British Victory: War of 1812

I'm looking for Ideas on how the war of 1812 could've been won by the British for somethin i'm workin on. If anyone has any please help.

Thanks, McCarthy
 
...We did win. :confused:

If you mean more decisively, sure: Hartford Convention succeeds and secedes, victory at Plattsburgh, victory at Fort McHenry, no staff fatalities at Queenston Heights or the Thames (as much as it pains me to say so, the latter would probably have more of an effect), Boney decides he likes being king of Elba. Any of those would at the very least change the post-war borders, possibly a lot.
 
As has been pointed out here before :rolleyes:--- The British did Win the War. :p

However to answer your intent

A few more Battle victories, Maybe have the British attack New Orleans earlier and win, before the Treaty negotiations.

The US then agrees to the lesser Maine border and some minor Great Lake changes, or some such, in return for N.O.
 
This gets away from the original question, but I always wondered if the Brits had really won an overwhelming victory, whether they would have made America a British colony again. There must have been some in England who were still smarting that the 'damned rebels' had dared to defy the mother country, and would, even in 1814, still like to punish the defiant child.
 
haha, sorry yea a more decisive victory (I wouldn't call a status quo ante bellum, but it's somethin). would they have asked for land if they did better and America worse.

I was recently reading about the battles in Michigan and Ohio during the war, and it said "The British also had the long-standing goal of creating a large "neutral" Indian state that would cover much of Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. They made the demand as late as 1814 at the peace conference, but lost battles that would have validated their claims" do you think they would've actually gone through with it if they had won more decisively?
 
haha, sorry yea a more decisive victory (I wouldn't call a status quo ante bellum, but it's somethin). would they have asked for land if they did better and America worse.

I was recently reading about the battles in Michigan and Ohio during the war, and it said "The British also had the long-standing goal of creating a large "neutral" Indian state that would cover much of Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. They made the demand as late as 1814 at the peace conference, but lost battles that would have validated their claims" do you think they would've actually gone through with it if they had won more decisively?
Yes, they (probably) would have, especially if Tecumseh were still alive.
 
This gets away from the original question, but I always wondered if the Brits had really won an overwhelming victory, whether they would have made America a British colony again. There must have been some in England who were still smarting that the 'damned rebels' had dared to defy the mother country, and would, even in 1814, still like to punish the defiant child.
No, no, no. I'm bloody fed up of this! :mad:

Some of us may have been bitter (although thirty years isn't such a short time), but few of us were stupid. We all knew perfectly well why we had lost America and why we wouldn't be able to retake it, and why trying would be a tremendous and futile waste of time and resources.

That we still intended to subjugate America in 1812 is a myth spread by American politicians from 1815 onwards to give a heroic sheen to a war of naked American agression in which it received a sharp bloody nose and won only defensive battles of significance. It's a big fat lie.
 
No, no, no. I'm bloody fed up of this! :mad:

Some of us may have been bitter (although thirty years isn't such a short time), but few of us were stupid. We all knew perfectly well why we had lost America and why we wouldn't be able to retake it, and why trying would be a tremendous and futile waste of time and resources.

That we still intended to subjugate America in 1812 is a myth spread by American politicians from 1815 onwards to give a heroic sheen to a war of naked American agression in which it received a sharp bloody nose and won only defensive battles of significance. It's a big fat lie.
All versions of the war are in some aspects a lie by this point.
 
Naked American Aggression!?

We had skivvies on!! :mad::mad:

I.E. There were legitimate grievances but they didn't rise to the level of deserving war.
 
Yes, they (probably) would have, especially if Tecumseh were still alive.
that's exactaly what i've been wonderin, maybe if Isaac Brock survived, he could've led the Brits to more victories, maybe the battle of the Thames would be butterflied out
 
Yep. The British defeated the American invasion force, invaded the United States and burned down the White House. I'd say that counts as a British victory.
American Invasion force? America is invading itself?:rolleyes: Also, I dont see the burning of the capital as a victory. Just a lose of a symbol and a way to create the White House as it should be.
 
Yep. The British defeated the American invasion force, invaded the United States and burned down the White House. I'd say that counts as a British victory.
I count it as one too (somehow had forgotten the white house I am discraced!), but they didnt gain anything from their victories.
 
If not for the Battle of New Orleans I doubt we'd ever have these arguements. New Orleans was the last big battle of the war and let the Yanks finish on a high note but it decieved their people into believing the War of 1812 was something they could take pride in.

The War of 1812 was a failure for the Americans, started for reasons that were not even relevent any more about three days after war was declared and was full of almost nothing but dissapointments and failures and political upheavel.

The only way this War could have been a bigger failure for America would have been if Britain had smashed the fledgling USA into submission, left them totally beaten and demoralized and split politically to such an extent that bits of the USA broke away and declared their own independence (such as New England).

This was never going to happen as the War of 1812 was only ever a sideshow for Britain. It was possible that the British Empire could have won such a clear cut victory over the USA but there was no way in hell that Britain was ever going to give America priority over Portugul and Spain and Wellington.
 
American Invasion force? America is invading itself?:rolleyes: Also, I dont see the burning of the capital as a victory. Just a lose of a symbol and a way to create the White House as it should be.
You do realize I hope that Canada was NEVER a part of the United States? So how did America invade itself?
 
I count it as one too (somehow had forgotten the white house I am discraced!), but they didnt gain anything from their victories.
That's true, but when you can say that you successfully invaded your enemy's territory and burned down their capital city, I think you've earned the right to say you've won your war.
 
That's true, but when you can say that you successfully invaded your enemy's territory and burned down their capital city, I think you've earned the right to say you've won your war.
So the Canadians have no business claiming they won, then. :)

The Brit and Canuck zealots are just as arrogant and stupid about their feelings and version of this war as the Yanks are, I'm learning.
 
That's true, but when you can say that you successfully invaded your enemy's territory and burned down their capital city, I think you've earned the right to say you've won your war.
absolutly you do! I've been tryin to figure out why they didn't rub America's noses in it more. after all that and they choose status quo? i've been lookin for a POD for a timeline with a Amerindian nation, and a more decisive victory, and Tecumseh surviving could give me what i've been lookin for
 
Top