>On April 2, 1801, a British fleet commanded by Lord Nelson sailed up to Copenhagen with the intent of destroying or crippling the Danish fleet. Denmark, Russia, Prussia, and Sweden had formed an armed neutrality pact to enforce free trade with France, a potential threat to Britain's supply of timber from Scandinavia. That spring, London decided to act out of fear that as soon as the ice in the Baltic melted, the Russian navy would be able to venture out from St. Petersburg and form a superfleet with the navies of Sweden and Denmark.
>The British fleet attacked the fortifications of Copenhagen and destroyed or captured a large number of ships, but the Danes had bluffed them by deploying only old vessels not deemed seaworthy while Denmark's front line warships and merchant fleet was safely tucked away in the fjord of Roskilde.
>Six years later, London went in for a second round for fear that the Danish fleet could be used by France to invade the UK, although Denmark was still neutral and in fact had most of her army positioned on the German border in the event of a French invasion. Between September 2-5, the British opened a massive bombardment of Copenhagen, resulting in almost 900 dead and injured, including many civilians. Large areas of the city were destroyed by artillery bombardment and fires started by Congreve Rockets. The aged Danish admiral Ernst Peymann, 70 years old, ignored orders to scuttle the fleet and instead handed everything over to Britain. Fifteen ships of the line were captured but only four were ultimately used in the Royal Navy. Although Denmark now joined the war on the side of France, the loss of her navy limited her military contributions and at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, she was stripped of Norway, which was handed over to Sweden. The "fleet robbery" of Denmark was criticized even in the House of Commons.
Wow, that was douchey. Perfidious Albion is not a meme.
So that explains then why you play cricket which they introduced there?
Gabriel Brown
> trade with an enemy > declare neutrality Pick one.
Lucas Hill
The Bengali famine alone was possibly the single biggest act of scumbaggery in the last century.
Justin Robinson
we should all team up and exterminate the angloid
Angel Miller
Wait, didn't the War of 1812 happen because you tried to stop us from trading with France even though we were neutral? That and kidnapping American sailors for the Royal Navy.
Joshua Robinson
Bengali famine was too many people with too little food. Nothing to do with the British.
Bengal is heading that way again. Though it'll doubtlessly be blamed on the British again.
The RN pressganged its own citizens; America was not especially treated badly here.
Nolan Peterson
For example, all of India's traditional manufactures in particular the cloth industry was utterly ruined by cheap British imported textiles. Famines also resulted because most farmland was converted to opium and industrial crops rather than food.
Camden Flores
Or selling the South a huge ton of weapons and raider ships in the Civil War because mmuh ch33p cotton.
Kevin Green
Lolno That was the propaganda cooked up by the agrarian southern warhawks who really just wanted to manifest their own destiny into British North America (Canada). It's telling that New England, where shipping was most important and most sailors came from, wanted nothing to do with the war and even threatened to secede. Then, they kept fighting long after Britain stopped suppressing trade and impressing (mostly British) seamen.
Dylan Jenkins
>admiral nelson >commands the largest navy in the world at the time >still loses battles even when his fleet outnumbers the fleet that he attacks
Juan Sanders
> the entire navy takes part in each battle
Nathan Moore
British Prime Minister Lord Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston is the absolute only reason America won the civil war.
Matthew Ross
>It's telling that New England, where shipping was most important and most sailors came from, wanted nothing to do with the war and even threatened to secede Conversely however, Massachusetts supplied more volunteers for the US military than did Democrat-Republican Virginia.
Zachary Hernandez
>implying the british navy commandeered by nelson didn't lose battles even when they outnumbered the enemy
Jacob Young
git gud
Complaining about how the military and mercentile superpower of the day bullied other countries is irrelevant and useless.
Wyatt Hall
>Canadian education
It is difficult to find a more badass man in all of western history than Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson.
Tyler Watson
> A large military power never loses a battle
We won in the end, Pierre.
Jeremiah Thomas
Not surprising since the Brits blockaded the entire eastern seaboard and most sailors were out of work for much of the war.
David Foster
The Royal Navy never lost an engagement between the War of the Spanish Succession and WWI, almost 200 years, except in the War of 1812.
Andrew Martin
>san juan expedition >assault on cadiz >battle of santa cruz
Connor Fisher
One Congressman, when asked why the US went to war with Mexico for clay but arranged a peaceful settlement with Britain over the Oregon question, replied "It is simple. Britain is strong and Mexico is weak."
Austin Clark
at least we won 1812
Parker Price
Polk tried to bullshit the UK and was sent a message from the American diplomat in Britain saying that the British were sending a fleet that included 30 ships of the line.
America got even later on though during the Alaskan panhandle dispute. Roosevelt threatened the Brits and they quickly betrayed Canada to avoid a fight with the yanks.
Gabriel Jones
Any intelligent person hates the British. Lying and egoism is in their blood. They'll rape your children and call it justified because you were "too stupid" to stop them.
Asher Rivera
Yes, you did defeat the frogs. Cheers.
Alexander Bell
And they halted American expansion northward while fighting one of the greatest military powers in history.
Brandon Parker
Naval engagements between America and Britain 1812-1814 were closer to a civil war than anything else. The yank navy was somewhat effective because it was modelled entirely after the Royal Navy. They were essentially fighting themselves in all but name.
Grayson Nelson
>And they halted American expansion northward
At the close of the Civil War in 1865, London was terrified that the huge, battle-hardened US Army could be used to overrun Canada and there was nothing they could do about it, but Americans had had enough war and were eager to go home. The Articles of Confederation two years later were so that Britain would be removed from direct responsibility for Canada's defense.
Nope, the famines were mainly Britain's fault. The Mughals would distribute free food to people during famines. The British would raise taxes and drive up food prices. The British exported food out of India when people were dying in the streets. Same thing happened in Ireland. The Corporation That Changed the World is a good book that covers this.
Wyatt Ramirez
America almost certainly did send battle-hardened troops to Canada in an effort to test their willingness and capability to fight. America officially denies they were involved but a lot of historians believe they quietly sanctioned and may have even agitated the Fenians.
