![Gen._Sir_William_Howe[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Twe9TCu.jpg "Gen._Sir_William_Howe[1].jpg")
Where did the British go wrong during the American revolutionary war? Why exactly did they lose it? Curious.
>French assistance to Americans allowed them to simply outsupply the British
>retarded, but hard to predict, American guerilla tactics
>dissatisfaction amongst the populace with British taxation budged them towards supporting the rebellion
>American propaganda was also better
>>511322
>retarded, but hard to predict, American guerilla tactics
>American propaganda was also better
these two do not even deserve to be in the presence of the other two points 2bh family, so insignificant they are comparetively
>>511283
Not enough support. Most of the populous were happy to remain loyalist, since very little of the concerns affected them. But the British just had too much shit going on elsewhere to commit much of a force compared to the rebels and their allies.
Best thing said about it is that "America didn't win, but Britain certainly lost."
>>511283
As soon as France and Spain got involved (early 1776 for France when it comes to supplies), it was over.
Unlike what American propoganda says to make the revolution look more impressive, Britain wasnt a superpower yet in late 18th century
They were merely a lesser European power with a relatively small empire (in orange on pic related).
>>511283
I think about this a lot, the main thing the British fucked up on was not treating the likes of Adams, Washington and Franklin with the a little more respect.
Washington began his military career as a proud British officer, Adams defended the perpetrators of the Boston massacre, and Franklin had previously been humiliated when in London. Most of these men could have been appeased but both sides were too proud.
Britain did send an invading force which had the effect of convincing indifferent colonist that Britain essentially viewed them as another country already so oops.
Once the war began, Britain would have done well to be brutal if they wanted to win. They could have empowered more Natives, Slaves, and Loyalists and fought a ruthless counter-insurgency but it was the 18th century and they were largely too traditional for such tactics.
>>512145
I don't know, i would say the UK was probably the most powerful country in the world after the French and Indian wars, the fact America needed the support of Spain, France, as well as ancillary support from the still very powerful Netherlands in the form of credit and arms, shows how significant an adversary the UK was
>>512556
>I don't know, i would say the UK was probably the most powerful country in the world after the French and Indian wars
And you would be fucking wrong
The French and Indian War was a secondary theater in a big european war
Most european powers were stronger than Britain, the fact Britain managed to steal some colonies from France by outnumbering them 4 to 1 overseas while they were busy in Europe proves in no way they were stronger than them
How naive are you?
>the fact America needed the support of Spain, France, as well as ancillary support from the still very powerful Netherlands in the form of credit and arms, shows how significant an adversary the UK was
It proves they were a strong adversary for a bunch of peasants, yes, but not that they were a superpower
It only took French support to balance things
Spanish support was very superficial and only happened because France told them to, and don't get me started on Dutch "support".
Britain factually was a lesser european power
Sure they were terrifying for a bunch of colonials trying to revolt, but it only took 1.5 major european powers to get involved for them to lose.
>>512633
Britain often didn't field large armies on the continent, they didn't have too. Gave Prussia enough money to fuck everyone royally in the seven years war, deal with it. The UK won, get over it. Sure it probably wasn't capable of beating the French ,in France, in a land war but so what? France was not able to do the same to the UK. And i don't know where you get this 4 to 1 number from are why you consider it a bad thing.
Frances population was at least 3 times larger than the UK's. It is embarrassing that the UK was as powerful as it was, seriously what is your agenda for pretending it wasn't?
>>512556
If it hadn't been Washington, Franklin and Adams it would have be 3 other butthurt men, maybe 20 years later.
>>512762
>And i don't know where you get this 4 to 1 number from
It's the numbers for the French and Indian War
>why you consider it a bad thi
I dont considere it "a bad thing"
Simply, it shows that Britain committed its full strength on what was but a secondary theater for the French, and yet still had to struggle an entire decade to win.
This strongly conflicts with you naive view of the world back then with Britain as the most powerful country of the planet
>>512633
>Spanish support was very superficial and only happened because France told them to,
>In 1776, the Count of Aranda met in representation of Spain with the first U.S. Commission composed by Benjamin Franklin, Silas Deane and Arthur Lee.[94] The Continental Congress had charged the commissioners to travel to Europe and forge alliances with other European powers that could help break the British naval blockade along the North American coast. Aranda invited the commission to his house in Paris, where he was acting as Spanish ambassador and he became an active supporter of the struggle of the fledgling Colonies, recommending an early and open Spanish commitment to the Colonies. However, he was overruled by José Moñino, 1st Count of Floridablanca who opted for a more discreet approach. The Spanish position was later summarized by the Spanish Ambassador to the French Court, Jerónimo Grimaldi, in a letter to Arthur Lee who was in Madrid trying to persuade the Spanish government to declare an open alliance. Grimaldi told Lee that "You have considered your own situation, and not ours. The moment is not yet come for us. The war with Portugal — France being unprepared, and our treasure ships from South America not being arrived — makes it improper for us to declare immediately."[95] Meanwhile, Grimaldi reassured Lee, stores of clothing and powder were deposited at New Orleans and Havana for the Americans, and further shipments of blankets were being collected at Bilbao.
>>511369
This. The idea the American Revolution was fought by amateurs taking potshots from the trees whilst the British stood around in lines, is completely bullshit.
It is actually notable that the Americans only started winning when they started fighting in formations, just like Europeans.
Its not like the Americans had a monopoly on the idea either. The famous Rogers Rangers, the people who litterally wrote the rules for guerrilla fighting, we're British loyalists.
