1  2  3  4  5 ... 7  Next

They clearly failed their objectives, so how could they say they won?

   

We accomplished one objective; making sure the future residents of the British colonies that became Canada had horrible grammar.

But in reality, most Americans view the war of 1812 as a draw, and those who think the USA won do so because the Americans didn't lose any territory to the British. Granted the Americans didn't gain territory, but not losing an inch of dirt to a superpower is quite an accomplishment for a country less than 40 years old.

But the real answer to what most Americans think of the war of 1812 is most Americans don't think about it. It was 200 years ago, didn't really solve anything, and had a minimal impact on the course of American history. In contrast, America's other border war with Mexico in the late 1840s had a huge impact on American history, and even that is barely covered in history books.

   

Well, didn't the British also stop pressing American sailors in the Royal Navy as well? I recall that was also a contentious issue before the war.

   

awwww fuck not another one of these revisionist threads about 'Canada' beating the United States single handedly, with one hand tied behind our back

   

Their attempt to conquer Canada failed miserably and they don't like to be reminded of it.

   

The US/Texas won the Mexican war overwhelmingly but barely survived the 1812 one. Eliminate the distraction of Napoleon in France from the current events of the time and you would have had a British Empire, with considerably more military resources than it did in the 1780's, that could have concentrated all it's forces on the US and quite possibly had been able to destroy the American experiment altogether. Overall it's quite understandable how one would prefer to concentrate on the victory and try to forget all about the near-loss that almost happened.

   

Are you confident about that semi-colon?

   

Zip, It doesn't bother me so much that we failed to conquer Canada, the things I find more embarrassing are the nasty thing American Forces did to the civilians in British North America. It is much more unpleasant to be reminded of that. It wasn't exactly our finest hour.

   

British Forces in the colonies during the American rebellion were there i limited numbers and essentially as a police force. They thought their need to maintain a large number of soldiers was ended after the french indian War. I don't think they expected the grumblings of disconted merchants and colonial aristocracy to turn into a full blown rebellion. The soldiers and commanders were in a sense taken by surprise by the people they thought they were there to protect.

As Thanos points out, if Britain wasn't already engaged in a war of survival in Europe during the war of 1812(one of the reasons they were impressing 'Americans' into Royal navy service), and had they been able to muster their true military might against the Americans, you might have had America suing for peace and making territorial concessions. The geo political map of NA would be somewhat different. The United States would likely not have ceased to exist, because Britain had no desire to reacquire ungrateful colonists, and trade between the two was just as good or better than when the United Staes was a disparate collection of charter, royal and proprietary colonies. The 49th parallel likely wouldn't have meant SFA with Manitoba encompassing the original Selkirk grant, Montana and Idaho would have remainded the property of the HBC, British Columbia likely would have been two provinces, the southern one encompassing what is today Washington and Oregon.

It would have been a serious blow to the upstart nation, and chances are there wouldn't have been a smooth transition of world power from the Anglos in the United Kingdom to the Anglos in the United States. English civilization would be slightly different.

   

Who said they won?

I think most historical studies from Canada and the US are in agreement. You provide no link to support your dig at the Yanks.

   

thought so....he's from Ontario. same types who gloat about Canada's health care system and how it's better than the States but fail to realize that in rankings in the developed world, it's only better than what the Americans have, rather than being the best.

   

I heard about a survey a few years ago, I cant source it because I can't remember where I saw it. But i'm pretty sure that it said out of Americans:
50% Didn't know it existed.
40% Said that they won
10% Said "Canada" won.

I'm just pulling this from memory.

   

That was resolved prior to the outbreak of war, yet the US interior states/territories (not the maritime states) pressed for war anyways. Impressment was an excuse, not a cause.

   

This month's issue of the BBC History Magazine - in my opinion the best history mag there is - has a several-page article in it in which it says that, for all intents and purposes, it was the British who won that war.

Many of the articles can be read on the magazine's website. Unfortunately this one can't.

When Washington burned

BBC History Magazine May 2012

Professor Andrew Lambert, War Studies, holds a five page feature proclaiming that the British had a greater reason to rejoice after the War of 1812, a military conflict between the United States of America and the British Empire. He comments that maybe now is the time to 'reconsider who really won the War of 1812'.

   

There was bad blood left over from the American Revolution when people in British uniforms committed no end of atrocities against American civilians. Then, after the peace of 1783, the British continued to act as if the 'Colonies' were still in their dominion with demands that the US could not extend into the Ohio and then the Mississippi Valleys, the Brits were still arming the natives and encouraging them to attack American settlers, and when the US bought the Louisiana Territory from France the British demanded that the Mississippi remain open to their Navy and they initially demanded control of New Orleans.

In short, there were a few axes to grind and the War of 1812 was not unlike a festering boil that finally ruptured.

On the US side the issues varied according to the political groups but among the key issues:

* British refusal to recognize US sovereignty in the Louisiana Purchase and on the high seas.

* Continuing British intrigues involving natives killing American settlers.

* British claims on Maine (whose lumber was critically needed by the Royal Navy for masts).

* British interference with the Dutch bankers when the US wanted to purchase the Louisiana Territory from France (Understandable from the British perspective as the deal gave $15 million to France).

* A confluence of American desires to evict the British from North America and a desire to annex British North America.

On the British side there were more than a few politicians who saw the war as a chance to reclaim the colonies who they really saw as autonomous and not really independent.

Many US & British historians refer to this conflict as the Second War of American Independence because at the end of the war the relationship between the US & Britain was more or less settled for the next fifty years.

In the absence of British interference the Yankee trading and whaling industries flourished and American westward expansion would now proceed unabated by the machinations of London.

The side-effect of the British employment of the natives as proxy-warriors was that US sentiments towards the natives remained negative well into the late 1980's. With the natives having allied with the British in the period 1775-1815 and then remaining hostile after that, popular sentiment in the US resulted in the 1830 Indian Removal Act where most hostile tribes (except the Seminole) were removed west of the Mississippi to Oklahoma. Donny Brasco used to whine about this and my response has always been that when the natives picked sides they should have picked a winner. They didn't. Too bad.

Another curious ripple effect of the war was that it caused the US Navy to establish itself as a formidable force that could punch above its weight and the US after that time consistently invested in the navy. When World War One came along a century later it was this navy combined with the Yankee trading traditions that provided convoy support to Britain. With World War Two the US Navy achieved global dominance and few historians believe that could have happened absent the War of 1812.

Fascinating stuff.

At the same time, Canada did not exist in 1812 as even a semitautonomous dominion so it is no more legitimate to pose the conflict as US v. Canada than it would be to claim of United States victories/losses in the 1765 French & Indian Wars.

   

1  2  3  4  5 ... 7  Next