Now that /his/ is a thing...
Who won 1812?
>>7034
>flags are gone so this type of thread doesnt work anymore
CANADA WON. I AM TOTALLY NOT A CANADIAN POSTER!!!
I keep hearing that Canadians burned down D.C. But I can't find a source. Everything points to British troops doing so.
>>7872
Canada didn't really exist back then.
>>7034
It was a stalemate. Nothing was really accomplished.
>>7034
America, we got more out of it than Britain desu
>jackson
>stopped impressment
>show of power
>our national hymn
>declare war
>fail spectacularly
>capitol burn down
>forced to truce
The US won 1812 like they won Vietnam.
Should the War of 1812 be considered a part of the Napoleonic Wars?
>>7872
it was upper and lower canada at the time
>fishing rights in the gulf of st lawrence
Obviously the USA
it was a white peace, neither side won or lost
>>8014
a major factor that lead to the war - the impressment of US sailors into the british navy - was directly due to the napoleonic wars, but idk if I'd really go that far.
>>7171
Lel
>>7034
Why do Canadians like to claim they beat America, as in its current 50 state form?
Not fight 13 state Colonial America to a draw with the British doing everything?
Single states like California or Texas could beat Canada
>>8182
If something as incidental as a Russo-Turkish war is considered part of the Napoleonic Wars, I see no reason for the War of 1812 not to be included. It wouldn't have happened if not for the wars in Europe and the US maintained sympathy for France, Quasi-War notwithstanding.
>>8014
No. There were still issues between the US and UK from the Revolutionary War, the Napoleonic Wars only gave the immediate cause as a byproduct of strain on the Royal Navy.
>>7872
The soldiers that burnt down DC had just come from the Peninsula (i.e. Spain and Portugal), so most of them probably did not live in Canada.
>>8682
>canada barely makes the 25 year limit
>>8659
British troops, cant remember where the garrison came from that specifically
It was all just one big laugh for everyone involved
>>7985
Impressment ended before the US declared war.
It's retarded to say the US lost the war because their capital building was burned. Wars aren't a game where winning is done by capturing a capital. You might as well say Prussia lost the 7 years war because the Russians occupied Berlin.
It was a tie because neither country accomplished the victory it set out for. Britain's 3 prong attack failed to meet up in 2 parts and the lower part was a defeat at New Orleans by Jackson.
>>9947
The British had bigger fish to fry, namely Napoleon, They eventually beat him, but at the cost of losing america, if anything Napoleon won that war.
>>10227
The Battle of New Orleans was fought after Napoleons defeat using veterans of the Napoleonic war.
>>10278
So the British forces immediately went back to full strength the day after winning against napoleon just like in my video games?
What I'm aying is that you can't deny Napoleon had a huge part, if that war was the only one the British were fighting, America would be speaking english right now. British english.
>>10352
Well of course it had something to do with it, but you could say the US wasn't in prime condition either what with its Navy being whittled down to nothing thanks to Jefferson or the wars being fought against the Indians in Florida. Wars aren't often fought at the convenience of both parties. The point is that it was a tie because neither side accomplished what it wanted to and both just wanted to end it since fighting served no more purpose.
>>10594
Exactly, I agree with everything you just said.
Interesting excersise to imagine 'what if' though.
>>7034
Nobody won, It was a stalemate.
>>10882
read the thread first faggot
fuck we history board now
hope it's good
andnot shit
fuck
like years forver phil collins
Notice how Canadians love to take credit for british victories but never take credit for the time based Andrew Jackson fucking destroyed the brits an New Orleans
I hope this board works
pls work
>>11094
this thread is just /int/ without flags
fucking pointless
>>11094
I'm liking the board so far.
>>11001
It really does seem like the battle of New Orleans gets overlooked a lot simply because of the treaty being signed before the battle began. In the process of repelling the Brits Jackson turned formerly anti-American pirates into allied privateers, as well as injecting a new sense of American unity to the people of New Orleans (all still newly acquired from the French).
>>7034
British "won" in terms of military/strategic victories. However, the ensuing peace called for Status quo ante bellum.
>>7034
US:
>got impressment to stop for the most part
>showed itself as a worthy power at land and sea
>continued to be a country (1812 is often referred to as the Second War of Independence)
>was embarrassed by Canadian ventures and White House burning
Brits:
>got their pride hurt by severe early naval losses
>were too busy fighting Napoleon and the Dutch to really worry all that much about those damn colonials
>continued to be a massive empire for the next century
Canadians:
>got something to feel sort of proud about compared to big brother USA, even though they weren't a thing back then
>>7034
STATUS QUO ANTE BELLUM
T
A
T
U
S
Q
U
O
A
N
T
E
B
E
L
L
U
M
>>8940
They didn't fight the colonial form, they fought the early-1800s form. The nation just started expanding west, and had built a sizeable military. They had Russian Empire-tier tactics, as in awful, so the failed their invasion of Canada. Canada pushed them out and was able to take parts of Michigan, a victory to many people. However, Britain got BTFO, so they made a white peace, meaning Canada had to give up Michigan. The Canadians would consider it a victory because they were able to successfully invade the US and successfully defend Canada. keep in mind that they had expanded very deep into the west at this point.
The Revolution happened way earlier and didn't involve Canada.
>>12007
>They had Russian Empire-tier tactics, as in awful
Please elaborate on this
Do you think Americlaps will ever pay us back for our damn tea?
>>12289
Ask us again next week.
>>7034
Canada won meme.
>>9947
The war was over before the battle of new orleans was fought. Words traveled slow in those days.
>>11094
it's like /lit/ + /int/ with a dash of /pol/
i like it
>>12289
I think Britain being in massive debt to the US after WWI shows us how thoroughly we pay back our debts.
Canadian here
Honestly consider the war to be a draw. Nobody really gained or lost land
>>12045
The Russian Empire had absolutely awful tactics, seen especially well in the Russo-Japanese War and WWI, and remnants of it in WWII and preceding wars.
For example, they used outdated tactics with outdated ships in the RJW. They couldn't properly communicate with each other and used more traditional land battle maneuvers. In WWI, they just threw troops at the Germans until one side lost all of their troops, and after that they drained on already strained resource lines to fuel a hideously unpopular war. Something like this can be seen in WWII with Stalin's strategy. There are plenty more examples of these.
>>7034
The US didn't manage to achieve all of its aims, and neither did the British. However the US did manage to assert itself as a country that could fight the British on relatively equal terms. We also got control of the Ohio River Valley.
British didn't lose Canada, and that was really what mattered. So it came down to neither got exactly what they wanted, but the Americans at least got some of what they wanted.
>>7034
We also burned down York, aka Canada's capital today.
The reason all those Canucks never bring that up is cause even they know how irrelevant they are.
It was more or less a draw, with all sides getting some gains out of it to a degree. The only side that really got the short end of the stick were the natives.
>>13421
York was rebuilt as Toronto. Canada's capital is Ottawa.
No one won, and the Indians lost.
>>7034
>Before the war: Impressment
>After the war: No Impressment
USA obviously
>>15586
>the Indians lost
That's all that matters
No one won, no one lost except for the indians, like usual kek.
>>9350
>>canada barely makes the 25 year limit
Trudeauvian/Liberal propaganda. The British North American colonies got responsible government (the governor would appoint the executive council from the legislative assemblies and would be bound to follows it advice) in the 1850s. In 1867, the British North America Act created the Dominion of Canada, which for the most part was internally self-governing. In 1931, the Statute of Westminster gave the self-governing dominions of the British Empire (and Commonwealth) equal status to the United Kingdom.
By Canada's own request, however, the British North America Act remained UK legislation. The Dominion government and the provinces could not agree to an amending formula (e.g. 2/3 of both houses in Congress and 3/4 of state legislatures in the USA, a referendum being approved throughout the Commonwealth and the majority of states in Australia, etc.). This is what changed in 1982, with the passing of the Canada Acts in Canada and the UK.
There's a better case for 1867 being the "birthday" for Canada than 1982.
>>16975
I don't really think that's propaganda. Even if the Liberals try to make a big deal out of Trudeau "bringing home" the constitution, I doubt any of them would consider 1982 to be Canada's birthday, and if they did they'd get a lot of flak for it. Anyone who argues that Canada is only about 25 years old is either grossly uninformed or a dumbass most likely.
>>15416
Ottawa was made the capital in 1856.
Before that, the capital of the Province of Canada was a variety of cities including Toronto. Twice.
Alright, this is my opinion as a Brit.
The US invaded Canada and fully blew the settlers/Canadians the fuck out.
Then British troops came over and saved them.
Now what part of that is a Canadian victory?
>>17867
While that is a good point, the post being replied to said "Canada's capital today."
