Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC), I don't know why people keep mentioning that these Historians have to bring new evidence to light to support their view?. The impressment of sailors did not stop until the war with Napoleon was totally over in June 1815. The War of 1812 was fought between the United States and the United Kingdom. The British army that had attacked New Orleans was still free to do whatever it pleased on American land, and American soldiers crouching behind one of the most complex defensive structures ever built; augmented with cannons from a US warship was hardly a great victory. note this is not criticism of you but what you are stating92.30.167.238 (talk) 13:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC), but that Is one of the problems I find with this article because I don't think It does represent the majority view, as most historians who have studied the war of 1812 in depth(I.e written a book on it) have stated that this war was a British victory as they achieved their all their aims[4] [5] [6] [7] . Instead of standing up to their oppressive government and re-claiming their constitutional rights as natural persons under the law, these ill-informed apologists waste everyone's time by pushing aggressively biased and ill-informed points of view and completely distorting the fundamental principle of neutral point of view expounded by Wikipedia. The goal to remove Empire traders from the American West, and interrupt their aid to the Indian tribes was (successful). These events vindicated the long tradition of Crown-Indigenous . War of 1812 | The Canadian Encyclopedia Don't get it? Although a few thousand lives were lost and houses, farms and mills burned by the Americans, the Maritimes as well as Upper and Lower Canada successfully resisted American invasions in 1812, 1813 . Except maybe to everyday Canadians. Page contents not supported in other languages. So with the Korean war, a North Korean invasion is repelled - result is "North Korean Invasion repelled", With the Spanish Armada, Spanish invasion is repelled - result is "Decisive Anglo-Dutch victory". China gained no land and are still considered the victors. I have a riddle for you all. Just who won the War of 1812 in North America has been an ongoing debate since the Treaty of Ghent was signed on Christmas Eve in 1814 in Belgium. In June 1812, the United States declared war on Great Britain, citing among its grievances the practice of removing sailors from American merchant ships and forcing them to serve in the British. *Prevent the Native tribes from arming and condensing into one nation. The War of 1812 was fought between American and British forces. If those statements are true then that means that 1) Britain won a military victory over the US and 2) that they lost the negociation war. As for Impressment and Anglo-American Discord, 1787-1818, I appreciate it you pointing it out, and would like to get access to it, but as it is an unpublished Thesis, it is unlikely to be in your average library unless someone specifically requested it. Here is the bias. At the same time, the Spanish and Portuguese, with. Fourth would be the British North American colonists. Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC), Rjensen, I disagree with many of your statements, but I think it probably pointless to argue who won point by point. [deleted] 3 yr. ago. Watering down this War into some wishy washy "everyone was all happy at the end and all was equal" is really misrepresenting and an oversimplification of this war and hints at just one convenient side of the story Deathlibrarian (talk) 09:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC), I didn't mention the historians that say that the war was a loss for the US because they have been mentioned already in the section above, which discusses the issue directly, but happy to reiterate. The US was also the only side to gain land in the war, Carleton Island. when the United States left it. However, this page as you put is for discussion on why British and Canadains think we won the War of 1812. So why the disconnect? I therefore feel anxious not only to add the Floridas to the South, but the Canadas to the North of this empire. I realize that these wars are not identical to the War of 1812 but they posses striking similarities in at least one aspect. He withdrew sullenly and reluctantly after the war ended, but his grip had already been made untenable. I have reinserted the NPOV note. History Marches quickly! ((2) the indian threat was primarly addressed though the creek war which Britain was not part of [[not the war of 1812]. Obviously someone is going to mention the Battle of New Orleans, probably the only impressive American victory of the war and use that as a justification for victory, despite the fact that the British had invaded Mobile more than a month after New Orleans had occurred. As for your opinions on Latimer and Benn, I can assure you I have similiar feelings about historians that say the US did not lose the war, but that's our own perspectives. So who tried to do what, and who came closest to successfully fulfilling their pre-war aims? Technically speaking of course, the War of 1812 had no official victor. Preceding unsigned comment added by TJ13090 (talk contribs) 03:27-07:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC), You're logic defies its self all over the place. The numerous American victories of superfrigates vs frigates did not affect the blockade. So British Books on 1812 say British Victory. Results of the War of 1812 - Wikipedia of Independence was now enlisted on the side of Great Britain, and the successful defence of Canada by regiments The invasion of Canada was repulsed Invasion of Canada for expansion of the republic's territories: This failed very miserably, and suffered numerous defeats at Queenston, Crysler's Farm, Chateaguay and Lacolle Mills. The assumption that the British were arming hostile Indians: from the viewpoint of the British, they were protecting the Indians from the settlers (and there is the argument that the arming of the indians was simply trade). while Britain cared very little for this treating them as a mere secoradry objective at Ghent THUS THIS WAS PRIMARLY ACHIVED THOUGH PEACE in 1814 RATHER THAN THE WAR ITSELF. If that wasn't bad enough you state how this war was a US loss when in fact every loss can be balanced by a victory as well. The War of 1812 was the revolution all over again, we failed at taking Canada but won the war by defeating the last enemy invasions at Lake Champlain and New Orleans. It is also a clear indication of the inherent weakness of the 'states' rights' camp. The British did not send large troops to support the Royal Navy until 1814. Let me explain to all those who cannot (or will not) wrap their minds around that fact. Have not seen the source of the figures given for the wars human casualties, but in most respects they appear rediculous at first glance. And on top of this, Politicians in the UK at the time, according to Hansard, viewed it as a victory. "What did the war accomplish? I am trying to say that historians have come to two conclusions about this war, and both perspectives should be shown in this article. 6, once again you display no evidence as there is non that the US secured it honor .this is another myth as Donald hicky states just because the US won a battle after the war doesn't mean it secured its honor as the relationship between the US and Britain returned to as it was before the war. The War of 1812, which lasted from June 18, 1812 to February 18, 1815, was a military conflict between the United States, Great Britain, and Great Britain's Native American allies on the North American continent. The Americas insist that they won the war for a number of reasons. And what was the invasion of Canada for? At sea, the war was never winable for the Americans in the classic sense, due to the Royal Navy's overwhelming numbers, but most unexpectedly they forced Britain to confront the fact that the cost of the war at sea was too high for them to continue indefinitely, even after Napolean was defeated (successful). In response to RJensen, I don't have Latimer's book (yet), but it seems that he regards it as a British Victory, according to the book being discussed in these reviews: http://www.newsfromnowhere.org.uk/books/DisplayBookInfo.php?ISBN=9780674025844, http://www.andrewlownie.co.uk/books/latimer.jon/1812.shtml Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC), Rjensen, we are not actually here to debate who won or lost, our personal opinions are not relevant. Thats why Jon Latimer regards it on balance as a British victory. Please make a donation to TVO today. Preceding unsigned comment added by TJ13090 (talk contribs) 03:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC). The fact remains that in the end both powers had simply had enough, ie when the talks at Ghent were about the break down the current prime minister made it very clear to the King's negociators just how much an end to the war was desired. But if this has already been mentioned then why arnt the views of the historians who hold the stance that Britain won ,more represented in the results section as other historians( who stat the war ended in a military stalemate, for instance it would be a lot more represenetive if the results section also stated that Britain retains it maritime polices at sea or that Canada remains a part of the British empire to represent the conclusions of these British and Canadian historians. It did more than any other event Judging from your poorly supported arguments, I guess you're a hardcore, angry teenage American who can't accept the general historic consensus. Even in our own history books, we are a side-note. I also don't agree with the supposition that "In addition to the position that one, or the other, side "won," there is broad agreement among editors (as among historians) that both sides benefitted". They lost the battles that were important, except for the Thames. Iraq pushed back. No it does not, because the war continued until we defeated the invading British army at Yorktown. List of War of 1812 battles - Wikipedia I will say though, if the Canadian theatre was considered a separate conflict within the War of 1812 (not unreasonable considering the unique conditions it provided; ie The US was effectively the super power), I think you could make a very strong case that the status quo was a great victory for the British/Colonists. They all have a clear military victor. *The Americans surrendered an entire army at Detroit, which collapsed the American war machine for a while. To show the relative insignifigance of DC, the Capitol Building wasn't even completed until 1868. Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.31.248 (talk) 06:43, 9 February 2009 (UTC), The comment below was originally added to Talk:War of 1812#Who won the war. Shipman7 (talk) 03:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC), I think I disagree with the information in this box, I find it a tad pro US, and a little bit condescending. They insist that the Americans took advantage of them being involved in the Napoleonic War which was being fought at the time. Americas success in the assertion of its independence from the British also makes them insist that they won the war.