Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 13:53:06 -0800 (PST) From: mark.spiegel@lmco.com (Mark Spiegel) To: tms2@mail.ptd.net (Thomas M. Sommers) Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Guns and freedom [Was: Re: On "intelligent people" and"dangers to BSD"] Message-ID: <200003312153.NAA20741@sgi523.lmms.lmco.com> In-Reply-To: <no.id>; from "Thomas M. Sommers" at Mar 31, 100 3:16 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
: : "G. Adam Stanislav" wrote: : > : > I believe, if my information is correct, their greatest advantage was : > tactical. The British army used the traditional war tactic of having : > soldiers in a single file and expected their opponents to do the same. : > : : I think this view of the war is partly mythical. While partisan warfare, : to which your comments apply, did play an important part in the war, the : decisive battles, such as Saratoga and Yorktown, were entirely : conventional affairs. The Continentals (that is, Washington's army) wore : uniforms, and used linear tactics and smoothbore muskets, just as their : opponents did. The militia, while capable of harassing supply lines and : attacking isolated outposts, could not have faced a regular force in the : field. Not true. When the British attempted to split the Colonies in two down the Hudson Valley, it was the locals and their rifles who defeated Bourgoyne's (sp?) Army, as it tried to move from Montreal to British-held NYC. This battle was decisive as it convinced the French king to back the American revolution. He had been reluctant to supply support because he didn't want the embarrassment of having backed a loser. Since the Colonies had negligible, if not non-existent, weapons manufacturing capabilities, getting French help was extremely important. Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003312153.NAA20741>