the revolutionary war from the brits point of view

[Katahu]

In conclusion, the All-Powerful Red Coats lost the war anyways to a bunch of farmers.

[Hagar]

In conclusion, the All-Powerful Red Coats lost the war anyways to a bunch of farmers.

Did you even read anything from my link?

the fact that it was a civil war (perhaps 100,000 loyalists fled abroad at its end), and that it was also a world war (the Americans could scarcely have won without French help) - are often forgotten.  

[Woodlouse2002]

If Hollywood has taught us anything then it is that the revolutionary war was won almost single handedly by that notable american hero Mel Gibson and his motly bunch of militia in a fight against the wicked english who murdered his son.


Or it could be said that we let America go because they were starting to cost Britain money when the policy of the empire was that it should pay for its self.

Or any of the other reasons posted above.

You choose.

[H]

Did you even read anything from my link?

Katahu could equally ask if you read it to the end:

Although the war was not formally ended until the Treaty of Versailles in 1783, it was clear after Yorktown that the British, with their world-wide preoccupations, no longer had any realistic chance of winning. There had, however, been some moments that might have led to victory....in this sort of war the British were in any case eventually likely to lose, unless they could strike the patriots such a telling blow as to win the war at a stroke, and it is hard to see how this could have been achieved. Conversely, the patriots had always been likely to win, provided they struggled on and avoided outright defeat.

Of course, in his comparison of George Washington to Vo Nguyen Giap, Britain is the U.S. and its (at the time) colonies (vying as the United States) VietNam.
P.S. There was no contention about these being "British" colonies -- that's its only real tie to the term revolution.

[Hagar]

Katahu could equally ask if you read it to the end:

I actually read the whole thing carefully & found it very interesting. I learned a lot of things that I previously didn't know as I only had a brief idea of what this was all about. I'm much more interested in the American Civil War & know far more about it. I visited the Civil War museum at Charlotte, NC during one of my trips to the US & was fascinated by the history of the whole area. Unfortunately I didn't have time to visit some of the battle sites we saw signposted along the way. It was sobering to think that this bitter war took place comparatively recently compared with the civil wars in my country. So recently that there are many surviving photographs taken at the time. I'm not sure if this is the first time that cameras were used to record a war.

While my comments were not intended to be taken too seriously, Rottydaddy confirms my suspicions that this is somewhat romanticised in the US, as so many of these things are nowadays. Nothing wrong with that or celebrating the victory over big bad Britain & the Redcoats as long as you appreciate the facts behind it.

It's hardly surprising that some of the original settlers would have liked to sever their ties with Britain as this was the whole reason they came to the New World in the first place.

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

In my humble opinion Doug the history books should be rewritten so that folks get the truth and not the hollywood version.

Of course that may not sell or make many movies LOL

The truth rarely does.

A lot of people do not know that a good many of the British Regiments serving in the colonies at that time were Colonial Regiments (India) for example and hired German units.
A large part of the Regular British Army was fighting in Europe against one of the worse dictators of all time, the little fat fellow "Napoleon".
Thank God he got his but kicked by one of the Greatest Generals of all time.

In conclusion, the All-Powerful Red Coats lost the war anyways to a bunch of farmers.

[myshelf]

the 1769 born napoleon must have REALLY thrown a fit at the british regular army for them to be held in europe while the american colonies started their revolution in 1774

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

Your absolutely right...I have my evil people mixed up. LOL

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug
P.S. They have so many dam wars over there it is hard to keep track of.  I am still waiting for the 100 years war to end.

[Hagar]

Maybe you got confused with this Doug. http://www.answers.com/topic/war-of-1812
[quote]War of 1812, armed conflict between the United States and Great Britain, 1812

[FLYING_TRUCKER]

You are absolutely right Doug!

It is strange years after the American Revolution they had a Civil War.

[WebbPA]

You have never heard of the War of 1812?

England, being pissed off at having lost the Revolutionary War, made another attempt to retake America.

The Redcoats succeded in burning the White House, giving rise to the popular rumor that it was renamed such to cover up the fire damage.

And Andrew Jackson would roll over in his grave if you ever suggested that America's wars with England ended by 1779.

[beefhole]

So recently that there are many surviving photographs taken at the time. I'm not sure if this is the first time that cameras were used to record a war.

It was

England, being pissed off at having lost the Revolutionary War, made another attempt to retake America.

Umm... not exactly.

President Thomas Jefferson, attempting to force the warring European nations to respect America's neutral rights, enacted the embargo act in 1807.  It barred any ships from exporting goods to foerign nations from American ports.  This also effectively ended imports (there were two more acts which weakened the Embargo Act passed in the last days of Jefferson's presidency, not necissarily worth mentioning).

The War of 1812 occured largely because of a change in philosophies when Madison took office.  Jefferson believed that as soon as the Napoleonic wars ended, the European powers would let America alone.  Madison, on the other hand, believed that the continual violations of America's neutrality were part of a bigger plan by Britain to knock America off as a trading rival.

While all this was going on, the European powers simply laughed at America's idealism.  They believed that when superpowers were at war, lesser nations (such as America) should choose a side and be done with it, not ramble about neutral rights and morality.  In it's first few years, the Embargo Act did more damage to America then to any European nations, which quickly found new markets in Canada and South America.

Eventually, Madison and the republican controlled house and senate would stand no more.  They believed that a swift invasion of British Canada would bring victory.  Ironically, as America declared war, Britain had finally decided to give in and reopen trade.

The Redcoats succeded in burning the White House, giving rise to the popular rumo that it was renamed such to cover up the fire damage.

True, but irrelevant.  Madison was back in the White House two days later after the Brits were defeated at Baltimore.  The burning never served any strategic purpose.

btw, I'm taking an AP US History course rigth now, we do 500 years of history in extreme detail, so I know this stuff pretty well

[WebbPA]

I love revisionist history.  I hope you don't make the unforgivable mistake of questioning your teachers - I see you are from the US so their bias is "the US is always wrong".

It's short notice but this page is about as good a source of War of 1812 info as anything else.

[beefhole]

I love revisionist history.  I hope you don't make the unforgivable mistake of questioning your teachers - I see you are from the US so their bias is "the US is always wrong".

It's short notice but this page is about as good a source of War of 1812 info as anything else.

I don't get it.  Not sure if the link was meant for me, but everything on that page (and I mean everything) we've covered.

[Hagar]

You have never heard of the War of 1812?

Of course I've heard of 1812 when Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia & failed, proving once again that people fight hardest when defending their homeland. Hitler should have taken note of this when he repeated the mistake in 1941 & earlier during 1940 against Britain. The Napleonic Wars mainly concerned the balance of power in Europe & I simply never realised America's involvement in it. According to that article America & Britain were technically at war. Apart from the Civil War of 1861-1865 I never learned a lot of American history. I very much doubt that most Americans know much about British history.

I think Hollywood (meaning the entertainment industry as a whole) is as much to blame as "revisionist" history for the distorted views on historical events so many people hold today. Add to that the wartime propaganda that is still believed by many to be true & you have a situation which often makes it very difficult to reveal the facts. As I mentioned before, that Piltdown Man hoax made me very sceptical at an early age & since then I question everything I've been told by so-called experts.