didn't this start because U.S was selling weapons to both Britain & France during the Napoleanic Wars? Thus turning the British against them Britain was pressing US sailors and stopping US trade w/ France by force if I recall. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Britain was pressing US sailors and stopping US trade w/ France by force if I recall. Which makes sense because whatever U.S was selling France was being used in the war against the British Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Which makes sense because whatever U.S was selling France was being used in the war against the British France and the US have a long history of mutual aid. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 France and the US have a long history of mutual aid. Yes, they helped U.S gain independence from Britain I think, but you don't poke the bear unless you want to get mauled Quote
Guest American Woman Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Britain was pressing US sailors and stopping US trade w/ France by force if I recall. Yes. The impressment of American sailors from our ships was a major cause of tension with Britain. Quote
Argus Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/war-1812-important-because-kept-u-government-snooki-090017088.html "A new survey suggests Canadians and Americans have vastly divergent attitudes towards the border war that broke out in 1812 and bumbled along for three years." Fortunately we burnt their capitol House and saved our beavers. Americans aren't taught much history, and Hollywood hasn't done anything on the War of 1812 because it was mostly seen as a failure. Not to mention any number of American armies and generals humiliated themselves through incompetence and lack of fighting spirit. The war ended without them gaining any ground. Sure, the British stopped impressing American sailors and intercepting ships destined for France, but that obviously would have happened anyway since the war with France was over. And when you're fighting someone much smaller than you (Canada) a stalemate can't be seen as a heroic national victory. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Yes, they helped U.S gain independence from Britain I think, but you don't poke the bear unless you want to get mauled I imagine those were soon-to-be Canada's words exactly on April 10th 1865. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest American Woman Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Americans aren't taught much history, and Hollywood hasn't done anything on the War of 1812 because it was mostly seen as a failure. Wrong. On both accounts. The war ended without them gaining any ground. Sure, the British stopped impressing American sailors and intercepting ships destined for France, but that obviously would have happened anyway since the war with France was over. And when you're fighting someone much smaller than you (Canada) a stalemate can't be seen as a heroic national victory. Gaining ground wasn't an objective of the war, and we weren't "fighting Canada," we were fighting the British. Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) I read one of the reasons was because "The British military support for American Indians who were offering armed resistance to the expansion of the American frontier to the Northwest" Isn't that kind of what the U.S did during the Revolutionary War? They tried to get the French in Canada to fight with them Edited February 13, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
Argus Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Wrong. On both accounts. Gaining ground wasn't an objective of the war, and we weren't "fighting Canada," we were fighting the British. That's so much nonsense. Your anger was supposedly about how the British navy was treating you, so the proper thing to do would be to build up a big navy and challenge them. Instead you invaded Canada - and did a ridiculously poor job of it. You also only dared do that because 95% of the British military was busy with the French. The instant the war with France ended the US hurriedly negotiated peace. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I imagine those were soon-to-be Canada's words exactly on April 10th 1865. I don't understand, are you talking about Jack Miner or the U.S Civil War? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I don't understand, are you talking about Jack Miner or the U.S Civil War? That Union Army was looking West and North...lookin' for something to do...lol. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 That Union Army was looking West and North...lookin' for something to do...lol. They would have been repelled for a 4th time if they did Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 They would have been repelled for a 4th time if they did The Union Army as of 1865? Nope...we'd have lost horribly. Ask the Rebs...a far better Army than we could have ever mustered at the time. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Basically War of 1812 was a sideshow for the Napoleanic Wars in Europe The British could not lose to the French so they made US sailors fight for them, desperately searched American ships for deserters, forced the U.S to stop trade with the French through illegal means all in their effort to beat the French Don't we all feel used Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 The Union Army as of 1865? Nope...we'd have lost horribly. Ask the Rebs...a far better Army than we could have ever mustered at the time. The British were still in control then.. the U.S wouldn't have wanted another war with the British Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.