Analysis Of The Siege Of Detroit: The Jaws Of Defeat

From the native Americans the American revolution was a total disaster. Before the war patriots worked hard to try and ensure Indians interest, for Indians that could help the military. It was known to most the natives, that independent America had a greater treat to them and what they did then the British. Native land holdings had already been reduced, and an American win would harm what they had and what they owned previously. Treaties created between the British and individual tribes offered Indians some protection against illegally settlers, but if the Americans won and were left with nothing, natives would be left to defend their homelands without any benefit just doing it because they have to. it is important to remember the impact of

It also give a momentous lift to the political or military careers of other men. The War of 1812 looked more to the past then to its future, it echoed the philosophy and problems of the American Revolution rather than exploring new ones. It was it second and last time that America was the underdog, tried to conquer Canada, and the Indians played any major role. The war was unusual in generating such heated political opposition and nearly distinctive in ending the war in a draw. Though most Americans pretended that they had win the war, they could point to a few gains to withstand this claim. It is this lack of victory that may best explain why the war was little

When it comes to Canadian History, perhaps the most controversial and widely disputable topic of debate would have to be one of Canada’s greatest wars: The War of 1812. A wide array of views are held on many aspects of the war ranging from who won to what ramifications the war would ultimately sire. In yet another discussion on the ever so controversial War of 1812, a new question was posed and deliberated by five historians: whose war, was it? Like any other question posed about this war a multitude of ideas would ultimately arise in each of their differing viewpoints. In their roundhouse discussion, the historians would ultimately serve to paint the War of 1812 as a war that transcends much further than the nationalistic view. A view that, though an important part of Canadian history, has been exaggerated to the point of choking out the many voices who fought and continue to fight for inclusion in the narrative. In their remembrance of the War of 1812, society unwittingly failed history in their lackluster commemorations which exclude important narratives and voices and stand tainted by the misuse of history to serve the nationalistic agenda.

Dennis Carter-Edwards’ article The War of 1812 Along the Detroit Frontier: A Canadian Perspective covers the theme of local history during the 19th century in Detroit. In particular, Carter-Edwards explores the Canadian perspective of the war of 1812 in the Windsor-Detroit region. The author examines three big categories; the measures that the British took to defended the area, the factors that influenced British decisions, and the power players that played a role on the outcome of the war. The article is an in-depth account of the events and people that were key players in the war, especially in the Canadian context.

In June 1812 the Unites States took on the most powerful in the world at the time, Great Britain, this war would not only define James Madison’s presidency but also the future of of the United States. However this war is known as the forgotten war, forgotten by the Americans and the British. On the other hand, it is remembered by the Native Nations and Canada. The big question that comes to mind is who won? Well it’s say to say that both side suffered great losses and great wins and some may say Canada got the upper hand. For a forgotten war it sure did have a great everlasting impact.

Sir Isaac Brock and Tecumseh may have had a strong alliance but together could not find a way to defeat the freedom-loving American people or it’s president, James Madison. These three men all had powerful leadership roles and largely affected the War of 1812 and changed the future of North America. Tecumseh, the Shawnee war chief, James Madison, the United States President, and Sir Isaac Brock, the British commander of Canada, all had dreams for the future, and the War of 1812 would determine which of these would come true. Tecumseh wanted to preserve the land for his people and get the white men out of the Shawnee’s lives. James Madison wanted the land in order to grow the United States, and be able to offer Americans more opportunities

Prior to 1877, very many wars took place in America. Each individual war occurred for many different reasons, but most were related to settlements of certain tribes or ethnic groups. As for the War of 1812, this was a war between Britain and the United States; a war in which land and tribes were once more a main contributor. Many settlers and tribes were involved and affected greatly by the War of 1812, and many things occurred as a result of this war. The purpose of this essay is to address the many different aspects of the War of 1812 and the affects that it had on the United States overall.

Due to America’s expansion in the West, it made a very negative impact on the Native Americans there. For example, numerous amount of native Americans died due to the new diseases that they were being exposed to; such as influenza and smallpox. Additionally, Settlers tooks over large amounts of the Native Americans’ hunting grounds. Due to their inhabitants of the hunting grounds, it chased the animals that they would hunt. Lastly, the Native American population decreased. Seeing all this change being brought on to their land, Native Americans began to resist. America responded by attacking the Shawnee villages on the Tippecanoe River while Tecumseh was away, looking for allies. __________________________________________________________________________________

In a battle outside of Prophet’s town of Tippecanoe River, Prophet foolishly decided to attack American militiamen while they were sleeping. The town was torched in the battle that followed, and years of planning and organization was wasted. After this incident in June 1812, Tecumseh and a small company of Native Americans joined the British at Amherstburg. During the war, American’s called for an invasion of Canada mainly because the support the British gave to American Indians. In the Battle of Thames, Tecumseh died and an American victory is gained.

The Battle of Fort Detroit on August 15 to 16,1812. Unfortunately the British won this battle, It was General William Hull's fault, He lost hope when he saw a large British troop and Native Indian troops gathering outside the Detroit's Walls and instead of fighting, General Hull decided to surrender fort Detroit to the British without even trying to fight. They are very lucky that one of the British generals, General Isaac Brock allowed them to return to their homes, Unlike the other regular U.S troops, They have been captured as prisoners to Canada. Some Americans think that what General Hull's did is a disgrace to America's

Other think of the war of 1812 as the “second war of independence”. For too long were the Indian tribes treated as government possessions and were regularly assigned agent to oversee their personal affairs. They were considered to be incompetent and needed to be micromanaged. Independence is a word the Indians recognize all too well and they continue to fight for complete independence today. The United States claimed that one of its justification for the war included British violations of the provocation of Indians. The Indian access to the British was very open and the United States wanted to close that union. The federal government drafted and passed several pieces of legislation to do so. The policies are: Removal, Concentration, Allotment,

Published for the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812, James Laxer’s Tecumseh & Brock is a unique, if troubled, work of historical scholarship. The book approaches the War of 1812 through the lens of two key leaders: British general Sir Isaac Brock and leader of his allied native confederacy, Tecumseh. Laxer argues that Britain avoided defeat in Canada by forming an alliance with Tecumseh’s native confederacy, since they shared the common enemy of the United States. Gathering this intuitively from the text proves challenging, at best. The separate conflicts between Britain or the Native Americans versus the US are portrayed as being personified by Tecumseh and Sir Isaac Brock, respectively. Much of the author’s critical thinking revolves around the effects of the two men on history, as representatives of their conflict with the United States.

Native Americans have as we’ve read through each chapter been heavy contributors to troop numbers in every war throughout U.S. history, however, it wasn’t until more than twelve thousand Indians served in the armed forces during the World War I (WWI) that they were recognized (Calloway, 2012, p.446). By recognized, I mean as civilized human beings worthy of being a part of American society. This again showed the ignorance of our historical forefathers in their actions and dispositions in all manners of national and human interest. The president of the Society for American Indians Seneca Arthur C. Parker saw the native contribution to war as a sign of their patriotism and assimilation through their willing sacrifice, whereas the Native Americans saw the war as a chance to win honors through

Graeme Garrad, author of the article and a senior lecturer in history at Cardiff University evokes the event of War of 1812. He writes a beautiful article entitled “The saviour of Canada” which was printed in the journal History today in October 2012. This article is about how Canada defended Britain from United States in the War of 1812. He tells about the consequences of the war and describes how Canada helped Britain. I am going to review his article on the basis of language, images, content, facts, His style of writing, how he concluded the argument, what title lead us to expect from the article, bias or not.

History should be told from the perspective of the losers because they teaches us not to repeat the mistakes that made them the losers. In the sources “ Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United. The New Press. N. 2003 p,3-7” tells a story of the Europeans as the winner and Arawaks as the losers. The Europeans were able to control the natives lands and make them into slaves which made them the winners. The losers were the Arawak Indians whose loses their lands, people and freedoms to the Europeans In chapter 1 “ They ... brought us