Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack
And I never said Canadians can't fight. In college I did a report on the Royal Newfoundland Regt. of which my G-Mothers cousin fought and died with during WWI. It was a great report (If I must say) and I got an A. It talked about the dedication and unwavering bravery during the Battle of Beaumont-Hammel in the Somme. My favorite quote from the British General was...
"... it's assault failed because dead men can advance no further."
The fighting capabilities and spirit of Canadian soldiers is not a target here.
Then what's with the "Weak" comment eh?
It is accepted that the burning of Washington was in retaliation for the burning of York. *** for tat and all's fair in war.
Well the whole point was that with given resources, we can get things done very much in the same manner as you guys..... just a little differently and like a whole mafia family situation where the whole family gets involved.... and we got plenty of room for family to stay over if they wish..... which if they were smart in the winter, they won't, because the only place they'll be able to stay in up in the artic.... fun fun...
From what I have read was they were dispatched from Bermuda and landed at the Chesapeake.
Ah, from what I read, they were dispatched from there, did their stuff in the Chesapeake campaign and well:
George Cockburn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (external - login to view)
"Cockburn played a major role in the War of 1812 as second in command to Admiral Sir John Borlase Warren to the end of March 1814 and then to Warren's successor, Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane for the rest of the war. He cruised relentlessly up and down the Chesapeake Bay and other parts of the Atlantic coast in 1813 and 1814, seizing American shipping, disrupting commerce, and raiding the ports. In the Chesapeake, Cockburn was responsible for carrying out government instructions to encourage the emigration of the enslaved Black population. In addition he implemented Cochrane's own plan of recruiting a Corps of Colonial Marines from among the Black refugees. The most important of Cockburn's actions was the capture and burning of Washington on 24 August 1814 as an advisor to Major General Robert Ross."
bassically from what I gathered, he went all along the Atlantic Coast on various other missions, but was sen the order to go into Washington, from the previous link:
"On August 24, 1814, the advance guard of British troops made a march to Capitol Hill; they were too few in number to occupy the city, so General Robert Ross intended to eliminate as much of it as possible. He sent a party under a flag of truce to agree to terms, but they were attacked by partisans from a house at the corner of Maryland Avenue, Constitution Avenue, and Second Street NE. This was to be the only resistance the soldiers met. The house was burned, and the Union Flag was raised above Washington....."
and goes on with more details on what occured after they got to the white house....
but anyways, it sounded to me that he did a mission on Canada's behalf. *shrugs*
Burning Washington was not the sole action of the Chesapeake Campaign, it was the first. The same troops that burned the White House boarded their ships and moved on to Baltimore where they were beaten and forced to retreat back to their ships and left the United States.
Well that goes along with the above about having too few to occupy Washington, later on in the link, they talk about also being smashed by a huricane that also damaged their ships.
But anyways, I never said it was the sole action, as you said it was the first of the campaign..... I never said anything about being the entire campaign.... I just said they acomplished their mission of going into Washington, burning the place and leaving, read further in the link and it explains it pretty well.
As the same US Forces that burned York where eventually turned back from Canada so was the same for the British troops that burned Washington.
That's all I'm saying.... we ain't weak, and yes you clarified above about the military, but what did you mean about the weak comment?
Usually when we all get into these topics of comparison, it ends up on the military force comparisons, so one can only assume you may have been refering to that as being weak.... I dunno, I can't read your mind all the time, sometimes I can only guess.
But losses do not always determine the outcome of a war or battle. The US lost more men during the Revolution than the British did. Did we lose?
No.... you guys gained something in that.... there wasn't anything really gained in the 1812 for either side, except one side lossed more lives.
Everything went right back to the way it was and the British toyed with the idea of getting concessions but when it was drawn out for them that although they were successful in some battles their invasions were all repulsed... including the invasion that did originate from Canada and may have contained Canadian Militia.
The US started the war because it was being pushed around by the British, particularly on the high seas with the pressing of US sailors. The US had a very small navy and Canada was the only place to strike at British interests. In the end the war was just as costly for the British to continue as it was for the US. There was no surrender, it was a cease fire and everything went back to the way it was.
Indeed, which would explain Nova Scotia's history of ship building, etc.... lots of "British Loyalist" heritage around here.... along with Scottish of course.
But Like I said, I was merely nit picking
Well when some big mouth likens the US to a "fat smelly kid" I am sure you do not expect me to lay up on that. You know me by now.
We like to vent and drink a lot too!
Oh I know how you'd respond.... I just think the words could have been chosen a bit better
I could a handled fat smelly kid and not have to pull the weak card...... man.... that was harsh..... getting all misty eyed now, geez.