Napoleon

[moomin]

Wut, my good man?

You mean to imply that all those marvelous Hornblower books I've read don't give a fair portrait of that lowlife enemy of all mankind and Her Majesty's Government?

To spread such lies! For shame!

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by ASHBERY76
Napoleon was a great man, some of guys need to read more books on him and keep away from these biased anglo/american books.

From what I could tell... most people supported the decision to use Napoleon instead of Joan anyways.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by ASHBERY76
Napoleon was a great man, some of guys need to read more books on him and keep away from these biased anglo/american books.

To be fair, America supported Napoleon, giving him lots of money (to purchas france's claim to the Loisiana territory), etc...

In fact, I don't know that he is mentioned unfavorably in our history texts. The English at that time are, however. Keep in mind that America went to war with England about then (note to canucks: I am sorry that our history texts don't mention you in the war of 1812, I know that your books point to the war as an Canadian/American war, but I can't change what our books say right now...)

[Jon Shafer]

Bah, the War of 1812 was a big American push to York (Ottawa) which failed, then an Anglo-Canadian push towards the Great Lakes, which failed. After that there was basically nothing but British raids of the Atlantic coast occured... well, besides the battle of New Orleans, where the British lost 50 times as many casualties as the Americans.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

To be fair, America supported Napoleon, giving him lots of money (to purchas france's claim to the Loisiana territory), etc...

In fact, I don't know that he is mentioned unfavorably in our history texts. The English at that time are, however. Keep in mind that America went to war with England about then (note to canucks: I am sorry that our history texts don't mention you in the war of 1812, I know that your books point to the war as an Canadian/American war, but I can't change what our books say right now...)

I would like to add in the text books how the Kanucks burned the white house, that's how it went, wasn't it?

I dont' remember Napolean being unfavorably treated in my textbooks either. Just that he was a bit bloodthirsty, which isn't a bad thing.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


I would like to add in the text books how the Kanucks burned the white house, that's how it went, wasn't it?

I dont' remember Napolean being unfavorably treated in my textbooks either. Just that he was a bit bloodthirsty, which isn't a bad thing.

The burning of the white house is mentioned in history texts, but as being carried out by the _brittish_.

The really scary thing was when I was flipping through a citezenship test prep book, and one of the questions was "Which war was Washington DC burned durring?" I almost cried...

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

The burning of the white house is mentioned in history texts, but as being carried out by the _brittish_.

I was aware of that. I was referring to this thread where it was claimed the canadians burned it. I knew otherwise. C'mon I did, really.

[Jon Shafer]

Meh, Washington was never burned. Only the inside of the White House (which was all stone, so nothing really happened anyways) and the Capitol building was burned (which was promptly put out by a rainstorm). However, York was burned to the ground.
The actual burning of the White House was carried out by a British naval task force led by Vice Admiral George Cockburn.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Trip
Vice Admiral George Cockburn.

nice name

[Jon Shafer]

He's British, what did you expect.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory

To be fair, America supported Napoleon, giving him lots of money (to purchas france's claim to the Loisiana territory), etc...

I don't consider it's "giving lots of money" if it's to PURCHASE a territory.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


I was aware of that. I was referring to this thread where it was claimed the canadians burned it. I knew otherwise. C'mon I did, really.

Well, reading that entire thread was certainly an XPerience, and I hope that rabid athalon fans don't attack me for saying so... *grin*

The importaint thing (IMOH) is that the canadians _belive_ that they burned the whitehouse, they _belive_ that _they_ and not the british won the war. The ammusing bit to me is that just about any way you look at it, the Brittish (or Canadians, whatever) _did_ win the war. Save that America achieved all of its war aims...

[Jon Shafer]

How did they win?

There were only minor skirmishes, aside from the burning of the White House and York, other than the battle of New Orleans. In that one basically the Americans whipped the British worse than Napoleon ever did.

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by Trip
How did they win?

There were only minor skirmishes, aside from the burning of the White House and York, other than the battle of New Orleans. In that one basically the Americans whipped the British worse than Napoleon ever did.

Well, durring the war, America never won a battle, fought the whole thing on its own territory, didn't come close to London, (whereas the American Capital was burned) etc...

In fact, the only reason America came out so well in the peace treaty was because England (one MP in particular, though I don't remember his name) realized that America was going to be a power one day and decided that it would be better off to have a friend over here rather than an enemy. I'd say that they were proved correct...

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Andrew Cory
Well, durring the war, America never won a battle, fought the whole thing on its own territory, didn't come close to London, (whereas the American Capital was burned) etc...

That's one reason why I don't much like the War of 1812.. there weren't really any battles. Except for New Orleans, of course.
York, the Canadian capital was burned, as well as many skirmishes (I won't call them battles) in Canada. Other than that, the only actions that were fought were due to British landing parties along the Atlantic coast.

In fact, the only reason America came out so well in the peace treaty was because England (one MP in particular, though I don't remember his name) realized that America was going to be a power one day and decided that it would be better off to have a friend over here rather than an enemy. I'd say that they were proved correct...

They were just tired of war... Britain had been at war since 1792, and they were anxious to have more ships and men to devote to the campaign in Spain, as well as what led up to Waterloo. I would say the war was pretty even.