Terrorist attacks in London

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

It is long term. All change is long term. I think Americans have it so good in a society of microwaves and fastpasses that the processes that take longer seem unfathomable. I am truly thankful that there is no Hitler around today - I don't know if we would have the patience or stomach to fight the war over time that it took to accomplish the job. I am glad America has already been founded, because the 11 year from our Declaration of Independence in 1776 to the passage of a Constitution in 1787 would be seen as an eternity and the attempts to start America would be called a failure.

I suspect that most American's capacity to stomach a long term battle is directly proportionate to their belief in the cause. For me, a week in Iraq would be equivalent to 50 years of fighting for our independence.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by SacTown Chronic

I suspect that most American's capacity to stomach a long term battle is directly proportionate to their belief in the cause. For me, a week in Iraq would be equivalent to 50 years of fighting for our independence.

I can understand that....but that made me think of something.

I wonder what the opinions of the French were in the 1770s. They had their own domestic issues. I wonder if they thought it worthwhile to be assisting this group of colonists thousands of miles away when only 20% of those colonists wanted freedom from England anyway. Of course, there's no way to know for sure.

The leaders of France saw the bigger picture. It wasn't so much about helping colonists half way around the world as it was about opposition to the British.

I sure am glad they helped us out and saw the bigger picture. I would guess, though, that the French probably lost more then 1700+ in 2.5 years. Again, I can't say for sure - I really don't know.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I sure am glad they helped us out and saw the bigger picture. I would guess, though, that the French probably lost more then 1700+ in 2.5 years. Again, I can't say for sure - I really don't know.

600+ at Yorktown alone...........No numbers are available for the entire War.

[wendybeth]

See? It all comes back to the French.

However, I fail to see how the Fench involvement in the Revolutionary war compares to this- quite a stretch there, guys. The government of France during the Revolutionary war was still an absolute monarchy, and they were using us every bit as much as we were using them. No ideology at play here at all, gentlemen- just good old fashioned mercenaries. Ironically, their involvement contributed to the downfall of the monarchy and helped to pave the way for their own revolution.

From Wikipedia:
"France, the Netherlands and Spain entered the war against Great Britain in an attempt to dilute Britain's superpower status. France officially entered the war in 1778 and soon sent troops, ships and military equipment to fight alongside the American Patriot army against the British for the remainder of the war. French military involvement in the war proved decisive, though disastrous for the French economy. France's standing army at the time is estimated to have been some 100,000. Spain entered the war in 1779, but did not recognize the new American nation and sent no troops to fight alongside the United States. The Netherlands entered the war late in 1780, but its navy and army was soon overwhelmed by the superior British Royal navy and army."

According to the same submission, the number of Patriots was between 40-50%, while the number of Loyalists was around 15-20%.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Billy Joel We didn't start the fire

Harry Truman, Doris Day, Red China, Johnnie Ray,
South Pacific, Walter Winchell, Joe DiMaggio

Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Studebaker, television,
North Korea, South Korea, Marilyn Monroe

Rosenbergs, H-bomb, Sugar Ray, Panmunjom,
Brando, "The King and I" and "The Catcher in the Rye"

Eisenhower, vaccine, England's got a new Queen,
Marciano, Liberace, Santayana good bye

CHORUS
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire
No we didn't light it but we tried to fight it.

Joseph Stalin, Malenkov, Nasser and Prokofiev,
Rockefeller, Campanella, Communist Bloc

Roy Cohn, Juan Peron, Toscanini, dacron,
Dien Bien Phu falls, "Rock Around the Clock"

Einstein, James Dean, Brooklyn's got a winning team,
Davy Crockett, Peter Pan, Elvis Presley, Disneyland

Bardot, Budapest, Alabama, Krushchev,
Princess Grace, "Peyton Place", trouble in the Suez

CHORUS

'57 Little Rock, Pasternak, Mickey Mantle, Kerouac,
Sputnik, Chou En-Lai, "Bridge on the River Kwai"

'58 Lebanon, Charles de Gaulle, California baseball,
Starkweather, homicide, children of Thalidomide

'59 Buddy Holly, "Ben Hur", space monkey, Mafia,
Hula hoops, Castro, Edsel is a no-go

'60 U-2, Syngman Rhee, payola and Kennedy,
Chubby Checker, "Psycho", Belgians in the Congo

CHORUS

Hemingway, Eichmann, "Stranger in a Strange Land",
Dylan, Berlin, Bay of Pigs invasion

"Lawrence of Arabia", British Beatlemania,
Ole Miss, John Glenn, Liston beats Patterson

Pope Paul, Malcolm X, British politician sex,
JFK blown away, what else do I have to say?

CHORUS

Birth control, Ho Chi Minh, Richard Nixon back again,
Moonshot, Woodstock, Watergate, punk rock,
Begin, Reagan, Palestine, terror on the airline,
Ayatollah's in Iran, Russians in Afghanistan.

"Wheel of Fortune", Sally Ride, heavy metal, suicide,
Foreign debts, homeless vets, AIDS, crack, Bernie Goetz,
Hypodermics on the shores, China's under martial law,
Rock and Roller colour wars, I can't TAKE it anymore!

We didn't start the fire
It was always burning since the world's been turning.
We didn't start the fire
But when we are gone
It will still burn on, and on, and on, and on...

.

[Name]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

According to the same submission, the number of Patriots was between 40-50%, while the number of Loyalists was around 15-20%.

Well, we'll just have to go into wikipedia and correct that obvious oversight to the correct percentage of 20% patriots.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

According to the same submission, the number of Patriots was between 40-50%, while the number of Loyalists was around 15-20%.

I think those numbers have been inflated and deflated over the years as no accurate poll was ever taken at the time. However there are other ways to measure and get a sense of where the hearts and minds of those who lived back then were. Judging by some of the reading on this subject I have done today I would say that about 20% of the pop was strongly opposed to the Revolution and that an equal number(20%) were strongly for Revolution. The remaining 60% were mostly anti-British but not too keen on actual revolt.

I very telling statistic:

By 1779, there were more Americans fighting with the British than with Washington!

<<<In the Year 1779 there were no less than 21 regiments (estimated to total 6,500 to 8,000 men) of loyalists in the British army. Washington reported a field army of 3,468. <<<<

[wendybeth]

From a VOA broadcast- The Making of America:

"No one knows for sure how many Americans remained loyal to Great Britain. The Massachusetts political leader, John Adams, thought about thirty-three percent of the colonists supported independence, thirty-three percent supported Britain, and thirty-three percent supported neither side. Most history experts today think that about twenty per cent of the colonists supported Britain. They say the others were neutral or supported whichever side seemed to be winning."

Not that it has squat to do with the OP, so I think I'll quit my participation in this particular derail, and maybe chime in if it gets back on topic. ( Or if we find out it was the French. )

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

However, I fail to see how the Fench involvement in the Revolutionary war compares to this- quite a stretch there, guys. The government of France during the Revolutionary war was still an absolute monarchy, and they were using us every bit as much as we were using them. No ideology at play here at all, gentlemen- just good old fashioned mercenaries.

So you are saying that because it was a monarchy, it was OK for the French to be involved? Actually, I would think the French citizenry would resent it even more. The were subject to the rule of a king, yet their armed forces were assisting others in getting freedom? Apparently they did - as wendy mentioned - a mere decade later the French monarchy fell.

I would suggest that we are using and being used as well. The Iraqi citizenry does, in fact, wish to be free (more so than the 20-50% of the American colonists that did), and we want democracy to spread throughout the reqion of the middle east for a wide variety of reasons. And yes, one of the goals all along was to establish a democrary in Iraq, as democracies have never been freindly to terrorists, and with a fundtioning democracy in Iraq, it is more likely to spread.

Go ahead, wendy...stay out of the thread....I dare you.

[Ghoulish Delight]

When the French got involved in the American Revolution, it was active, initiated by the citizens themselves. In Iraq, there was no active revolution, unless you count the Kurds, and even they had pretty much carved their niched and stopped at that. The fact remains that no revolution that's been initiated by outside forces has ever lead to a successful, stable nation.