Australia's New Leader Is An Atheist: Americans, Don't Try This At Home!

[dbucfan]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/22/an_electoral_dry_run_down_under_106422.html

UFOJoe - you get your wish -

[spartan]

The American revolution was fought because we had learned to fend for ourselves and recognized that we were not gaining from the relationship with England, especially driven home when they stopped treating the colonies as regular English subjects. The revolution was fought because England too, realized they were gaining more from the relationship than they were offering - but they also realized they really had nothing to offer, they just wanted us to give up freedom after experiencing it - because they didn't want to lose all the free stuff they were getting from America.

Interesting perspective, but one that I would beg to differ. The British Army had been in "the Colonies" defending the original 13 states for decades. Multiple wars were fought so I think the "fend for themselves" is a little bit over ambitious. Oh they contributed don't get me wrong, I am certainly not saying they were moochers, but the brunt of the fighting to defend them was done by regular British troops. With regards to the "not treating as English (um British?) subjects" there is an argument against that too. The  Revolutionary War started because the British Parliament imposed taxes to assist against the war with the French. They, the British Parliament, arbitrarily imposed taxes to help with that effort. The BIG difference is that the Colonies had no representation in Parliament and could not argue that the taxes were good, bad or indifferent. Personally I think it is not so much what the British did, it is how they went about it. Implemented better, listened a bit more, and  perhaps a little arbitration and the Revolutionary War would never have happened. The British were arrogant about the matter and with the benefit of hindsight  made the biggest jerk-up in history!

How's that for changing the subject of conversation?

[The White Tiger]

Great, I'll bite - even though the paltry sum of troops committed to "defending" America (the colonies provided most of the muscle during those "defensive" situations) prior to the intolerable acts the king had begun to tax subjects to pay for his more important engagements with the French - while not really hearing any of their petitions regarding being able to keep what they earned.

You could say that he began to take from wage earners in America, in order to pay for previous global commitments, and some social welfare projects...

of course, those taxed didn't need get the social programs, and didn't gain from the global commitments except lighter pockets and a smaller voice in their own government...

Then they all had tea and everything changed.

As you can see, I'm a great student of U.S. history

[ufojoe]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/22/an_electoral_dry_run_down_under_106422.html

UFOJoe - you get your wish -

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

[dalbuc]

Great, I'll bite - even though the paltry sum of troops committed to "defending" America (the colonies provided most of the muscle during those "defensive" situations) prior to the intolerable acts the king had begun to tax subjects to pay for his more important engagements with the French - while not really hearing any of their petitions regarding being able to keep what they earned.

What irked the British was that the colonies whined about the cost of taxes but the cost of defending them was much much higher than what they were being asked to pay. The original 13 colonies were basically the welfare cheats of the British Empire.

[spartan]

Great, I'll bite - even though the paltry sum of troops committed to "defending" America (the colonies provided most of the muscle during those "defensive" situations) prior to the intolerable acts the king had begun to tax subjects to pay for his more important engagements with the French - while not really hearing any of their petitions regarding being able to keep what they earned.

....

As you can see, I'm a great student of U.S. history

I will follow on from dalbuc, go to this site and check the forces involved in the French and Indian Wars:

http://www.britishbattles.com/battle-of-quebec.htm


You might find that 99% of the "muscle" was provided by British Regulars. What the Americans did provide and proved to be invaluable were several Ranger and Scout companies.

[The White Tiger]

And as the pre-revolution engagement at Fort Necessity, during the French & Indian War proved...the British officers were pretty good - but the British regulars weren't always...so the British tended to use a lot of local boys for the heavy lifting.

More to the point - there were a lot of costs associated with billeting soldiers in the houses of Bostonians - which also tended to be considered "intolerable"...by the people...

The King still did NOT hear the will of the people - he instead punished and scolded them - and sent troops to live with them just to make sure they got the message.

In the end - a Tea Party was necessary to send the message to a Tyrant that he had become obsolete.

Those who were taxed and punished - who paid the bills for the Tyrant to spend on public works programs in London, or to under-write unceasing wars - decided they weren't getting their money's worth...

[spartan]

And as the pre-revolution engagement at Fort Necessity, during the French & Indian War proved...the British officers were pretty good - but the British regulars weren't always...so the British tended to use a lot of local boys for the heavy lifting.

Actually it was the other way round. The British Officer Corps had a lot to be desired as a bunch. They bought their commissions and had little in the way of training. Brave as muck, yes, competent? That was very hit or miss. It was the grunts of the British Regulars that usually won the day for the British Army. The British did have a knack of pulling out genius generals when it mattered, Marlborough, Wolfe, Clive, Wellington to name a few, but the officer corp as a whole ranged was far from professional.

[The White Tiger]

Apparently Washington was not of the same opinion...at the time...