By: symonsez

symonsez — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:50:04 +0000

While technically, there is truth in what you say, pragmatically it is misleading, particularly the last sentence. If you hold true, you must rant and rave and say that it is false information for anyone to say that the Revolution was over after Yorktown because the Treaty of Paris was not signed for two years and the British Army didn’t leave until 1783. History records that the Mexican Army surrendered in early 1848 but in your volume…it wasn’t over until May 1848 when the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was ratified. Of course, you must insist that, for the US, World War I was never over because, while there was an Armistice, the Treaty of Versailles was never ratified by the US. World War II went on in your back yard much longer than the rest of the world. While Germany and Japan signed articles of surrender in 1945, there was no treaty until the 1950s and the Treaty on the Final Settlment with Regard to Germany that recognized Germany as a sovereign nation and all claims by the Allied Nations was not signed until 1990 and did not take effect until 1991. So, you must then say that it is false to say that World War II was really over until 1991. http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/2plusfour8994e.htm Methinks that Germany did not complete its World War I reparations to the “Great Powers” until the late 1990s. North and South Korea are officially in a state of War as we speak…so you must argue that there is in fact a war continuing in Korea! The Gulf War was never really over…there were articles of a cessation of hostilities under terms..such as the no fly zone…really you could say that the second go around that took out Saddam was really a continuation of the previous engagement as Iraq did not live up to the terms so the US resumed hostilities.

Do you see how your argument and position opens a whole can of worms? I do appreciate your stopping by but, after much fun at your expense, I must say that I disagree though concede that, I suppose techincally you might be correct…though then you would have to also say that at 9am on Dec 7 1941 we were not at war with Japan until the next day when, retroactively, Congress made such a declaration. And, of course, there was no war in Vietnam…yet there was a treaty.

Thanx again for contributing.

By: CM

CM — Sun, 03 Jun 2012 01:37:27 +0000

The Battle of New Orleans was fought DURING the War of 1812. The treaty was not ratified until February 1815 and ratification of the treaty is what resulted in the war being over.Saying that the Battle of New Orleans was not fought during the War of 1812 is just continuing false information!

By: symonsezwlky

symonsezwlky — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:51:55 +0000

Thank you for your comments. Feel free to stop by and add to the discussion any time.

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:29:41 +0000

When the Redcoats entered the abandoned Capitol Building , they staged a mock session, toasted President Madison, then burned the place down. Much of the mayhem was retribution for the Americans attempting to burn the Canadian Parliament earlier.

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:43:52 +0000

Good job- the hurricane, accompanied by a tornado, knocked some Redcoats clear into the air, and when they withdrew from Washington, they appeared to be a defeated army, though they had met little human resistance!

By: weihnachten weihnachtsmann

weihnachten weihnachtsmann — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:58:03 +0000

Incredible story

Comments on: Hurricane of Providence Saved Washington DC and perhaps the Nation

By: symonsez

By: CM

By: symonsezwlky

By: Henry

By: Henry

By: weihnachten weihnachtsmann