7118Re: [WarOf1812] Naval battles
- Sep 1, 2000--- "Ibbotson, Mark [LSS]"
Also you could back up
my theory that a lot of the U.S crews were British
deserters, that goes for U.S land forces also.
The book by Roosevelt, says something to this effect.
In it he says James makes this assumption, Roosevelt
disagrees. This is why I want to find other books on
the subject. Each side seams to be accusing the other
of exaggerating. At least that's what I read in this
You have to remember the
states only had those bloody frigates and 1 v 1
against a british frigate showed who had superior
That's what I have learned so far. That and the better
trained crews made the world of difference.
--- "Ibbotson, Mark [LSS]"
If only Yeo had the
balls of Nelson eh.
It would have made the world of difference I suspect.
But it seems on Lake Ontario, both were content to do
almost nothing, while blaming the other for not
initiating the battles.
> Rob I do not know if Jame's book is still in print__________________________________________________
> but i have seen the book you refer too but never
> bothered to read it. perhaps now i will.
> Superior frigates on the U.S side showed Britain a
> thing or two. Even some spectacular defeats "Perry"
> & constitution for a start.
> Britian did manage a successfull blockade in the
> end, 74 gun + men o war saw to that.
> You have to remember the states only had those
> bloody frigates and 1 v 1 against a british frigate
> showed who had superior designs.
> Also you could back up my theory that a lot of the
> U.S crews were British deserters, that goes for U.S
> land forces also.
> If only Yeo had the balls of Nelson eh.
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
- Next post in topic >>