as a cowardly tactic,
do you believe this to be so?
2006-12-10 11:47:02 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
at the time it was crude and unrefined, completely unheard of in civilized society
2006-12-10 11:52:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really. The British of that day slaughtered innocent people and would murder those they thought were threats. Fear tactics. I find that more cowardly then hiding and sniping armed soldiers who were doing such things. The patriots didn't have the numbers like the Brits did. Plus to face them toe to toe would have been stupid and suicide. They had them bright red coats, who could resist?
In my opinion John Paul Jones was a very brave man. He took on the Royal Navy with basically no funds and under trained men. It was like a mouse taking on a tiger or seeing a lamb beat up a lion. Mr. Jones got their attention. There is no logic calling the patriots cowards, they risked all and won.
2006-12-10 20:05:18 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yea, cowardly, unlike the Brits who bayoneted fleeing enemy soldiers in the back.
2006-12-11 00:58:02 · answer #3 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess your next post will compare insurgents who play hide and seek while murdering and butchering the Iraqi civilian population, to the patriots who fought for independence from Great Britain.
2006-12-10 20:05:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well in their eyes it was cowardly. Considering a "fair" fight was lining people up facing each other and taking turns firing muskets from 25 yards away
2006-12-10 19:57:02 · answer #5 · answered by Kenny S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋