Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sherman Logan
Sherman Logan said: "But the disproportion between the firepower of the patriot militia and that of the British army was a LOT less that between today's unorganized militia and a modern military force."

I'm not so sure.

Most cities in the U.S. during the Revolution were located on the coasts and were dependent upon shipping.

The Militia surprised the occupying forces in Boston by taking the big guns from Fort Ticonderoga, dragging them to Boston, and placing them, during the night, on the hills surrounding Boston and Boston Harbor. This enabled the Militia to free Boston and sent their enemy's army and navy scurrying away.

It was not long before the enemy ships showed up in New York and used the surprise provided by their navy's mobility to take New York.

At the end of the war, if not for the timely arrival of the French navy off Yorktown, Virginia, the enemy may have been able to make off in its ships and simply relocate again.

Washington was very careful to avoid LOSING the war in any given battle and was able to survive to see a decisive victory.

Similarly, the people of the U.S. need to simply avoid losing a key battle to eventually win the war against the counter-Revolutionaries who wish to eliminate our right to keep and bear arms.

25 posted on 12/31/2012 2:56:05 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: William Tell

I do not understand your point. I was addressing specifically the firepower or weaponry each side had, not the strategy with which they were used.

If we are going to talk strategy, the Americans were foolish to repeatedly try for battlefield victory. Guerrilla warfare was more effective in their circumstances. However, the idea of guerrilla warfare wasn’t well developed yet, and patriot reliance on it might have demoralized their supporters so much they would have given in to the King.

Weaponry was almost identical. In fact, for the first couple years the biggest armament advantage the Brits had was their bayonets, which the colonists were slow to get. Also the colonists often had considerable difficulty with the quantity and quality of their gunpowder.

That the British won most of the battles throughout the war was a consequence of their generally greater skill and discipline, especially against militia, not of any weaponry advantage.

I’m not addressing the naval issue, where obviously the Royal Navy outclassed any possible American fleet by ridiculous amounts.


26 posted on 12/31/2012 3:15:31 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson