[gDGwm8BC]

this was an interesting read. its interesting to note that there is so little mention of this particular angle of our mutual histories (can/us)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...3040/?page=all

from the article...

Seeking to buff up our sense of tradition, the Harper government has deliberately turned back time by making our navy Royal and adorning our embassies with portraits of Her Majesty. In that light, the 1812 commemorations have the power to strengthen at least one model of what it means to be Canadian by reawakening the glories of the past.
But whose past?
“Had the war ended differently, had the American invasion not been repelled, Canada as we know it would not exist.” It's hard to contradict the defiant syllogism of Heritage Minister James Moore as he announced his government's commemoration plans at Fort George, a reconstruction of the British army headquarters along the contentious Niagara River that the Americans captured in 1813.
The simplest way to make the war meaningful is to describe it as a triumph of national character where Canadians fought off the Americans – and gained a great victory, you might as well add if you're playing to the crowd.
The reality is murkier. Canadians weren't yet Canadians. The term was still applied mostly to francophones, and when Upper Canada was created in 1791 – a mere eight years after the U.S. War of Independence ended – it was designed more as a bulwark against the American expansionists than a statement of New World identity.
When the war began, the typical Upper Canadian was a newly arrived American lured by cheap land and low taxes more than by an anachronistic desire to be our valiant forebears. So the war against the Yanks was fought largely by British regular army and native allies from both sides of the porous border – though the boast that local militias led the way against the invaders was being made almost from the beginning. Much debunked, it still thrives for obvious reasons: pride and politics.
The political differences that provoked the fighting were potent and undeniable. The British had been blocking U.S. shipping from reaching French ports during the Napoleonic Wars and essentially kidnapped American sailors to feed the insatiable manpower needs of their ships. The Americans, for their part, were threatening to drive the British out of North America and claim territory they believed was rightfully theirs. Britain's alliances with native tribes that resisted American land grabs raised tensions even higher. ....entire article at link.

[nerkvcbtre]

it was designed more as a bulwark against the American expansionists than a statement of New World identity. Is bulwark used in the Canadian National Anthem?

bul·wark

   [bool-werk, -wawrk, buhl-] Show IPA
noun 1. a wall of earth or other material built for defense; rampart.

2. any protection against external danger, injury, or annoyance: The new dam was a bulwark against future floods.

3. any person or thing giving strong support or encouragement in time of need, danger, or doubt: Religion was his bulwark.

4. Usually, bulwarks. Nautical . a solid wall enclosing the perimeter of a weather or main deck for the protection of persons or objects on deck.
5.
Early Canada

[gDGwm8BC]

it doesn't appear in the nat'l anthem, lol...

i think the applicable definition would be #2..."protection against external danger, injury, or annoyance..."

because let's face it, sometimes americans can come off as being potentially dangerous, injurious and annoying...lol

[nerkvcbtre]

http://wdfyfe.wordpress.com/tag/canadian-tourists/

[gDGwm8BC]

http://voices.yahoo.com/american-tou...t-1881030.html

[gDGwm8BC]

...here's what it's like at the border nowadays...

[gDGwm8BC]

back on topic, there was a fellow named david parish who had some serious pull in the area at the time, and if i understand correctly, was helping to finance the us gov war against upper canada, and the reason why they attacked fort york instead of trying to control the st lawrence valley and the flow of supplies. it seems that parish wouldn't allow this and worked hard to keep the war from these regions as he owned much of the land there. hence the attack at fort york.

[finasteridonline]

I found this to be a very balanced description of the war of 1812.

http://world.time.com/2012/06/18/the...da-and-failed/

history is very editorial about this war and it's almost impossible to find an account that doesn't subtly take a side, especially regarding the pretenses for the invasion.

[nerkvcbtre]

Maybe the entire bulwark was setup to protect the Queen's Rep. ?

You can't just go about slaying hopeless Indians with advanced technology all by your lonesome.

You could lose valuable trade partners that way.

[gDGwm8BC]

Maybe the entire bulwark was setup to protect the Queen's Rep. ?

You can't just go about slaying hopeless Indians with advanced technology all by your lonesome.

You could lose valuable trade partners that way.

i think the whole thing was intended as a means of stopping the us from incorporating all that canadian territory along with its vast resources. imagine what the map would look like if the us had succeeded...

[nerkvcbtre]

i think the whole thing was intended as a means of stopping the us from incorporating all that canadian territory along with its vast resources. imagine what the map would look like if the us had succeeded...

My point is the U.S. itself was the Queen's bulwark creation.

Set them free, but keep a string attached.