What was the point of the war of 1812?

It's an attempt to claim they won the war because they managed to still exist when it finished.

>It's an attempt to claim they won the war

because America did win the war.

I didnt realize how much that pic triggers bongs

It was seen that way as a time. A reassertion of independence from Britain.

There's a frigate on frigate battle, as well as a naval siege. You should put on your glasses so you can actually see.

>and what would have come your way if we hadn't been wrapped up in a pan-European conflict.
Considering that the Royal Navy had standing orders to not engage with U.S. ships unless there was a 3-1 advantage, not sure it would have mattered. A U.S. frigate was equivalent to a British ship of the line but faster.

This is wrong.

strikes me as a bit of a fantasty considering the brits were never interested in doing so

>Got any larger than a skirmish between a couple of sloops and a brig?

That what this war was made of
Any random Napoleon Wars battle had greater casualties that the entire "war" of 1812

American history is entirely fantasy

>triggers
>no counter-argument
Child.
>equivalent to a British ship of the line
Since British ships defeated the Nuestra Señora de la Santísima Trinidad, which was a 4 deck gunship, the most heavily armed in the world, I doubt it. Proof?

>*nglos are THIS mad that America managed to go to war at the right time and right place
>*nglos are THIS mad that America will ALWAYS love the French more than them

So... The War of American Butthurt?

>Following their earlier losses, the British Admiralty instituted a new policy that the three American heavy frigates should not be engaged except by a ship of the line or smaller vessels in squadron strength. An example of this was the capture of President by a squadron of four British frigates in January 1815. But, a month later, Constitution engaged and captured two smaller British warships, HMS Cyane and HMS Levant, sailing in company.[120]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812#Single-ship_actions

>smaller
None of those were Ships of the line though.
Which is what I've been saying. US Navy's battles with singular British minor ships is excellent, but a British fleet would have sorted you out, had we been able to divert enough resources.

Once again, our frigates were equivalent to your ships of the line hence the policy so it really wouldn't have mattered that much.

Crushing the Spaniards and Frogs.

It would. The policy was introduced to keep losses down, and because your frigates and sloops were better than our equivalent ships.
We had no 1st rate ships in the Americas
You had fewer ships globally.
Frankly its delusional if you say that a large portion of the Royal Navies best ships wouldn't have made a difference.

It wasn't a draw. If the American navy sailed up the Thames and burnt down the houses of Parliament it would be quite obvious who had won that war.

respect for sovereignty of nations

Trips of truth, the British sailed up the Potomac and burnt down thr white house.

>France lost WWI because Germany shelled Paris!
Not the first time Britain smashed the United State's capital, not the the first time they lost the war after doing it either.

Exactly. It'd be like saying the Russians had beat Napoleon.

Shelling Paris isn't the same as marching into it with an army and occupying it. Do you think the Americans would've had any chance at avoiding total calamity if the British weren't occupied with fighting Napoleon?

Different circumstances and you know it. The Royal army wasn't completely defeated like Napoleon's imperial army was.

>america trading with britian and france
>britian REEs the fuck out,tells america to stop trading, and fucks up the trade ships
>britian agrees to stop messing up american trade
>news doesn't reach america fast enough so war happenes
>america stood no chance but it helped napoleon and america got some more land
>we also got to see based AJ kickass and got to watch spain be eternally BTFO
>years later the war is seen a cluster fuck and people argue over who won
>no one realizes that the true victor was nappy

>Do you think the Americans would've had any chance at avoiding total calamity if the British weren't occupied with fighting Napoleon?
Yep. Considering they landed fresh reinforcements at New Orleans and got completely BTFO and the troops that attacked D.C. were also promptly removed, I'd say that Britain didn't have a snowballs chance in winning. The burning of Washington is a meme anyways. It was very mild compared to what Americans did in Canada. York (modern Toronto) was almost completely razed. British regulars didn't even burn any buildings in Washington down.

>FORGETTING ABOUT OLD IRONSIDES
>Constitution and the Guerriere
>Constitution and the Java
>Constitution and the Junon
>Constitution against the Cyane and the Levant

So you really believe that if the Royal Navy and British army were completely focused on America the Americans would've won?

Considering that the latter segment of the war was fought with troops that were transferred over from Europe after Napoleon's defeat..... I'd say that it would go more or less as it did historically.

The British had issues fighting in numbers abroad as it was, let alone entirely across the Atlantic.

You think they can devote their whole army and navy away from europe? it wouldn't end well for them

Also, without the situation of war in Europe, the circumstances that led to the war would not exist, so it's pointless to ask what would have happened if they weren't busy with napoleon,

The answer is they wouldn't have been at war with the united states, that is unless they just decided to fall back on perfidious ways and nick american ships and sailors anyway because at the end of the day the anglo is a villain.

b-b-brittania r-rules the w-waves...

youtube.com/watch?v=T-3ws7b4sZg
>American Naval Superiority Intensifies

>mfw Britain's largest aircraft carrier was built just so they could say they built a supercarrier
>mfw it was built at the minimum tonnage to be considered as such because they couldn't afford anything larger

I think it's mothballed isn't it?

or is that their other carrier I'm thinking of

Queen Elizabeth class. They both slotted to be commissioned next year. They can only afford to field 2. The Invincible was decommissioned a few years ago, which is probably what you're thinking of. The U.S. has Gator Freighters larger than the fucking invincible.