Europeans see the American Revolution as a proxy war that happened between the Seven Years War and the Napoleonic Wars

>Europeans see the American Revolution as a proxy war that happened between the Seven Years War and the Napoleonic Wars
>Americans see the American Revolution as this grand romanticized and mythologized war where underdogs defeated the greatest empire the world had ever seen with the help of a few Frenchies
Is this true? What's your thoughts?

Other urls found in this thread:

patriotsline.com/how-well-do-you-actually-know-the-declaration-of-independence/the-declaration-of-independence-the-grievances/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Britain was busy with France and India, if they wanted they couldve crushed your little rebelion

>if they wanted they couldve crushed your little rebelion
They fought agains the rebels didn't they? Therefore they obviously wanted to crush the rebellion. They just failed to do so.

They could not have crushed it due to logsitics, maybe eventually they could have defeated it but it would be far more trouble than its worth

Remember France didn't immeadiately come to our aid, we had to win a little first

They decided it wasnt worth it, as they were losing India which was 1000x more important and France was fucking them up the ass. All im saying is that it was more of them giving up then USA winning

>All im saying is that it was more of them giving up then USA winning
You uh...Want to rephrase that?

If Britain fully commited USA would get BTFO

REPARATIONS

REPARATIONS

I WANT MY FUCKING LAND BACK NOW

t. Loyalist

Maybe, but you can't really be sure. All of that type of stuff is just speculation.

Except that is false because they fully committed at the beginning and did not BTFO us.

People forget that it took months to cross the Atlantic back then.

The Loyalists already in the America's didn't lose for lack of trying

>British fully commit in the beginning
>don't BTFO the yanks
>France is convinced to help the Americans

>brits
>crushing anything without the help of a huge coalition

This isn't quite as implausible as it initially sounds given that the US wouldn't be relevant until the 1890s at the earliest.

Who cares?What i'd like to know is the reason behind the revolution?I mean why did the british people just decide to go independent?Did they do it for power and money and disregarded their patriotism?

they had to pay shit to britain

So did the citizens of the UK.Whats the difference?

Most of the American patriots were born in the colonies. Many of them never set foot on the British Isles. Why would they feel patriotism for a country they've never even set foot in?

You see it like that because frogs where good guys that didn't try to get credit for it, so you could build your identity around this war.

Because they're british?

The american revolution was lead by a group of land prospectors (George Washing was a land prospector for example) who were angry that Britain said that they couldn't expand westward.

The average bloke was at best apathetic about it, which is why it took over a decade before Britain just said "fuck it, it's not worth dealing with these cunts" and left.

It was just another war against the British here.

We wanted to be treated like Brits but the parliament wouldn't give us reps and they just gave us dumb taxes that we couldn't have an input on.

We weren't in debt to them they just gave us random retarded taxes on random shit to pay for the war and they didn't give us input. The elites also got pissed because the monopoly imposed by Britain was causing them to not get top-quality goods. The average guy was just found it a bit annoying but annoying enough that they'd be fine with following the elites into the Revolution.

The Brits didn't think so

Its not about the physical land, its about the people; your culture and values and kin.
A man in Alaska may never set foot in Florida but they still both feel loyalty to America do they not?

They didn't get any participation, basically it was "pay your taxes and shut up", so the upper class incited a rebellion in order to keep their money for themselves.

No.GB lost the war,they didnt gave america away.
Whats the difference between canadian colonials and american?

We won the first three anglo-dutch was. And in the fourth we helped achieve American independence. Business as usual.

That makes no fucking sense.Why wouldnt they recognize you?

see
on why it was started, America actually was very very lightly taxed, for the war effort britain wanted to increase it (still below mainland), this was used as an excuse to rebel.

Fine.I guess colonialism was a bad move by the europeans after all..

I wouldn't expect a guy from our Overseas Territories to love Metropolitan France as much as I do.

effectively they gave it away because if they had actually put focus on it they could easily have won.

Are there even french people on your oversees territories?

Because they are dumb arrogant cunts and still are today. We are better off without them anyway.

It wasn't about them keeping money it was them being pissed because the forced monopoly gave them second-grade goods. The random retarded taxes were just annoying and were leading into bigger shit like the Navigation acts that just got people annoyed enough to follow the elites.

There were many reasons, I am aware of most but do not want to just make a list. Examples mentioned in this thread about no reps, monopoly, no expansion, second-grade goods, random taxes, Navigation acts, are all reasons.

By putting focus your mean weakning their armies in india and europe?

NO TAXATION
WITHOUT
REPRESENTATION
BOSTON TEA PARTY BEST DAY OF MY LIFE

White people, with white French ancestors?

That's pretty rare in the Caribbean, apparently. More common in la Réunion and when Kanaks are 100 000 in New Caledonia, at least 60 000 Europeans live there

Honestly it would not have been easy. They could hold onto NYC well but eventually they probably would have just said "fuck it this is more trouble than its worth" and just went away however it is doubtful we would have gone much beyond the Appalachians that way, meaning we would be far less powerful and probably at like 120,000,000 population rn rather than the huge 320,000,000 assuming we didn't eventually break through and get that territory.

>Brits
>valuing Muslim territory and poo-in-loo territory over the USA

their loss I guess. what a lack of prioritization

You can't expect to dump a bunch of colonists in a territory, tax them, and expect them not to want to participate in government. Either don't tax them or don't bother colonizing.

Not that Portugal and France really did that. All you did was build trade posts and fuck off.

The only real colonizers were Spain and Britain.

>Muslim territory

Fuck you m8

Dutch colonies usually werent even state property. But owned by companies.

Don't forget effectively dragging us into the Seven Years' War to begin with by their schemes in Europe, and barely giving any financial or military support to the colonies for centuries and then turning around and expecting them to be completely fine with whatever laws they passed without any representation.

>The only real colonizers were Spain and Britain.

Implying Canada, Australia, south America are good.

Which makes it even funnier that countries like Portugal and the UK lost wars to them. Countries vs the ancestor of Shell.

I mean the taxes weren't really a big deal but in all other areas Britain just treated us like shit really.

Sorry I forgot you

And that's pretty much how India started, except the East India Company became, effectively, a government agency over time.

Honestly I feel like the jump from corporation to colony is a more stable way of doing things, so long as people are encouraged to immigrate out to the colony and expand it. Corporations, for as shitty as they can be, at least generally improve the stability and quality of life in a barren wasteland of uncivilization.

>Sorry I forgot you

It happens all the time to the Dutch.

>if they wanted

So they just let the americans win huh ?

>basically invent globalism and corporatism, as well as modern agriculture
>navy gets rekt by brits
>forgotten in the sands of time

must be hard

We won all wars, excluding the one for your independence.

The Burgers were told they had to pay taxes to contribute to the costs defense and funding of the British-led NATO of the times and they pulled a 'hahaha fugg you, we're not paying'' and a 'Spain, France pls fight for us and gain our independence'.

Fuck you, because of the Revolution, the Glorious British Empire has all but dismantled now.

I would've LOVED this flag. But you all RUINED it for your precious "patriotism".

Disgusting.

>Europeans see the American Revolution as a proxy war that happened between the Seven Years War and the Napoleonic Wars
No. Europeans don't care or even ever think of it, because of it's irrelevance. Same with your civil war. Nobody cares.

>France fucking up Brits
>American Revolution happen during the 1760 - 1770s
>France fucking up Brits at this time.

And the Seven Years War ended right AT the fucking beginning of the rebellion.

This.

>Britain losing a tremendous piece of territory, three times the size of their own country, on the outskirts of the Americas, playing an important part on their influence in that part of the world, is nothing but a proxy war.

If we lost one of our colonial possessions today like Puerto Rico, and they start causing dissidence, we would be losing our fucking shit. We would have pulled out of the Middle East so fast; north Africa would have looked cracked on satellite vision due to all the Jets sonic booming their way across the earth.

Same shit that in Latin America. Now all those poor peasants are serving the criollos kek.

Britain could not have "crushed" the rebellion. There were too many Americans, with modern (for the time) weapons and tactics and they were ready to fight for independence. Foreign support just compounds this

The taxes might not have been exorbitant, but the British had long followed a policy of noninterventionism in the colonies. The colonists were used to handling their affairs, without direct British oversight
When the British started to change this, people got pissed.

>There were too many Americans
Agreed, this has been true for the last three centuries :^)

They wouldn't crush shit. British are shit at warfare, they can only set up Europeans against each other and use they buttfuck buddies Prussians to kill other Europeans en masse.

Brits are cancer of this planet and they should be treated accordingly.
This too.

I don't get it

Don't forget not all of their politicians supported the way it was fault. They viewed the colonies as Brits and would have just preferred to make some token policies to appease the colonists as opposed to killing fellow Brits. Plus as you said with tactics pic related was depleting their field officers.

Says the country whose citizens are responsible for our cops carrying guns.

Bullshit. It was a powerful widespread Empire against a weak force of colonials. If it was actually worth it, and they weren't preoccupied with more important shit, then the colonials would have been fucking destroyed.

t. Nigel Cucksworth

>against we
>us

but 90% of current americans had their ancestors coming to the US of A in the late 19th & early 20th century???

Soldier of the Provisional Rifleman of the 11th Virginia regiment.

Fought in the battle of Cowpens son.

What a steaming pile of shit that just fell from your mouth.

see

Basically this

The US were greedy fucks who showed no faith to the mother land. Look at Australia, New Zealand and Canadas living conditions compared to that overpopulated dump called the USA. If they stayed with the empire they still would have become the most powerful nation anyway.

The war from a british perspective (of which there are very few because not many people care): The then british americans were initially lightly taxed, but after george washington started the seven years war against the french we started taxing them more to try and make up for the losses. This lead to merchants stirring the americans up and starting a revolution. We never fully committed to it, which is easily understandable once you think about how irrelevent the colony was at the time.

Funny that, they conveniently list all the reasons in the Declaration of Independence for all to see.
patriotsline.com/how-well-do-you-actually-know-the-declaration-of-independence/the-declaration-of-independence-the-grievances/

>Brits who know nothing of the conflict acting like it didn't matter "w-we didn't care about you guys anyway"

Gets me everytime