Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
17 Answers
- tham153Lv 73 days ago
Would have had little choice, as those elements of my family living here were very involved. The horse Paul Revere rode was loaned to him by my 4X great grandfather (and never got back). Others also fought, one being foolish enough to fire a musket out a window at British troops marching from Boston to Breeds Hill. They burned his house down.
- Spartan LLv 53 days ago
It wasn't one country v another country.
It was a second English civil war fought on a different continent.
The first English civil war (mid 17th century) was Cromwell and his republicans v Charles and the royalists. The republicans won but a few years later the monarchy was invited back because life was so dull with the puritans in charge.
- Anonymous4 days ago
No. As a person who is neither British nor American, I would have sit down on a chair beside the battlefield just before the battle began and eaten my crackers and popcorn during the battle.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- AspenLv 44 days ago
Hindsight is 20-20. I’d like to imagine I would have. Maybe I would have because I consider myself an American patriot. That said, I don’t think it’s as clear cut as we today normally think it to be. I think too many Americans today would shout “yes!” Without any knowledge of the politics of the time. We need to be aware of BOTH perspectives of the conflict and to keep it within a larger global context. By global, I mean that for us Americans the war was everything. But for Britain, it was only 1 theater of conflict of a broader British-French war that was fought not only in North America (remember we needed the French to effect a final victory starting at Yorktown), not to mention it was a conflict fought in Europe, India, and the West Indies.
For example: it was wrong for Britain to demand the colonies to pay taxes without their consent or impute. But wouldn’t it be reasonable for Britain to expect the colonies to pay for compensation for fighting on our behalf in the French and Indian war? Surely colonies have the right to control local politics without foreign powers butting in...but of course we we a collection of BRITISH colonies. Wouldn’t Britain, as the colonial homeland have a prerogative of controlling local politics of her subject land holdings? Wouldn’t this be the same as the US federal government having the right and prerogative to control or make demands of state governments? Wouldn’t State governments, as members of the United States have a responsibility to interact and cooperate with the federal government? And if that federal government had defended a state from foreign intrusion, once over, wouldn’t it be reasonable for the federal government to expect some compensation due to the expenditures caused by that same engagement (done on our behalf)? Ultimately, I believe we were destined to separate from Britain, but I think folks who jump too quickly assuming without question that they would have been on one side or the other without an understanding of context are a bit naive.
- Anonymous5 days ago
Hell yeah. God bless America. We gave the Brits a good thrashing.
- Anonymous5 days ago
One of my ancestors was a captain in the continental army. I was a corporal in Vietnam
- 5 days ago
If I was 265 years old it is quite likely that I would have served in the Continental Army.
That of course is assuming my ancestors had chosen to immigrate 100 years earlier than they did.