And congratulations on a well deserved victory. Of the men we had there, you outfought us tactically. However, i'm just saying if we had considered america important enough to use the entire might of the empire against, we would have probalby won.Toasterhunter86 said: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.
While I agree with the sentiment it should be noted that during the Revolution the Colonies preferred tea and coffee was a rare, exotic oddity. Also prior to becoming a huge-ass empire Britain favored coffee.Uncompetative said:Tea > Coffee.
Thats true.EMFCRACKSHOT said:And congratulations on a well deserved victory. Of the men we had there, you outfought us tactically. However, i'm just saying if we had considered america important enough to use the entire might of the empire against, we would have probalby won.Toasterhunter86 said: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.
Dutch with the most advanced sniper rifle at the time produced by the Germans.NeutralDrow said: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.
At least until they went up against a bunch of Dutch marksmen in South Africa...TMAN10112 said: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.messy said: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 infamous SCAMola said: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?messy said: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)
No way, you'll start having withdraw when it hits tea time and we throw yours in the ocean (again).EMFCRACKSHOT said: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
Was that during the Second Boer War? 'Cause I'm pretty sure these aren't sniper rifles:Tehpwnsauce said:Dutch with the most advanced sniper rifle at the time produced by the Germans.NeutralDrow said: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.
At least until they went up against a bunch of Dutch marksmen in South Africa...TMAN10112 said: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.messy said: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 infamous SCAMola said: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?messy said: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)
U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. WOOOOOOOOO!Uncompetative said: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.
Well I would have said rifles but I have no idea how advanced the rifles used were in context to other rifles. Either way they were used to snipe not fight battles.NeutralDrow said:Was that during the Second Boer War? 'Cause I'm pretty sure these aren't sniper rifles:Tehpwnsauce said:Dutch with the most advanced sniper rifle at the time produced by the Germans.NeutralDrow said: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.
At least until they went up against a bunch of Dutch marksmen in South Africa...TMAN10112 said: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.messy said: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 infamous SCAMola said: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?messy said: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)
![]()
![]()
Exactly. Hence, the British scare tactic of being extremely visible broke apart when fighting Dutch marksmen in South Africa.Tehpwnsauce said:Well I would have said rifles but I have no idea how advanced the rifles used were in context to other rifles. Either way they were used to snipe not fight battles.NeutralDrow said:Was that during the Second Boer War? 'Cause I'm pretty sure these aren't sniper rifles:Tehpwnsauce said:Dutch with the most advanced sniper rifle at the time produced by the Germans.NeutralDrow said: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.
At least until they went up against a bunch of Dutch marksmen in South Africa...TMAN10112 said: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.messy said: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 infamous SCAMola said: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?messy said: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)
![]()
![]()
WaffleTron said:I posted a similar picture to this in the "Happy 4th of July" thread, and here it is!Wardog13 said:Since it is 4th of July, I feel nothing is more appropriate than to discuss what started it all, The Revolution.
Ill start this thread with a badass picture.
![]()
![]()