Would you have fought?

[MEANDWARF]

Depends if short people were allowed to fight back in the colonial days.

[Burgold]

Okay, I don't want to be the negative voice here and I'm definitely no history-buff, but weren't most of the American troops just volunteers doing it for a paycheck? Like most weren't really out there for some ideological reason. In fact, I read somewhere that support was waning and Washington had to agree to pay his army more so they would stay and fight? Weren't most farmers (as most people were that day) that could only fight during the non-farming months?

I don't know if it was like after world war 2 when there was a huge sense of duty to enlist after Pearl Harbor was attacked.

I guess you could say that it's no different today. Soldiers fight for the ideology of their current leader.

Quite a few probably did, but a lot of them never got paid and stuck it through anyway. The Revolutionists didn't have enough resources and the French didn't always come through.

[jnhay]

Depends if short people were allowed to fight back in the colonial days.

I'm pretty sure battle axes were pretty ineffective in those days too.

[rincewind]

I'm pretty sure battle axes were pretty ineffective in those days too.

Someone hasn't seen the Patriot...

XbtA0TIyoI8

[CommanderDOOM]

Oliver Cromwell

James Armistead (James Lafayette after the victory) Wentworth Cheswell

you know what happened to them after the war for the next 200 years??

[Predicto]

My ancestor was a famous Tory.

So, ummmm... :paranoid:

[SonOfWashington]

I have no idea. Now I would probably say yes, but back then, who knows.

[GhostofSparta]

2 of my ancestors signed the Declaration of Independence: Robert Morris of PA (also signed the Constitution) and Lewis Morris of NY. So while I picked "maybe" I think I might've had to man up because of them. Also, I'd be coming after Predicto the Tory up there :saber:

[joeknows]

Yes,though there wouldn't be any of that lining up in ranks to be target practice on my part.

funny you mention this because although im sure there was some of this going on ... the brits had complained that we werent engaging in the rules of war because we would lure them into the woods and fire from behind trees. we didnt stand 2o paces apart and take turns firing.... we would never had lasted if we had.

[Harwich Hog]

I know it's a different question entirely but it's perhaps a more important one to ask. Rather than who would've fought, what would have happened to the world had the people that did chosen not to? Any rebellions would have likely been put down and intellectuals would have lobbied for it and got it eventually (likely in the same way Canada, Australia did).

The British however probably would have had very little interest in looking much further west. Louisiana Purchase doesn't take place, France retains territory around the Mississippi and the Spanish take the west coast. Once the value of the land became apparent you'd be looking at a land-grab on a scale much larger than was seen in Africa toward the late 19th century. Obviously it's all hypothetical but the world would be a very different place...

So for those who are happy with their place in the world, everyone has got to be thankful they did and with the benefit of hindsight say "yes" too.

[Predicto]

Also, I'd be coming after Predicto the Tory up there :saber:

Good luck with that.

Sir Guy Carleton kicked your traitorous colonial butts at the Battle of Quebec, and he could do it again. :saber:

[Prosperity]

yeah, probably

i'm totally down with pissing off the English

[GhostofSparta]

Sir Guy

That is perhaps one of the greatest names in history.

[Predicto]

That is perhaps one of the greatest names in history.

He was a pretty cool dude, actually. Not only a good soldier, but a very progressive leader for his time. When he was governor of Canada, he allowed religious equality and made the civil servants take a salary rather than extort fees out of people for their services.

After he won the early battles that kept Canada from joining the revolution, he went back to England. He was sent back after Yorktown and was put in charge of getting all the Loyalists safely out to Canada or England. As part of that, he refused to hand over slaves back to their slavemasters - something which pissed of George Washington pretty badly.

Then he was sent back to Canada, where he got the Canadians their own legislature and start in self-rule.

"High-principled and able, Carleton was perhaps the most admirable British colonial commander in America in his time."

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0810447.html

[Teller]

If pissing of George Washington is your idea of "progressive," P, then count me even happier to be a conservative! :pfft:

Now on a serious note, I think I can say with relative certainty that I would've fought. I volunteered to serve this country wherever and whenever I was needed. Unfortunately -- or fortunately -- I'm not sure which, I never got the call to fight overseas, but I was itching like a mother ****er to go after 9/11. I'm sure many of you who never put on a combat boot felt the same way then. Sadly, I got stuck guarding a gate at Ft. Dix, NJ. And if you've been there, you know that Iraq or Afghanistan are preferential to the "Garden State."

As most of you know, I'm a stubborn ****. And I will argue to the death for something that I believe in. Rest assured that where and when it matters, I'll FIGHT to the same degree for what I believe in as well.

So yes, I would've gladly taken up my musket and fought for this land from the beginning, as I wanted to 200-couple years later.

My blood is good too. My granddad was a D-Day vet, so I come from good, hard bark. Now, Predicto would like to share a photo with you.

(Much love and respect, buddy. Happy Fourth to you, and to all!!!!)

[Enter Apotheosis]

Absolutely. I love my country more than anything. I consider fighting for my country the same as fighting for my family and friends. Indepedence is the most critical thing.

USA!!!

Now on a serious note, I think I can say with relative certainty that I would've fought. I volunteered to serve this country wherever and whenever I was needed.

That kind of patriotic sentiment would have made both of you great Tories.

[zoony]

Yah, I'm not quite getting the responses in this thread.

You know who the biggest patriot of the revolutionary war was? Benedict Arnold. That man loved his country.

The rest were traitors.

[IONTOP]

Absolutely... If my country called specifically on me (and whomever they drafted) sign me up and I would give my life for freedom...

[Predicto]

If pissing of George Washington is your idea of "progressive," P, then count me even happier to be a conservative! :pfft:

Not a safe thing to do. Here's proof. (warning strong language)

sbRom1Rz8OA

Now on a serious note, I think I can say with relative certainty that I would've fought. I volunteered to serve this country wherever and whenever I was needed. Unfortunately -- or fortunately -- I'm not sure which, I never got the call to fight overseas, but I was itching like a mother ****er to go after 9/11. I'm sure many of you who never put on a combat boot felt the same way then. Sadly, I got stuck guarding a gate at Ft. Dix, NJ. And if you've been there, you know that Iraq or Afghanistan are preferential to the "Garden State."

As most of you know, I'm a stubborn ****. And I will argue to the death for something that I believe in. Rest assured that where and when it matters, I'll FIGHT to the same degree for what I believe in as well.

So yes, I would've gladly taken up my musket and fought for this land from the beginning, as I wanted to 200-couple years later.

Sounds like you would have been a loyal Englishman to the end.

My blood is good too. My granddad was a D-Day vet, so I come from good, hard bark. Now, Predicto would like to share a photo with you.

(Much love and respect, buddy. Happy Fourth to you, and to all!!!!)

Can't do it. It's too recent since the last time. I have some (tiny) sense of shame.

[jnhay]

Are you guys actually placing your current personalities into the setting back then?

[Predicto]

Are you guys actually placing your current personalities into the setting back then?

Why not? Plenty of people try to place the Founding Fathers' personalities into the 21st century.

[boobiemiles]

Yep, sign me up and put me on the front line with the drummer, and flag bearer. Especailly if I knew that our actions would spawn democracy.

[jnhay]

Why not? Plenty of people try to place the Founding Fathers' personalities into the 21st century.

I HATE when people do that. "If George Washington were here he'd be outraged!" Hold on, who cares about what George Washington thinks? I guess our own opinions and preferences should be thrown out the door because GW disagrees with them?

[rincewind]

I HATE when people do that. "If George Washington were here he'd be outraged!" Hold on, who cares about what George Washington thinks? I guess our own opinions and preferences should be thrown out the door because GW disagrees with them?

Not to mention they only do that for the Fathers best qualities. It always cracks me up when people say 'The Founding Fathers would have done this or that, therefore so should we.' Yeah, they also had slaves (and purposely kept slavery out of the Constitution), fought duels, and were for a large part drunk.

[polywog999]

Not to mention they only do that for the Fathers best qualities. It always cracks me up when people say 'The Founding Fathers would have done this or that, therefore so should we.' Yeah, they also had slaves (and purposely kept slavery out of the Constitution), fought duels, and were for a large part drunk.