"Iron Tears" sounds familiar, who was the author again?
as I say I get a bit over-zealous.
....and I'm honestly not anti-american
as I say I get a bit over-zealous.
....and I'm honestly not anti-american
Greatest Empire Ever
- Thread starter Jersay
- Start date
AHA!!!! yes, I remember that book, it details the internal politics of britain during the war of independence, it makes the point I was trying to make that britain wasnt "whole-heartedly" into fighting that particular war.
very good book though
very good book though
Some were not into fighting the war in America. Some were very much into bringing the colonies back. The bottom line is that Britain KNEW they could not conquer the colonies. That is why THEY even sought outside help by hiring all of those Hessians (ie Germans).
Once the war for Independence started there was no way that England could win.
British troops were only in charge where their boots were standing. When they moved out the Colonials regained control.
Once the war for Independence started there was no way that England could win.
British troops were only in charge where their boots were standing. When they moved out the Colonials regained control.
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
And the Americans used French and German troops? Also lost many of the battle to the british. I think the British didn't care too much about America, like the French with Canada, it didn't have that much to offer at the time and being tied up in a fight with little to gain and the European balance of power and colonies which produced a lot more wealth with little trouble. Cutting the "fat" (America) was better economically for the British.
Plus you have to remember there was also a large Tory and Late loyalist population in the colonies and ended up coming to Canada and other British colonies.
EagleSmack said:
And the Americans used French and German troops? Also lost many of the battle to the british. I think the British didn't care too much about America, like the French with Canada, it didn't have that much to offer at the time and being tied up in a fight with little to gain and the European balance of power and colonies which produced a lot more wealth with little trouble. Cutting the "fat" (America) was better economically for the British.
Plus you have to remember there was also a large Tory and Late loyalist population in the colonies and ended up coming to Canada and other British colonies.
see he's put it better than I ever could, see I think the problem is this, and it stems from a world view again:
whatever happened back then didnt prevent britain from becoming the biggest empire the world has ever seen, some would say it was in spite of this.
I think what gauls many English people is this: we are constantly told by the germans that we may not mention the war, that it is insensitive towards our german friends, even though it was the most evil, wicked crime to ever be commited by one group of human beings towards another, EVEN when the european union the nazi's designed came true.
Whereas, some 200 odd years ago we lost a group of what were previously devoted colonials because they were unhappy with a change in the status quo, and while this was not in itself a war crime, and no genocide was commited at that time, we are still constantly reminded of it.
whatever happened back then didnt prevent britain from becoming the biggest empire the world has ever seen, some would say it was in spite of this.
I think what gauls many English people is this: we are constantly told by the germans that we may not mention the war, that it is insensitive towards our german friends, even though it was the most evil, wicked crime to ever be commited by one group of human beings towards another, EVEN when the european union the nazi's designed came true.
Whereas, some 200 odd years ago we lost a group of what were previously devoted colonials because they were unhappy with a change in the status quo, and while this was not in itself a war crime, and no genocide was commited at that time, we are still constantly reminded of it.
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
How are you constantly reminded of it? Just curious.
Daz_Hockey said:
How are you constantly reminded of it? Just curious.
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
Um so tell me how is the EU an German-Aryian dominated orginization, based on german nationalism and racial supremesy. True it isn't a lose as NATO/Nafta/Norad in the form it actually has a democratic body wheren ours..... well we appoint burocrats and generals too and basically follow the lead of the Americans.... I guess Norad/Nato/Nafta is really the dream of the nazi's but in North America. Anyhow it reminds me more of the Nazi dream then the EU!!!
Daz_Hockey said:
Um so tell me how is the EU an German-Aryian dominated orginization, based on german nationalism and racial supremesy. True it isn't a lose as NATO/Nafta/Norad in the form it actually has a democratic body wheren ours..... well we appoint burocrats and generals too and basically follow the lead of the Americans.... I guess Norad/Nato/Nafta is really the dream of the nazi's but in North America. Anyhow it reminds me more of the Nazi dream then the EU!!!
crikey, that stirred you all up, nope, the plans for a coallition, a kind of German back European superstate were drawn up by the nazi's.
it's strange how Germany is now the main power (apart from the UK) behind the EU. Well I'm speaking from an english perspective, so Canada doesnt celebrate the 4th of July then?....perhaps you should have a word with Mr Blair and Mrs Thatcher before that, cus we seem to have to. Thanks for That Mrs Thatcher
it's strange how Germany is now the main power (apart from the UK) behind the EU. Well I'm speaking from an english perspective, so Canada doesnt celebrate the 4th of July then?....perhaps you should have a word with Mr Blair and Mrs Thatcher before that, cus we seem to have to. Thanks for That Mrs Thatcher
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
I will have to check on the nationality of troops. I do not think, in fact I know that the Colonials barely had enough money to pay their own troops. The French came in on the side of the Colonies because it was in French interest to do so. The French supported us with supplies, cash, their Navy (which was the biggest contribution IMO), and troops (about 6000) towards the end. I know that they were at Yorktown. When the British General surrendered their he made a feeble attempt to hand the French General his sword. The French General said
"Non Mesiuer" and waved his hand to Washington.
Cornwallis said he wasn't feeling too good that day and left the surrendering up to his subordinate. :roll:
Sure the Colonials lost some battles to the British. They also won some. But it doesn't really matter how many battles they lost, the end result is they won the war.
It is easy to say they didn't care. That is like losing a game and saying you didn't want to win anyways. The British fought the war for over 7 years and you are saying they didn't care? Please.
You are correct about the Torys and Loyalist. A lot of Colonials were against Independence and moved to Canada and Britain. I am sure they would not have been too safe hanging around.
Finder said:
I will have to check on the nationality of troops. I do not think, in fact I know that the Colonials barely had enough money to pay their own troops. The French came in on the side of the Colonies because it was in French interest to do so. The French supported us with supplies, cash, their Navy (which was the biggest contribution IMO), and troops (about 6000) towards the end. I know that they were at Yorktown. When the British General surrendered their he made a feeble attempt to hand the French General his sword. The French General said
"Non Mesiuer" and waved his hand to Washington.
Cornwallis said he wasn't feeling too good that day and left the surrendering up to his subordinate. :roll:
Sure the Colonials lost some battles to the British. They also won some. But it doesn't really matter how many battles they lost, the end result is they won the war.
It is easy to say they didn't care. That is like losing a game and saying you didn't want to win anyways. The British fought the war for over 7 years and you are saying they didn't care? Please.
You are correct about the Torys and Loyalist. A lot of Colonials were against Independence and moved to Canada and Britain. I am sure they would not have been too safe hanging around.
yep....Banner's every bleedin where, you will not believe how PC the UK has become, so's not to offend anyone, you wouldnt believe how "shocked" our political leaders where when americans dared to suggest tht we send the anti-british muslim's to Guantanimo bay
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
If the Germans tell you that you cannot mention the war tell them "Tough... we kicked your azz!".
I am behind you on that.
Daz_Hockey said:
If the Germans tell you that you cannot mention the war tell them "Tough... we kicked your azz!".
I am behind you on that.
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
Well I'm sorry but celebrating the 4th of July in Britain is just plain stupid. I would be equally annoyed about it also if I were you, this is an American holiday, it should long be a dead issue in Britain. That's just nonsense.
Daz_Hockey said:
Well I'm sorry but celebrating the 4th of July in Britain is just plain stupid. I would be equally annoyed about it also if I were you, this is an American holiday, it should long be a dead issue in Britain. That's just nonsense.
Don't get me wrong I'm a Social Democratic Republican, and I think the American's did the right thing. But to believe in the "Mighty" american army which brought down the British.... hmmmmmmm... It's like saying the North Vietnamess beat the American Army. They won the war only because the American's chose that it just wasn't worth fighting anymore even though the NVA really never won many battle at all and the american's had the highest kills, land taken, better raids, everything, but the NVA where determined like the Americans for independance to just wait out the American's.
The Myth of the American dominance during the revolutionary war is ignorance and revisionism and not historically correct.
The Myth of the American dominance during the revolutionary war is ignorance and revisionism and not historically correct.
you understand now where I'm coming from now, I'm not against American celebrating it's independence, what I am against is britain sucking up to the politically correct heads of the EU, it's bad, it's really bad, I give you an example, While I was in new york, a few Aussie's told some American's that they disliked the US, so what did they reply with...and quite rightly too "well why dont you leave if you dont like it here!!"
that, in Britain, would be termed as a racial insult, to which you would have the police knocking on ur door....now thats what I'm against, while our fans have been warned that during the world cup we are not even allowed to whistle the Dambusters or great escape tune!!!!
Like I say, it's a German-dominated EU, as was planned
that, in Britain, would be termed as a racial insult, to which you would have the police knocking on ur door....now thats what I'm against, while our fans have been warned that during the world cup we are not even allowed to whistle the Dambusters or great escape tune!!!!
Like I say, it's a German-dominated EU, as was planned
Genghis Khan's empire stretched from China to Poland. His empire was the largest ever. But I don't think his empire was the greatest. Certainly, it was largest ever.
Also, we may not want to admit, but the Arabs at one point had a great empire, kindom. So did the Chinese with their dynasties.
We only get to learn our side of story, Euro-American.
Also, we may not want to admit, but the Arabs at one point had a great empire, kindom. So did the Chinese with their dynasties.
We only get to learn our side of story, Euro-American.
Re: RE: Greatest Empire Ever
I think you are a little too far into left or right field here, because Germany itself has many strong anti-nazi laws and have been governored by the Social Democrats for awhile now (now in coalition again). I do not see the EU as an extention of the nazi goal, nor that of the French revultionary and Napolianic empire. This is a DEMOCRATIC orginization which respects the differences across the boarders and has been lead by Presidents from different nations. In no way does this remind me at all of the Nazi-German dreams of having a pan-Germanic European empire.
Daz_Hockey said:
I think you are a little too far into left or right field here, because Germany itself has many strong anti-nazi laws and have been governored by the Social Democrats for awhile now (now in coalition again). I do not see the EU as an extention of the nazi goal, nor that of the French revultionary and Napolianic empire. This is a DEMOCRATIC orginization which respects the differences across the boarders and has been lead by Presidents from different nations. In no way does this remind me at all of the Nazi-German dreams of having a pan-Germanic European empire.
Finder said:
Finder... I agree with you bud. But both results were the same. Actually the Vietnam War and the American Revolution were very much alike and the end results were the same.
Washington knew he could not stand toe to toe with the British and fight on Britains terms. What he did know was he had to keep the army intact. As long as the Colonies had an army, British rule was in jeopardy. The British were very frustrated at Washington's ability to escape or avoid a battle.
The same with Gap in Vietnam. He knew he couldn't afford large scale battles with the US. That would be playing into our hands. So he kept a mobile army that would fight when conditions were good and would melt away when they weren't.
So it doesn't matter how many battles were loss. Both N. Vietnam and the Colonies got the desired results. British out of America and America out of Vietnam.