The British army was spread too thin, and they regarded the Continentals with contempt. The British were also too arrogant at the time to adapt to guerrilla warfare. Cornwallis was forced to Yorktown, where a naval blockade by French vessels prevented further retreat, and was forced to surrender. This happened in spite of British naval superiority. Insufficient British warships were stationed in the area because this eventuality seemed too preposterous to be seriously considered.
2007-03-16 10:47:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Helmut 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The primary reason why the US won the revolution is that the British political focus was on other more pressing issues, like Napolean.
First of all, the Revolutionary war was never popular in England due to the fact that it was the 13 colonies and was settled by and large by middleclass and upper lower class english subjects. There was very little support to take/keep the colonies.
Second, English troops were needed in case of a French invasion, over in Spain and Portugal fighting France, and to keep India - all of these were considered more important than the 13 colonies.
If the english navy had committed to a full naval blockade and the full weight of the english army had come in through Canada - history would have been very different. It was a near thing anyway.
2007-03-16 10:20:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Actually the Continental Army did very little. The militias and "insurgents" did most of the fighting. It was Militias under Benedict Arnold, of all people, who defeated and captured Burgoynes Army at Saratoga. In the south guerillas, without uniforms or a country, forced the english to withdraw to Virginia.
Another thing was hardware. The Englished used a short musket which was good in formation and easy to reload while the Americans used thier hunting muskets which were good at long range. Americans could fire at the Brits while out of range of return fire.
The British had a habit of dragging more crap with them than they could possibly use. American troops could cut down trees in thier path and slow them to a crawl.
2007-03-16 10:21:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Largely because it's nearly impossible for an invading force -- especially one operating from overseas, and especially given the technology of the time -- to be able to maintain an effective combat offensive against an entrenched local enemy fighting for their freedom.
Unless the other side has (and uses) overwhelming force, the invading/occupying army simply cannot sustain the losses, or maintain the logistics supply chain for very long if they don't have a local source to replenish their consumables.
That's why the first goal of an invasion is to establish a beachhead, create a local stronghold, and then secure sufficient territory to provide for renewable local resources.
2007-03-16 10:12:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
The French
2007-03-17 13:03:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by HHH 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
"In late December 1778, the British captured Savannah and started moving north into South Carolina. Northern Georgia was spared occupation during this time period, due to the Patriots victory at the Battle of Kettle Creek in Wilkes County, Georgia. The British moved on to capture Charleston and set up a network of forts inland, believing the Loyalists would rally to the flag. Not enough Loyalists turned out, however, and the British had to fight their way north into North Carolina and Virginia, where they expected to be rescued by the British fleet. That fleet was defeated by a French fleet, however. Trapped at Yorktown, Virginia, the British surrendered their main combat army to Washington in October 1781. Although King George III wanted to fight on, his supporters lost control of Parliament, and the war effectively ended for America. A finale naval battle was fought by Captain John Barry and his crew of the Alliance as three British warships led by the HMS Sybil tried to take the payroll of the Continental Army on March 10 1783 off the coast of Cape Canaveral."
"In August 1775 the King declared Americans in arms to be traitors to the Crown. The British government at first started treating American prisoners as common criminals. They were thrown into jail and preparations were made to bring them to trial for treason. Lord Germain and Lord Sandwich were especially eager to do so. Many of the prisoners taken by the British at Bunker Hill apparently expected to be hanged. But the government declined to take the next step: treason trials and executions. There were tens of thousands of Loyalists under American control who would have been at risk for treason trials of their own (by the Americans), and the British built much of their strategy around using these Loyalists. After the surrender at Saratoga in 1777, there were thousands of British prisoners in American hands who were effectively hostages. Therefore no American prisoners were put on trial for treason, and although most were badly treated, eventually they were technically accorded the rights of belligerents. In 1782, by act of Parliament, they were officially recognized as prisoners of war rather than traitors. At the end of the war both sides released their prisoners."
2007-03-16 10:19:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by sjsosullivan 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
The French. Read about the battle at Yorktown.
2007-03-16 10:18:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Funny, I was under the impression that it was the farmers and minute men that won it.
Silly me.
2007-03-16 12:17:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Kevin A 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
because they were actually fighting for their freedom, their ways of life, so they could start the beginning of the American dream.
2007-03-16 10:26:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by james m 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
No rebel army in the history of humanity has ever lost a war,so wait and see who wins iraq.
2007-03-16 10:11:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋