How did America push threw first 4 years of the revolutionary war with out any help

[Collegeguy]

We couldn't have won without the French even though they were late.

Even then we only won because one of Britain's top generals decided he liked to bang women more than he liked being a soldier, so he got his winky wet instead of reinforcing Cornwallis.

[goobernoob]

We couldn't have won without the French even though they were late.

Even then we only won because one of Britain's top generals decided he liked to bang women more than he liked being a soldier, so he got his winky wet instead of reinforcing Cornwallis.

Without the french directly supporting us, probably.. Without the french fighting the british at all? unlikely. even if the enemy of my enemy doesn't want to be my friend, he is still useful.

[Deleted]

When I first read about this war I was surprised with how few soldiers the British Generals actually had under their command there.
And a large portion of them were German mercenaries.

Looking at how huge the continent is, it's hard to keep large area's under your control with too few men wich gave the Americans lots of room to move and recover.

[smelltheglove]

1: we had plenty of experienced military leadership that joined against the british
2: huge, heavily forested area - forests always benefit a smaller force if used correctly
3: even the common soldier was adept at foraging and living off the land, moreso than the british forces. in that aspect home turf is a HUGE advantage
4:an ocean between us and britain. this remains a huge hurdle even today, at the time it was far bigger. having an ocean crossing might be the only reason britain wasnt overrun by the nazis, and that was closer to our time and tech than the revolutionary war

[Deleted]

Here comes the master piece. That's why England couldn't win...

All the Mississippi and around, wood, agriculture, water....

Even US constitution is " french ", so yes this Eye of Providence is not a hazard.

USA is a french colony and still in the dark.

[Deleted]

Battle of Trenton achieved much more than simply winning a small battle. It was a make or break sort of battle, the army had suffered many blows during the summer and autumn and public support was fading, states were unsure if they should support Washington and moral was fading quickly. British at this point were pretty much just waiting it to collapse.

Washington made a plan and rest is history.

Fun fact: The town was occupied by troops from Holy Roman Empire.

[lockedout]

The reason we rebelled isn't because only of taxes. You guys were taking our food and making us take care of your soldiers

Taxation without representation.

- - - Updated - - -

It also didn't hurt that we didn't fight "fair", doing things like sniping officers.

All is fair in love and war.

[Seefer]

Vietnam kicked our ass and they had less than we did, it's a matter of underestimating the ability of the little guy.

[Bathory]

The biggest cause though was the initial mismatch between the fighting styles of the Americans and the British. Not all, but many engagements saw the american forces making use of terrain advantages and early guerrilla tactics. That combined with knowing the lay of the land gave them quite a boost.
.

This. Mixed up the fighting tactics they were used to

[slime]

And The real reason is that the Americans won because they not only took the native's lands but also their gods and super powers. George Washington turned into Apache Chief and crushed entire armies of redcoats by himself, the reason why he got elected president is because they feared his great power.

Almost sounds like a good sequel to Abe Lincoln vampire hunter.

[Dedweight]

3. Logistics. Britain couldn't get troops in efficiently and quickly.

Not to mention the bright red jackets and a slight tendency to marching in lines, kind of puts them at a disadvantage against guerrilla warfare tactics.

[c2dholla619]

sun tzu the art of war.
power isnt the only deciding factor of battle

[Wikiy]

Europeans were just that weak back then. They couldn't handle our American superiority.

Please educate yourself before spouting nationalist bullshit.

[NewOrleansTrolley]

No one reads long posts about history. I'll give the short answer.

The US wasn't without aid for four years. It was without supplies for two years (1775-1777). To answer the question directly, we really couldn't. Washington wisely was running away from big battles until the French gave the US some supplies, money, and training in the winter of 1777. From 1775-1777, the British took over cities easily while having a tough time finding them / engaging them in big battles in the country. The only big American battle pre-winter of 77 was the battle of Saratoga with Benadict Arnold.


Also this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbRom1Rz8OA

[Lazy Gecko]

In addition to the huge distances they probably didn't take the threat seriously enough early on. Like when Soviet Russia just casually sent a bunch of soldiers in the general direction of Finland and got their asses handed to them.

[Deleted]

Not to mention the bright red jackets and a slight tendency to marching in lines, kind of puts them at a disadvantage against guerrilla warfare tactics.

American troops mostly fought the same way.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...March_1781.jpg

[Deleted]

The reason we rebelled isn't because only of taxes. You guys were taking our food and making us take care of your soldiers

Should have made your food less delicious then. And even soldiers need cuddles.

[ShamanTankFTW]

Realistically; We were not the only ones at war with the English at that time, they were also involved in a war with the French. In my opinion the reason why they never sent thier main force over to the Americas is because they thought so little of us at the time (combat wise). Also add onto the fact that the french was an actual superpower while we honestly were nothing on the global stage. In short, they under-estimated us.

[Deleted]

One other thing to consider is that a posting to the Americas at the time was considered a punishment duty, all Englands best troops and Officers were in India and Europe, which means the dregs were sent to the other side of the "new world".

[Deleted]

This thread made me read more about the subject and it seems it comes down to a couple of reasons it seems:

1. The British army was not large enough to occupy the vast continent and British commanders didnt work together at all (and had huge ego's)
2. Long supply chain for the British and the hometown advantage for the Americans.
3. Alot of pressure and threat from other European countries, like France, Spain and the Netherlands who could make use of the situation and capture other colonies or even the country itself.

Basically, the British decided that other colonies (mainly India) were more important and they were reluctant to go all out in America.