American Revolution General Discussion Thread

[TMAN10112]

1)Well, I don't know where I would be if it didn't happen.

2)Possibly, French support really helped towards the end of the war (lack of French support would have been just another factor against the Patriot cause). This was a war/rebellion that would have been hard to snub out permanently with anything less then a massive defeat and occupation.

3)Yes, the Patriot army had almost dissolved more the once (the best example being the night pictured in the painting you posted). Chances are that even if the Patriot army had been destroyed, the rebellin itself would had continued due to an escalading amount of anti-British feelings among the American public (a new army would have most likely risen up after some time).

Of coarse it could have happened like.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANpnPSlwm1M[/youtube]
Yea, I'm pretty sure thats how it happened...........

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Our teachers always said that the British had a disadvantage wearing red, but how much better was blue really? (I'm honestly asking this questions it's always bugged me)

Really? Is that the kind of crap they're using now? So Britain got beaten by a bunch of colonists 300 years ago, big deal! Do we really need to make up silly excuses like that?

Well they didn't say that's the whole reason but red is obviously poor camouflage, I just wondered how much better blue was. I was "taught" this at a very young age so the reason was simplified.

Then again, war in the 700s wasn't about camouflage like today, it was more about lining up the two armies in front of each other and seeing who could get the most pot-shots. And really, blue is no better than red in camouflage terms.

 

[TMAN10112]

Our teachers always said that the British had a disadvantage wearing red, but how much better was blue really? (I'm honestly asking this questions it's always bugged me)

Really? Is that the kind of crap they're using now? So Britain got beaten by a bunch of colonists 300 years ago, big deal! Do we really need to make up silly excuses like that?

Well they didn't say that's the whole reason but red is obviously poor camouflage, I just wondered how much better blue was. I was "taught" this at a very young age so the reason was simplified.

The british colors were actually quite effective. With the "advancing Column" tactics of the time, having all of your solders dressed in red would make your advance towards the enemy more intimidating (most battles ended in a bayonette charge rather then at a distance), and hopefully make them break their lines first.

 

[Shock and Awe]

1)Well, I don't know where I would be if it didn't happen.

2)Possibly, French support really helped towards the end of the war (lack of French support would have been just another factor against the Patriot cause). This was a war/rebellion that would have been hard to snub out permanently with anything less then a massive defeat and occupation.

3)Yes, the Patriot army had almost dissolved more the once (the best example being the night pictured in the painting you posted). Chances are that even if the Patriot army had been destroyed, the rebellin itself would had continued due to an escalading amount of anti-British feelings among the American public (a new army would have most likely risen up after some time).

Of coarse it could have happened like.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANpnPSlwm1M[/youtube]
Yea, I'm pretty sure thats how it happened...........

That shit was epic.

 

[luckshot]

glad it happened

no we probably couldn't have won without the french

some luck, some skill, and changing the tactics on the british
the American forces made use of guerrilla warfare to hurt the morale/numbers of the british as well as using woodsmen to slow down the enemy by blocking roads/taking out bridges. the us forces also had many experienced commanders

 

[Veylon]

1) I'll say yes. Even if you have your doubts about the slave-owning founding fathers, important documents and structures came out of it, like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which were later imitated my many other countries.

2) Could Have? Yes. Would Have? Maybe. The French didn't enter the war until after the Colonists had won a big battle at Ticonderoga. Once they did, their skill at sieges and stand-up warfare was vital for the cause. My thought is that if they hadn't entered the war, the Colonists would likely have won most of what they were after, but it would've taken considerably longer. Remember that there were many upper-class British that sympathized with the Colonists' ideals.

3) Lucky? The Americans had all kinds of good luck during the war. The British generals bickered with each other endlessly, even to the point of withholding support so that a rival would lose a battle and look bad. The French managing to actually defeat the British navy and land troops in support of the Americans was a big factor, giving the Colonist a parity they hadn't had before. Even more than that was the French defeating the Royal Navy again so that Cornwallis's army was captured instead of being able to just sail away. That was the Tet Offensive of the war, the battle that revealed to the British just how costly it would be to win and drained them of any remaining enthusiasm.

 

[fudgebo]

The British lost the naval major naval battle thats what ended the war, supply line broken, war couldnt continue and as the brits lost a naval battle {something which never happened} they got scared.

 

[Octorok]

You damn pesky colonies! As an aristocrat, I have nothing to say but that revolution has taken away our precious Empire. From the American Colonies to the Oriental Expanse, I believe that the Monarchy should be reinstated and that the British Empire should bully people into submission again. I hate revolution.

 

[lava_lamp]

1. Are You Glad It Happened?

yes

2. Could the Americans Have won without French support?

probably not

3. Could the American victory have been one big stroke of luck?

slightly

 

[SiliconKnight]

Our teachers always said that the British had a disadvantage wearing red, but how much better was blue really? (I'm honestly asking this questions it's always bugged me)

Really? Is that the kind of crap they're using now? So Britain got beaten by a bunch of colonists 300 years ago, big deal! Do we really need to make up silly excuses like that?

Well they didn't say that's the whole reason but red is obviously poor camouflage, I just wondered how much better blue was. I was "taught" this at a very young age so the reason was simplified.

The british colors were actually quite effective. With the "advancing Column" tactics of the time, having all of your solders dressed in red would make your advance towards the enemy more intimidating (most battles ended in a bayonette charge rather then at a distance), and hopefully make them break their lines first.

A huge nmber of British losses were not caused by blue-coated regualrs but by hunters, trappers, and farmers( all very good at not being seen in thier home territory). The blue coats got their asses kicked because they weren't hidden either and didn't have the same high quality training.

 

[GrinningManiac]

It IS a MASSIVE stroke of luck that they won they way they did.

Some British light infantry were making their way through a forest when a young Rebel officer rode down the path, checking if it was sutible for marching or something. They had at least twenty rifles pointed at him, when the leader told them to hold fire, on the grounds that it was unfair to kill a man unawares. That officer was Washington.

They may have won anyway, but they would have changed history for better or worse

 

[matnatz]

I honestly don't think the place would have been that much different. We would have granted you independence in the end anyway. However, I'm British, so this still stings a bit. OK, that we lost the war doesn't bother me, it was a long time ago. But films like The Patriot actually annoy me. Makes you realise how Germans must feel when they watch a silly WW2 action movie. A feeling that Americans have never had. If they had just handled it in a more mature way...

Some British light infantry were making their way through a forest when a young Rebel officer rode down the path, checking if it was sutible for marching or something. They had at least twenty rifles pointed at him, when the leader told them to hold fire, on the grounds that it was unfair to kill a man unawares. That officer was Washington.

Curse our sense of fair play! We did a similar thing with Hitler apparently.

 

[Toaster Hunter]

We let you win that wAR. we couldnt be bothered outting in the effort required to put you in your place as we had more important interests elsewhare in the empire. You should also remember that we were at war in a number of different places at that time so you never faced the full might of the British Empire.
One day, we will come for what is rightfully ours =P

The initial British assault in early 1776 was the largest British overseas operation the Empire ever launched with 20,000+ men. There wasn't a war elsewhere until years later when we gained French support. It was a miracle we won, but we won none the less.

 

[matnatz]

One day, we will come for what is rightfully ours =P

We won't have to. They'll give themselves over! First we take these forums and then the world is ours. Have you seen this place? They love us here!

 

[Kubanator]

We let you win that wAR. we couldnt be bothered outting in the effort required to put you in your place as we had more important interests elsewhare in the empire. You should also remember that we were at war in a number of different places at that time so you never faced the full might of the British Empire.
One day, we will come for what is rightfully ours =P

The initial British assault in early 1776 was the largest British overseas operation the Empire ever launched with 20,000+ men. There wasn't a war elsewhere until years later when we gained French support. It was a miracle we won, but we won none the less.

I think that Britain didn't value it's colonies enough, which basically set them up for this.

PS: The only overseas operations were in North America.
PPS: Britain had a shit-ton of land it had to control.

 

[Agent Larkin]

Our teachers always said that the British had a disadvantage wearing red, but how much better was blue really? (I'm honestly asking this questions it's always bugged me)

Blue is as useless as red but a lot of US troops wore there normal brown or gray clothes which blended in with the forests nicely. Coincidently the British riflemen wore a Dark green and were know to deal huge damage without being seen.


Now to answer the OP:
1 Yes as it gave republicanism a fighting chance in the world
2 Without the French harassing British supply lines you probably would have lost
3 I reckon diplomacy could have settled the situation easily enough but because of the technology at the time wasn't viable.

Now just to sit here and Ireland and ponder the fact that got it right the first time. We tried about 12 before we got it right.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Um...am I glad it happened? Yes. Regardless of the validity of one or two arguments in the colonies' lists (the reparation for the French and Indian War fought on our soil), Britian was still quite a horrible colonialist power.

Could we have done without the French? Likely not. They not only trained us, supplied us with weapons, and fought alongside us, they also fought the British elsewhere in the world (it's an interesting thought experiment...what if France had won the war and claimed India?).

A stroke of luck? Everything is a stroke of luck.

Our teachers always said that the British had a disadvantage wearing red, but how much better was blue really? (I'm honestly asking this questions it's always bugged me)

Really? Is that the kind of crap they're using now? So Britain got beaten by a bunch of colonists 300 years ago, big deal! Do we really need to make up silly excuses like that?

Well they didn't say that's the whole reason but red is obviously poor camouflage, I just wondered how much better blue was. I was "taught" this at a very young age so the reason was simplified.

The british colors were actually quite effective. With the "advancing Column" tactics of the time, having all of your solders dressed in red would make your advance towards the enemy more intimidating (most battles ended in a bayonette charge rather then at a distance), and hopefully make them break their lines first.

At least until they went up against a bunch of Dutch marksmen in South Africa...

 

[Uncompetative]

I'm not glad the Revolution happened.

A bunch of tasteless zealots who committed a genocide against the Native American people, then built ugly strip-malls over their grave sites.

Tea > Coffee.

 

[shaboinkin]

When does Paul Revere come to town and give us presents?

 

[Adaephon]

Well i do doubt that without French(and to a lesser extent Dutch and Spanish) aid the colonists could have won,and definitely victory would have been a lot harder to accomplish.

Was it luck?some of it definitely, but other parts weren't so yes and no.

Am i glad it happened? Well if it had failed then i dont really know if the world would be better, well a lot less natives would have died, but without the American threat to the south,Canada wouldn't have been unified for defense and when it eventually was then i wonder if all of British North America would be one country. Then again, it would have been a huge difference in the balance of powers in Europe, not that the 13 colonies were that valuable but without the Americans, the Spanish,Russian and French territories would never have been bought/conquered so that would really warp the borders that we know today.Napoleon then would have been much weaker, he couldnt trade slaves with the Americans to raise money for his army and navy but at the same time thats bad because that trade was the reason that the British banned slavery, but since the British wouldnt need their troops to defend Canada during the war of 1812, they would have had more guys fighting in Europe...but now that i think of it it is only due to the Americans that Japan exists, Admiral Perry saved Japan from itself by forcing trade into it and kick starting the Meiji Restoration so really, japan would never have advanced to the point of being able to be a totalitarian colonial power that it was from 1910-1945 and so one wonders if that is a good or bad thing...no Japanese empire does make Hitler a tad weaker, the people being used to fight off the Japanese could then be sent to Europe and North Africa which would have been a huge boost to not only the British, but the French and Dutch as well would have maintained their colonies which would have helped considerably when rebuilding after the war.But then again,the American revolution may be a bit controversial at parts(one of their main reasons to rebel was because they weren't allowed to steal any more native lands by British law unless granted peacefully or the natives were enemies, like the Hurons were)but the revolution did inspire revolutions in France and Russia which were very important factors in the eventual decline of imperialism and divine monarchy in the world.So perhaps if Lafayette had not been to America he would never have been able to help lead the revoultion in France which led to the creation of the French republic which was a beacon of hope for the Germans,Austrians,Russians which led to the eventual end of their empires and the creation of modern democracies.

K so i went out on a bit of a tangent there but for the most part, yes i do think the revolution was a good thing, but since i cant go back in time and change it i mught be wrong.