Hmmm sounds like something losers would say.

I think the biggest part that is glossed over is the fact that after the 7 years war France was *almost shut out from North America, they were still allowed a stake in the newfoundland fisheries, which allowed them to maintain a larger pool of experienced sailors they could recruit from than they otherwise would have, which allowed them to even the discrepancy between themselves and the Royal Navy during the American revolutionary war.

Still Coping……

two Brits coping for good ol' American freedom

Yall got your ass kicked

The Americans used the Indians tactics

Very biased. The war won a decade before was not done by the British alone, it was done alongside Americans. Also, it’s not a myth that Americans had an advantage in being rugged backwoods men marksmen. Daniel Morgan’s riflemen were a huge reason America won the war. This just sounds like a bitter Englishmen who has been educated about the American revolution from the losing side

It does help that the Baron Von Steuben was able to drill the army relentlessly while in winter quarters at Valley Forge. The Continental Army didn’t even know how to properly use the bayonet, mostly using it as a cooking utensil. “Appalled by the state of U.S. forces, Steuben took the lead in teaching soldiers the essentials of military drills, tactics, and discipline based on Prussian techniques. He wrote Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the United States, which remained the army's drill manual for decades, and continues to influence modern U.S. army manuals.”

What happened?

Im american. Not sure where this narrative comes from that we thought we were some amazing army. It was taught and is pretty known that we were a ragtag band of commonfolk that had to use untraditional tactics to win. Our national anthem is literally about getting our asses kicked but surviving lol

The first point is partially true, general Burgoynes taste for extravagance and underestimation/lack of understating of American nature allowed his army to be penned in by American forces, leading to his surrender at Saratoga

The French and Indian war was fought primarily with "provincial" troops. Colonial. Who wore , not Red coats , but blue (the color assigned by the British for "provincial troops. As it was truly a "world war" , most truly "British" troops were badly needed elsewhere. A cadre of British troops were provided , as were senior officers. Thus was create the Nucleus of the future Colonial army. Irregulars were heavily employed by the colonials , units such as Francis Marion's , "The green mountain boys" and Daniel Morgan" Virginia rifle men . Both sides employed native tribes. Irregular warfare didn't win the war , but caused the British a great deal of pain and frustration.

The system of buying ranks was as actually running during the American Civil War. 🤔 Although rather prudently the Ranks were not infact permitted to command. 😳 This produced the curious abundance of “officers” in the wake of the war. Purchase of specific equipment was at least a requirement. A number of colonels were created for having purchased cannons.

So how much would someone like lord Hill pay. At least two statues of healing Shropshire that are quite big

The longer an insurgency, the more likely it will win.

I AM 1776

The British Army has always prided itself in the bravery of its common soldier. Well, there is a fine line between “bravery” and foolhardiness or just plain stupidity. An example: the Battle of Majuba and other engagements in the 1st Boer War..

Average British L just can’t accept that they’re bad

As an American I was taught that we won the War because George Washington and his men were able to get across the river by clinging to Chuck Norris’ back and watched him single handily drive all the Brits back home to their tea and crumpets with just his nunchucks

Arrogance and disunity between Generals Howe, Clinton, and Burgoyne up in the North resulting in Burgoyne being forced to surrender. Clinton was either disinclined or too slow to support Gen. Cornwallis in the South thus leading to Cornwallis having to surrender.

The lecturer did not seem to present the discussion of height stats correctly. Of the appx 379 Soldiers listed in the graph, the average height appears to be 67.5in (5’7.5) at best if the column of ‘Under 5’.6’ was calculated as all 5’5 and not shorter. Most of the Soliders (228) appear to be between under 5’6 and 5’7.5, so the average height is much shorter than in the UK today (5’10).

British army relied too much on the royal navy, when the French Navy arrived that’s the reason the British went under siege at Yorktown

You missed something , if you look back to before musketry and regiments , English longbowmen were the terror of medieval battlefields . Which means its something before colours and musketry . I put it down to a single document , the Magna Carta . It allows any Englishman to hunt in all forests but the Kings forest . Doesn't sound like much does it , well consider if you are hungry you use a bow/ musket /rifle to hunt yourself and your family food . This would be done by teenage boys guided by their father , so instead of just having army drills Englishmen had practical experience using weapons to shoot at fast moving targets and hit them if you didnt want to starve . Compare this to your Frenchmen , he will only have handled a bow/firearm upon joining the military , no prior knowledge just his training , he was forbidden by his local Lord from hunting and poachers would be hung if caught . We in recent history (mid 80's) have given up this right and can no longer carry firearms , only those that can get permits can hunt . This will eventually be realised by our armed forces as the single biggest reason for the decline in enlistment . If I cannot use a firearm to my benefit , why should I use one to your benefit ? If I cannot defend my person and property with a firearm , why should I defend your person and property with one ? We have created an elite class of those that can afford firearm licences and permitting and those that cannot .

The answer is yes🦅🌎⚓️🇺🇸

Guts

The Regimantal Tradition has been eviscerated.. look what they did to the Royal Scots...

The Regimantal Tradition has been eviscerated.. look what they did to the Royal Scots...

Sigma continentals defeat soyboy Brits

I lived in South Carolina my whole life. I recently heard of “Carolina Day” which celebrates the victory at Sullivans Island. I’m gunna throw a party for it this year and confuse my neighbors with the old state flag, the Union Jack 🇬🇧 and some fireworks flying.

I respectfully agree with most of the points the guest made. There were however examples of the kind of “guerrilla” fighting and ambushes that took place in the war. The opening battle along the road between Lexington and Concord saw the British take significant casualties under fire as they retreated in column down the road while militiamen fired from cover from the trees. The Saratoga campaign saw the British completely unprepared for war in the forested terrain of upstate NY and saw many ambushes on their supply trains as well as casualties among officers from snipers. Additionally, of the British forces who took part in the French & Indian War (Seven Years War), roughly 60% were from the American colonies.

Short!? Thank you, Sir for a concise video. Finally a video that doesn't spend twenty minutes into the creation of number, culture and world wars when trying to answer: what is 2+2.

Losers always make excuses.

I have news for you but it still happens and even in the US Army it is happening. It is just not as overt, and it is a little different. There are people that send their kids to West Point and the only reason they make it through is because of who their parents are. Those influences then dictate how they are taken care of, the assignments they get, and the rank they achieve.

As an American, I will say, for all the fun we have with the teasing about the war, the general consensus really is just that we got insanely blessed. In a toe to toe match with the Brits, we didn’t stand a chance. Kind of like the Union and Confederacy in the American Civil War. Like the South, all the Colonies had to do was endure longer than their opponents will to fight to force Parliament (or Congress in the case of the ACW) to indulge a negotiation. Like the Union, the British had numbers, money, industry, and population. They truly were the superior force in virtually every metric. Naturally, this isn’t to take anything away from our boys on the home front. To the contrary, to admit just how strong the British were stands as a testament to both parties: the Empire for all its power and prestige and capacity to wage war across a vast ocean in the age of sail and the colonies for their ability to survive for years on little income, resources, and manpower while being able to sit at the table with Titan empires like France and negotiate with such competency as to win indulgence. I like to say that some contests are fought between such capable opponents that while a victor necessarily emerges, there are no losers. The American Revolution was one such contest.

In my Pennsylvania high school in the 90s we were taught, in essence: 1) we dragged the war out to bleed the British government of manpower and resources and the British people of the will to support the war, and 2) we relied heavily on France to conduct a global campaign against Britain and to provide us with materiel Please know that we are taught a more nuanced record of history than you posit and I, for brevity, wrote here. Additionally, you seem to show a bunch of clips from The Patriot, which we find absurd ahistorical claptrap on multiple fronts, including race history (the laughable premise that in colonial South Carolina the black farmhands were free men that chose to work the farm until they were heartlessly kidnapped from Mel Gibson's character and forced to fight for the British army).

I don't agree guerella warfare was not a factor in the victory of the American Revolution. Guerella warfare was more prominent in the South. I will agree however that improved standard military tactics was a larger factor in defeating the British.

Or how America defeated British as a world power with 50% militia???🎉🎉🎉😂😂😂🙌🙌🔥🔥

I know it's not Victorian Era but remember the Swamp Fox that out fought Cornwallis and won the Revolutionary war

American airborne here the true red white and blue baby. I was in Hellmond providence and Arghandab River Valley about 30 miles away outside Kandahar. I can't believe that took place there!!!!!

And the rivalry hasn’t ended the engineers love to poke fun at my lot for the supposed white lanyards given for cowardice and abandoning the guns at colenso even if it is total bollocks (the gunners were shot off their guns and multiple attempt were made by the artillery to recover them and a couple of batteries still have the the battle honour of colenso) I believe although may be mistaken that other quirks exist like animals traditionally having higher ranks than their riders so that if mistreated the soldier could be done for striking a superior officer rather than damage of military equipment Some units also don’t have colours the cavalry have Mini ones (sorry donkey wallopers i forget their names) And the royal artillery has its guns as the colours The rivalry between the engineers and artillery is very famous and most of it is an argument over who is older (officially no one as both made from the board of ordinance on the same day although clearly it’s the artillery)

It’s more like the British army was THAT bad.

Underrated aspect is that the brits lost the information war. The rabble rousing of the continentals to demonize the brits and get locals to become revolutionaries is underrated. Even when the actual story was more or less made up, or completely disingenuous. It became rallying cries. Propaganda matters. Whereas the brits had wins, but it was never ending occupation. Kind of like Afghanistan.

Royal Corps of Transport , now that's proper British Army 😁

During ww2 Canadian and. Australia troops mire effective because if strong leadership down to corporal.

Strangely enough another Scottish square was broke during Napoleon. They got in but they didn't get out sir

Another great regimental jab. The royal artillerys white lanyards. Ask anyone in the royal artillery and we will say is stems from the fuse lanyard we once wore. Ask anyone in the wider army, especially those cheeky engineers and they will say the white lanyard is a shaming uniform accessory for a battle during a war (usually cited as the boer war but ive seen many different accounts with different wars or battles) All i know for sure is the gunners in the RA wear that lanyard proudly. Either as a show of defience that we did not abandon our guns or for those who belive the story as a vow to never let it happen again.

Lovely side note. 1 regiement (its really not a regiment its a corps but historically its called a regiment) the british army has no traditional colours. The royal regiment of artillery. The royal artllery attatched to support almost all other units saw itself earn battle honour after battle honour. And so the king gesnted the regiment the honour of UBIQUE.(everywhere) and our guns became our coulours. This is part of the reason wester armys artillery units take such pride in there guns, the way they are maintained, layed and defended to the last man. The guns or modern equivalent represent the pride of the regiment, the spirit of its men. We also fall in 3rd in regimental precedense in perade. With the Royal Horse Artillery regiments taking 2nd precednce...unless we perade with our guns then RHA take precedence and lead the parade.

Another Canuck here, and the summary of the Regimental tradition was a lot of fun to watch. Still, when it comes to the nominal thesis - "What makes the British Army so damn good?" - I suspect a contributing factor is the relatively small number of peer-to-peer fights Britain has fought, at least since the development of gunpowder. And in most of those major fights - World War 1, World War 2, the Napoleonic Wars, and so on - Britain has had plenty of allies. I intend no insult! Canada, which can fairly legitemately claim to have never lost a war, or at least not since 1760, has taken the "don't fight very often and when you do have lots of friends" principle to an even greater extreme. But it's also true that when you mostly avoid fighting people who might be better than you, you tend not to lose.

As an American who went to school some 40-50 years ago, I was taught that the reason the Americans won was that all we had to do was keep a reputable army in the field and allow the expense of logistics beat the British. On the whole, this basically says the same.

yep, they got so good so quickly because it was 'us' fighting 'us'.