
"The Battle of Plattsburgh (1814)" Topic
5 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the War of 1812 Message Board
Areas of InterestNapoleonic 19th Century
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article The first aerial ship proper for my Turks.
Current Poll
|
Tango01  | 10 Dec 2020 9:03 p.m. PST |
"The War of 1812 began when the United States declared war on Great Britain. At the time, Britain was already battling France as part of the ongoing Napoleonic Wars. To support the war against the French Empire, Britain had imposed trade restrictions on the U.S. and forced thousands of American seamen to serve the British Royal Navy. For these and other reasons, the U.S. went to war with Britain. When France's Napoleon Bonaparte was deposed in early 1814, the British were able to focus more of their resources and soldiers toward the War of 1812. The British became much more aggressive and launched invasions of the U.S. However, in early September 1814, the U.S. defeated an invading British force at the Battle of Plattsburgh, which is considered a major victory in the War of 1812…" Main page link Amicalement Armand
|
IronDuke596  | 11 Dec 2020 8:08 a.m. PST |
A very short but clear article on the campaign that is only marred by a few technical errors, eg. turning or winding the Saratoga is hardly a "brilliant strategic move", it was normal naval tactical maneuver brilliantly timed. The author states "The decisive victory at the Battle of Plattsburgh helped encourage peace negotiations between the U.S. and Britain," it was indeed strategically decisive but it did more than just encourage negotiations as they had been going on for many months. Up until the arrival news of Prevost's failure, the British negotiators were insisting on holding any territorial gains (eg. LGen Sherbrooke's northern New England states gains) and were willing to continue the war into 1815 to keep those gains knowing also that their plans for the Mississippi campaign were in motion and that the U.S. was virtually bankrupt. Prevost's failure, despite having overwhelming odds against Brigadier-General Macomb's army, so dismayed the British government that it gave instructions to Admiral Gambier's negotiating team to settle the war with Americans as 'status quo ante bellum', as it was before the war. This is why the battle of Plattsburg is strategically decisive. |
Tango01  | 11 Dec 2020 12:54 p.m. PST |
Thanks!. Amicalement Armand
|
Brechtel198 | 12 Dec 2020 4:31 a.m. PST |
It wasn't just Plattsburg, but the British failure at Baltimore as well as the fighting on the Niagara Peninsula, where the Americans defeated the British twice and fought to a bloody draw at Lundy's Lane. Even though the Americans withdrew to Buffalo after the siege of Fort Erie, they fully intended to return in the spring of 1815. And then the post-mortem at New Orleans… 1814 was not a good year for the British in North America. Nor was it a good year for British generals in North America…Riall was captured and Ross killed; and at New Orleads in the first part of January 1815 had two generals killed in action and one seriously wounded and out of action. And Wellington was insisting/hinting to get the war over with… |
Tango01  | 12 Dec 2020 12:42 p.m. PST |
|
|