by Staeny » Sun May 27, 2012 8:02 am
by Sibirsky » Sun May 27, 2012 8:08 am
by West Vandengaarde » Sun May 27, 2012 8:09 am
Staeny wrote:The overwhelming American opinion seems to me to be that George III was a tyrant? As a result of the glorious revolution, constitutionally he had no more power than the present Queen Elizabeth II does today? It would seem to me that Parliament, being responsible for the Stamp Tax among others was the real tyranny- if you consider it to have been a tyranny?
by Forsakia » Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
by SaintB » Sun May 27, 2012 8:40 am
by New Waterford » Sun May 27, 2012 8:46 am
by Serrland » Sun May 27, 2012 8:47 am
New Waterford wrote:He was mentally ill, so even he did what the Americans say he did that made him a tyrant, he may not have been entirely to blame. He didn't really have any real power anyway.
by Tmutarakhan » Sun May 27, 2012 8:48 am
by Giovenith » Sun May 27, 2012 8:53 am
by Wirbel » Sun May 27, 2012 8:55 am
Mikoyan-Guryevich wrote:Don't RP that your naval strike force has just launched 1000 fighter jets, this is just pure shit.
by Greed and Death » Sun May 27, 2012 9:03 am
SaintB wrote:Honestly, most of the demands made by Parliament leading up to the war were not that unreasonable. They just refused to take the middle ground and allow the colonies representation. The British Govt. needed money to pay for armies and wars they had raised and fought to protect their colonies so they made taxes, but instead of doing what they had done in the past (tell the colonies they needed them to levy taxes or tariffs to pay for the Royal Army and allow the leaders of the colonies to sort them out) they just passed laws that forced colonists to pay certain taxes. Almost all of those taxes were repealed within a year of being passed because of the sentiment in the colonies but the parliament kept passing new tax laws after repealing the old ones.
The Colonists wanted to raise their own taxes, and Parliament wanted them to know who was boss; it eventually lead up to King George being pressured by Parliament to use the Army to occupy Boston and the outbreak of the revolutionary war. Once volleys were traded upon the common square of Lexington all the colonists realized that to give up then and sue for peace would be the end of their autonomy from Britain unless they could create their own nation.
I don't think George III was a tyrant, he was a man stuck between a rock (Parliament) and a hard place (the American Colonies).
by Greed and Death » Sun May 27, 2012 9:07 am
Wirbel wrote:No. The British asked us to pay for a war that we started. We just were brats and we whined and complained and eventually separated from them.
by Greed and Death » Sun May 27, 2012 9:11 am
Staeny wrote:The overwhelming American opinion seems to me to be that George III was a tyrant? As a result of the glorious revolution, constitutionally he had no more power than the present Queen Elizabeth II does today? It would seem to me that Parliament, being responsible for the Stamp Tax among others was the real tyranny- if you consider it to have been a tyranny?
by Tmutarakhan » Sun May 27, 2012 9:12 am
greed and death wrote:Well first parliament did offer representation
by GrandKirche » Sun May 27, 2012 9:12 am
greed and death wrote:Wirbel wrote:No. The British asked us to pay for a war that we started. We just were brats and we whined and complained and eventually separated from them.
While fighting in the colonies preceded the 7 years war the Americans were simply not important enough to start what essentially was a world war.
by Murray land » Sun May 27, 2012 9:20 am
by Tmutarakhan » Sun May 27, 2012 9:24 am
GrandKirche wrote:Asking someone to stump up for the defence of their homes is fair enough and is millennia old.
by Cresilia » Sun May 27, 2012 9:24 am
Norstal wrote:NORTH KOREAN JUCHE
Cows? You no have cows. You get picture of Glorious Leader to eat instead.
by GrandKirche » Sun May 27, 2012 9:28 am
Tmutarakhan wrote:GrandKirche wrote:Asking someone to stump up for the defence of their homes is fair enough and is millennia old.
We did not want troops from Britain over here. They were useless during the war, and an intolerable intrusion in peacetime. Without them, we defended ourselves quite well, thank you; extended ourselves all the way to the western ocean, you might notice, while the British said we mustn't go past the ridgeline marking the watershed of the eastern coast because they couldn't "protect" if we "overextended" the frontier.
by Tmutarakhan » Sun May 27, 2012 9:34 am
GrandKirche wrote:Tmutarakhan wrote:We did not want troops from Britain over here. They were useless during the war, and an intolerable intrusion in peacetime. Without them, we defended ourselves quite well, thank you; extended ourselves all the way to the western ocean, you might notice, while the British said we mustn't go past the ridgeline marking the watershed of the eastern coast because they couldn't "protect" if we "overextended" the frontier.
And never mind those inconvenient natives you slaughtered by the thousand to extend that frontier eh?
GrandKirche wrote:You didn't mind them when fighting the French.
GrandKirche wrote: Also, remind me, when you fought against Britain to try and show how awesome your shiny new country was in 1812, who got their capital burnt to the ground and forced into a stalemate by an enemy fighting you with, at best, the B Army owing to a guy called Napoleon being a bit more of a priority?
by Bontivate » Sun May 27, 2012 9:36 am
by Murray land » Sun May 27, 2012 9:36 am
by Inzaristan » Sun May 27, 2012 9:40 am
GrandKirche wrote:Tmutarakhan wrote:We did not want troops from Britain over here. They were useless during the war, and an intolerable intrusion in peacetime. Without them, we defended ourselves quite well, thank you; extended ourselves all the way to the western ocean, you might notice, while the British said we mustn't go past the ridgeline marking the watershed of the eastern coast because they couldn't "protect" if we "overextended" the frontier.
And never mind those inconvenient natives you slaughtered by the thousand to extend that frontier eh?
You didn't mind them when fighting the French. Also, remind me, when you fought against Britain to try and show how awesome your shiny new country was in 1812, who got their capital burnt to the ground and forced into a stalemate by an enemy fighting you with, at best, the B Army owing to a guy called Napoleon being a bit more of a priority?
by Old Tyrannia » Sun May 27, 2012 9:43 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Cyptopir, IC-Water, Ifreann, Juristonia, Likhinia, Republics of the Solar Union, Simonia, Singaporen Empire, Soul Reapers, Stratonesia, The French National Workers State, Tiami, Tungstan
Advertisement