Author Topic: The Name Is Appeasement ... (German Paper Article) (Read 4516 times)

J_A_B · « **Reply #45 on:** August 14, 2005, 01:07:16 PM »

"oh yeah... that would be funny... finland and england attacking capitol hill..."

Well, at least the British can claim to have done it before.

J_A_B

Gunslinger · « **Reply #46 on:** August 14, 2005, 01:08:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
"oh yeah... that would be funny... finland and england attacking capitol hill..."

Well, at least the British can claim to have done it before.

J_A_B

yes and we all know how that turned out

AKH · « **Reply #47 on:** August 14, 2005, 02:53:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
yes and we all know how that turned out

We captured and burned it. Now what is your point, if any?

Gunslinger · « **Reply #48 on:** August 14, 2005, 02:58:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKH
We captured and burned it. Now what is your point, if any?

scoot ahead in the history timeline.

AKH · « **Reply #49 on:** August 14, 2005, 03:01:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
scoot ahead in the history timeline.

To when?

Gunslinger · « **Reply #50 on:** August 14, 2005, 03:06:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKH
To when?

October 19, 1781 would do just fine for me.

storch · « **Reply #51 on:** August 14, 2005, 03:09:20 PM »

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

AKH · « **Reply #52 on:** August 14, 2005, 03:26:06 PM »

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

AKH · « **Reply #53 on:** August 14, 2005, 03:35:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
to when we kicked your behinds so hard you returned to england wearing your bottom sides as hats circa 1815 iirc. be thankful we didn't ally with france or you would be eating croissants and napoleons now. er wait...... maybe we didn't do you any favors afterall.

Sure. That's why Canada is part of the USA, isn't it? Your primary aim was to remove Britain from the continent. You declared war. You attacked. You failed.

Status quo ante bellum doesn't imply an overwhelming victory as you do.

storch · « **Reply #54 on:** August 14, 2005, 04:54:45 PM »

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #55 on:** August 14, 2005, 05:05:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKH
Your primary aim was to remove Britain from the continent. You declared war. You attacked. You failed.

I don't think we had a primary aim of removing Britain from the continent. From around 1776 on, our primary aim was to remove Britain from our new nation. YOU attacked , WE declared war, YOU lost. TWICE.

AKH · « **Reply #56 on:** August 14, 2005, 05:17:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
you sir are a student of revisionist history. Oh btw nice hat, it suits you.

Please elaborate. Specifically, what exactly has been revised?

AKH · « **Reply #57 on:** August 14, 2005, 05:53:37 PM »

Quote

The seat of anti-British fever was in the Northwest and the lower Ohio Valley, where the land-hungry frontiersmen had no doubt that their troubles with the Indians were the result of British intrigue. Stories were circulated after every Indian raid of British Army muskets and equipment being found on the field. By 1812 the westerners were convinced that their problems could best be solved by forcing the British out of Canada.

While the western "war hawks" urged war in the hope of conquering Canada, the people of Georgia, Tennessee, and the Mississippi Territory entertained similar designs against Florida, a Spanish possession. The fact that Spain and England were allies against Napoleon presented the southern war hawks with an excuse for invading Florida. By this time, also, the balance of political power had shifted south and westward; ambitious party leaders had no choice but to align themselves with the war hawks, and 1812 was a Presidential election year.

President Madison's use of economic pressure to force England to repeal its blockade almost succeeded. The revival of the Non-Intercourse Act against Britain, prohibiting all trade with England and its colonies, coincided with a poor grain harvest in England and with a growing need of American provisions to supply the British troops fighting the French in Spain. As a result, on June 16, 1812, the British Foreign Minister announced that the blockade would be relaxed on American shipping. Had there been an Atlantic cable, war might have been averted. President Madison had sent a message to Congress on June 1 listing all the complaints against England and asking for a declaration of war. Dividing along sectional lines the House had voted for war on June 4, but the Senate approved only on June 18 and then by only six votes.

Revisionist or not?

Torque · « **Reply #58 on:** August 14, 2005, 07:19:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
no you didn't, you couldn't have managed it without our help for the second time in a half century. we had to cross the puddle to once again save your hides. all well and good that we did. perhaps we should stay out of this coming fight and see how well you guys acquit yourselves without the help of your stronger and considerably wiser younger brother.

cuba sent troops to the eto?

AKH · « **Reply #59 on:** August 14, 2005, 08:22:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I don't think we had a primary aim of removing Britain from the continent. From around 1776 on, our primary aim was to remove Britain from our new nation.

Well, you think wrong or this is a lie - take your pick.

Quote

The fundamental strategy was simple enough. The primary undertaking would be the conquest of Canada.

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
YOU attacked , WE declared war, YOU lost. TWICE.

ONE LOSS, ONE DRAW, actually, but don't let HISTORICAL REALITY get in your way.

I hope the CAPS helped