Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
202 bytes added ,  03:20, May 27, 2015
The third view didn't include the British so I corrected this.
Line 208: Line 208:  
However, some noted historians have called the war a British victory and an American defeat, arguing that the British achieved their military objectives in 1812 (resisting American incursions) while the Americans failed to conquer Canada. Many non-academic Canadians share this view.<ref>Carl Benn, “The War of 1812” ( ), by a Canadian; Latimer, ''1812 War with America'' (2007), by a Brit.</ref>
 
However, some noted historians have called the war a British victory and an American defeat, arguing that the British achieved their military objectives in 1812 (resisting American incursions) while the Americans failed to conquer Canada. Many non-academic Canadians share this view.<ref>Carl Benn, “The War of 1812” ( ), by a Canadian; Latimer, ''1812 War with America'' (2007), by a Brit.</ref>
   −
A third view,<ref>Wesley B. Turner, "The War of 1812: The War That Both Sides Won"  (2000), a Canadian; Mark Zuehlke, ''For Honour's Sake: The War of 1812 and the Brokering of an Uneasy Peace'' (2007), a Canadian; Walter L. Hixson, "War of 1812," in Paul Finkelman ed, '' Encyclopedia of the United States in the Nineteenth Century'' (2001) 3:360.</ref> argues that the U.S. was successful because (1) the U.S. had restored its honor and successfully resisted a powerful Empire for a second time, thus winning a "second war of independence"; (2) the threat of Indian raids ended as did the British plan for a semi-independent Indian sanctuary, and (3) the Royal Navy had stopped restricting American trade and impressing American sailors. Rjensen (talk) 22:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
+
A third view,<ref>Wesley B. Turner, "The War of 1812: The War That Both Sides Won"  (2000), a Canadian; Mark Zuehlke, ''For Honour's Sake: The War of 1812 and the Brokering of an Uneasy Peace'' (2007), a Canadian; Walter L. Hixson, "War of 1812," in Paul Finkelman ed, '' Encyclopedia of the United States in the Nineteenth Century'' (2001) 3:360.</ref> argues that the U.S. and Britain were successful. Britain was successful because it had repelled the invasion of Canada and lost no territories while achieving their huge war goal, the complete defeat of Napoleon. The U.S. was successful because (1) the U.S. had restored its honor and successfully resisted a powerful Empire for a second time, thus winning a "second war of independence"; (2) the threat of Indian raids ended as did the British plan for a semi-independent Indian sanctuary, and (3) the Royal Navy had stopped restricting American trade and impressing American sailors. Rjensen (talk) 22:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    
===Lessons===       
 
===Lessons===       
2

edits

Navigation menu