Since this year marks the 200th anniversary of the war of 1812, which coincidentally is also the year of the 100th Grey Cup game, I wonder if the CFL couldn't muster an extra special half time salute or two. If it was done right it could be really good, cannons going off and stuff They could get two large groups of "soldier"s from each side to have a mock battle or maybe just a march past and salute. Invite some units from the US to participate. It could be pretty entertaining if there was some serious planning in it.
There is an excellent documentary on the war here.
Cool idea. Unfortunately, anyone who's seen a touchdown at the Rogers Centre knows that smoke does NOT clear the air in that stadium very quickly. That puts the kibosh on muskets, cannons, and explosions.
It really should be in Toronto, or Hamilton, since they're closest to two of the (failed) invasion attempts in the war, and also given that York (now Toronto) was sacked by the Yankees. There's no way it would go over well at all in Montréal, since British regulars figured prominently, along with militia and First Nations.
The CFL could still do a nice half time show without smoke. A couple of colour/honour guards or a march past/salute with re-enactors.
Montreal was headquarters throughout the War of 1812.General Prevost was in charge.The Battle of Chateaugay was a very important turning point in our favour. Over 1600 French-Canadian regulars and 200 natives under the command of Lt.Col. Charles De Salaberry defeated an American invasion force, twice their size, just south of Montreal....Those who do not know history are doomed to relive it.........This not a slight on you,rpaege, but Montreal would be as good a choice as anywhere,considering it played such a pivotal role in defending Canada.BTW,I am neither French nor English, just a guy who believes credit should be given where due !!!!
Well perhaps you're right, but I remember the intensely negative reaction that the commemoration of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham received, which caused the event to be cancelled. Granted, that was very different situation in a completely different location, but I'm not convinced that there wouldn't be intense negative separatist reaction to anything that celebrates the defence of British Canada, even though, as you rightly point out,that defence – and one of the biggest victories - was largely due to the brave habitants of Lower Canada.
On the other hand, it has been said that even though the local French Canadian population distrusted the British, they distrusted the Americans even more. So maybe it would work. I just wouldn't want to see the CFL get embroiled in a highly charged and negative political debate.
This is incorrect. Canada wasn't a sovereign nation yet, but it was the two provinces of upper and lower Canada, and the name Canada as a place was used by Euros since the 1500s. Even before that by First Nations.
If "we had ever kicked british ass like the USA once did" Canada would likely be part of a bigger republic and not exist at all. So be thankful the British helped defend their colonies. Also, early in the war there were seasoned British regulars in Canada, but not in large numbers because England was still at war with Napoleon. After Nappy was defeated the British were in a position to move HUGE numbers of crack troops to Canada, and it was this possibility that helped bring about the Treaty of Ghent that ended the war and set the geo-political landscape of North American for the next 200 years. So be thankful the Brits saw fit to defend their colonies even though they were in a protracted and bloody war in Europe.
And tell it to the families of those militia members, farmers, and other locals and First Nations who died that it was all due to the British and "boatloads" of reinforcements (never happened). Incompetent Yankee generals, poorly trained troops (especially early in the war) and arrogant war hawks in Congress also contributed to the expansionist Americans' defeated invasion attempts.
To say it was all "one (sic) by British troops" is absolutely false.
yes, I agree with most of what you say. However, it would still mean more to me if we had won without the help of any british citizens or military. I hate the british and do not want to celebrate anything to do with them.
Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the UK, commented famously with classic dry British humour when addressing a joint session of the US Congress back in 2003 after getting a tour earlier in the day as covered the early history of the United States of America:
Mr. Speaker, sir, my thrill on receiving this award was only a little diminished on being told that the first Congressional Gold Medal was awarded to George Washington for what Congress called his "wise and spirited conduct" in getting rid of the British out of Boston.
On our way down here, Senator Frist was kind enough to show me the fireplace where, in 1814, the British had burnt the Congress Library. I know this is, kind of, late, but -- sorry.
Actually, you know, my middle son was studying 18th century history and the American War of Independence, and he said to me the other day, "You know, Lord North, Dad, he was the British prime minister who lost us America. So just think, however many mistakes you'll make, you'll never make one that bad."
FYB,you should heed what rpaege says,because he really knows his stuff.The only other people not mentioned were the Loyalists and the Black troops who were still streaming into Canada because they preferred to live under British rule. There were also 5 states that refused to fight against their northern neighbour.............Now,when you say you hate the British, do you mean the English or are you including the Scottish,the Irish and the Welsh as well ? It seems to me you're living in the wrong country to make such a blanket statement.