The British apologize for celebrating 1814 White House burning anniversary @ Embassy.


EagleSmack
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

The Queen was born to a Scottish mother in Mayfair.

The Brits are Ruled by the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.


Quote:

Two weeks after the peace treaty had been signed and Britain had already won the war.

The fact that two Yanks have mentioned the "azz kicking in New Orleans" to me in the same thread on the same day is further proof that Yanks are taught revisionist "history" in school and genuinely believe eveything they have been told.

Peace treaty and the Birts won. LOL. It meant we'd stop kicking your azz and sinking your ships.

And boy... New Orleans was probably the most thorough azz kick the Brits received EVER. The pride of the Brit Army and famed units of the Napoleonic Wars beat down in the swamps of New Orleans by Kentucky back woodsmen and US Marines!
 
captain morgan
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

I don't think the royals would be too pleased if the Krauts had the audacity to celebrate the Blitz. The Germans have NOTHING to celebrate when it comes to WWII or WWI.


Like it or not, the Germans conquered all of Europe and had the UK quaking in terror... Germany's blitz campaign shook the very foundations of your nation

One small nation that was able to control the Empire that took Britain hundreds of years to build, they did in a matter of a few years
 
Blackleaf
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

The Brits are Ruled by the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

To say that Prince Charles, who has a Greek father and a mother who is half-Scottish, is "German" is just barmy.

Obama is Kenyan, by the way.


Quote:

Peace treaty and the Birts won. LOL. It meant we'd stop kicking your azz and sinking your ships.

And boy... New Orleans was probably the most thorough azz kick the Brits received EVER. The pride of the Brit Army and famed units of the Napoleonic Wars beat down in the swamps of New Orleans by Kentucky back woodsmen and US Marines!

Too little too late, boyo. You won the battle but we'd already won the war.

New Orleans was also a mere minor skirmish compared to other contemporary battles such as Waterloo, and the Yanks then and still today exaggerate its meaning and its significance.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Like it or not, the Germans conquered all of Europe

No, they didn't.

Quote:

and had the UK quaking in terror

And we beat them.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Aug 26th, 2014 at 09:22 AM..
 
EagleSmack
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Like it or not, the Germans conquered all of Europe and had the UK quaking in terror... Germany's blitz campaign shook the very foundations of your nation

One small nation that was able to control the Empire that took Britain hundreds of years to build, they did in a matter of a few years

The interesting part is the English asked the Germans to come to England to rule over them.

WTF? Seriously.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Like it or not, the Germans conquered all of Europe and had the UK quaking in terror... Germany's blitz campaign shook the very foundations of your nation

And they had to be saved by the rest of the Anglo-Allies once again.

Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post



Too little too late, boyo. You won the battle but we'd already won the war.

New Orleans was also a mere minor skirmish compared to other contemporary battles such as Waterloo, and the Yanks then and still today exaggerate its meaning and its significance.


More Brit revisionism to cover up another embarrassing defeat.
 
Blackleaf
#35
Quote:

Germany's blitz campaign shook the very foundations of your nation

Not as much as Britain's bombing campaign of Germany shook the very foundations of that nation. About as many people were killed in the RAF's bombing of Hamburg alone than were killed throughout the whole of Great Britain in the whole of the Blitz.

Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

The interesting part is the English asked the Germans to come to England to rule over them.

That's because when we decided to take all the Catholic scum out of the Line of Succession, Sophia, Electress of Hanover, was the nearest Protestant in the Line of Succession. She, however, died before she could become Queen, so her son, Georg, became George I.

Quote:

And they had to be saved by the rest of the Anglo-Allies once again.

The Yanks and Canadians, as I've already said, had it much easier than Britain and her people in WWII. I'd like to have seen how they would have handled having Nazi Germany just 570 miles away.

Quote:

More Brit revisionism to cover up another embarrassing defeat.

New Orleans was a minor skirmish compared to other, TRUE battles of the day, such as Waterloo.
 
EagleSmack
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

The Yanks and Canadians, as I've already said, had it much easier than Britain and her people in WWII. I'd like to have seen how they would have handled having Nazi Germany just 570 miles away.

Better than you did!



Quote:

New Orleans was a minor skirmish compared to other, TRUE battles of the day, such as Waterloo.

Were the Brits even at Waterloo? The Prussians defeated Napoleon at Waterloo while the Brits sat on their butts... again.

"Give me night... or give me Blucher." - Wellington at Waterloo.

Typical of the Brits... waiting for yet another allied army to come to their rescue.

Geez what a pattern.
 
BaalsTears
#37
The War of 1812 and the Korean War were similar in that each conflict was inconclusive. There were many causes contributing to the hostilities called the War of 1812. Both Britain and America had plans to hamstring the other in North America. America was an expansionist power while Britain was a fearful status quo power. The Americans were not primarily concerned with conquering Canada. Rather, America's objective was to ensure its ability to continue to expand westward. The conquest of British North America would have been icing on the cake. The British were interested in preventing the rise of a new great power in the western hemisphere. They sought to block American expansion at the Mississippi River.

America failed to achieve its secondary objective of conquering Canada. Britain failed in its primary objective of preventing the rise of a new great power in the western hemisphere. However, these objectives were integrally tied to the Napoleonic Wars. Britain feared invasion, and used its trade embargo to weaken the French. However, Britain's trade embargo was unlawful when imposed on a neutral power such as the United States. Britain did commit acts of war against America in enforcing the embargo. Britain did deny America the freedom of the high seas.

With the exceptions of the defense of Ft. McHenry and the Battle of New Orleans, American performance on land was lackluster. However, American conduct of the naval war was inspiring. I recommend Theodore Roosevelt's history on this subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Naval-War-1812.../dp/0375754199

Roosevelt notes that if America had lost the Battle of New Orleans it is unlikely Britain would have observed the strict terms of the Treaty of Ghent. Most scholars agree.

Finally, I would like to observe that in the great sweep of history things don't always turn out as planned or hoped. What importance was North America to Britain when the most popular boy's name in that country today is Mohammed? The British are losing their special identity, and becoming the Yemen of the North Atlantic. Similarly, what importance was Manifest Destiny to America when the US is in the process of becoming a latin american country?
 
Blackleaf
#38
The odd objects looted from Washington DC in 1814


Magazine Monitor
A collection of cultural artefacts
BBC News
29 August 2014


The Burning of Washington in 1814 by British troops, as depicted by Tom Freeman

It's been 200 years since the British burned Washington, but objects looted in 1814 will probably never be returned, writes Tammy Thueringer.

Other than an off-colour tweet and subsequent apology by the British Embassy, the bicentennial of the punitive mission of 1814 that left the US capital in flames has received little attention this week.

The burning was one of the final events of the often-forgotten War of 1812, a conflict which saw the US try and fail to grab bits of Canada and Britain try and fail to blockade the US. British troops torched the White House, Treasury and parts of the Capitol Building in a punitive mission near the end of the war. They also looted what they could, effectively collecting "souvenirs".

After the attack, the Royal Navy sailed to Bermuda with their spoils, included four paintings of King George III and Queen Charlotte, a grandfather clock and President James Madison's personal government receipt book.

Today, the artworks hang in two Bermuda government buildings and the clock is in private hands.



The destruction of Washington was in retaliation for an earlier US attack on the Parliament of Lower Canada at York (now Toronto). The US also looted, taking a royal standard, the first Mace of Ontario, a golden staff used by Upper Canada's Parliament, and a lion statuette, carved out of wood and painted gold.

Today, the standard and lion are just two of the hundreds of "trophies of war" on display at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland.


The wooden lion taken by the US in April 1813 from the Legislature of Upper Canada in York (now Toronto)

The "trophies" in Bermuda and Maryland will probably stay there, at least in part because of the American Civil War-era "Lieber Code".

The US declared that items captured from an enemy in time of war can be kept. The laws only applied to American forces, but other states adopted similar regulations.

Since then, several international laws prohibiting wartime looting have been created, but the original code also remains in effect.


James Madison, president at the time, and the government receipt book looted in 1814

Despite that original code, some of the looted items have made it home.

In 1934, President Franklin Roosevelt ordered the return of the mace and Madison's receipt book was returned to the Library of Congress in 1940.


Scorch marks of the fire are still visible today on the White House as two areas have been left unpainted


But as for the paintings of the British royals, the Americans seem unlikely to press for their return.

BBC News - The odd objects looted from Washington DC in 1814

Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTears View Post

However, Britain's trade embargo was unlawful when imposed on a neutral power such as the United States.

That's debateable.

Also, the French imposed the same embargo on the Yanks. The Yanks just blamed it all on the British, though. Even to this day they still largely ignore the embargos the French placed on them and solely concentrate on the British embargos, which were necessary in our time of war.


Quote:

Britain did commit acts of war against America in enforcing the embargo. Britain did deny America the freedom of the high seas.
?

And America committed acts of war against Britain by trying to invade British colonies.

America was the aggressor in the war of 1812. Now stop the excuses.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

America was the aggressor in the war of 1812. Now stop the excuses.

We don't need to make excuses to client states.
 
Blackleaf
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

We don't need to make excuses to client states.


Just stop it. You were the aggressors in the War of 1812 - and you lost.

By the way, your hero, Tecumseh, was allied to the British and opposed the United States as he didn't want those bloody Yanks encroaching on his tribe's patch.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Aug 30th, 2014 at 07:46 AM..
 
Tecumsehsbones
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Just stop it. You were the aggressors in the War of 1812 - and you lost.

By the way, your hero, Tecumseh, was allied to the British and opposed the United States as he didn't want those bloody Yanks encroaching on his tribe's patch.

Yes, until the cowards betrayed us at Fallen Oaks. We learned. Mostly that the British are faithless cowards. A lesson the Yankees have gotten since then in 1861, 1917, 1942, 1956, 1965, and appeared to actually learn in 2003.
 
Blackleaf
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTears View Post

.The Americans were not primarily concerned with conquering Canada.

They most certainly were. The Yanks wanted to acquire the Northwest Territory, which included a vast swathe of Canada. Indians in that area were opposed to this Yank expanionism, and allied themselves with the British, who were treated far better under British rule than they would be under brutal Yank rule.

Quote:

The British were interested in preventing the rise of a new great power in the western hemisphere.

No, they weren't. The American colonies were not that important. They were minor colonies to the British, compared to colonies like India. There was no indication at the time that the US would become a great power.

Quote:

Britain feared invasion, and used its trade embargo to weaken the French. However, Britain's trade embargo was unlawful when imposed on a neutral power such as the United States. Britain did commit acts of war against America in enforcing the embargo. Britain did deny America the freedom of the high seas.

The Berlin Decree of 1806 forbade French, allied or neutral ships trading with Britain. By this means Napoleon hoped to destroy British trade, disrupt its growing industrial expansion - Britain was on its way to achieving global economic dominance - and diminish its credit.

Great Britain responded with the Orders in Council of 1807 issued 11 November 1807. These forbade French trade with the United Kingdom, its allies, or neutrals (such as the USA), and instructed the Royal Navy to blockade French and allied ports. This order required all shipment to stop in English ports to be checked for military supplies that could have aided France. Ships that did not stop to be checked at English ports were liable to British seizure.

So you can actually blame the French for the British embargo on the USA, because if they had never placed such an embargo on the British in the first place then the British would never have replied in kind with an embargo on the French, which affected the USA.

Of course, most Yanks would never have been taught all this in history lessons.

Also, to say the embargo was "unlawful in international law" is untrue. The Ynaks, of course, tried to CLAIM it was unlawful under international law, but whether it actually was is debateable.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#43
Blaming the French for choices Britain made is an example of the responsibility-dodging that lost you an empire and turned your island into a toilet. Which is actually kinda appropriate, considering its inhabitants are turds.
 
Blackleaf
#44
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Blaming the French for choices Britain made is an example of the responsibility-dodging that lost you an empire and turned your island into a toilet. Which is actually kinda appropriate, considering its inhabitants are turds.

The Berlin Decree of 1806 forbade French, allied or neutral ships trading with Britain. By this means Napoleon hoped to destroy British trade, disrupt its growing industrial expansion - Britain was on its way to achieving global economic dominance - and diminish its credit.

Great Britain responded with the Orders in Council of 1807 issued 11 November 1807. These forbade French trade with the United Kingdom, its allies, or neutrals (such as the USA), and instructed the Royal Navy to blockade French and allied ports. This order required all shipment to stop in English ports to be checked for military supplies that could have aided France. Ships that did not stop to be checked at English ports were liable to British seizure.

So you can actually blame the French for the British embargo on the USA, because if they had never placed such an embargo on the British in the first place then the British would never have replied in kind with an embargo on the French, which affected the USA.

So you CAN blame the French. They started the whole thing in the first place. What did Old Boney expect the British to do when he forbade French, allied or neutral ships trading with Britain? Just meekly sit back and accept it, or fight back?

The truth is that the FRENCH were to blame for the economic blockade which Britain set up which affected Yankeeland. Yet, of course, I bet none of you get taught all that in school.

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Yes, until the cowards betrayed us at Fallen Oaks.


Don't you mean Fallen Timbers? You can't even get the name of the battle right.


Quote:

We learned. Mostly that the British are faithless cowards. A lesson the Yankees have gotten since then in 1861, 1917, 1942, 1956, 1965, and appeared to actually learn in 2003.

Almost 13% of Yank soldiers during the War of 1812 cowardly deserted. More recently, US soldiers in Vietnam and Iraq had a habit of deserting and fleeing to Canada. Desertion seems to be far more of a problem in the American Army than it does in the glorious British Army.



Coward American marines hiding and crying in Iraq - YouTube