Can the Brits Swing Ohio?

[Imran Siddiqui]

When US General Hull invaded Upper Canada in July 1812, he issued this proclamation:

That's nice, but seeing how the Brits incited native tribes to attack American settlements since the end of the Revolutionary War, justified. A majority of the major land battles in the war involved the Americans against native tribes.

Emancipation doesn't mean conquest. We may promise the same things in Iraq, it doesn't mean we are there to conquer them.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by notyoueither


That's why he sent his navy and army to help defend us and thrash you, right?

He just wanted to keep the beaver coming.

[notyoueither]

Actually, British North America (Canada) was a financial liability ever after the Revolution. It was maintained more for prestige than anything else. It required far more British attention to defend than it was worth, given that they never intended to reconquer the US colonies.

At the end of the Civil War, with the enlarged Union Army finding itself unoccupied, the cost of defending the Canadas reached a breaking point. Thus the British government gave us a firm push to propel us from the nest to forestall the necessity of fighting yet another war over the Great Lakes and beaver pelts.

From their POV it worked. They continued to enjoy the benefits of Canada as part of the Empire while they suffered little or no cost to defend us. It isn't a coincidence that Australia and New Zealand followed Canada to independence on a similar model not long after.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Actually, British North America (Canada) was a financial liability ever after the Revolution. It was maintained more for prestige than anything else. It required far more British attention to defend than it was worth, given that they never intended to reconquer the US colonies.

At the end of the Civil War, with the enlarged Union Army finding itself unoccupied, the cost of defending the Canadas reached a breaking point. Thus the British government gave us a firm push to propel us from the nest to forestall the necessity of fighting yet another war over the Great Lakes and beaver pelts.

From their POV it worked. They continued to enjoy the benefits of Canada as part of the Empire while they suffered little or no cost to defend us. It isn't a coincidence that Australia and New Zealand followed Canada to independence on a similar model not long after.

Too bad the foresight was lacking to do the same for the 13 colonies in 1700's. The US-British alliance could have gotten off to a much earlier start.

[notyoueither]

They needed to be convinced.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Why are rightwingers so rude?

Everyone hates spammers.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by notyoueither
They needed to be convinced.

Incidently, you guys needed to be convinced that not everyone agreed with you, and that you could get your butts handed to you. You're welcome.

[DinoDoc]

That's all right. If you enjoy Liberal domination, it's no skin off our nose.

[notyoueither]

I guess you're right.

I'll just suffer up here with my universal healthcare and budget surpluses. Being Liberal can sure be a *****.

[DinoDoc]

Had your ride in a Sea King yet?

[notyoueither]

Nope. You been to Vietnam or Iraq as part of the in uniform tour?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

When US General Hull invaded Upper Canada in July 1812, he issued this proclamation:

That's nice, but seeing how the Brits incited native tribes to attack American settlements since the end of the Revolutionary War, justified.

Bull, the natives were incited by Americans invading their land west of the Ohio.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Emancipation doesn't mean conquest. We may promise the same things in Iraq, it doesn't mean we are there to conquer them.

And 200 years later, the American perspective remains distorted. The people living in Canada in 1812 were largely loyalists who opposed the colonial rebels. They wanted nothing to do with the US.

[DinoDoc]

Nope but I'm not really interested in trolling Canadians about thier inferiority either. The stupidity of the Guardian is much more interesting.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Incidently, you guys needed to be convinced that not everyone agreed with you, and that you could get your butts handed to you. You're welcome.

It didn't work at all! There was a deeply ingrained misconception immediately following the war and up to the present that the US won the war due to the outcome of the (irrelevant to the outcome of the war) battle of new orleans. Electing the general from said battle as president of the US probably served to magnify the influence of this perception.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Nope but I'm not really interested in trolling Canadians about thier inferiority either. The stupidity of the Guardian is much more interesting.

Just remember who's the ***** in this relationship and then we can get on with laughing at the Guardian.