MikeyD Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I wonder what would have happened had Napoleon successfully escaped to America. Any thoughts? He probably would have been dined and feted like a celebrity but public grumbling would soon grow over the widespread international difficulties his 'guest status' would cause. Imagine if Hitler had successfully escaped to Argentina. Most of Europe at the time saw Napoleon as a monster on the scale of a Hitler. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce90 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Marshall Ney did didn't he according to legend? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetchez la Vache Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Fetchez la vache! You called? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelson 1812 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh... thought this thread was how the Brits were lucky to escape from the clutches of America! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh... thought this thread was how the Brits were lucky to escape from the clutches of America! You mean after we evicted you? What makes you think we would have wanted to keep you? We didn't have many zoos in those days. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelson 1812 Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 You mean after we evicted you? What makes you think we would have wanted to keep you? We didn't have many zoos in those days. We certainly lucky you evicted us. Not sure what you mean by keeping us, as most Brits prefer to be here... Your loss is the Royalty that would have eventually would have moved there. With America being so rich in assets, and the power house of the world... the best the UK would have been in the long term is another state in America had you remained in the Empire. Sad to say, America has lost the opportunity to have a more leading role across the world, and empire. Therefore, I think it is more your loss, than the Brits and Commonwealth. Sad to hear you had to increase the number of zoo's over there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 2, 2013 Author Share Posted August 2, 2013 Oh, it's on! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 2, 2013 Author Share Posted August 2, 2013 You called? Long live The Python! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 4, 2013 Author Share Posted August 4, 2013 Another tasty bit from Gary McClellan @ GameSquad: How did the US Garrison at Ft. Niagara find out that war had been declared in 1812? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted August 4, 2013 Share Posted August 4, 2013 Another tasty bit from Gary McClellan @ GameSquad: How did the US Garrison at Ft. Niagara find out that war had been declared in 1812? twitter? No? oh I know youtube!!! or maybe that reporter in SF that got burned by an NTSB intern!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 4, 2013 Author Share Posted August 4, 2013 All good answers...any more takers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 7, 2013 Author Share Posted August 7, 2013 LEGEND HAS IT..."Some of the (US) Officers were attending a formal mess function across the river at (British) Fort George. When word reached the British Garrison commander there via messenger from York (today known as Toronto) he politely informed his guests that they were at war and gallantly allowed them to return to their side of the river." (DANJANOU) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altipueri Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Not legend I think. From Canada's Historic Places: "News of the declaration of War reaches Fort George, Upper Canada. Contemporary accounts mention that American officers from Fort Niagara were dinner guests at Fort George when news of the American declaration of war arrived. Thomas Clark, a Queenston merchant and business associate of John Jacob Astor, had received the news from a Mr. Vosburgh the previous day. After hearing the shocking news, the assembly continued their meal. Following toasts to both King George and President Madison, the Americans returned to their fort in peace. An American newspaper account noted that "several American gentlemen were there on a visit who were treated very politely by the Governor," namely Major-General Isaac Brock. The news of war was very unwelcome on both sides of the Niagara River. " 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 8, 2013 Author Share Posted August 8, 2013 How civilized! Thank you, altipueri. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Shame how some things have changed eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 8, 2013 Author Share Posted August 8, 2013 ...or not. We do still share the world's longest "unprotected" border. Love thy neighbour...and all that stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 ...or not. We do still share the world's longest "unprotected" border. Love thy neighbour...and all that stuff. I wouldn't call it unprotected. There are plenty of cops of various sorts that guard crossing points and patrol the more undeveloped stretches. 'Unfortified' is the word that has been commonly used to describe it and that is a much more precise term in this case. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted August 9, 2013 Author Share Posted August 9, 2013 I like your choice of words, Michael. "Unfortified" it is. And because we are so civilized, I shall use the American spelling to extend an offer to "love my neighbor." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 I meant shame how a lot of chivalry seems to be gone from mainstream American/Brit/Western culture, especially in regards to say warfare. That's not to say that I don't understand why things changed, or think that it does make entirely more sense to kill as violently, efficiently and as quickly as possible to end a war sooner, and thus end suffering sooner. The idea of benevolent warfare is somewhat silly I suppose, but it still doesn't take the romance from the idea to me at all. edit: the idea popped into my head as I was writing this : what does everyone here think about the 'honor' of the German officer corps in WW2? For example in Keegan's Six Armies in Normandy he has a chapter on the Mortain counterattack titled 'The Honor of the German Army'. One of his arguments is that the Germans fought so long and hard, even knowing it was hopeless, to preserve the honor of their army. Do other feel the German Army had honor in WW2? Knowing the atrocities were being committed? Does fighting an inherently 'wrong' war dishonor the officers and soldiers on the 'bad' side? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Do other feel the German Army had honor in WW2? Knowing the atrocities were being committed? Does fighting an inherently 'wrong' war dishonor the officers and soldiers on the 'bad' side? No. When you get right down to it the grunt soldier and his NCOs and junior officers are *no* different on either side. In general. I realize that there are some formations that were created to commit those atrocities and my argument breaks down for that. But for the regular soldier convinced or conscripted into service is just trying to stay alive and defend their country. They *can* have honour. As Forest Gump would say "honour is as honour does". The true honour a solider possess comes from *their* behaviour and *their* motivation. Which is why I say a soldier on either side can be honourable. Don't forget there was dishonourable behaviour committed by some soldiers in all armies. At what level in command and what level of knowledge of atrocities that breaks down is not clear for sure. I recently heard an interview with a documentary film maker or author (I forget which) who is working on a project documenting the Japanese atrocities committed in China. His take on it though is to try to learn about the motivation / training / etc of the soldiers who committed those atrocities. I came away from listening to what he learned about their training (which amounted to brainwashing really) and the techniques used to create monsters who would carry out horrific acts out of ordinary men questioning how we should judge them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinoza Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 ''BLSTK Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: BLSTK BNKR Posts: 183 I apologize to my Forum Brethren. But you know you wanted to say it. It's unfortunate that beelzeboss' (grand)mother survived the Warsaw Uprising.'' So denigrate a person or a group on the basis of ethnicity and then casually converse about honour and chivalry? Fully backed in you musings by venerated Michael , ian and Sublime ? Our young BLSTK receiving prime education indeed. Good night to you all , my dear gentlemen and respected intellectuals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandur Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 war is the most dishonorable thing humans are able to perform, its about taking stuff, killing stuff and destroying stuff? whats honorable about it? honor in war is a romantic notion that gets injected into stories and anecdotes mostly after the war, its all BS. honor is mostly a selling point to get idiots to sign up and "earn" some honor, cause there is no other reason to sign up rly. next thing i hear from you guys is the knights in the sky, WW1 honor and chivalry bull****. when i hear bout honor in war i get angry, rly angry, its a idiotoc concept and you guys are right in line with the military aristocracy throughout the 18th(late), 19th and 20th(early) century. a bunch of narrow minded idiots living in a militaristic dream world. at least 21th century stops this a bit, i dont read how honerable it is for russia to kill Chechens, how honorable it is for the US to kill arabs and so on. by now we get it, i hope. if anyone want to sell you the "feel good" honor in war, go ahead and kick him in the nuts, that would be a truly honorable deed. sry for this post, but rly i get angry when i read such honor BS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 when i hear bout honor in war i get angry, rly angry, its a idiotoc concept and you guys are right in line with the military aristocracy throughout the 18th(late), 19th and 20th(early) century. a bunch of narrow minded idiots living in a militaristic dream world. at least 21th century stops this a bit, i dont read how honerable it is for russia . It seems you wandered into the wrong room, Pandur. The Kumbaya forum is two doors down on the right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 Spinoza You've got a lot of nerve to put my name in a post as venerating or supporting anyone when I clearly never did that at all. And Pandur you've only proven yourself to be the idiot. I never said there was any inherent honor in all of warfare in general. But it's ridiculous to claim that upon hearing the two sides were at war letting your new enemies safe conduct to their lines is anything but an honorable move. I do however think there is honor in the profession of a soldier. I could really care less what you think about honor anyways - the fact that the mention of honor makes you want to puke just tells me you have none to begin with. If you'd like to point me to a post of mine where I glorify blood n guts as 'honor' I'd like to see it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 No. When you get right down to it the grunt soldier and his NCOs and junior officers are *no* different on either side. In general. I realize that there are some formations that were created to commit those atrocities and my argument breaks down for that. But for the regular soldier convinced or conscripted into service is just trying to stay alive and defend their country. They *can* have honour. As Forest Gump would say "honour is as honour does". The true honour a solider possess comes from *their* behaviour and *their* motivation. Which is why I say a soldier on either side can be honourable. Don't forget there was dishonourable behaviour committed by some soldiers in all armies. At what level in command and what level of knowledge of atrocities that breaks down is not clear for sure. I recently heard an interview with a documentary film maker or author (I forget which) who is working on a project documenting the Japanese atrocities committed in China. His take on it though is to try to learn about the motivation / training / etc of the soldiers who committed those atrocities. I came away from listening to what he learned about their training (which amounted to brainwashing really) and the techniques used to create monsters who would carry out horrific acts out of ordinary men questioning how we should judge them. Interesting answer. When I wrote my question I had more in mind the professional military officer class of the German military - the Prussian Officer Corps if you will. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.