The British-American War of 1812 - Explained in 13 Minutes
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 พ.ย. 2020
- Watch thousands of documentaries on CuriosityStream: curiositystream.thld.co/knowl...
Use my code: "knowledgia" to get 25% off your yearly subscription.
The British-American War of 1812 - Explained in 13 Minutes
♦Consider supporting the Channel of Patreon and gain cool stuff:
/ knowledgia
♦Please consider to SUBSCRIBE: goo.gl/YJNqek
♦Music Used :
Kevin MacLeod - Interloper
Kevin MacLeod - FaceOff
Restless Natives - Doug Maxwell
♦Script & Research :
Skylar Gordon
#History #Documentary
Thank you so much for watching, guys! You can help our channel by watching thousands of documentaries on CuriosityStream
Register with this link: curiositystream.thld.co/knowledgianov
And use my code: "knowledgia" to get 25% off your yearly subscription.
It was just called The War of 1812 not the british-american war of 1812
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS The british barely did anything. It was canadians.
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS Lol another person who had low reading comprehension
@@MastemaJack largely true. Britain's priority then was fighting Napoleon.
It was mostly just officers who were from Britain. Most of the actual fighting was done by people who were born there in Canada.
UK: *burns Washington DC*
US: "Alright, we'll call it a draw"
I mean, we got a badass anthem so it was a draw
@@fryreviews693 nah... You still lost
@@DidacusAugustus, We didn’t lose, we just failed to win
@@fryreviews693 alright McClellan. You’re out!
'tis but a flesh wound
Kind of a plot twist that the British were actually holding back the whole time because Napoleon was keeping them busy back in Europe.
I mean, would you rather fight your old colony that's across a literal ocean. Or a literal Dictator that steamrolled most of Central Europe. Still the war itself provides very interesting thought experience; like alternate histories and such.
@@TheIceman567 hahaha...USA got the terms? They lost this war...hahaha...keep on lying to yourself.
@@mildew1 yep, end of impressment, end of orders in council and the end of British support for the natives doesn’t sound like a loss to to me keep being butt hurt. Facts are facts.
@@TheIceman567 hmm...America tried to conquer Canada and failed. Britain achieved its objectives by keeping the territory. USA got some butt kicked. Britain kept control of the seas. Keep on dreaming of American success that wasn't. Butt hurt? I am proud that Canada won. USA should be ashamed of itself for committing an aggression and losing.
@@mildew1 incorrect, the USA goal was to never annex Canada that in fact was a war myth. Btw the USA won the majority of battles even winning the last two battles fought in Canada at Cooks mills and Malcolms Mills 🤷♂️Nor was the USA’s goal to “take control” on the seas lol. You’re pretty butt hurt because 2nd there was no Canada. 😂 committing aggression? So impressment, supporting natives isn’t aggressive?
Fun fact. Had Napoleon not sold Louisiana to the United States in 1803, Britain would've ended up with it after the Napoleonic Wars and modern day Canada would've stretched to the gulf of Mexico.
The good timeline
@@ChrisJohannsen why would anyone want more Britain in the world?
@@leroysanchino Not if they want USA more any how. Any the case i am on the British side on these. Rather than yielding those land for the USA i rather have those land yied to Tecumseh Confederate like the British intended a buffer states between British Canada and USA.
@@leroysanchino People argue that British Canada or USA win or lose. Only the truly loser was Tecumseh Confederate. Even after the worst due to the hand of Jackson act those people and what remains of them have more suffer trial to came.
Here's another fun fact , the only building in Washington D.C. not burned to the ground in the War of 1812 was the Masonic Temple it was not touched !
Some of the most significant battles were excluded, notably the famous Battle of New Orleans. This took place after the signing of the Treaty of Ghent and launched Andrew Jackson towards national fame eventually leading to his presidency. The battle was the end of the Gulf Campaign, American forces were outnumbered by around 8,000 to 5,800. Yet the result was a staggering 2,000 British casualties vs 71 Americans.
Also, an enduring motto of the US Navy “Don’t Give Up The Ship” came from the last orders of Captain Lawrence aboard the Chesapeake. His words were memorialized on Commodore Perry’s flag as a rallying cry hoist above his flagship Lawrence and later Niagara during the battle of Lake Erie.
Its likely because, death count apart, it wasn't a significant battle in terms of notable increase/decrease in chance of victory. In the grand theatre it meant very little.
Still, its an incredible story. Its similar in some ways to the Battle of Rorke's Drift.
Yes, 5,800 hiding in a swamp, ready for an ambush against an unsuspecting enemy. No big surprise in the high casualties with that in mind because anyone can shoot down an enemy who can’t shoot back. And even then you only won a peripheral battle which didn’t even matter seeing as a peace treaty had just been signed but the news hadn’t gotten to where it was supposed to be. Okay, a great psychological boost to catch the enemy napping but it changed nothing, or at least not for the British.
But on the other hand your new army got beaten up badly by an army made up largely of Canadian farmers and other partisans. Pretty embarrassing for you really.
The British kept control of Canada. All you gained out of the war was the chance to take it out on the Indians again, namely Tecumseh’s lot and the other Creeks. Heck, you almost nearly lost some of your people in New England who were that pissed off that they were thinking of breaking away. You pissed off all those businesses in New York who had been doing good trade with the British ever since the revolutionary war ended and you were very lucky not to have faced another army coming over from Europe.
You know what stopped that? Wellington, fresh from victory at Waterloo was asked if he would lead an invasion. But common sense prevailed. He reckoned the expenditure wouldn’t be worth what it would achieve because wars cost lots of money ... and just like us, you had to tighten your belts because you were short of money. Or as we would say here, we were both as skint as @rseholes.
Americans always quote Battle of New Orleans , conveniently forgetting the last major battle of the war, Battle of Fort Bowyer.
In 1814 we took a little trip
@@ryanc970Who's the only superpower, not the Br*****.
British :- its just a minor theatre of the Napoleonic wars
Americans :- nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo it a war in its own right !!!!!
Then why not come and take it when the Napoleonic war was over?
Because you couldn't.
Because once Napoleon was beaten the British were going to send a large AF army. Then the Americans noped right out of it.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 the British at the time decided to maintain the status quo in order to not incite tension in the US. The reason being is that Britain rather watched on as mainland Europe fought each other allowing the UK to grow further in the colonies. It would be of no use to the British to take American land as in peace time trade with the US was necessary
@@Hunter-ww9rd Because they had no choice.
They were taking our sailors.
We forced them to stop/
They hindered our trade we forced them to respect it.
Im mean how could this pass you over?
You make it seem like we were the instigators.
Just how fucking dumb are you?
@@valeriejames4675 Yet we fought on till Feb. 1815 the war being over since Dec. 1814 and we defeated the British at New Orleans.
Yeah we ran......
Americans: We won!
British: We won!
EU players: a white peace it is ...
Mhm
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS what territory did they gain? The USA was the only one that gained territory West Florida and Carleton island.
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS not true, the british only held Washington DC for 25 hours and it lead to Baltimore where the British withdrew from the Chesapeake.
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS I agree it was.
@DIEGO PEREZ GENIS You're talking out of your a**.
US: Declares War
Britain: Repeals trade restrictions before receiving declaration.
US: Well this is awkward…
Hi- I subscribe your channel for long time - good work, keep doing it! It is always problem to keep as much information as possible from one hand and to keep movie length 'acceptable' from the other hand. Well done!
I am wondering what kind of software do you use for animating your maps?
It’s crazy. I live in Niagara Falls and a lot of these battles took place right near me. I live 30 seconds away from Lundy’s Lane. My public school growing up was called “battlefield”. It was the site of the battle of Lundy’s Lane. You could actually find musket balls in the field sometimes. And right next to our field was a cemetery where Laura Secord is buried. Cool stuff.
I’m from the American side.
"We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
i live here too
@@juansantana8448 k juan
@@juansantana8448 in 1814 we took a little trip
Most of us in the UK have never heard of this war. We've had so many foreign wars that this war is just a footnote, if that.
Most Americans know little to nothing of this war.
@Artour Babiev begged for what treaty? Not in this war. Please show me where this happened 😂
@Artour Babiev really? Because Wikipedia agrees with this video...
@@TheIceman567 that’s very true
@Artour Babiev This guy skipped how the Americans sacked the Canadian capital, FYI. And how deep the Americans cut into Canadian territory overall. Get over yourself lol
I would call it a win by Britain because it was the US trying to invade Canada which they did not succeed in doing.
But 12:04 states the USA got what it wanted. Nor was the US goal to take Canada
@@TheIceman567
Oh so Jefferson was just joking when he said that taking Canada would be "a mere matter of marching"? Too dumb to google? Don't worry, most Americans are.
@@JB-yb4wn Jefferson wasn’t president in fact he was out of office and retired in Virginia. Your google link littery stated by two Canadian historians “The United States, meanwhile, could claim to have won the war because they didn’t lose any territory in the Treaty of Ghent, says Wesley Turner, a retired associate professor of history at Brock University. “But more importantly, the British ceased supporting First Nations people in their fight against American settlement in the Midwest.”
Although this goal was “barely mentioned by U.S. President James Madison in his War Message,” Turner says, it was central to U.S. ambitions and the reason why U.S. interior states supported the war. Up to 1812, the British had been arming natives defending their lands against U.S. encroachment. Afterwards, the British dropped this support and deserted their allies. With the Treaty of Ghent in place, the United States could move into native lands without fear of British opposition - and they seized the opportunity.”
And…
“The Americans also looked on the conflict as a victorious second war of Independence against Britain, says Macleod. “Seeing themselves as bullied and oppressed by the British Empire, they resorted to war and compelled Britain and the world to acknowledge American sovereignty and American power.”
Might wanna open that link, too dumb to open that google no worries most Canadians are 🤷♂️ouch!
@@JB-yb4wn America is the reason Google exists. Anyone who wants to start a business leaves the stagnating shitholes of Europe and Canada then starts it in the US.
@@JB-yb4wn Jesus bro what’s with all the hate
Is it just me, or is it every time America loses a war they call it a draw. I.e. this war, Korean war, Vietnam war, war with the Taliban.
If the foreign country was occupied and invaded, that will be a US win. If US was invaded and occupied by a foreign country, it will be a US loss.
If neither country was invaded and occupied by another, it is a draw. Which country was invaded and became under another country’s power after the war? US landing in Korea and pulling out is similar to England trying to invade US but pulling out later in 1812. Draw!
@@Me-fm9zk Interesting way of looking at it.... A wrong way, but interesting none the less.
To win a war a country must achieve the objective of going to war. To Draw BOTH countries must fail at their objectives and call an end to the war.
- The American Objective of the Korean war was to get rid of North Korea and reunite korea as one country. America FAILED to do this hence LOST the war. The North Korean objective was to retain control of the north which they did, Hence they WON
- The war of 1812 the British entered the war to PROTECT their colonies in the north and stop America invading the north, Which they did. Hence The British WON. It could be argued that Americas objective was to end the trade embargo, However that would likely have ended after the defeat of Napoleon and without costing 15000 American lives and 3 years of war. Also the fact the British benefited for the lowering of the trade embargo. So very arguably the british won that war too.
As Americas apt Representative Trump proved with the retreat in Afghanistan , You can't give your enemy everything they have ever wanted a still claim victory.
As a response to your strange belief that wars require invasion. I look forward to the conclusion of Americas war on DRUGS and war on TERROR where they will apparently invade and conquer TERROR and DRUGS.... Somehow.
@@kieranclarges2514but yet how is this? North Korea invaded the south first to take it over the UN forces including Britain stopped this. You’re logic makes no sense. North Korea invaded South Korea in June 25, 1950. Please study. The UN goal was to defend South Korea.
Well the trade embargo didn’t end after the napoleon happened during the war which was a US goal achieved. But yet how that? Britain tried to take US land and Indian buffer state and Maine the buffer state was to block westward expansion which failed and easily won by the US. And impressment ended. Also won by the US as for the economy in the US it grew every year. Another win for the US. I mean at 12 minutes it literally explains what the USA achieved.
As for Afghanistan the goal was never to defeat the Taliban. The US went into Afghanistan to kill or capture Bin Ladden goal was achieved in 2011 Why by 2014 the combat mission ended and turned into a training mission and then the pull out the ANA was supposed to take care of themselves then fell apart once NATO withdrew. Please study before commenting as to not embarrass yourself further.
@@kieranclarges2514☝️
except the US has never lost a single war in history, the US achieved its war goals in the war of 1812 both 1776 and 1812 were resounding British humiliations, Korean war was a victory North Korea failed to invade South Korea the US successfully defended South Korea and the US achieved its main war goals of resolution 82 and 83, Vietnam was a decisive victory for the US 1.4 million NVA/VC KIA vs only 58,000 US KIA the US defeated the Vietnamese in almost every single engagement thats about as clear as a victory can get, and the US never lost a single battle with the Taliban unlike the British losing to a bunch of American corn farmers with pitch forks in both 1776 and 1812, the British lost the Korean war, the British lost the war with the Taliban in fact the British lost not one, not even two but THREE separate wars in Afghanistan, the British lost the Anglo-Afghan war in 1842, the British lost the Anglo-Afghan war in 1919, and the British lost the 2001 war in Afghanistan, the British lost to rice farmers in the Indonesian war of independence in 1949, the British lost to desert farmers with flip flops during the Aden war in 1967 etc... the US has never lost a single war in history 247 years of history and still maintains an undefeated war record
Some say that the war still rages on in this very comment section...
Haha. There seems to be some disagreement
Well at least we know who won!
@Adam It was a truly unique war. Each side has the potential to claim victory. But in my opinion, Canada won. We fought off the americans and defended our land. And like you said the war essentially established Canadiam nationalism.
In school its taught that if the americans didn't attack, that we would of willingly joined america in a few years, or decades. But instead it helped rally Canada as a nation and provide a sense of national pride.
Different countries teach different things. It interesting to see history from someone else's view
haha yup
😂😂😂😂
1:40 START
Thank you
Thanks
Obrigado!
Gracias
Thanks
It was not England as the act of union between Scotland and England was already in place, it was the United Kingdom of Great Britain 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
Americans struggle with that concept. In fact England ceased to be an independent sovereign nation in the reign of Edward 1 when it effectively merged with Wales.
@@johnholt890 Americans struggle with it because we're not used to considering such small parts of the globe.
Seriously, there's 8 billion people on the planet; you expect us to care about your intra-island affections?
The Bank Of England's 1st 20 year central bank charter in the USA ended in 1811. The US was able to keep Britain from taking the Louisianan territory, but issued a 2nd, 20 year bank charter in 1816. After it's end in 1836 no other charter would be issued until December 23, 1913, when most of congress had left for holiday, the bankers created a perpetual charter whose shareholders are private.
all wars are banker wars
This is the crux of it.
Canadians: we won!!
Americans: we won!
natives: we lost.....
British: what war?
Uh no. For most Americans it's also "what war?"
And now the uk is a tiny island the size of Florida that’s ruled by a 90 yr old woman
I thought Lonnie Donnegan won
@@leroysanchino the old lady rules over a lot more than the British Isles.
@@leroysanchino Florida will soon be a lot smaller due to failure to act over co2 emissions
For the record:
1. At the time of this war, Toronto didn't exist. The community that did exist was named York. You didn't mention that the Americans captured York, the capital of Upper Canada, and burned it to the ground. That was one reason the British burned Washington after they captured it. Payback.
2. For that matter, Ottawa didn't exist. However, in the aftermath of this war, it was decided to construct the Rideau Canal so as to expedite troop movements should a similar conflict arise again. The building of the canal (1826-1832) created a community at the northern end of the canal system known as Bytown, named after Lieutenant-Colonel John By, the person in charge of building the canal. It was only renamed Ottawa in 1855.
For someone dealing in History, a little more accuracy is in order.
The fire at York has a disputed cause: no one knows who actually started it, but the Americans did try to put it out. It certainly wasn't done under orders.
He is an American, they know shit about history
@@bubbasbigblast8563 the Americans also burned the town of Niagara-on-the-Lake, not just government buildings but all private businesses and homes leaving the vast majority of the town homeless in December in Canada, as they retreated, which isn’t disputed, and is another reason the White House was burned.
@@bubbasbigblast8563 With the Death of Pike from the magazine explosion the USA lost control of its troops. Which one specifically started the looting & pillaging is like trying to identify which bean made you fart...
More accuracy? In 13 minutes. 🤣🤣🤣
USA's Mission: take Canada
UK's Mission: Keep Canada
*USA DOESNT TAKE CANADA*
*UK KEEPS CANADA*
USA: well i guess we won
Not what happened the US goal wasn’t to annex Canada at all 😂😂
@@TheIceman567 That literally was one of the Main Goals of the War.
@@anothergermanmapper7754 actually it wasn’t that’s a myth. In fact here is historian Donald Hickey on the subject th-cam.com/video/GrCzcI0_JaY/w-d-xo.html
Yeah they cant admit defeat at all lol
@@greenbasterd9112 yeah Canadians can’t
*grows up in Western NY in the early 21st century, and then learns more of the truth about the war of 1812 from a TH-cam video than ever from school.*
There was a small mention that New England refused to invade Montreal, but you should also mention that New England was close to breaking off from America because of this war, and that when the revolutionary war started it was initially envisioned that New England would be its own country, not all of the 13 colonies. They even flew New England and Massachusetts flags in the battle of Lexington and concord.
This is exactly why I think Boston should be the capital of the US not DC
@@natedoug5305 ew boston
Adversary American Baltimore is in Maryland, not New England
@@natedoug5305 Didnt we seize and hold Boston? And raid DC. I think you need a safer capitol more in land.
@Chayse Larsson Not Toronto. But yes, first you guys commited war crimes and in retaliation your capital was burned down.
Thats what the USA does, commit war crimes and than brags about it as a good thing.
How many presidents are war criminals ? Sry how many aren't? Lol
America: Canada needs some freedom
Canadians: Thanks for your concern, but we will politely decline!
Lol
More like “sorry but if it’s okay with you, we politely decline”
@Smited One Their were natives who fought against the british and then switched sides to fight for the british. Some of my Mackenzie side rebelled against the British colonial government in the 1830's as well.
@Smited One Well, 2/3 conflicts that your ancestors helped in were won by the British.
Ryan Gerrard Canadians: ...and why don't you go back to your plantations- perhaps you can also entertain some European autocrats/dictators there.
You completely overlooked the victorious Battle of Plattsburgh September 11, 1814.
And the British victories of Chrysler's Farm and Chateauguay.
I'm from Buffalo and we're taught about how the British burned down the settlement during this conflict. There is also a sunken British frigate in the Niagara river off of the Black Rock neighborhood.
Yo Im from buffalo too
Most Brits forget it happened because it was so insignificant lmao
Defeating Napoleon overshadowed it. We remember Waterloo and Trafalgar, Nelson and Wellington. It was far more important, as otherwise Britain would have been invaded.
Napoleon was a very dangerous military genius and had to be stopped.
Yeah, big powers can't really recall all of the minor conflicts it was embroiled in. Just like the US can't really recall the part it played in the Falklands War. For the US, that was very insignificant as well.
For the US, most of British empires last year's collapsing weren't noticed.
@@compatriot852 Irrelevant but okay😐
@@compatriot852 I'm British and didn't notice, yet you did? You've proper nibbled there mate
Didn’t New England almost break away from America too?
No they wanted more power in government.
@@TheIceman567 The South... on the other hand...
@@shindari what during the civil war? That was over keeping their slaves.
There were talks about New England seceding (namely the Hartford Convention, if I recall correctly), but it never seriously amounted to much. New England was never supportive about the war, though.
@@Eggnog18 in fact there was no mention of secession in the Hartford convention.
Title: America vs British.
Me: Are we thinking same people?🤔
The guy is really downplaying the how much the battle for upper Canada was fought by people from the area. The British didn't put a whole lot of effort into the upper canadian battles. The local peoples knew the terrain and lead a lot of the more strategic actions.
This rhetoric of the noble Americans fighting off colonial britian is romantic but it was never that true. The Americans were just as interested in colonizing Canada as they were native lands.
The American revolution was largely a civil war. In the war of 1812 many of the people fighting on the british side were Americans who moved north after the American revolution(a civil war from their point of view) Like the American revolution the british were not nearly as involved as Americans like to suggest. It was far more locally born peoples doing a large amount of the fighting. This idea that it was native guys with bows and arrow and british boys from London isn't at all accurate.
Upper Canada was a mish mash of Americans(who were called loyalist), natives/mixed race natives/descendants of Fur Trappers and French Canadians. In the big picture the Brits were making far more money from colonies in the Caribbean/Africa/Asia. Their attachment to Canada was never ever that strong.
It was far more Canadians wanting british support than vice versa. Canada has always been a country that likes to play ethnicity card whenever it makes political sense, when in reality most Canadians have always been mixed in one for or another. Whether it being "British Canadians" who were far more Americanized than they want to admit, French Canadians trying to pretend anglophones were more english than they actually were, or people trying to make the unsubstantiated claim that native groups were in any way a unified group. A lot of the "native" were people who had partial british and french ancestry. They used modern technologies/weapons/tools/ideas etc.
I feel for the native Americans, abandoned by everyone.
Native american woman are hot
@@StruanRobertson29 how?
@@ophiolatreia93 the usual way. Ps gongrats on your name,very noble
At the end..they all settle for the skin colour.
@@farhanmohammad4807 ?
No mention of the New England Conference in 1812? New England almost broke away from the US.
True, New Englanders saw themselves as a different ethnic group from the rest of Americans, and to a certain extent still do today. When the revolution started in Massachusetts they were originally fighting for New England independence, not independence for all of the 13 colonies.
James O'Malley New Englander is still it’s own defined ethnic group with their own culture today imo. They have more culture than any other part of the country
Ross' burnt the White House Down, same Night or Day a Flag 1st Stilled by Ross was still there... All you need to know... Ross! Ross! Ross!
@Adversary American A longer one yes but a culture is still a culture. America has a culture, they are different from the rest who are nonAmericans and that enough is American which are all an off branch of the New England culture which came from the 13 colonies.
@@jackconnolly5308 They are also the only part of the country that still has a lot of economic ties to the UK,the only other being New York (My state),the buffer state for some reason.
nice video man thanks for the info!!💯
Great documentary. I continue to be amazed by how much Napoleon accomplished in his lifetime.
He got Joaquin Phoenix to play him in a movie, that is very impressive!😊😊
Um you missed The Battle of New Orleans in 1815. It was Andrew Jackson's shining moment
Andrew Jackson said the Treaty of Ghent would of been abrogated, and the war continued, if he had lost.
And here I thought his shining moment was that time he nearly bludgeoned a failed assassin to death with his cane and had to be pulled off by his guards. The guy was a monster to the natives but, man, did he ever go hard on basically everything he ever did. XD
I think it's because despite the fact that it's a famous battle, it had no real impact on the war because a peace treaty had already been signed before the battle even happened.
@@treystewart731 yeah, but no one in America knew that because it takes months for news of the treaty to travel from the snow covered fields of Belgium to the rain soaked swamps of Louisiana.
Oh, hey your right. Andrew Jackson kicked ass.
Thank you soo much, this was our topic in class and i was researching endlessly in Wikipedia, you just saved my life.
"We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
This is my first time to know about this war...thanks for sharing
Excellent video. Concise and informative.
General Brock- a Canadian hero very well remembered
I must say, his last stand at Queenston heights is incredible.
He was not Canadian though, you understand that right?
@@safeysmith6720 I am a Canadian, I know the history of Canada, I know that General Brock was born in the motherland, I know that his leadership was essential in defeating the american invaders. With his planning and preparations in the years before the war of 1812 , with his early victories in the war and the victory on the day of his death he could be identified as the single most important individual in Upper Canada. SO, yes he is a Canadian hero, without him Canada might not exist.
@@rb239rtryou know Canada wasn't a thing yet, right?
1867 formation of Canada and domestic government. 1931 foreign policy control. Finally got a patriated constitution in the 1980s. Since the Canadian constitution was still a British law until the 1980s, one could argue Canada was not an independent nation until then.
Its okay, no need for the little man syndrome. Grew up on the border, nothing but positive experiences with Canadians. Nothing wrong with being part of the British Empire either during that time. Gave us both all the ideals we formed our nations with.
@@WhydoIsuddenlyhaveahandle WTF. I think you have the little man syndrome.
All this from me saying that Brock stands as a Canadian hero, which he is. Statues, streets, avenues, university all named after him in respect of what he meant for Canada.
Geesh.
BTW, the creation of Canada has certainly led to a different path for Canada's society vis a vis American society. Good points in both societies, but when the chips are down, one is certainly better.
I like it! One quibble: why no mention of the Battle of New Orleans? I thought for sure you were going to jump in with it after mentioning the month-long lag between the armistice and the end of fighting.
It might be because it had no effect on the outcome of the war. It was just a minor footnote in the grand scheme of things, which is sad to say considering how many people lost their lives in that battle.
@Sean Greenfield it’s not entirely the same, New Orleans ended up happening after the treaty of Ghent. Waterloo happened before Napoleon’s second abdication, Waterloo caused the abdication.
😂
@@archivesoffantasy5560 The battle of New Orleans guaranteed American expansion.
@@spehhhsssmarineer8961 American expansion was going to happen either way. Natives couldn’t stop that onslaught.
I love your channel keep up the great stuff
Ah, nothing like watching some good content like Knowledgia 🥰🥰
Thank you that was well stated and well explained, an excellent 13 minutes.
Please more videos like these!! I LOVE THEM
The war of saving face, Where a country that was about to get everything they wanted from another country that couldn't be bothered anymore, and declared war anyway. While that country with much bigger issues (Like bankrupting itself trying to fight France) fought anyway just to not seem weak
British soldier knocking on the door of the white house: "Hello Dolly?"
@Johannes whos the whole world according to you? no one outside of the US, UK, and Canada know about the war of 1812 it was minor in comparison to the revolutionary war which Britain lost and the US won, and by the way nope the UK didnt win the war of 1812 either, even the great British Duke of Wellington Arthur Wellesley and later the official prime minister of the United Kingdom himself concluded that the war of 1812 was a draw (meaning not a British victory) and the peace negotiations should not make territorial demands
and i quote: "I think you (Britain) has no right, from the state of war, to demand any concession of territory from America. [...] You have not been able to carry it into the enemy's territory, You cannot on any principle of equality in negotiation claim a cessation of territory except in exchange for other advantages which you have in your power. [...] Then if this reasoning be true, why stipulate for the uti possidetis? You can get no territory: indeed, the state of your military operations, does not entitle you to demand any." the fact that the Duke of Wellington himself concluded that the British did NOT win the war of 1812 then thats good enough for me, the UK did not win the war of 1812 its as simple as that
A British officer of the time said it was an unnatural war between kindred peoples and he was glad it was over.
Yes, that was John Le Couteur
Right, that is what the brits would like to believe and make believe, but they "forgot, there were many other nations in the US territory, and the brits and their descendants are just one the many. "We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
@@juansantana8448 I mean the spaniards were Just one of the many aswell, their Business was slaughtering natives as it was the US's
@@juansantana8448 The original 13 Colonies were overwhelmingly British, with some German and Dutch. The dominant language was and still is English, Culture, Law system and political structures were based on British. So what on earth are you talking about😆
No word about the bankers behind this? How about this quote "Either the application for the renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war". Seems kind of relevant.
Another scuffle causing tensions at the time, although to a lesser degree, was the rivalry between US and Britain on the frontier to capture the fur trade, particularly in Oregon territory. US fur trappers established a trading post on the mouth of the Columbia just before British trappers arrived and elbowed the US trappers out. After 1812, the countries agreed to shared exploitation of the territory, which removed the international factor and placed the rivalry on the local companies themselves. Eventually, US expansion and emigration would convert Oregon into a US territory.
Hmmmm, I would not call that a victory, considering the political disaster that Cali, OR and WA are currently!
A lesser degree!!! You think!
Britain's tiny island was at war with Napoleons French & allies among others .
Our army was spread around the world building the biggest empire ever known.
...lol, fur trade wars , definitely of lesser significance..
I guess that's why British schools don't mention it.
..hmm let's talk Napoleon or fur wars lol ..
The British were busy taking over the world.
I live like 2 blocks from fort Malden, and was at fort Erie a few weeks ago for the reenactment.
this is the most confusing war because there isn’t an oversimplified video
I'm am British and proud but America is close to my heart. I don't know why. It just is.
Fun fact for reading this comment, I had an ancestor disappear at the Roanoke settlement in the 1580s. I also have my family that immigrated in the 50/60s.
America, the UK loves you.
The same from an American living in Britain. This war was a a stalemate.
Despite our countries getting off to a rocky start, most Americans love the UK and we feel the same way about you that you feel about us. 🇬🇧☮️💙💪🇺🇲 Allies forever
Thank :]
The special relationship
virgin "But the British won!!!!!!!" "NOOOOOO" vs the chad "It was a stalemate."
As a Brit I am proud to say our history and blood are inter twined , that we are brothers in arms to face today's world .
Very true much love to the UK 🇬🇧🤝😂 my fiancé and kids are British btw.
@@TheIceman567 Are they your kids too? If so then they are half British half American
🤢
🇺🇲❤️🇬🇧
The world doesn't look at it like brothers. More like a master and his pet dog.
Note: the Republican party was founded in 1854 the Party mentioned in the video is the Democratic- Republican Party it is a completely different Party founded in 1792 and does not exist anymore.
I like this short documentary! Respectfully, I think Old Hickory and the Battle of New Orleans being omitted is a miss. Though fought after the war was officially over, it is still one of them main things people think of in the War of 1812.
The war was still on as the treaties weren't ratified by both sides, and had the brits won the battle, they would have had every reason to abrogate the treaty and either give the land back to the Spanish or the Indians, halting westward expansion. The battle was a pivotal event in its own right.
It's one of the main things Americans think of, but it was a meaningless battle except for the poor schmucks who died.
It was also one of the only major victories america had during the war
Imagine if Britain wasn’t fighting Napoleon in Europe….I’m American but I’m damn sure we’d be like Australia, Canada, and New Zealand today if Britain sent their full force against us
yea but they got India instead
Nothing would change apart the queen would be the head of state
It would probably be facing guerilla activities like India and Afghanistan.
Have you heard of the revolutionary war...
@@biggibbs4678 that was before this though and we had help from the Spanish and French
A very good intro to the war. for context.....but no mention of Plattsburgh, Bladensburg and New Orleans surprised me
Love the chapter titles, I never knew the challenger disaster occurred in 1812
This was excellent. Kinda sad you didn’t mention the Battle of New Orleans that happened just after the signing of the peace treaty. I’m from the area and there’s a lot of “pride” in that and it’s pretty much how we ended up with Andrew Jackson being such a major player in the early US. Much love!
Good song
"We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
They also neglected to mention the Battle of Fallen Timbers, which opened the Old Northwest to settlement.
I wondered why it wasn’t mentioned
Also how he escaped with only 71 of his men dead…
I really like this video! Not many people know About this war, although it is really interesting!
Indeed!
There was nothing inevitable about American independence.
If the Brits had managed to end one of the other wars it was fighting worldwide it may have had enough to defeat the Frenchie loving traitors.
@@julianshepherd2038 I see what you mean! Perhaps, by the grace of God, we came out on top! 🇺🇸 Yeah, we were traitors to Britain, but the taxes were unfair...
@@julianshepherd2038 There was, but the question was when. Look at Canada and all the others, US would have been much sooner. If Britain won they would be tied up in the Americas and the British Empire might have been far weaker. High cost for little gain.
That's the lesson, they were constantly fighting wars and overplayed their hand taxing the colonies for the 7 years war. They were smart to cut their losses with the Revolutionary War. US was better off rebelling in the long and short term, not getting roped in with the British Empire's interests which benefitted the latter far more than the former at that point.
Ask anyone who lives in Salaberry-de-Valleyfield 😂
The War of 1812 is an interesting conflict in that it's barely mentioned in British history books and most Americans have never heard of it but it's very well known in Canadian culture because it help unite a proto-nation.
it is actually well known in usa, well certain battles of of it, the burning of the capital is known but everyone forgets about the burning of york, and the battle of New Orleans which was an american victory great enough it has a few songs about it.
but to be fair to non-history people the war accomplished very little for both sides, it got british to fuck off messing with american shipping, but realistically by the time it occurred they were about to stop due to napoleon being out of picture. So its no wonder its forgotten.
Yeah they fucked off after burning the white house 🤣
@@liammclaughlin982 the US burnt down the Canadian capital York (Toronto) in 1813 so it cancels out, and sent your limey boys packing at New Orleans
@@liammclaughlin982 Dont say that it hurts my feelings
This was like 16% of 1812 in 16 min. There were way more battles than just a fort surrendering, Plus the amount of ships lost in 1812 was pretty big. Maybe my Vintage 1854 History book is outdated cause there's over 26+ Battles on land and 10+ On Sea. Very disappointed in this video but it did give a quick history but left out all the details of battles and what happened after wards. "Britain Takes Fort, Britain Ends War... 1812" That's the amount of info i got from this video (You made it very long just talking about governments discussing War/Policies.
You Said it. My Grandfather told me stories that he passed down from Generation to Generation. And Yes there were a lot more battles than a Fort being taken.
@@visionstudios7178 Old History will be Replaced with New Propaganda Ridden History. This Country isn't what it used to be. God Bless!
God Bless. You're Truly a Patriot!
It's crazy that during this time, Napoleon was also going around waging war on 90 percent of europe
That’s why this war was a stalemate. 😉
Most of the wars napoleon actually didn't start
90 percent of Europe invaded France after the revolution, Napoleon returned the favor.
And got his raw handed to him by the British and Prussians. 😂 Britain was pretty badass. There is no denying it
@@sutty8526 he was fighting whole coliations by the time the brits and prussians beat him he had inexperienced conscripts mostly.......and even then the brits nearly blew it even wellington said it was close.....the real badass was france at this time at war internal and externally off and on for over 20 years basically aganist numerous nations.
The war of 1812 according to my Canadian history teachers:
"lol, we burned down the white house guis!!"
The Canadians never touched the White House
@Adversary American that's adding insult to injury u mean America wanted America to lose talk about loyal
@Adversary American dear lord
@Adversary American to be fair, not many Americans actually supported the revolutionary war with the crown since they were Brits themselves, and thus some never felt obliged to the US at that time especially after the 1812 war started
@Adversary American Hah,that means we claim the burning of the white house,lol.
It was the same as 1776 the British always holding back/fighting in multiple wars around the world at the same time. We don't even learn about these two wars
This war is not talked about enough. So interesting.
USA : ''lets burn down the Canadian government building, as no one cares''
Canada : ''you think you can get away with that dude''
"We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
It’s not like Canada did anything in response
@@dmeads5663 canada beat back the united states lol
Canada wasn't a country, the fighting was done by British troops@@Quole1234
@@Mark-nx5pk much of the fighting was done by natives and Canadian militia
No mention of Tecumseh.
A man oddly revered by Americans
@@fergusmallon1337 Without Tecumseh, whom held a couple battlefields, there would be no Canada. Fact.
@Wild Celtic-Saxon And a leader, with vision.
@@bradyelich2745 And he got owned
@@bradyelich2745 Back in my high school history classes in the 80s (in Quebec), my teacher spent a fair bit of time on Tecumseh along with the consequences of the War of 1812 both for Canada and for the indigenous people on both sides of the border. He made sure we knew Tecumseh was an important figure in our history. I think he was of the view that Brock got too much credit (not that he didn't deserve some, just that he got utterly lionized because he died in battle) and Tecumseh got overlooked far too much.
Conspicuous by it's absence is the mention of the Battle of New Orleans. Although the Treaty of Ghent had been signed, the news didn't reach the United States for about a month and both sides continued to fight vigorously. General Andrew Jackson commanded forces that drove the British into a pocket in and around New Orleans, and in a pitched battle stretching over about a week, the British were forced to surrender.
There were a couple of key reasons why, 1) The Americans had mostly rifles, that could outrange the British smoothbore musket, and was far more accurate. 2) A critical mistake the British made was to stack up what was available for fortification, they had a large quantity of burlap sugar bags from the local sugar cane crop, and when they got wet, sticky and gooey. When we shot bullets and cannon balls into these bags, the sticky goo/syrup got into the lock work of their cannons and muskets, and they could not fight effectively. A surrender was negotiated.
News of the victory reached Washington at the same time as news of the peace treaty, and in the popular imagination and the newspapers of the time, Americans credited the Battle of New Orleans with British peace, and Andre Jackson did nothing to disabuse them of this error, and rode the game into the Presidency. A footnote from the American side.
I didn't think much of this doc
Interesting tidbit you might like to know is that the British diplomats were delaying the treaty to give the British forces a chance to take New Orleans and handicap American expansion
I just thought I would mention that the Americans were forced in to surrender because the brits and Canadians won the war
@@snazzydares8787 actually they didn’t. Where did the USA surrender I’d love to read this. Fiction can be fun 😂😂 in fact 12 minutes literally states what the USA got. Britain failed in its goal of a natives Indian buffer state, Maine( which the British occupied east port Maine until 1818) and Minnesota to control the upper Mississippi. Doesn’t sound like the British won any thing while the USA got West Florida after forcing the British out, the Northwest territory it had been fight over since 1785 end of impressing and British support for the natives. Study before commenting you won’t embarrass yourself next time.
Mate we burned down your White House and the peace treaty at the end of the war the British wanted most of the Louisiana perches the only reason we didn’t was because it would upset the balance of power in Europe.
I was at the historic battlefield at Tippecanoe. It was very small battlefield. Just outside Lafayette, Indiana.
An article in The Smithsonian Magazine about 20 years ago stated several things; Britain had ended slavery in 1807 but US slavers were still trading, sometimes under false, often UK flags. The Royal Navy looked down upon such behavior, hence some of the impressment. Also the article went on to tell how, at that time, many of the "Canadian" colonists were former United Empire Loyalists, former American colonists who did not support the Revolution and had escaped to Canada and who had left friends, often family and properties in the US. As this video explains, many Americans likewise had no stomach for war with their former friends and relatives. Had not "War Hawks" instigated this war, scholars believe that eventual union of the two colonies would have been inevitable, given the common interests of both 'countries' at the time. The War of 1812 put a permanent end to that dream! Also, as taught in Canadian schools, the attack on Washington was felt to be in retaliation for a raid on York (incorrectly labeled as Toronto in the video).
You have done your homework... I'm going to look up that Smithsonian Magazine article... I've seen those points made before far less clearly elsewhere while researching, events.
Thanks for the reference.
Your post deserves more thumbs ups. Thank you.
"Britain had ended slavery in 1807" - - - - Yeah, tell that to Nigeria or the Indian sub-continent.
@@notmyrealname608 colonialism still goes on today. UK not being the only perpetrator!
I think British left Washington shortly after burning it down. It had all the appearance of payback for the American burning of York, current day Toronto. That war likely doesn't occur without the war in Europe. The war likely was the major factor in British seizing Americans at sea. Years later, in early years of Civil War, an American ship seized several Confederate soldiers on a British ship. Lincoln smartly intervened quickly, having the men returned to the British. Lincoln's comment was "One war at a time boys." All this, because some American naval officer was risking war with Great Britain in order to seize a few rebel soldiers who may have been fleeing the war anyway. It seems people never learn.
The Battle of New Orleans was fought AFTER the Treaty of Ghent, but was still a main factor as to why the US believed they won the war. It was a smashing victory for the United States, even though it didn't affect the peace treaty. However, it increased feelings of nationalism, patriotism, and optimism in the US and ushered in the Era of Good Feelings.
And there was that stupid song
It also kept the British from controlling commerce on the Mississippi and thereby slowing down US expansion westward. It was a critical battle.
- Wins a battle after the treaty has confirmed a stalemate
- that battle shows we won
?
@@larrymatrale1368 IT was not not nearly as critical as it is made out to be by America. It was against a diversonary force designed to draw out American soldiers. And it did.
@@Whoami691 It was critical. The Treaty of Ghent stated that whatever you controlled at the end of the war , you got to keep. That would have given the British control of New Orleans and by default most of the Mississippi River commerce. That definitely would have had an impact on American growth.
You need to clarify a few things...
Barring the colonists from Western expansion was more of a policy tool to encourage Indian loyalty to the Crown over the French. Keeping this ban after the Treaty of Paris by encouraging friction between the US and Native nations was not the only tool Britain employed as they also occupied areas clearly American as defined by the same treaty.
Impressment of Americans at sea was substantial, some 15,000. So undermanned and compensated was the Royal Navy tha it included other foreigners as well.
It was the Jeffersonian Republicans, not the Republican party, which included the Warhwaks. A group of politicians from the west and south led by Henry Clay.
It may have happened after the Treaty of Ghent but I think the Battle of New Orleans would have been worth mentioning...
I wonder what the thoughts of important persons were at the time, American and English. I'm thinking of Lord North's words after hearing the outcome of Yorktown. Thanks for the upload.
compare and contrast to donbass, present day. Or Israel 1948
I like how this video plays the 1812 overture in the background.
Will anyone ever say that napoleon is one of those people that changed the course of history itself?
I believe Napoleon is pretty universally recognized as a person who changed the course of history
@@nagrom1003 Agreed. His avarice turned France into a European "afterthought," in terms of power, after he was defeated. Russia began taking much greater interest in "European Affairs" after Napoleon invaded them. Napoleon's war was almost certainly a cause of the War of 1812. And, oh yeah, he sold America about ONE THIRD of its' present day territory, all so he could fund his war in Europe.
Also...
Arguments could be made that he planted the seeds that would one day lead to World War One... and everything that came afterward. So yeah... Napoleon, historically, is a pretty big deal.
Yes he made the world a cohesive place - first by winning and then losing otherwise, UK was busy in its empire expansion rather than in fighting in spain, Europe. Russia, USA were not interested in Europe. Germany got unified due to these Napoleonic wars. Often memory of the wars drive the future generations - so the two world wars and previously Napoleon ´s war are driving today’s EU.
Everyone literally says that, all the time. The world we live in today is a direct result of Napoleon's destabilizing the European Powers
Yep, modern military tactics, revolutionary ideas, unification of Italy and Germany. The dissolvement of the HRE, and the indirect creation of all Latin American countries. All came from Napoleon. The world would be a much different place if Napoleon was never born
I always wondered about communications in conflicts like this. Your video gave me the answer. People might not know that a war has started or ended until MONTHS later. LOL
The battle of New Orleans was fought long after the peace treaty was signed.
so basically a phone call could've stopped all of this 😂
One correction: Rensselaer's name was Stephen Van Rensselaer, who went on to establish Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and become Lt Governor of New York. Otherwise, excellent video!
He failed to mention that US troops and their Indian allies burned Queenston, the capitol of Upper Canada. The Brittish burned Washington in retaliation.
Let is be known that the fire were not done by any such orders, and the Americans did try to put it out.
Washington was burned in retaliation for the Americans taking over Fort York for a week or so.
@@misaelfraga8196 I've never heard that before, I'd believe it but I'd like to see some evidence for it before putting my faith into that statement.
I'm kind of surprised Winfield Scott's capture at Queenston Heights wasn't mentioned.
the battle of Queenston Heights was largely ignored even though it was Issac Brocks finest victory.
This video has some minor inaccuracies however I'm not going to gripe about such a controversial and pointless war
Excellent history lesson. I'm surprised, though, that the battle of New Orleans wasn't mentioned. Always thought that was key.
That battle happened after the signing of the treaty so had no impact. Even if the British had won, they would still have pulled out. It's a nice side note for America, but nothing more.
@@elizabethsturdivant4986 the treaty wasnt ratified yet at the time
@@UserName-om6ft The Treaty of Ghent was signed by the Americans in December, 1814. It wasn't ratified by Congress until February, 1815 because it took that long for the news to travel. For all intents and purposes the war was over when the Battle of New Orleans was fought. It was meaningless and had no impact on whether or not Congress ratified the treaty. Split hairs if you must. I guess Yankee pride demands it.
@@JohnCampbell-rn8rz if the treaty was signed why did the British try to invade New Orleans anyway and STILL lose? treaty signed or not the British still invaded New Orleans with the intention of nullifying the Louisiana purchase, the British didnt recognize the Louisiana purchase and the territory still belonged to Spain as far as the British were concerned, the British had their own ambitions with their invasion attempt at New Orleans but failed miserably, same with the failed British invasions at Plattsburgh and Baltimore, i understand you were born in the UK and all that so you want to try and hype the UK up as much as possible to comfort your national ego and bias and you try to ignore facts and brush British failures under the rug when they dont suit your narratives and brush American successes under the rug but it wont work, you cant change historical reality just because you dont like it
@@UserName-om6ft cope yankee
The british be kicking ass while helping portuguese..I be like wow that my big sister❤
@User Name 📚
@User Name haha the preuß called the anericans armd mob becus they alway lost battles
@User Name haha british burned white house is in european books they won
@User Name you say this becus americans lost
@User Name no they lost spectaculeraly
Isn't it true that Madison wanted to declare war on both France and England ? Especially to quell ideas that he was being used by Napoleon or that he showed favour towards France. I believe there is a letter he sent to Jefferson where he states his desire to declare war on both.
I believe he was talked out of it as declaring war on France was pointless, what could they do, but England could be attacked through attacking Canada
Careful in mentioning the 1812 war, at least in Canada. A side show for the British, Napoleon's war was the focal point for the UK.
The looses were the native indian tribes.
Are you British?
Why be careful mentioning the war in Canada? Canadians love this war.
@@chocomanger6873 lol
If you fail to do what you set out to achieve how is that not classed as a loss? The colony was defended and remained a colony.
tard the war of 1812 isnt a loss for the US because the goals the US set out to achieve in the war of 1812 was to end British impressment of American sailors and end British support of the natives and the US achieved those objectives, so how is that not a win for the US if the US got what it wanted? and not to mention the British tried to invade the US several times (see the battles of Baltimore, Plattsburgh, and New Orleans) all of which were repelled, the British failed to invade the US the US successfully defended America, in fact as a bonus the US was the ONLY country that gained territory in the war of 1812, the US successfully expanded its territory west, the US successfully took Florida in the South, and the US successfully took Carleton Island from the British in the North, the US also never lost a single inch of territory, the British on the other hand failed to gain a single inch of territory despite trying to and the British ended up losing Carleton island to the US, if you knew anything about the war of 1812 youd know the British didnt even come close to winning in fact the US won as the US achieved several of its objectives and gained more than anyone else in the war while losing nothing
@@UserName-om6ft shut the hell up son thank the French and Spanish your country exists. You’ve replied to everyone’s comments is this all you do?? 🤣🤣 swear I’ve seen you in other comment sections as well and aren’t you the same user name that lost money on the World Cup?? 🤣🤣
@@Yehnah677 im not going to thank anyone their help wasnt needed and no one is grateful for them at all, you should be the one thanking the US for the reason why your country still exists because if it wasnt for the US your whole country would be controlled by Germany right now, you're welcome for the fact that the US bailed you out of WW2 and saved you from Germany, as for the revolutionary war you seem to forget the British also had help, the German Hessians, the Loyalists, and the Natives were crucial in helping the British fight the war and without them the British alone would have never stood a chance, both sides had allies in the revolutionary war yet the British still lost so hold the L and cry about it, and i made my money back in the world cup by betting on the teams that won, cope and seethe kid
@@UserName-om6ft they weren’t needed 🤣 okay buddy. America didn’t fight in the Battle of Britain I’ll thank my lot for saving Britain. Calling me a kid when you’ve got hundreds of comments on several channels get a job mate you’re embarrassing yourself. More people disagree with you than agree with you and it shows in all the comment sections you appear in.
@@Yehnah677 in the revolutionary war the British are the ones that needed help from the Germans, the Loyalists, and the Natives yet Britain still lost, winning a battle doesnt win a war, the UK would still lose WW2 if it wasnt for the US, just a matter of time before the UK surrenders to Germany, "More people disagree with you than agree with you" because im always in comment sections filled with British nationalists and revisionists who spout the same myths like you do, thankfully i dont fall for your brainwashing lies and i actually know the historical reality
I love History .Please make more good vedios like this 😗
Basically, War of 1812 was one big cluster f for both sides.
Yeah, and thanks to that we are not British subject - God Shave the Queen! "We fired one shot and the brits begun a running on down the Mississippi. to the Gold of Mexico..."
@@juansantana8448 wtf are you talking about, there’s nothing I can find which states that Britain wanted to take back the Americans during this war lol.
Based on the timeline given here, the outbreak of the war is inexplicable. President Madison was seeking reelection in 1812. He hoped a war with Britian would boost his chances. Why would he think this? Because the War Hawks had done very well in the 1810 midterms. Congress had abolished the War Department earlier that year. In other words, the politicians didn't see the War Hawks coming until they arrived.
Then what was the Secretary of War, William Eustis doing then? Sticking his thumb up his ass?
The fact Britain were fighting 2 wars at once and won both is crazyyyy
nope the British lost the war of 1812 and in Europe the British didn't win either, the UK mostly hid on their island while the other European powers mainly Prussia and Russia doing all the heavy lifting to defeat Napoleon, not the British
they had alot of help with napoleon he was fighting at least 2 to 3 opponents minimum at one time....and mostly mainland european armies not brits.......on the seas the brits were formidable but army to army they had a small but professional army but it couldn't hang with the powerhouses in a slugfest.
@@UserName_om7ft lol the usa absolutely lost the war of 1812 lol. Canada beat them lol
Not 1812 tho
Why don't you place more commercials??? We love them.
Not sure I agree with the comment at 8:15 saying the British were well prepared. They were in Europe because of Napoleon but in Canada Brock had next to nothing to fight a much larger US army which is why they went on the offensive and acquired the aid of the Natives. At least that's what I've always read and heard from various sources.
Technically the US regular army was only twice as large as Brocks British regulars and the British regulars in 1812 where noticeably better (as you would expect from a country that had been at constant war for 20 years vs a country that had been at peace) but the US had massive militia forces available which is where the real disparity in forces comes from at the start of the war, something like 300,000 people in British colonies and a few Million in the USA, might be as high as 7 Million I don't off hand remember.
I'm subbing just cus of that map design lol
The US lost this war it wasn’t a war of independence. If that’s the case, then any war is a war of independence if u think the country being lost is the only thing that constitutes a winner. US clearly lost they gained no territory only lost
Incorrect the USA far from lost and they did gain territory west Florida and Carleton island. And defeated Britain’s ally the natives which were trying to block westward expansion. Please study you won’t look so dumb next time.
@@TheIceman567 Apart from more people agree with him and he's actually right. Please study you won’t look so dumb next time.
@@onix2130 I would call it a draw truthfully, the Americans burned York(Toronto)the capital of Canada, the British also couldn't mobilize enough troops to do a full scale invasion. Also, The Battle of New Orleans was a crushing success by the Americans which prevented further British expansion in the southern US, plus both sides lost and gained territory.
@@TheIceman567 The USA invaded Canada and FAILED, the British invaded the east coast, burned the white house and just got bored and Left
@@blutimberry incorrect the USA invaded successfully defeated the natives burnt York and was in Canada until July 1815. “Got bored “ not it was called the battle of Baltimore.
Thank you for the info. God bless.
What?? No Battle of New Orleans????
It didn't leave any real impact on the war (it was fought after the Treaty of Ghent had already been signed), and I assume was left out for that reason.
@@treystewart731 yes but it was bad ass
It must not have fit the narrative.
@Dod o slightly is reaching
@@feelsweirdman_1823 Defensive battles from fortified positions have been fought against armies 10 times the defender's size and won, it's only natural.
Britain went beast mode when they burned the whitehouse to the ground lol
York (Toronto) was captured and the parliament and other gov buildings were burned. The White House was razed in retaliation.
Look at the Battle of New Orleans we destroyed most of your navy and killed 30-50 thousands British while only losing 5 Americans lol
LOL
@@WuzzyYT That is completely ridiculous numbers. You must be using that for emphasis. The Battle of New Orleans was actually fought after the Peace was declared.
@@WuzzyYT Just looked it up. Total British casualties were just over 2000 of those 285 were dead, 1285 wounded and 484 captured. US lost 13 dead and about 40 wounded. A thorough trouncing but not to the level you indicated.
At 7:00 the term "War Hawks" was not party specific. It was used much as we use the term "war mongers" today. Also, the "Republican Party" referred to was not the Republican party of today, which was not formed until 1858. At that time, the Democratic Republican party was sometimes referred to as Jeffersonian Republicans, or Jeffersonians, and very often just Republicans. They are the Democratic party of today.
Blake, That's awesome news!
As previous comments are quick to point-out Americans are quick to forget they didn't feel the full force of the British as the empire had far more important lands of interests to think about hence not going 'guns blazing' on the Yanks in that respect.
That was only at the start of the war though. After Napoleon abdicated the British sent 2 invasion forces into the US which were both repulsed. One going for Washington D.C. and the other for New Orleans to try to take control of the Mississippi River.
@Just Getting By You realize that Napoleon's primary army was defeated before Waterloo correct and he had first abdicated in 1814 right? IT was after Napoleon first abdicated in 1814 that Britain could then focus on the was in America where Britain then sent 2 invasion forces to the US which were both defeated as I said in my comment above. The British were focused solely on the war in America for about a year before the 2 sides agreed to peace since the US got the objectives it started the war over completed and Britain had no desire to fight America with it being it's largest trading partner.
It was after the war of 1812 ended that Napoleon came back from exile and took control back over of France in what is called "The 100 Days Rule" since Napoleon was only in charge of France again for about 100 days. Napoleon then tried to make peace with the nations of Europe to allow him to stay in power and they refused which forced him to try to quickly make a new army to fight all of Europe again. The British and Prussians with other smaller allies were the first to get to France to fight Napoleon before he could form to large of a army which lead to the allied forces defeating Napoleon's new army at Waterloo. The real defeat of Napoleon came in "The Battle of Nations" or the Battle of Leipzig where the forces of Russia, Austria, Prussia, Sweden and other minor German nations defeated the French and forced him to retreat back to France where they continued the attack which eventually lead to Napoleon's abdication.
@Just Getting By Lol I mean you just edited your first post to make it sound like you said the correct thing so who knows what you said now.
And when you say "Who says I’m only thinking about land battles? Or even just the European theatre?" of what the Napoleonic wars or the War of 1812? There is no European war for the war of 1812 and the sea battles for the war of 1812 had actually been going the Americans way in the later years of the war. So I'm not sure what you are trying to say there.
As for the invasion forces those were as big of forces as Britain could send supply wise. It took Britain months to send over the invasion forces it sent over after the wars with France ended (until they started back up again). The war of 1812 was the same story as the American Revolutionary War was in that Britain had more troops that it physically could send over to America but if they sent them they would not have enough supplies to fight or eat for a period of time even measured in weeks. Sending troops across a ocean to fight a war in foreign territory is not a easy thing to do especially back then when the troops being sent over would eat most of the food they were sent over with just during the pretty long trip across the Atlantic.
Those limited supplies that the British armies had in both wars but particularly in the American Revolutionary war are what led to the 2 largest British armies ever surrendering prior to WW2 happening during the Battles of Saratoga and Yorktown. The British wanted to send smaller forces with more supplies, that would be more spread out, and thus be able to fight longer during the war of 1812. Which worked for them during the earlier years of the war but when the larger forces were sent after the war with France seemed over with the larger armies were again defeated.
@Just Getting By Ok... yeah.... I never said that wasn't correct. I said after the wars with France ended the only war Britain was fighting still was with America. During that time Britain tried to force a ending of the war in their favor with the invasion forces I spoke about and those invasions failed.
At that point the US had completed the goals it wanted in starting the war with Britain and Britain didn't really even have any goals in the war since it wasn't something they wanted in the first place. So both sides were willing to negotiate a peace deal since the US already had what it wanted in starting the war(the stopping of Britain from supporting the Indian Barrier state both diplomatically and militarily, the ending of the trade restrictions on who the US could trade with and the end of the impressment of US sailors).
@@PhillyPhanVinny no, Britian DID achieve their goal. Their goal was to defend their territory, which they did. So you are wrong.
You have to talk about Jackson's victory over the British at New Orleans. It helped get Jackson elected the 7th President. He then had a huge impact on history.
Not a good one tho. Dude was a real murderer
@@4realjacob637 i think that was the point
Jackson is the only President to pay off the Federal Debt.
@@4realjacob637 he became the first non-nobility to hold office after succeeding John Quincy Adam's. That being said he was a bloody murderer probably buring in Hell at this point.
No idea what you're talking about.
Dear General:
We have met the enemy and they are ours. Two ships, two brigs, one schooner and one sloop.
Yours with great respect and esteem,
O.H. Perry
Battle of Lake Erie