In sixth grade, I binge-watched these videos for fun and scoffed at the high schoolers in the comments who had AP history tests in, like, two days. Anyways, guess what I have in two days.
Someone once said that the Americans are okay with the War of 1812 because they think they won, they Canadians are okay with it because they KNOW they won and the British are okay with it because they've forgotten all about it.
Actually it was British soldiers who burnt down the Whitehouse these soldiers, were fresh out of Europe British forces where sent into a offensive taking countless land.
@@neelmehta9069 The US did lose. Americans invaded Canada first with the purpose of annexing it. And they failed. But since we're talking about victories, let's not forget the burning of Washington. If a foreign army occupies your capital and burns down your palace, you've lost lol.
that's a myth, the U.S.A never lost one engagement in Vietnam including the TED offensive, we got everything we wanted and left, natural resources, sadly thats how it works.
The peace terms that ended the war were those of status quo ante bellum, “the state of things as they were before the war.” So, while the War of 1812 was legally a tie-a wash-in terms of territorial acquisitions, historians now look at its long term effects to judge who won. The Americans declared war (for the first time in their nation’s history) to stop British impressment, reopen the trade lanes with France, remove British support from Native American tribes, and to secure their territorial honor and integrity in the face of their old rulers. All four of these goals were achieved by the time peace broke out, although some British measures were scheduled to be repealed before the war had even begun. By establishing a respected footing with Britain and Canada, the United States also experienced a commercial boom in the years after the war. The overall result of the war was probably positive for the nation as a whole. The British gained little to nothing from the war, save for an honorable friendship with the United States. Valuable resources were diverted from the battlefields of Europe for the War of 1812, which brought no land or treasure to the crown. The British also lost their Native American lodgment against United States expansion, further unleashing the growth of a major global trade competitor. However, the British did ultimately defeat France in their long war while avoiding a fiasco in North America, which is a considerable victory in the context of the global conflict they waged.
@@mega00760 The US never lost a battle in Vietnam, but they never won the war because it wasn't a territorial war. Just like US never gained any land in the war of 1812, but again they didnt lose the war because it again wasnt a territorial war.
Kartkid024 We did the lose the war just because we never lost a battle doesn’t change that, our goal from the beginning was to preserve South Vietnam as a separate entity from North Vietnam and we failed to do so
America: Hey Canada I want resources I'm going to invade you now. Canada: Can you not? America: No ( Commences Invasion ) Canada: Where going to deny you after we beat Napoleon ( Defeats Napolean ) Completely denies invasion and burns the white house down. America: Yea We Won! U.S.A! Canada: k
+John Doe Since people in British North America (which was Canada before we asked nicely to be independent) were still referred to as British at the time and not Canadian yet, it is reasonable to say that Canadians, at least in part, could have been the ones to set it the white house aflame.
+John Doe Canada wasn't a country we were part of the British Empire, and a lot of Canadian born volunteers were placed in units from places parents or grandparents were from.
+John Doe Canada didn't become a nation until 1867. The difference between the British and British colonists that lived in what later would become Canada is practically irrelevant. Maybe consider political systems, citizenship and dates while you are reading those books.
...and we made them our pants, and got Laura Secord chocolate out of it :D Also, Robert Ross, the guy who ordered the burning of the White House, is buried at the Old Burial Ground in Halifax Nova Scotia, and the last time I visited there, his grave was covered in hash pipes; tributes left by smug and passive-aggressive Canadian patriots.
York isn't the White House. Was at York often when my brother reserved there. ( the reserve base). But yea, a surrender and white house went down. This is what I've read, I'm astonished how you remember ( teasing). But c'mon, you'd steam roll us now, but we got ya then. And ... hockey. Bat flip. lol. Just having fun, cheers!
It's not an issue, it's more just a tease up in Canada. Nobody talks about it. Everyones aware you'd blow us up now. Just let us have some fun with 1812. Not such a fun topic for native history on a serious note. But ya, you beat the brits, we beat u, now... well now is interesting... I'll leave it there lol.
Rest of the World: You lost America: No we didnt! Rest of the World: You lost more battles, more men, had more taken prisoner, had more wounded, had your capital sacked and white house burned... America: New Orleans!! Rest of the World: k
+Colonel Sanders America: You lost Vietnam Vietnam: No we didn't! America: You lost more battles, more men, had more taken prisoner, had more wounded, had your capital bombed to shit, etc. Vietnam: Tet, which was technically still an American victory, but you eventually left. America: Whatevs No side won in 1812.
One thing often left out is that DC was burned in retaliation for Americans burning York (modern Toronto) earlier in the war. Additionally the battle of Plattsburgh was also hugely important as it forced Prevost with his battle hardened troops to return to Canada
It should be noted that there was no such thing as "Canada" in 1812. We weren't officially a country until 1867. What the US was invading were "the Canadas": the colonies of Upper Canada and Lower Canada, part of British North America at that time.
BS Semantics. Canada existed on maps since the 1500's. I don't know why people keep getting hung up on independent nation status. The USA history starts when they declared independence rejecting their British heritage. That is their choice, & does not apply to anyone else. Canada started with its French colonial founding as such is Older then the USA.
Roland Goodfellow Actually the Statue of Westminster (1931) gave Canada an independent Parliament that could make decisions without the approval of the Brits. I consider this as the beginning of Canada as a country independent of Britain.
oilersman95 So long as Canada keeps the Monarchy I'm not sure what the differences, is. Regardless of how autonomous the political system may be, culturally its the same people. HELL if the UK breaks up during the Scottish referendum the monarchy can just relocate to Canada.
GamesLegitament Yeah, Yeah, .... more or less. Depends from the point of view. This war was only possible in the context of the Napoleonic wars, both the for immediate causes of the war and the possibility of engaging Britain. On the other hand, it had nothing to do with the politics of the Napoleonic wars. It was a war fought to help Napoleon nor to weaken Britain. It was mostly a war caused by domestic causes and with domestic aims in mind, not with international or European war aims. Therefore, technically, it is not part of the Napoleonic wars, although it happened in the context of the Napoleonic wars.
+Ed Richardson Damn, speaking for an entire nation. Glad you are so enlightened to American beliefs. Please go back to your failed government systems and lack of ability to win your own wars.
Yet in spite of the fact the American invading armies proclaimed they intended to liberate Canada the US historians continue to insist that it wasn't a goal. That way they don't have to admit they failed. You will be emancipated from tyranny and oppression, and restored to the dignified station of freemen. July 12, 1812, General Hull
jared pailing LOL that is unfair to China. China did free themselves from European control where as Americans are Europeans who stole Native lands and act as if by betraying their European ancestry they can delude themselves in to the idea they are "True" North Americans. Their self image is twisted out of necessity as its not a very pretty truth to start with.
Aha I kid I kid. Exactly though I suppose the top 1% of americans who benifited from breaking from Britain had to fool the lower class into believing they did the right thing somehow.
Ed Richardson Canadians also invaded native American land. What is so good about Canada, anyway? The US is way more powerful. And yeah, some of the things taught in classrooms is inaccurate, but the US is a country of, freedom, liberty, and yes, defiance. The only thing we can thank Canada for is Justin Beiber and maple syrup. "Sorry", did I offend you? Isn't that something you say up there? "Sorry"?
I think you can count the War of 1812 as a win for The British Empire. If the america tried to invade a british dominion and the british stopped them I would count that as a victory.
I'm no expert, but, didn't the Americans technically lose? Their goal was to take Canada and drive out the British, but that didn't go down too well, right? Britain, however, accomplished their goal of keeping the Americans out and losing no territory, so shouldn't they have won for ending the war on that note? (no youtube war of 2014 please, not trying to be rude)
I know right. Americans think they won/drew even though they failed to annex Canada fallowed by a blockade of their country. The British then destroyed Denver, Maryland, Captured New York and destroyed Detroit and burned their capital city to the ground. The failed their primary objectives even though Britain was focusing their armies on a more significant war. That is definitely not a draw.
Well the US succeeded in destroying Britain's Indian allies and toward the end of the war the US forces managed to blunt a couple of major British offensives (such as the attack on New York). The treaty that was signed reinforced the Status quo ante bellum - which sort of means that nobody won. But if you consider the British achievements in contrast to the US war aims - then yes. The British repulsed the US attack on Canada and managed to capture several important US cities. They also succeeded in shutting down the US coast and they prevented the US from supplying raw resources to continental Europe (a major driver for war). So I'd say Britain won, but it is equally valid to say that nobody won.
smalltime0 I wouldn't say it's equally valid to say it was a draw because their goals were different. The British goals were met whereas the Americans failed.
Ebeneezer stark That's right at the start of the war. But the British assaults on Washington and New York went beyond simply defending Canadian territory.
smalltime0 The American invasion of Canada went far beyond just trying to address trade & sailing rights. Sorry but how was Washington anything but a response to American actions in Canada? It was of no tactical value And the troop moment toward New York was incredibly half hearted amounting to nothing but one minor "fleet" battle on a lake. Might just as well call it a tempest in a tea cup.
Britain won the war, and the Canadians were the biggest winners of all. Canadian/British war aims were to defend the territorial integrity of the colonies, defend their homes and farms and way of life, and that's exactly what they did. I think it's silly to call it a draw. The US failed to accomplish most of it's objectives, while the other side accomplished all of theirs.
According to your logic, the British beat the Germans in the Battle of Britain because Britain merely survived while Germany failed to conquer Great Britain. Although Britain did an excellent job in thwarting Hitler's attempts to remove the last Allied power in Western Europe, it's hard to say that they won considering their citizens lived in fear all of that year of being bombed. One cannot simply declare winners in losers in wars based upon who accomplished their goals, especially petty ones such as preserving one's way of life. The official effects of the war are both concluded in the treaties that end them and in the policies and mental attitudes that prevail thereafter. That is why the War of 1812 was a draw in North America: the status quo was maintained, and this led to a disarmament of the American/Canadian border years later.
Alex Titus Saying that you cant declare winners or losers in war based upon the acomplished goals is honestly rediculous to say and I refuse to continue this conversation with you if you honestly think that way. Do you think wars are won and lost based on who killed more of who? shake your fucking head. If the D-day assault failed, I can 100% tell you for a fact the allies would have stood no chance and would have lost the war. Because we couldn't preserve our way of life. Something you all "petty". Don't worry, you clearly are submissive and I'll feel bad for you when you turn around and pull down your pants an say "here you go!!" when an enemy country knocks on your doorstep. You are foolish, sir.
I wonder what things would be like had Tecumseh not been killed. I think it would be neat if there were a separate country inside the US, with native american culture preserved. and no, Indian reservations aren't the same thing.
+Flintstoned I wonder if they would have later expanded allowed them to have greater control. The USA is a big place but is many empty so them losing land wouldn't really make much of a difference to them
William Henry Harrison said that he could have easily built an empire like the Aztecs encompassing that area of North America, had it not been for the USA being right there.
+Mailna Harrison was running for President when he said that & is is customary to puff up their accomplishments when doing so. "Look at this big bad enemy I personally defeated." The biggest factor in the tribes uniting behind Tecumseh had far more to do with the threat posed by American expansion then Tecumseh's actual ability to inspire. At this point the tribes would have followed anyone who was fighting back.
+Flintstoned Probably not. With the invention of the railroad and mechanization in general, manifest destiny became a steamroller that no one could stop. It would only be postponing the inevitable.
there is actually u see the us signed a deal with the native so they could have ther own country but 2 decades later the usa forgot and pushed them of ther land
+Vincente l This guy has fallen victim to the historic mistake of revisionism, where the actions of the past are judged by the morals and knowledge of the present. It is a fatal mistake to make. Judge actions by the knowledge and morality of the time I think most of these decisions were made by (then) good motivations, therefore we should celebrate the actions while acknowledging the unfortunate results.
+Adam Rafique-Clash of Clans "I hope corporations just stop taking over the US" I'll agree, though declaring the US to be a fascist regime is a bit misguided.
+Vincente l Though I think, in contrast to the histories of other empires and nations throughout the world, American history is pretty damn good. Every nation has dark aspects to its history that it's not proud of. There are most likely things we are doing today in our country that future Americans will look back on and condemn us for. The perspective of hundreds of years makes a lot of difference.
I remember reading somewhere: The Americans love the War of 1812 because they think they won, the Canadians love the War of 1812 because they think they won, and the British love the War of 1812 because they know they won.
“an episode in history that makes everybody happy, because everybody interprets it differently...the English are happiest of all, because they don’t even know it happened.”
Britain, you can't just stop shipping. (150 years later) Cuba you can't do that, quick block off all shipping. Do what we tell you to do Cuba, DO WHAT WE TELL YOU TO DO!
+Felix Hammer not the same thing we were blocking trade from America to Cuba. Plenty of other Western countries were free to trade with them. Britain impressed Americans who tried to trade with France even though they had no jurisdiction on American trade so that's where the difference lies.
What did Canada win? We fought Britain, not Canada. It wasn't even a country, it was the name of the colony under the British Empire. They also had two failed wanna-be Wars of Independence, called the Upper and Lower Canadian Rebellions, where they actually asked for American assistance. Lel.
"Americans were confident that Canadians would join the US. When marching from Detroit, General William Hull informed the Canadians: 'You will be emancipated from tyranny and oppression and restored to the dignified station of free men' and the Canadians were like 'Yeah, we're okay actually.'" BRILLIANT! I love Americans, but their pomposity made the British look modest and self-effacing by comparison!
With out debate over controversial events & how they are portrayed how do you know you watching history & not a white wash? You do know there is a difference don't you?
Ed Richardson To be fair, there's a difference between comments debating controversy and comments that shout "CANADA SUCKS" and "CANADA BITCHES !!!! Oh canada !! But fuck the queen!!"
In 2012, the actual canadian government made a huge deal of the War of 1812 (which is NOT thaught in Québec's history class) and we celebrated the 200th anniversary of the war with museums expositions and our usual Royal Canadian Mint (we have special coins pretty much every year, sometimes more than once per year). It is also the last war that took place on Canadian land.
Thomas Francis America wom because we beat the Indians without a lost of territory. Canada won because they were successful in the war. Britain won because they killed the most americans. The indians won because... No, they just lost.
The USA didn't declare war upon Natives so murdering them does not give you victory over Britain. Are you psychotic? According to article 9 of the Ghent treaty (which ended the war) the USA agreed to return all lands to natives to 1811 positions. Which means you lost to natives during the war & then murdered innocent people after the war for the crime of defending themselves.
Honestly the American rationale on this war is hilarious. They rushed for peace as soon as Napoleon was defeated. Imagine in the Duke of Wellington sailed to Canada after Waterloo? There probably would be no United States today
Never a British goal. All they wanted was trade preference & to protect their interests so long as profitable. That was Why Canada was let go in 1867. If The USA had made a fair offer instead of being dicks they could have avoided a world of hurt.
@@emperorconstantinexipalaio4121 What? Canada was Britain until we separated and made it our own country. Meaning 1812 Canadians are the same thing as British people. Great Britain won the war of 1812, not Canada. Which is how it goes when getting taught history in Canada. Stupid yank.
When you take on an Empire already at war to stop a tyrannt... yeah... its relevant. The USA timing was part of exploiting Britian and others being tied up stopping the "Empereor Napoleon". Most of the British forces were there. So yes, being part of the 1812 Canada-USA is highly significant. Even with Pappa Brit very busy the local Canadians still beat off the Americans and punished them for burning our capital buildings in York with burning theirs in Washington.
In Chatham, Ontario there is a park in our Downtown area called "Tecumseh Park" which has a Canon near the Thames River which is actually the historic site of the war of 1812 during the Battle of the Thames. The canon is pretty much a landmark here in Chatham-Kent and they have signs along the path towards it that shows some history from the war.
We lost 1812, and it wasn't even close. British crushed us almost everywhere. The thing about 1812 was that we didn't buckle as a nation, and I think that's the lesson there, is that we took our asswhipping like men, didn't cry to go back to Britain, nor did we give an inch in negotiations.
Don't be so hard on yourselves ... At least America's Got Talent. Lots of talented basketball players. Especially Lebron James. He use to dunk sometimes. Then America's got Dunkin Donuts that's got lots of fried dough balls with holes, and don't forget the biggest hole of them all, the Grand Canyon. You can hire Mexicans to measure it if you'd like because America borders Mexico and the Mexicans there are immeasurably reproductive at finding the hole. There's a whole lot of them that do, but America is a country with a whole lot of talent at least that is why America's Got Talent such as golfers, they specialize at finding the hole, because that's where they hit their golf balls in attempts at hitting a hole in one. Then there is firing in the hole, something which Americans are also talented at as once an American president named Andrew Jackson led some Americans who fired into a whole lot of British soldiers in New Orleans, then the British soldiers either ran for their lives or fell down and died in a hole. A song was written about it by a talented American named Johnny Horton called the Battle of New Orleans. Johnny Horton loved donuts, probably because who wouldn't, besides the British since Americans fired holes into the British army at New Orleans like they were donuts being devoured by Americans.
@@matthewblairrains6032 "but they where not trying to invade" Oh my god, I can confirm that most people didn't even watch the video. The British were planning on establishing a Native American state in the Midwest, as well as annexing part of Northern Maine.
@Kenny Ben The British request for land came AFTER the war. Since the British won, and the Americans were weakened, they thought they could gain territory from the negotiations. The war did not start because of British aggression and desire to expand territory.
***** Not true. The constitution is a joke, and it is party rule only and individual mps are only allowed to vote the way the party tells them. Name one great canadian statesman. Just one.
***** I'm glad you picked Sir JAM. PERFECT! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Scandal "The scandal ultimately led to the resignation of Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, and a transfer of power from his Conservative government to a Liberal government led by Alexander Mackenzie.[3] One of the new government's first measures was to introduce secret ballots in an effort to improve the integrity of future elections." A crook was your first choice and a douche bag was your 2nd. fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/05/24/pierre-trudeaus-disastrous-record-is-finally-laid-out-for-all-to-see/ Kelly McParland: Pierre Trudeau’s disastrous record is finally laid out for all to see
***** And every prime minister of Canada. But most especially the ones from Quebec. The very first Canadian prime minister gets caught red handed asking for another $10k bribe. Hilarious! All governments suck. Really really hard.
***** And you have been allowed to do just that. So what's with all the whiney bs? You've been allowed to wallow in your own national brand of socialism and nanny statism. Hey! Kathleen wynne is one ugly biatch! The last time something that ugly was elected to office, it was a horse. And it's arse looked better than wynne's face. No nation has benefited greater from it's US relationship than has Canada. so I guess you guys are all of imaginary history?
George Cockburn is my ancestor! I'm so excited you mentioned him in the video! I gotta tell you though it's pronounced Coh-burn. The spelling is just bad luck.
John Green: "And no matter how you feel about America's international interventions, you need to remember it didn't begin in Afghanistan or even Europe. It started with freakin' Canada". Canadians: "Sorry."
Fun facts: The bald eagle doesn't make that sound you think it does, that sound comes from the red-tailed hawk. The majority of the bald eagles' nesting grounds are in Canada, making them mostly native Canadians. And many of the Founding Fathers of the USA wanted the wild turkey to be their national animal because the turkey was more noble in their minds. The bald eagle scavenges and steals its food rather than hunting it more often than not, which is cowardly, and clearly not cool by capitalist standards.
fortheallince Congrats on those birds, but, Colorado has a very small bird population compared to Canada and the rest of the states. Fun fact #2: Canada has more natural farming and less Monsanto, in comparison to America. Both countries have fake meat of all kinds though. I personally prefer the organic, Canadian made/butchered bacon; or as some of us might call it: meat-candy :D
No, Ben Franklin once wrote in a letter about adding the turkey as the national bird.. It was not officially stated and definitely not wide spread. Also, any bald eagle that lives in Canada is simply just visiting, this way they get a real appreciation for true freedom of the US by viewing an oppressed communist country that is Canada. (because this is the internet, I want to mention that is 100% satire)
Side note: in the US history course I took, the teacher referred to Henry Clay (mentioned at 2:18), John C Calhoun, and Daniel Webster as the politicians that never died. That is to say, they pop up countless times in 19th century US history
Traditionally, achievement of war aims names the victor in war. The US wished to annex the Canadas (North and South) which it failed to do. Great Britain wished to repel an American invasion into it's crown territories, which it was able to achieve, but it did not wish to take control of America again as it would have been economically unviable due to the debts it amassed during the Napoleonic Wars. So to this end, Britain did win the War of 1812, however neither side (aside from the Indians of course) actually suffered any serious repercussions and the war itself did not have have a significant direct impact, although it did indirectly bring many benefits to the US. It's like someone trying to take your pencil and you stopping them. Sure you stopped them, but the point of it has been lost somewhere.
Since I was a child I always liked to envision the US and Canada as half-brothers; the US being bred from their mother England and father Spain, while Canada born of England and father France. Canada is the "good" son who has kept in touch with it's mother and never created waves in the community. US is the young upstart, who *rebelled* in it's youth to be it's "own person" (so to speak), and continues to try maintain it's reputation as someone you shouldn't fuck with. The US is the older, tougher brother, where Canada, although bigger in size, is more the kinder, gentler young brother. They've had their differences, and even come to blows when they were growing up, with Canada showing at a early age that he won't be bullied, but they've resolved their major differences. Aside from occasionally picking on and name calling, they know that they can trust one another to have each other's back and rely on the brotherhood they share. In the future they may have a "falling-out", but for now, despite their current money problems, they remain Great North American Brothers. Oh, and Mexico is the US's other brother, whom he keeps trying to disassociate with, trying to put up *walls* in their relationship to keep it *out* of it's life, because the US thinks Mexico is *stealing* money from him. This was fun...
It's a country, not a woman. I mean, come on, man. Just listen to some of the stuff our forefathers signed on to. How do you take pride in this crap? Because it just happened to benefit you?
Kaiser Louis-Philip V Sure its nation but isn't a critical historical examination more honest then mythologizing it? Pride is more about ego then sincere affection. My people were largely stone age tech when the Europeans showed up, not a whole lot to boast about compared to putting a man on the moon but we are good people. Fought bravely for the causes we believed in. We had our heroes & villains. Triumphs & Failures. (America coming in to being was not of any particular benefit to my people really.) What do you want to compare your Nation to? Rome? British Empire at its peak? So its not as good as you hoped, is it as bad as it could have been ether? Our feelings about the past shouldn't be too nostalgic, after all the reason we study the past to better understand where we are going.
"In 1814 we took a little trip, along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Mississip. We took a little bacon and we took a little beans, and we fought the bloody British in the town of New Orleans."
Amarianee -There once was a man named Madison, he's the president you know, he thought he'd tell the British, right where they could go, he said "we'll invade Canada", he thought he was so tough, instead we went to washingtoooooonnnn.... and burned down all his stuff! And the Whitehouse burned burned burned, and we're the ones that did it, it burned burned burned, and the president ran and cried
Adversary DOT-Communist It doesn't matter if was strategic or not. It was the capitol of the United States. It was sacked and razed. That is an overwhelming victory for the British. As to New Orleans. Yes that battle was a victory for the US, however the British just sailed down the coast and captured another area. Then they got word that the War was over and they went home. The Invasion of Upper Canada was the failed start of an attempt to capture BNA. This was said that it would only be a matter of marching and then they where to march on Halifax in 1813. However the stiff resolve of defence of the Local Red Coats, Canadians, Natives, and American Immigrants proved the US wrong. The United States had hoped for a quick victory in the war, and it turned out to be a very very costly war that brought the US Economy to its knees.
All I'll say to the Murican Revisionists who claim the burning of Washtub DC 'did not matter' is this... Bladensburg, the battle where Jimmy 'the Warmonger' Madison and his sordid crew ran from a numerically inferior force with their tails between their legs like whipped dogs... War is expensive, a nation with no domestic taxes whose income depends entirely on trade tariffs in it's blockaded ports, that has NO way to pay it's war debt, gets it's capital burnt to the ground by enemy forces, and responds by sending diplomats to Europe, uninvited, to negotiate a peace, in a treaty that specifically forbade said nation from claiming Canadian soil... That's not a win, that's "our bankers have cut off our overdraft, time to surrender gracefully and hope we don't get too screwed..."
+Thanato "It doesn't matter if was strategic or not. It was the capitol of the United States. It was sacked and razed. That is an overwhelming victory for the British. " Capit*A*l of the US. Capitol is one of the seven hills of rome and a type of government building (in the case of the United States federal government the one the Congress with its two houses/chambers resides in) named after the imperial roman palace built on it. Capital is the word for a "head city" (the literal meaning of capital) including all other kinds of buildings besides capitols. And burning a parliamentary building or the "Executive mansion" isn't winning a war just like burning down Moscow didn't let Napoleon "win" _his_ russian campaign. As long as you don't get a hold of the government and can turn that into a negotiation position it is unimportant who holds the house it usually sits in. As long as the administration can and does work, you haven't won anything but a thinly veiled symbolic strike.
Okay, kids. Britain won, we get it. It was important to the US as England stopped seizing US ships, we stood up to a great power and survived which made other countries respect us a lot more. It also helped us in production advances.
6 лет назад
you tried to invade Canada but then ended up with a burned down white house and a shitty peace treaty. and by a smaller british force might i add. and no, the usa lost a lot of respect after the war, due to the fact that the british army only had about 4000 regular troops there. most of the fighting was done by canadian farmers. you should of had it in the bag, but instead ended up with nothing. american war goals: annex canada and push the british out of america. british war goals: defend canada form US attack then counter attack until peace treaty is signed
Anime Uploader uhhh it was us awesome Canadians who burned your White House lol also when you USA residents tried to steal Germany hill in WW1 you failed Canada stepped in we won now in Germany the German bunker hill is part of a museum
Common misconception #1: "The British were kicked out the US a second time". Incorrect. What would be a better way of putting it is "The US was kicked out of Canada". However for the sake of maintaining a myth this salient fact is brushed over, sloppily. Let's remember who initiated the war, the United States, and that their key intention was a swift and decisive victory in Canada. The fact the precise opposite happened should tell you who really won. Then the focus is thrown onto the British counter offensive into US territory and it's apparent "lack of success". For fighting what started as a defensive war only to end utterly repulsing the attackers and tearing a new arsehole right across the aggressors territory, that is categorically NOT failure. British troops were operating on US soil right upto the war's official and technical conclusion (Capture of Fort Bowyer). There was no kicking out, simply an exit after causing terrible damage to the aggressor. The fact that the US launched an offensive to start the war only to end up fighting a desperate defensive war as far South as New Orleans shows you who really won. *Common misconception* #2: "The USN defeated the Royal Navy" The US enjoyed some early frigate victories in the war against the stretched out British Naval Squadron operating out of Halifax. And later on had success attacking British whaling and the likes in the Pacific and near the Galapagos/ Western seaboard of South America. This only happened for the wars first year. After the capture of the USS Chesapeake by the HMS Shannon a trend set and the British evened the score in frigate actions. The Royal Navy went on to impose a devastating economic and trade naval blockade on the US, thus wrecking the US economy. The raids conducted under the supervision of John Borlase Warren terrified the Chesapeake region and the British caught more prizes than the US. Ventures like that of David Porter against British whaling ships in the Pacific were put to an end when his ships the USS Essex and USS Essex Junior were taken by James Hillyar on the HMS Phoebe and HMS Cherub. The total effect on the British maritime economy by the War of 1812, with British whaling recovering well, was negligible and didn't amount to more than a scratch.
The Colonies under British rule were run as business ventures with little interference from parliament unless asked for by those businesses. The Hudson Bay Company ran Most of what is modern day Canada. It was Businesses in Quebec & Ontario (Upper Canada) that lobbied for Canadian independence. It was all about money. Fact is independence made little difference for the vast majority of people regardless American Canadian or any where else in the Empire. A lot of very rich people gained & lost in the changes though.
We had not just one but two failed wannabe American Revolutions and then we just asked nicely. By that time Canada was seen by the British as not worth the effort to keep under control and let us have a semi-independent Dominion (because Americans were squeamish about having a Kingdom border them). So basically the Canadians were pretty much one of the only nations to gain independence by asking nicely. That sounds quintessentially Canadian to me. And I'm Canadian!
Deathshead1923 They were NOT "Wanna be American" Revolutions both happened because of outrage at local corruption not British Tyranny which is how the Americans fancy theirs to be. In short there wasn't enough British oversight. Which historicaly has actually more often the cause of problems in British colonies.
Well Trump's inaugural speech wasn't the longest, but he used the word "sad" more times than any other president - do you think that qualifies for at least a smidgen of pneumonia?
"Sir, we could crush these hockey fans in a matter of weeks... But they are simply too kind so none of our men shoots at them :- (" - unknown American general to the President
Technically Canada won the War of 1812, simply because we held off Manifest Destiny of the Americans and retained all of the land that would become our great nation. So, yeah, there you have it.
Still it is hard to convince anyone that a country “held Off’ something that didn’t exist until 30 plus years later and only then as an idea. Manifest Destiny was a plan, a theme. Better to say that Great Britain kept the US from claiming Canada (what would we do with it? Go skiing) and all Americans from enjoying hockey and freezing their asses off… What part of America are you from anyway... Is Vancouver / Edmonton / Calgary / middle of nowhere / close to Toronto? LOL timtwoface
Don't get me wrong, the Americans got fucked up and went home with nothing but dead bodies. However the only thing that kept my country, Canada, safe from Manifest Destiny was Great Britain and eventually our close friendship with the United States of America. We're not a warlike people, we don't have the population or infrastructure .
Loved the Canada Jokes!! Love Crash Course too, history was a really dry subject in school. This is way more interesting and fun. Even if this is like 4 years old video ^_^
The only reason is I feel that Canada "won" this war is that we successfully defended ourselves and took 2 major U.S. cities before giving them back because there was no real purpose for it. And I also say the states "lost" simply because their plans failed and came closer to losing land than gaining it. Edit: yes I know that the British came and finished the job but Canada held it's own just fine (and looking back now that is all that really needed to happen) for long enough so Britain could come back and "help out" (intimidate the Americans enough so that they sign a treaty) to just end a pointless loss of life and resources.
The purpose of the US invading Canada was to get the attention of the British. Yes the invasions didnt all go as planned, but in the end they got the attention of the British. Now in the long run it ended up becoming a 2nd revolutionary war for the Americans when the British attempted to reclaim much of the US. That's where I think many Americans saw it as a win as the ultimately defended their country successfully from the strongest military in the world (even if they didnt come full force). Much of what the US's military is today came from what they learned in this war. So it was still a milestone and what I'd call a success. However as far as he war goes I'd call it a draw in a really pointless war.
I'm British and don't feel too bad about the war. I just researched the other countries Britain was at war with at the time. Spain France India Africa west indies. in all fairness to britain, if Britain focused it's full attention to America then there would be no America. it's people would have been killed. America found it's self in a sweet spot against the British. not only at war with 5 different countries at the the time but when Britain lost soldiers they took weeks to get back across the Atlantic, Americans could replace instantly.millions of Americans vs a few British ships with soldiers on board is in my eyes not worthy of the word "war". in the UK we call the revolutionary war a scuffle. which is basically a bar fight. the real war was with France. if Britain lost to France then we would all be speaking french right now.
The British wanted the Native American tribe territories in the West and in 1812 those territories were not yet a part of USA. That's why the British and Canadians were a team with Native American tribes to defeat USA. America gained territories in the West which are now the 50 states of USA. So America did win the war of 1812 since Britain didn't win the battles to take over western territories. And yeah America wears the pants with Canada which is another way of saying America is dominant.
