Other What's an unpopular opinion you have?

Technically the US didn't exactly do that. If she did that , Canada would be part of the continental US right now. No , I think what you're looking for is 'we managed to defend our country from another invasion , and neither side gained or lost anything'. It wasn't exactly a resounding route , either , because Britain managed to raze Washington DC during those three years , too. Usually 'we kicked their asses' would mean one accomplished everything they set out to do , which definitely not the case. I guess the US did manage to capture a significant portion of Spanish Florida (reducing it to being the size of the state Florida) as a part of the concurrent wars with the Seminoles and other Native Tribes , but by then the spainairds were scarcely a world power. They couldn't even defend the territory anymore to begin with!

Do you REALLY want to get into a historical debate with me right now?!

I'm pretty sure we were the clear victors in the Revolution because we were colonies that revolted and rejected the rule of the British crown. It's a big deal when you consider a colony full of "farmers with pitchforks" defeated the world's most powerful standing army at the time. I'm over simplifying but it does not take away the fact that when an Empire loses a bunch of colonies over the pond it constitutes an ass kicking. That went for any colony of the time that rejected and successfully repulsed the stranglehold on them via military or economically.

As for 1812, the reason I described as a pipe dream because for starters, King George III was obviously off his rocker. Secondly the Invasion of the US was already largely unpopular among common folk and many in parliament at the time. Thirdly when the British Empire is kicked out a second time this pretty much broke the morale of an already war weary England and not to mention how much blood and treasure was lost with absolutely nothing gained constitutes an ass kicking, even though you write off as merely defending another invasion. When I say ass kicking does not necessarily pertain to an offensive military campaign, it works defensively as well. When you spend all that time and energy and got nothing because you were sent packing translates into an ass kicking in my book. So is this really about historical context or semantics?
 
Do you REALLY want to get into a historical debate with me right now?!

I'm pretty sure we were the clear victors in the Revolution because we were colonies that revolted and rejected the rule of the British crown. It's a big deal when you consider a colony full of "farmers with pitchforks" defeated the world's most powerful standing army at the time. I'm over simplifying but it does not take away the fact that when an Empire loses a bunch of colonies over the pond it constitutes an ass kicking. That went for any colony of the time that rejected and successfully repulsed the stranglehold on them via military or economically.

As for 1812, the reason I described as a pipe dream because for starters, King George III was obviously off his rocker. Secondly the Invasion of the US was already largely unpopular among common folk and many in parliament at the time. Thirdly when the British Empire is kicked out a second time this pretty much broke the morale of an already war weary England and not to mention how much blood and treasure was lost with absolutely nothing gained constitutes an ass kicking, even though you write off as merely defending another invasion. When I say ass kicking does not necessarily pertain to an offensive military campaign, it works defensively as well. When you spend all that time and energy and got nothing because you were sent packing translates into an ass kicking in my book. So is this really about historical context or semantics?
I do see your point. Especially about the Revolution - but your original post didn't mention the Revolution , it cited the War of 1812 only. If it did , I wouldn't have said what I did , because the Revolution actually was a major 'ass-kicking'. And yes , I do believe the defeat in the war of 1812 broke the British's willingness to regain the American colonies (which really was already quite.. faded , since Britain had a great many colonies elsewhere and were yet still to gain more) , but when I think of a milliaristic ass-kicking , it's something more akin to the Revolution (in which one side achieved nearly all it's major goals). Both sides invaded each other's territory and both were repulsed - and it was , on both sides , due to poor planning and even poorer execution. I suppose it could be about semantics (and I've been known to do that) , but I'm also saying the War of 1812 wasn't nearly as perfect as most American Citizens seem to think. It was a route , yes , but a route against a desperate , poorly supported invasion that still managed to sack the capital. And how did it actually 'break the morale' of the British Empire? If it really did that , why were they one of the major world powers up until the two World Wars collectively wrecked all of Western Europe?
 
********* , it did mention it and I just bloody read it wrong.

This is what happens when I get into the mindset of 'unpopular opinion' and then run it through my passion for history. And then don't read as carefully and miss the fact that you did mention the Revolution , and just didn't capitalize it.

So.. I just went full Britain , and kind of defeated myself by failing to notice things.
 
Last edited:
********* , it did mention it and I just bloody read it wrong.

This is what happens when I get into the mindset of 'unpopular opinion' and then run it through my passion for history. And then don't read as carefully and miss the fact that you did mention the Revolution , and just didn't capitalize it.

So.. I just went full Britain , and kind of defeated myself by failing to notice things.

It's fine I do the same thing whenever someone bad mouths my country.

I'm glad some people are still very patriotic. The Western world is in a serious lack of jingoism these days.
 
If that's the case then I admire your passion for history and it is refreshing to see someone else who is historically inclined.
Oh , why thank you! I always enjoy seeing other historically inclined people as well - it's not very often , outside of professors and actual academics , to find someone who really knows their history.

I feel like I derailed this thread , but in a few ways that whole string of posts was just my unpopular opinion about the War of 1812.
 
The only other tank that can match the M1A2 evenly in terms of firepower, armor protection and awesomeness. The only things the Challenger 2 has over the Abrams is a fuel efficient diesel, side armor and it has a built in tea brewer!
 
That's not true, unless you discredit the millions of people out there who don't identify with the gender binary, as well as historical references that suggest otherwise. (Ie: Two-spirit, ancient religions and more!)

Also, some governments officially recognize alternative genders. Take Ireland, for example.
Even if I don't agree, I respect your opinion.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top