It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by alldaylong
The thing that i always find amusing is that Americans call the 4th July "Independence Day" It isn't. America gained Independence on 3rd September 1783, with the signing of The Treaty Of Paris. The last British troops left America in November 1783.
You would think such an important period in American History would be documented correctlyedit on 2-7-2013 by alldaylong because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by svetlana84
Mark Dice went out to ask americans what 4th of july is about.
The answers, well i am speechless right now.
Just watch the video:
Americans don t know what 4th july is about
For all those who can't watch the video: in short none of the interviewed know what 4th of july is, from which country the us got independent from and when it happenend.
Doomed...
Your opinions?
Originally posted by starwarsisreal
reply to post by svetlana84
I'm pretty sure this will educate Americans especially video gamers
Originally posted by alldaylong
Please answer one question.
How can a country claim to be independent when large area's of the 13 Colonies where still under British Control,well after 4th July 1776?
Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Indigo5
and then went on to defeat the worlds greatest super-power at the time
With the help of the French who encircled British ships and provided the "colonists" with arms and ammunition to fight of the British. If not for the dastardly weasels in France, you'd still be paying taxes on your tea to the King, or Queen as it is.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by alldaylong
Please answer one question.
How can a country claim to be independent when large area's of the 13 Colonies where still under British Control,well after 4th July 1776?
The word "independent" is rooted in "dependent"...The 13 Colonies unanimously declared themselves independant on the 4th of July...what were they "dependent" on thier British rulers for? Persecution? Excessive taxation? Unjust trials?
Independance can be supressed, but the nature of independance...can never be fully extinguished by that opression...even in death or defeat. Once the American Colonists disavowed thier loyalty to the king and Britian...they were independent, albiet opressed for a few more years.
...When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation....
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
edit on 3-7-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by neo96
For crying out loud at least go watch the Patriot with Mel Gibson.
Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by alldaylong
fictionalized?
Originally posted by neo96
Miss the part where Mel says "trading 1 tryrant 3000 miles away for a few hundred 1 mile away?
Originally posted by neo96
Yeah so unbelievable.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Indigo5
and then went on to defeat the worlds greatest super-power at the time
With the help of the French who encircled British ships and provided the "colonists" with arms and ammunition to fight of the British. If not for the dastardly weasels in France, you'd still be paying taxes on your tea to the King, or Queen as it is.
Oh...Puhleese!
Yes the French helped and Kudos to them for the help...
The French had about 12,000 troops in America
US Local Troops were around 85,000
The Brits had
56,000 troops in America
30,000 Germans...Hessians...fierce mercenaries...the legend of the "Headless Horseman" is about a Hessian mercenary.
50,000 Loyalists...those that survived fled to your neck of the woods in Canada if memory serves me.
13,000 Natives
170,000 British Sailors
Originally posted by alldaylong
The 13 Colonies declared U D I ( Unilateral Declaration of Independence) as Rhodesia did under the Premiership of Ian Smith in 1965. This declaration was deemed illegal under international law. Independence only becomes legal when agreements are signed by all parties involved. This did not happen untill 1783 in the case of the 13 Colonies.
You can call yourself independent but your not untill it becomes legal.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by alldaylong
The 13 Colonies declared U D I ( Unilateral Declaration of Independence) as Rhodesia did under the Premiership of Ian Smith in 1965. This declaration was deemed illegal under international law. Independence only becomes legal when agreements are signed by all parties involved. This did not happen untill 1783 in the case of the 13 Colonies.
You can call yourself independent but your not untill it becomes legal.
That there is some real comedy...We were independent the minute we declared it. International law??? US law supercedes "international law" and the US declared itself independent. It's the same with Britian...do you think the Brits are subject to International Law above British law? On thier own soil??? Apart from that there was very little if any international law at the time...what a silly argument.
Just cuz the Brits didn't agree until we stomped on them, doesn't mean that we were not independent.
Put another way...the Brits tried to force thier rule through military action and failed...
Independance does not require the consent of tyrants...That is not how the world has ever worked.
The literal veracity of the USA's declaration of independance was determined via the trials of a Revolutionary WAR...which was decided unquestionably in our favor, validating that declaration.
Originally posted by alldaylong
As for stomping on Britain, well that took you 8 years. Not a quick victory was it?
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by alldaylong
As for stomping on Britain, well that took you 8 years. Not a quick victory was it?
All things considered given weather, contemporary technology, troop mobility, disease etc. etc. And being outnumbered and untrained....8 Years was a phenomenally speedy victory.
Why not discuss Englands "Hundred Year" war with France? What was the War of the Roses? 30 Years?...Yep..American civilians assembled an army and thoroughly defeated the most well trained military on the planet in 8 measly years...
Lincoln told a story of Ethan Allen, an American Revolution war hero who went to Britain after the war. After he arrived, the British, still upset about having lost the war, put their measly Brit minds together and came up with a plot to try to embarrass Allen by putting a large portrait of George Washington in the only outhouse where he might encounter it. They had hoped Allen would be upset about the indignity of George Washington being in an outhouse. That night, after dinner and conversation, Allen made his way out, candle in hand, and did his business. He came back in as high of spirits as ever.
“Didn’t you see George Washington in there?!” they said.
“Oh yes,” said Allen. “Perfectly appropriate place for him”
“What do you mean?” They said.
“Well,” he said, “there is nothing to make an Englishman # faster than the sight of General George Washington.
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by alldaylong
I think your numbers are fudged...and you will have to forgive me if I take a little patriotic pleasure in messing with a Brit on for the Fourth of July
I'll leave you with this...
Lincoln told a story of Ethan Allen, an American Revolution war hero who went to Britain after the war. After he arrived, the British, still upset about having lost the war, put their measly Brit minds together and came up with a plot to try to embarrass Allen by putting a large portrait of George Washington in the only outhouse where he might encounter it. They had hoped Allen would be upset about the indignity of George Washington being in an outhouse. That night, after dinner and conversation, Allen made his way out, candle in hand, and did his business. He came back in as high of spirits as ever.
“Didn’t you see George Washington in there?!” they said.
“Oh yes,” said Allen. “Perfectly appropriate place for him”
“What do you mean?” They said.
“Well,” he said, “there is nothing to make an Englishman # faster than the sight of General George Washington.
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by crazyewok
Thanks to the brits on this thread for demonstrating how the American Revolution is taught in Britian...with excuses and fudged numbers etc. I guess when you get your butt kicked so badly that the embarrassment effectively ends Monarch rule altogether in your country...you must have a long list of rationalizations.
Originally posted by alldaylong
My numbers are correct. Read if for yourself:-
www.americanrevolutionarywar.net...
The figure over the 8 years is 250,000. You should never rely on Wiki, no one who wants to discuss seriously ever does.
In the beginning of 1776, the army of Washington had 20,000 men wherein two-thirds of them were enlisted in the Continental Army and the other third were in the various state militias.
When the American Revolution in 1783 ended, both the Continental Navy and Continental Marines were disbanded.
There are about 250,000 men who served as regulars or as militiamen for the Revolutionary cause during the eight years of the war. However, there were never more than 90,000 total men under arms in one single time.
By European standards of the era, the American armies were relative small.
25,000 Loyalists who fought on the British side and thousands had served in the Royal Navy.
German states that supplied the British armies with more than 30,000 soldiers.
the number of British and German troops stationed in North America grew to over 60,000
over 20,000 black soldiers who fought for the British side.
Estimatedly, there are 13,000 native warriors who fought for the British side