MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 48 of 115 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47    48    49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115 )
Message
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/28/2022 9:20:20 PM
In the upper Hudson River Valley the hoped for influx of Loyalists to the British cause failed to materialize . Now, if you had mentioned the Mohawk Valley, then I would agree that in that arena, it was a civil war.

The British never did follow up on that "victory" since they retreated back to Canada in 1776. Logistics made the retreat the only possible solution. The battle proved to be a strategic victory for the American quest for independence.

Since you failed to capitalize "second world war", are you saying that that it too was a civil war? Or is your shift key not working properly? That happens to me too.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 5:51:22 AM
On this day in Baseball,...The New York Times reports Curt Flood will challenge the reserve clause by suing major league baseball. The Cardinal outfielder's legal action, whose case will ultimately be appealed unsuccessfully in the U.S. Supreme Court, paves the way for the players in the future to overturn baseball's reserve clause in their attempt to gain free agency.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 7:07:05 AM
Quote:
In the upper Hudson River Valley the hoped for influx of Loyalists to the British cause failed to materialize . Now, if you had mentioned the Mohawk Valley, then I would agree that in that arena, it was a civil war.

The British never did follow up on that "victory" since they retreated back to Canada in 1776. Logistics made the retreat the only possible solution. The battle proved to be a strategic victory for the American quest for independence.

Since you failed to capitalize "second world war", are you saying that that it too was a civil war? Or is your shift key not working properly? That happens to me too.


Again, you stated that the British were defeated at Valcour Island. Check your post They were not. As well, I have already stated that it was a clear tactical victory but not a strategic one. The best general that the rebels had, Benedict Arnold, was defeated and he retreated to Fort Ticonderoga. The British returned to winter quarters and it was a failed attempt to travel down the Hudson.

You are simply reiterating what I have already said.

The participants in the Revolutionary War were all British subjects other than the mercenaries on both sides. And since this was a war of internal conflict between members of the same tribe, that is sufficient for me to call it a civil war. And I am the least important of those legitimate historians who agree with me.

However, there are some interesting articles that compare and contrast civil war with revolutionary wars. We could look at those. If there is a significant difference we could consider that what started as a civil war evolved into a revolution. I would have to be convinced of the factors that create a difference between the two.

There are similarities between the causes of the first civil war and the one in the 1860's in that there was a faction among the people that resented infringement by the government on rights that they perceived that they had.

Another similarity is that both sides were well represented. In the first civil war that was won by those who favoured separation from the crown, approximately 30% of the population did not favour separation and many would fight to prevent it. These were the Loyalists. I presume that as in any civil conflict that a portion of the population were frightened and ambivalent and just wanted to continue to live their lives. Others may have shared the views of those that resented the British government but did not wish to resort to violence and favoured negotiation. And then we have those who supported rebellion.

And the third similarity is that both civil wars were bloody and ended with resentment of the other. One major difference is that during the revolution, a large number of those called Loyalists were compelled to leave the country. And many of those had been abused and had their assets seized. I am pretty sure that that did not happen in the second civil war.

I would add that the War of 1812 is considered by some historians to be a civil war as well in that it involved the same groups or factions as were involved in the first conflict. Loyalists, Patriots, Britons and First Nations.

Quote:
Since you failed to capitalize "second world war", are you saying that that it too was a civil war? Or is your shift key not working properly? That happens to me too.


Such an obscure comment. An attempt at humour?? Don't quit your day job.



NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 7:19:30 AM
The American Revolution, while not often called a civil war by modern historians, was referred to as a civil war in its first year, until William Henry Drayton, South Carolina’s chief justice, first used the term "American Revolution" in 1776. One major difference between the two terms is length. While some revolutions, such as the Cuban revolution, last multiple years, many revolutions are relatively short-lived.
What made the American Revolution look most like a civil war, though, was the reality that about one-third of the colonists, known as loyalists (or Tories), continued to support and fought on the side of the crown.

Looks can be deceiving though.

Looks like you fixed your shift key.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 7:33:34 AM
Quote:
The American Revolution, while not often called a civil war by modern historians, was referred to as a civil war in its first year, until William Henry Drayton, South Carolina’s chief justice, first used the term "American Revolution" in 1776. One major difference between the two terms is length. While some revolutions, such as the Cuban revolution, last multiple years, many revolutions are relatively short-lived.
What made the American Revolution look most like a civil war, though, was the reality that about one-third of the colonists, known as loyalists (or Tories), continued to support and fought on the side of the crown.

Looks can be deceiving though.

Looks like you fixed your shift key.



Why NY, I'm shocked. You quickly googled to find the difference between a civil war and a revolution and then cut and pasted the first response that you saw. No need to even hit the article that it came from.

Quote:
Looks can be deceiving though.


"If it looks like a duck.................." I think that the problem we are having is that to call the event a civil war makes you uneasy because it doesn't comport with the narrative that has been spun for nearly 250 years that the conflict was a grand and noble uprising of a people against a terrible tyrant who had committed great misdeeds against the people. I think that that vision is not sufficiently nuanced to allow for a more cold, sanguine analysis of the causes of the civil unrest and the aftermath. It does not do justice to the opinions of the Loyalists who were treated most shabbily by those who purported to be seeking freedom. Nor does it allow for the views of the British who were responsible for the establishment of British North America and had defended those who would support civil unrest.
That the result of the conflict was the creation of new nation that became a great power is not disputed. How could it be? The duck walks.

George
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 9:42:41 AM
Last I checked, ducks waddle.

Designed primarily for paddling, the legs of waterfowl are set back on the body. It's that placement, along with their large webbed feet, that gives the birds their characteristic waddle
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 10:01:25 AM

12-26,

1991 Mikhail Gorbachev resigns, the Soviet Union will collapse within the year!? Did anyone see that coming??

1943 the German Cruiser Scharnhorst is sunk by HMS Duke of York! Anyone on the details??

2004 the Indian Ocean Tsunami happens, killing over 200'000 people! Where might the next one be?? Is it possible on the Pacific Coast of N. America, or else where!? Anyone??

12-26, is Boxing Day in the Commonwealth countries! Happy belated Boxing Day to all of our Commonwealth members! Why do they call it Boxing Day?? Anyone?

12-27,

1831, Charles Darwin in his ship the HMS Beagle starts his journey to formulate his theory of evolution!? What caused him to come up with this?? He sure shook up many religions?? What say you??

1801 Napoleon conquers Italy! Why did he want to take all of Europe? What about that? Anyone??

1949 Indonesia becomes independent from the Dutch!? Did it take force?? Comments?

12-28,

1065 Westminster Abbey is opened! Anyone with the history of this great church??

1856 Woodrow Wilson is born! Why has he become kind of a villain of US Presidents? What say you??

2008 the Detroit Lions, my team become the 1st NFL team to go 0-16, way to go Lions!? 🤔

1832 John C Calhoun becomes the 1st Vice President to resign!? What caused him to do this?

12-29,

& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??

1937 Ireland becomes independent, anyone on how this happened??

1890 the US Calvary massacres over 200 mostly women & children at Wounded Knee! Terrible actions of the US! Why? Any websites or posts on this??

1808 Andrew Johnson is born! The first President to be Impeached?? Has any POTUS been impeached twice??

1998 the Cambodian Communist ruler is found to have killed 1.5 million people! How is this possible?? Anyone??

Sieze the day!
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1973
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 10:30:42 AM
"Puzzled by the geographical distribution of wildlife and fossils he collected on the voyage, Darwin began detailed investigations and, in 1838, devised his theory of natural selection.[15]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin

He was on Beagle from 1831 to 1836.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 11:00:08 AM
Lots to discuss on my last post, perhaps some new topics listed or missed by me??

Anyone??
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 12:19:29 PM
Quote:
Last I checked, ducks waddle.

Designed primarily for paddling, the legs of waterfowl are set back on the body. It's that placement, along with their large webbed feet, that gives the birds their characteristic waddle



As usual you are dismissive of anything that doesn't align with your views on virtually anything. You waste too much time trying to come up with a clever quip. A defensive posture, I think.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 12:55:16 PM
Quote:
& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??


The US had convinced itself that dominion over the whole continent was ordained. This was Manifest Destiny at work and coincidentally, the expression was coined in the same year.

But the progress to the annexation didn't just happen organically. The movement of settlers from the US to unclaimed territories was planned and when there was a critical mass of Americans in a territory, then the annexation was a foregone conclusion.

In the case of Texas, the American settlers had already rebelled against the true owners of the land, Mexico. That was 1836 and they set up their own independent republic. Oddly, in 1836 the Texicans who had won their war with Mexico had been turned down when they asked to be absorbed into the US. I don't know why though. Did it have anything to do with slavery? Perhaps someone with more extensive knowledge than I will explain how the annexation was effected in 1845.

EDIT: Both Spain and Mexico encouraged Americans to come to Texas. Will someone tell my why Mexico in particular would do that?

West Florida was also claimed from Spain at the time of the War of 1812. Britain had ceded control after the Revolutionary War. Again Americans had moved into the territory and rebelled against Spanish rule. Spain was no longer strong enough to defend its territory. This acquisition didn't pass the smell test as Napoleon scammed the Spaniards. Spain claimed that it still owned West Florida if Napoleon should ever sell it. The US bought the Louisiana Purchase territory and the Americans living in West Florida determined to rebel against Spanish rule. The US then annexed the territory.


The ownership of the Oregon Territory was in dispute though the British had solid claim to the territory and the Hudson's Bay Co. was the entity that was actually the administrator of the region. Americans began to move to Oregon Territory in numbers and began ask for an association with the US. Britain and the US negotiated a treaty in 1846 which saw Britain give up its interest in Oregon but the international border was extended along the 49th parallel and gave Vancouver Island to the British. President Polk and been demanding annexation of California and Oregon. He actually wanted all land up to 54'40 which was the southernmost line to which Russia could claim any land on the Alaskan coast. Not wanting another war with the US, Britain accepted the Oregon Treaty in 1846.

When Canada created its Confederation in 1867, it was anxious to add the Colony of British Columbia. There was a fear that the same tactics that the US had used to flood an area with people who would then demand annexation would happen in BC. There would be attempts by US politicians to convince blasé British politicians that the colonists in BC actually wanted to join the US. Canada had to engage in its own propaganda war to convince the British to take a greater interest in BC to ensure that it became part of Canada.

There was a pattern here that was disturbing to Mexico and to the rest of British North America. In Mexico's case, it led to war. In Canada's case the movement toward expansion was accelerated.

Cheers,

George
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 12:56:09 PM
Quote:
Quote:


You waste too much time trying to come up with a clever quip.


Thank you for saying the quip was "clever".




NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 12:59:10 PM
Quote:
Quote:
& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??




Not wanting another war with the US, Britain accepted the Oregon Treaty in 1846.





More evidence that GB was held hostage to Canada.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 3:52:05 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??




Not wanting another war with the US, Britain accepted the Oregon Treaty in 1846.





More evidence that GB was held hostage to Canada.



And the reading audience ponders at the meaning of this pithy comment. NY, you may think that this is an intelligent and deep comment but I actually don't know what the hell you are talking about. If you do perhaps you would share your reasons for making a statement like this. That's how it normally works on this forum.
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1527
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 3:54:07 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??




Not wanting another war with the US, Britain accepted the Oregon Treaty in 1846.





More evidence that GB was held hostage to Canada.



And the reading audience ponders at the meaning of this pithy comment. NY, you may think that this is an intelligent and deep comment but I actually don't know what the hell you are talking about. If you do perhaps you would share your reasons for making a statement like this. That's how it normally works on this forum.



You know George, this is nothing more than accepting self torture? Just saying...
----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 4:25:12 PM
I know DT. I'm my own worst enemy at times. And I am aware of the solution. just have to ignore the bait.

Cheers,

George
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 5:52:31 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:







More evidence that GB was held hostage to Canada.



And the reading audience ponders at the meaning of this pithy comment. NY, you may think that this is an intelligent and deep comment but I actually don't know what the hell you are talking about. If you do perhaps you would share your reasons for making a statement like this. That's how it normally works on this forum.


All the US had to do, to get GB what the US wanted them to do, was to threaten invasion of Canada. Happened in 1862 also.

GB finally got smart and grated Canada, Dominion status.

BTW, thanks for validating my point.
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 7:58:37 PM
Quote:
Since you failed to capitalize "second world war", are you saying that that it too was a civil war? Or is your shift key not working properly? That happens to me too.


Such an obscure comment. An attempt at humour?? Don't quit your day job.

Not humour, George. A meaningless insult … once more. Capitalization has nothing to do with equality.

Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 8:20:36 PM
Quote:

12-26,

1991 Mikhail Gorbachev resigns, the Soviet Union will collapse within the year!? Did anyone see that coming??

1943 the German Cruiser Scharnhorst is sunk by HMS Duke of York! Anyone on the details??

2004 the Indian Ocean Tsunami happens, killing over 200'000 people! Where might the next one be?? Is it possible on the Pacific Coast of N. America, or else where!? Anyone??

12-26, is Boxing Day in the Commonwealth countries! Happy belated Boxing Day to all of our Commonwealth members! Why do they call it Boxing Day?? Anyone?

12-27,

1831, Charles Darwin in his ship the HMS Beagle starts his journey to formulate his theory of evolution!? What caused him to come up with this?? He sure shook up many religions?? What say you??

1801 Napoleon conquers Italy! Why did he want to take all of Europe? What about that? Anyone??

1949 Indonesia becomes independent from the Dutch!? Did it take force?? Comments?

12-28,

1065 Westminster Abbey is opened! Anyone with the history of this great church??

1856 Woodrow Wilson is born! Why has he become kind of a villain of US Presidents? What say you??

2008 the Detroit Lions, my team become the 1st NFL team to go 0-16, way to go Lions!? 🤔

1832 John C Calhoun becomes the 1st Vice President to resign!? What caused him to do this?

12-29,

& today 1845 Texas is annexed by the US!? Why would the US do this?? Anyone??

1937 Ireland becomes independent, anyone on how this happened??

1890 the US Calvary massacres over 200 mostly women & children at Wounded Knee! Terrible actions of the US! Why? Any websites or posts on this??

1808 Andrew Johnson is born! The first President to be Impeached?? Has any POTUS been impeached twice??

1998 the Cambodian Communist ruler is found to have killed 1.5 million people! How is this possible?? Anyone??

Sieze the day!
Regards,
MD



Back to actual history, any new topics for amicable discussion??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 8:41:10 PM
Quote:
The American Revolution, while not often called a civil war by modern historians, was referred to as a civil war in its first year, until William Henry Drayton, South Carolina’s chief justice, first used the term "American Revolution" in 1776. One major difference between the two terms is length. While some revolutions, such as the Cuban revolution, last multiple years, many revolutions are relatively short-lived.
What made the American Revolution look most like a civil war, though, was the reality that about one-third of the colonists, known as loyalists (or Tories), continued to support and fought on the side of the crown.

Looks can be deceiving though.

I might suggest that what it was, is, or may be means very little. Rebellion; revolt; civil war or revolution (or, of course, Rebellion; Revolt; Civil War or Revolution) are and can be different descriptions of the same event. William Henry Drayton generated a term in 1776, but that doesn’t give the term legitimacy.

At issue, it seems to me, is that the US view the significance and implications of their rebellion against the Crown differently than anybody else. I see no reason for the rest of the world to accept US mythology, or to adopt US terminology, for a minor skirmish in a much larger war.

At the end of the WhatEver You waNt to call the reBellIon, one in three settlers (which I assume means white male landowners) was not in tune with the rebels. At least some of my family, linked to the British colonies in what is now the US, was in that category; they left with what they were allowed to take for what is now Nova Scotia, and have never regretted the decision.

So. The US grew economically and geographically. British assessments of 1775 proved wrong. So what? At the time, the 13 colonies were considered less valuable than Barbados.

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/29/2022 9:55:48 PM
"The US grew economically and geographically."=== Arsenal of Democracy.

I'll drink to that!
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/30/2022 5:19:19 AM
Big day one hundred years ago : foundation of the Soviet Union. A lifespan of the biblical three score years and ten, although it’s all too apparent that Putin and others in his entourage are not, and never have been, reconciled to its demise.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/30/2022 5:41:16 AM
On this day in US History...

On December 30, 1862, the U.S.S. Monitor sinks in a storm off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. Just nine months earlier, the ship had been part of a revolution in naval warfare when the ironclad dueled to a standstill with the C.S.S. Virginia (Merrimack) off Hampton Roads, Virginia, in one of the most famous naval battles in American history—the first time two ironclads faced each other in a naval engagement.

After the famous duel, the Monitor provided gun support on the James River for George B. McClellan’s Peninsular Campaign. By December 1862, it was clear the Monitor was no longer needed in Virginia, so she was sent to Beaufort, North Carolina, to join a fleet being assembled for an attack on Charleston, South Carolina. The Monitor served well in the sheltered waters of Chesapeake Bay, but the heavy, low-slung ship was a poor craft for the open sea. The U.S.S. Rhode Island towed the ironclad around the rough waters of Cape Hatteras. Since December is a treacherous time for any ship off North Carolina, the decision to move the Monitor could be considered questionable. As the Monitor pitched and swayed in the rough seas, the caulking around the gun turret loosened and water began to leak into the hull. More leaks developed as the journey continued. High seas tossed the craft, causing the ship’s flat armor bottom to slap the water. Each roll opened more seams, and by nightfall on December 30, the Monitor was in dire straits.

The Monitor’s commander, J.P. Bankhead, signaled the Rhode Island that he wished to abandon ship. The wooden side-wheeler pulled as close as safety allowed to the stricken ironclad, and two lifeboats were lowered to retrieve the crew. Many of the sailors were rescued, but some men were terrified to venture onto the deck in such rough seas. The ironclad’s pumps stopped working and the ship sank before 16 crew members could be rescued.

Although the Monitor’s service was brief, it signaled a new era in naval combat. The Virginia’s arrival of Hampton Roads terrified the U.S. Navy, but the Monitor leveled the playing field. Both sides had ironclads, and the advantage would go to the side that could build more of them. Northern industry would win that battle for the Union.
​================================================= ================================================== ============================

The Monitor's rotating gun turret is now at the Mariners Museum in Newport News, Virginia.

George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/30/2022 10:36:10 AM
Dec. 29, 1837. The Caroline Affair

Another event in the sometimes tense relationship between Britain, Canada and the US was the burning of the US packet, the Caroline, by Canadian militia.

1837 was a tumultuous year in the history of Upper Canada (now Ontario) and Lower Canada (now Québec). Both colonies experienced rebellions against the business and political elites that ran both provinces. In Upper Canada, this group was called the Family Compact and in opposition was a group of rebels led by Scottish immigrant, William Lyon Mackenzie.

On Dec. 5, 1837, Mackenzie gathered his group of rebels and marched down Yonge St. which is often claimed as the longest street in the world as it starts at the foot of Lake Ontario in Toronto and heads into the north country. Mackenzie was convinced that the people would come out of their homes and march with him right into the city of Toronto to the City Hall and then to the home of the Lt. Gov. Sir Bond Head. But the militia showed up and dispersed the mob.

On Dec. 8 Mackenzie gave it another go and gathered his rebels at Montgomery's Tavern, north of Toronto. The militia got wind of it and attacked. They again dispersed the crowd and arrested several of the rebels, some of whom would later pay with their lives.

Mackenzie was on the run and he and his supporters headed for the Niagara Peninsula and occupied Navy Island which is above Niagara Falls on the Canadian side of the river. Joining him were men from the US side who supported the rebellion in Upper Canada. The War of 1812 was little more than 20 years in the past and relations between the people on the US and Canadian sides could be tense at times. The Canadians were particularly resentful of the invasion in 1812.

You can see Navy Island on the map below to the NW of the much larger Grand Island on the US side. US Fort Schlosser is also indicated just to the north of Navy Island.



Mackenzie declared himself President of a Republic and continued to gather arms and supporters on Navy Island. These people and munitions were transported from the US side by the steamboat, Caroline which could be seen to be docking at Navy Island from the Canadian side of the Niagara River. The militia had seen enough of this collusion from the US side and the commander ordered a British navy officer named Andrew Drew to deal with the Caroline. And so he gathered a group of militia men and they rowed to Navy Island on the evening of Dec. 29 with the intent to seize the vessel.

But when they arrived, the Caroline had sailed to the US side and was docked near US Fort Schlosser. Commander Drew decided to head to the US side. The boarded the Caroline, killed a watchman and then cut the mooring lines. After setting the ship on fire they rowed back to the Canadian side as the Caroline, fully involved in flame, tumbled over the Niagara Falls as people from both sides watched.



The US was furious at this violation of sovereignty. The Canadians were furious that the US had done nothing to prevent the American supporters of Mackenzie from violating Canadian sovereignty.

Canada was still a British colony and the British and Americans were quickly in contact with one another. As tense as the situation was, neither wanted war. The US requested compensation and they wanted Commander Drew extradited to New York to be charged with murder. Drew remained in Upper Canada for three years before heading home to the UK, fearing for his life should he remain so close to the US.

Mackenzie fled to NYC and opened a newspaper. He had been a publisher in Toronto. Eventually the US charged and convicted him of violation of neutrality laws. He served one year and in 1849, he was granted a pardon in Upper Canada and returned home.

It sounds less serious than it was. Events like these can lead to war and neither side wanted that in 1837.

Still even after the event, Canadian rebels gathered in US states near the border and formed with US groups to create what were called Hunters' Lodges. These groups launched raids into both Upper and Lower Canada announcing that they were there to free the people from the British. They failed to understand that the people were generally happy to be part of the British Empire even if they sought more representative government.

The Hunters' Lodges were quite a problem through 1838 but President Van Buren cracked down and enforced US Neutrality Laws. The efforts of the lodges gradually subsided and disappeared.

The US and Britain signed another treaty in 1842 called the Webster-Ashburton Treaty. That resolved some border line disputes and created a means for sharing the Great Lakes. One more step toward the continuation of the peace established in 1814.

[Read More]

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/30/2022 7:54:44 PM
Hi George,

Yes an incident like the attack & destruction of the USS Caroline could have ignited into a full scale war! But cooler heads prevailed! The hull of the Caroline was pure copper! Do you know how valuable copper is??

Let me know next time they turn off the falls?
. I have a metal detector!? ☺

Cheers,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 6:08:24 AM
On this day in World History,...

The provisional government of Hungary officially declares war on Germany, bringing an end to Hungary’s cooperation—sometimes free, sometimes coerced—with the Axis power.

Miklos Horthy, the anticommunist regent and virtual dictator of Hungary, who had once hoped to keep his country a nonbelligerent in the war, had reluctantly aligned Hungary with Hitler in November 1940. While ideologically not fascist, Hungary had many radical right-wing elements at play in its politics, as well as a history of anti-Semitism. Those radical forces saw many common “ideals” with Nazism and believed the future lay with Germany. So though Horthy little admired Hitler personally, he felt the need to placate influential parties within his own country and protect his nation from Soviet domination.

When the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, Hitler demanded that Hungary mobilize its military against the Soviets as well. So on June 29, 1941, Hungary declared war on the USSR. In March 1942, Horthy replaced Prime Minister Lazlo Bardossy, (a political manipulator too eager to piggyback on German territorial expansion and turn on former allies for the sake of personal gains), with Miklos Kallay, who shared the regent’s goal of regaining the favor of the Western—non-Soviet—Allies. Kallay was able to communicate to the Allies that Hungary was open to switching sides again should they make it to Hungary’s border and offer Hungary protection from German and/or Soviet occupation.

In January 1943, the Battle of Voronezh against the USSR saw Hungary’s entire 2nd Army decimated by the Soviets, rendering Hungary militarily impotent. Hitler, who learned of Kallay’s sly communiques with the West, gave Horthy an ultimatum: Either cooperate fully with the German regime or suffer German occupation. Horthy chose to collaborate, which meant the suppression of left-leaning political parties and an intense persecution of Hungary’s Jews, including massive deportations to Auschwitz, something Kallay, to his credit, had fought to prevent. (More than 550,000 Hungarian Jews—out of 750,000—would die during the war.)

As Soviet troops began to occupy more Hungarian territory, a desperate Horthy signed an armistice with Moscow. When the regent announced this on radio, he was kidnapped by the Germans and forced to abdicate. Ferenc Szalasi, leader of the fascist Arrow Cross Party, was made head of the country on October 15, 1944, though he was little more than a puppet of the Germans. His rule of terror, especially against Hungary’s Jews, would become infamous.

Soviet troops finally liberated the bulk of Hungary from German rule in December 1944. On December 31, a Provisional National Assembly, composed of Communists loyal to the USSR, officially declared war on Germany. The Assembly would go on to sign an armistice with all the Allies in January of 1945.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 9:29:58 AM
Some historical events from the last 2 days of the calendar year, please comment on some of them!??

12-30

1853 the US acquired more territory from Mexico with the Garden Purchase, at least this area was not taken by war!
What say you??

1865 Famous British writer Rudyard Kipling was born, ah the Charge of the Light Brigade! Also Japan s Warlord Tojo, Tiger Woods, LeBron James, were also born on this date, on different Years of course!

1902 British Explorer, Robert Falcon Scott, travels further south than any European, previously! Who knows the Inuit probably already achieved this?? Later the Exploration bug would kill Robert F. Scott! What say you? Was his quest, folly!???

2006 Saddam Hussain is executed for crimes against humanity! Was justice served?? Anyone?

12-31,

On New Years Eve, 1857 Canada made Ottawa it's capital! Why? Was this a good choice?? Anyone??

1600 the East India Company was formed, good for England? Bad for everyone else!?? Comments?

1775 American troops led in part by Benedict Arnold lose the Battle of Quebec! You wonder if he was already leaning British?? Any thoughts on this??

1991 the Soviet Union ceased to exist!? Could you believe this happened?? A shocker? Or expected? What say you??

1999 the US keeps it's promise, & turns the Canal over to Panama! Comments??

Happy New Year, Y'all,
MD

Also on a more horrific note today in 2019 the World Health Organization learns of the awful pandemic, Covid 19! It's still strong, & evolving!? How many have we lost? Where does it rank as A deadly disease?? Will it ever go away?? What say you??

Also yesterday famous US Commentator, Barbara Walters passed away at 93! RIP!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 10:47:40 AM
Quote:
1775 American troops led in part by Benedict Arnold lose the Battle of Quebec! You wonder if he was already leaning British?? Any thoughts on this??


The rebels from the 13 colonies had been rebuffed in their attempts to enlist the people in the other British colonies to their cause. On Nov. 13, 1775, Brig. Gen Richard Montgomery of the Continental Army seized Montréal, unopposed. If they had hoped to curry favour with the populace, they did not.

The rebels were also angry that the British had passed the Quebec Act in 1774 that expanded the size of the colony into the Ohio Valley but also guaranteed French language rights, the right to practice the RC faith and maintained the seigneurial system that governed land ownership. Arriving in the town, the rebels discovered that the influential priests in Québec had told the people not to trust the rebels and to keep faith with the British.

The rebels also tried to pass Continental script to pay for goods in Montreal. That was unacceptable to the people.

And so the Continental Army forces developed a battle plan to head to Québec City to seize it. The short story is that the pincer attack with Brig. Montgomery leading one group and Brig. Arnold leading the other failed. Nearly 400 rebels were taken prisoner and Gen. Montgomery was killed while Gen. Arnold was badly wounded in the leg.

I doubt that he was leaning toward the British side. He was bravely leading his troops and paid the price for it. Benedict Arnold was not a nice man. I have mentioned before that post-rebellion the man was despised in Saint John, New Brunswick where he lived for four years. He had been a traitor to the British when he agreed to fight with the rebels and he repeated that act of treachery when he returned to the British fold. At this stage of the war, I think that he was committed to the rebel cause.

But it does seem that he was a most capable fighter and General. It would be another 5 years before he saw the light and returned to the British side, nose well twisted out of joint.
Cheers,

George
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 11:39:53 AM
Quote:
On New Years Eve, 1857 Canada made Ottawa it's capital! Why? Was this a good choice?? Anyone??


Not really Canada as we understand it today. In 1841 the British had united the province of Upper Canada with Lower Canada. The British had been shocked by the 1837 rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada and asked a man named Lord Durham to investigate and make recommendations as to how the two provinces should be administered in the future.

The Durham Report recommended amalgamation and so the Unity Act was passed in the British Parliament and the two provinces, now called Canada East and Canada West became the two provinces in the United Province of Canada. Everybody got that?
Durham's rationale was that the French-Canadians, a group of people that he did not like, were the cause of all the problems. The Unity Act would ensure that the English speaking people, mostly in Canada West would hold all the aces when it came to legislation and loyalty for that matter because they would be in the majority. There were 670,000 people in Canada East in 1857 but about 160,000 of them were Anglos. Add them to the nearly 500,000 Anglos in Canada West and the English speaking people would be at least equal in number. Seats in the amalgamated Parliament were equal and so the Anglos actually had a disproportionate influence on legislation.

The union was a failure because legislatively there was still a division. Provincial debts had been consolidated and both sides felt that that was detrimental. The French language was banned for use in Parliament. That went over like a lead balloon in Québec. Specific legislation that protected French language rights in education were suspended.

Note that we have been dealing with this English-French divide since pre-Confederation days and it still plagues us to this day.


Durham also recommended responsible government be established but his British bosses wouldn't go that far.

Ok, now what about the capital of the United Province of Canada?

The capital was moved around a lot which was an expense that had to be dealt with. The spectre of the ethnic divisions still impacted the union and so it was thought fair to move the capital between Canada West and Canada East. And so the first capital was Kingston in Canada West and that remained so from 1841 until 1844.

It was moved to Montréal in Canada East from 1845 until 1849.

From 1849 to 1851, the capital moved to Toronto in Canada West.

1851 to 1855, the capital was in Québec City in Canada East

1855 to 1859, Toronto again

1859 to 1865, Québec City

Finally, the capital of the United Province of Canada was moved to Ottawa from 1866 to 1867. I'm sure everyone can see the pattern here and the craziness of the concept at work.

So what does 1857 have to do with anything? Well, in that year Queen Victoria after listening to a lot of advice selected Ottawa as the capital of the United Province.

But the United Province and the other colonies of BNA were already in discussion to unite as one. Confederation would happen in 1867.

Ottawa was finally selected by Queen Victoria to remain as the capital of the Dominion of Canada. She was asked to do so because the politicians from the other colonies of BNA could not agree. Ottawa which was called Bytown until 1855, was a lumber town on the Ottawa river directly across from the Québec side. It was a dreary and muddy place surrounded by beautiful forests.

Politicians from Montréal, Québec, and Toronto all vied for their city to be selected. And so Queen Vic selected the one candidate to which all of the others showed disapproval, Ottawa. There is one story that is floated about that Victoria just liked the landscape pictures of the Ottawa area and another that said that she looked at a map and stuck a pin in Ottawa which appeared to be about half way between Toronto and Montréal.

There were better reasons to select Ottawa:

1. It wasn't Toronto and it wasn't Montréal. It was right on the provincial border between Canada West and East which would pacify both sides of the ethnic divide.

2. If it wasn't going to be Toronto or Montréal then it had to be Ottawa which was the only sizeable town between the two.

3. There was a beautiful Parliament being built in Ottawa to house the government of the United Province. No need to build another Parliament building in another city.

This is the Houses of Parliament being built on Parliament Hill in 1863, well before Confederation had been approved.



4. Ottawa was far enough away from the border so that it could not easily be occupied by the US should it decide to invade again. The War of 1812 had taught the Canadians that any town or city on the Great Lakes or the St. Lawrence River was vulnerable. In 1826, Colonel John By had started to build the Rideau Canal which would connect the Ottawa River and Bytown on the river, with Lake Ontario. The Rideau was part of the defence system recommended by the Duke of Wellington when he toured the Canadian defence structures.

So Queen Vic picked our capital because we were already fighting about where it should be even before Confederation. Canada asked the Queen to make the call and Ottawa is still our capital.

Cheers,

George


EDIT: MD asked whether Queen Vic made a good choice when she picked Ottawa. In my last year of high school I had to apply to universities for acceptance. I seriously considered an application to U of O or to Carleton. I am embarrassed to admit that when my mates and I had learned that as a government town, the ratio of women to men in Ottawa was 5:1, I had considered heading there. So shallow when I was 18



Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 12:59:15 PM
Dave,

Tennyson was the poet who we associate with the Charge of the Light Brigade, not Kipling.

Does it matter ? Not really.

Just me being picky.

Happy New Year!

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
12/31/2022 1:58:22 PM
Thanks Phil,

I always get those 2 mixed up!? ☺

Great New Year to you, & all, too!
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 7:12:43 AM
Quote:
Thanks Phil,

I always get those 2 mixed up!? ☺

Great New Year to you, & all, too!
MD


Dave,

If you’ll allow me, I’ll give the New Year a kick start with a quick stab at Poets’ Corner :

Wordsworth = Daffodils

Tennyson = Charge of the Light Brigade

Kipling = Barrack Room Ballads

Do you know what’s fretting me ?

Should that apostrophe be before or after the S in Poets ?

I’m entering 2023 as an even sadder fuss pot than I was last year !

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 9:23:45 AM
On this day in the Civil War,...

On January 1, 1863, Abraham Lincoln signs the Emancipation Proclamation. Attempting to stitch together a nation mired in a bloody civil war, Abraham Lincoln made a last-ditch, but carefully calculated, decision regarding the institution of slavery in America.

By the end of 1862, things were not looking good for the Union. The Confederate Army had overcome Union troops in significant battles and Britain and France were set to officially recognize the Confederacy as a separate nation. In an August 1862 letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley, Lincoln confessed “my paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or to destroy slavery.” Lincoln hoped that declaring a national policy of emancipation would stimulate a rush of the South’s enslaved people into the ranks of the Union army, thus depleting the Confederacy’s labor force, on which the southern states depended to wage war against the North.

​Lincoln waited to unveil the proclamation until he could do so on the heels of a Union military success. On September 22, 1862, after the battle at Antietam, he issued a preliminary Emancipation Proclamation declaring all enslaved people free in the rebellious states as of January 1, 1863. Lincoln and his advisors limited the proclamation’s language to slavery in states outside of federal control as of 1862, failing to address the contentious issue of slavery within the nation’s border states. In his attempt to appease all parties, Lincoln left many loopholes open that civil rights advocates would be forced to tackle in the future.​

Republican abolitionists in the North rejoiced that Lincoln had finally thrown his full weight behind the cause for which they had elected him. Though enslaved people in the south failed to rebel en masse with the signing of the proclamation, they slowly began to liberate themselves as Union armies marched into Confederate territory. Toward the end of the war, enslaved people left their former masters in droves. They fought and grew crops for the Union Army, performed other military jobs and worked in the North’s mills. Though the proclamation was not greeted with joy by all northerners, particularly northern white workers and troops fearful of job competition from an influx of formerly enslaved people, it had the distinct benefit of convincing Britain and France to steer clear of official diplomatic relations with the Confederacy.

Though the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation signified Lincoln’s growing resolve to preserve the Union at all costs, he still rejoiced in the ethical correctness of his decision. Lincoln admitted on that New Year’s Day in 1863 that he never “felt more certain that I was doing right, than I do in signing this paper.” Although he waffled on the subject of slavery in the early years of his presidency, he would thereafter be remembered as “The Great Emancipator.” To Confederate sympathizers, however, Lincoln’s signing of the Emancipation Proclamation reinforced their image of him as a hated despot and ultimately inspired his assassination by John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865.
==================================================================================================================================================
Not only were Great Britain and France deterred from establising diplomatic relations with the Confederate States, , they were deterred from intervening in any military manner.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 10:37:02 AM
That cut and paste article that NYG provided refers to “ enslaved people “ and studiously avoids the word “ slaves”.

I note that this had been increasingly apparent throughout media in recent years.

Why do you think that the phrase “ enslaved people “ had replaced the word “ slaves” ?

Does this pertain only to the African American slaves - sorry, enslaved people- or would it be applied to slavery in antiquity or under the rule of the Ottomans, or in the raids carried out by the Vikings in the Dark Ages?

Now I realise that there’s an objection to that word “ Viking “, too.

Isn’t it fascinating how we’re steered away from certain words when we discuss history ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 1:42:51 PM
Hiya Phil,

the debate over “slave” is part of the larger debate over “people first” language, a movement in which advocates ask us to use circumlocutions that stress the humanity of individuals rather than their characteristics.

Cheers, NY Giant
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1973
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 4:18:31 PM
Each generation finds its own words to dance around.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 5:32:13 PM
A TV documentary about Ancient Rome addresses slavery and the word “ slaves” is used.

When the subject matter is the Americas or the Caribbean, the phrase “ enslaved people “ is resorted to.

Is this attributable to our sensibilities about race and colour ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
NYGiant
home  USA
Posts: 953
Joined: 2021
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 5:51:23 PM
The words reinforce the idea of people’s humanity rather than the conditions forced upon them.

Race and color have absolutely nothing to do with it.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 6:05:43 PM
Quote:
The words reinforce the idea of people’s humanity rather than the conditions forced upon them.

Race and color have absolutely nothing to do with it.



Are you sure ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1973
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
1/1/2023 7:11:17 PM
First I've heard that race and color have nothing to do with it.
Page 48 of 115 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47    48    49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC