# April 1775, You are in command of all British forces, devise a winning strategy vs the Colonials! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 19, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304 "2012-04-19T18:26:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/61 "2012-04-27T19:43:45Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I don’t think that plan would have much chance of success. The British did try to seize key cities, Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Newport, Savannah. But they found that none of these captures had a significant effect of the war - the Americans just kept fighting somewhere else. The fact was that the United States didn’t have a key city that was the equivalent of London or Paris. The reason it didn’t have a significant effect was because the strategies were different. In one case you were trying to win the entire country by controlling ‘major’ cities, which failed because the US was not dependent on them, in the strategy I outlined the goal is to command and control a part of the US, to gain a solid foothold on US soil. This would bring the US forces against a defensive and very powerful British state, instead of the offensive British forces spreading out to conquer what is essentially for back then endless lands. > [@](#): > > I also think that any delayed strategy like the one you outlined or a naval blockade would have been a bad idea (from the British point of view). Time was on the American side - the longer the United States was in existence as an independent country, the more legitimate it would come to be seen by people. People would start thinking of themselves as Americans rather than Britons who lived in America. And if the general population came to feel they were a separate people, Britain’s chances of winning the war would virtually disappear. Britain had to win the war quickly while it was still possible to reconcile the Americans back into the Empire. It certainly could go that way, and the US lands had enough resourced to build a powerful nation independent of Europe, but the plan was to oppress the US via this British state. And after all how much worse could this plan be over what happened - might as well try something different. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2012, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/62 "2012-04-27T23:01:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Then I’m more confused. If you were responding to a different poster, why did you quote my post? …because I’m stupid. No, I was responding to you, I think we were just misunderstanding each other. It was not clear that you meant setting up an “official” legislature and giving it the imprint of London. Now, that might have worked, although I’m not sure why _Parliament_ would want that solution. It would rather undercut their authority. I can see the monarchy favoring it, but George III was rather whipped already. My point in counter was that the colonists were already willing to simply meet and decide things their way, regardless of what London said. > [@kanicbird](#): > > This would bring the US forces against a defensive and very powerful British state, instead of the offensive British forces spreading out to conquer what is essentially for back then endless lands. No, they’d just surround and raid the British into oblivion. In fact, the British had a very poor track record of defense during the Revolutionary War, and in general giving up all offensive technique was usually a sure-fire way of losing in that era. > [@](#): > > It certainly could go that way, and the US lands had enough resourced to build a powerful nation independent of Europe, but the plan was to oppress the US via this British state. And after all how much worse could this plan be over what happened - might as well try something different. How, pray tell, are you going to “oppress” the entire Eastern seaboard from one section of one colony? The Founding Fathers would have laughed their asses off at that one. Britain would have in essence been completely ceding the United States as an entity, and would have had little reason to bother holding onto a pitiful little base. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/63 "2012-04-28T04:02:59Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > No, I was responding to you, I think we were just misunderstanding each other. It was not clear that you meant setting up an “official” legislature and giving it the imprint of London. Now, that might have worked, although I’m not sure why _Parliament_ would want that solution. It would rather undercut their authority. I can see the monarchy favoring it, but George III was rather whipped already. > > My point in counter was that the colonists were already willing to simply meet and decide things their way, regardless of what London said. My point was that the legislatures that existed were pretty much impotent. That’s the way London wanted them and the colonials could see that London wanted them that way. So the colonials realized that to have any degree of control, they’d have to remove London’s control. London had essentially reduced the choices to two extremes: America had to either have no power at all or declare total independence. London was obviously banking on the idea that the Americans wouldn’t go for independence and would therefore back down to the proper state of subservience. Turns out they misread the situation. Could it have been avoided? I think it’s possible. There were figures in London who recognized the reality and argued for alternatives. They said that London should cede some reasonable amount of self-government to the colonies and thereby keep them in the Empire. But none of these figures were in a position of authority. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/64 "2012-04-28T04:19:09Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > My point was that the legislatures that existed were pretty much impotent. That’s the way London wanted them and the colonials could see that London wanted them that way. Well, there’s official and unofficial power. The colonial legislatures turned out to have a lot of the latter. > [@](#): > > Could it have been avoided? I think it’s possible. Well, there’s could and then there’s _could_. There was nothing physically stopping them from doing so, and the idea was certainly there. But as a practical matter London didn’t accept the idea until the Revolutionary War drilled it into them, and were still wrestling with it over 150 years later, in places as diverse as South Africa and India. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2012, 7:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/65 "2012-04-28T07:40:39Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > You are correct that there was more of a balance of power between the King and Parliament than exists today. The King still had some real power like appointing officials. I don’t recall offhand specifically how control over colonial administration was divided up. Well it was complex. Colonial affairs were handled (or mishandled) by the Board of Trade which was technically only an advisory body to the Privy Council but since it was made up entirely of Privy Councilors what was done there was the important thing. The Secretary of State of the Southern Department also had oversight until 1768 when the colonies were assigned their own Secretary. Since the new Secretary of State for the Colonies was also the President of the Board this essentially removed a layer of bureaucracy rather than complicated matters further. All of these people were appointed by the King. The Board hashed things out (with the Secretary consulting the Prime Minister as needed) and their decisions were rubberstamped by the Pivy Council in the name of the King. If Parliament objected to how things were going they had no authority to intervene. But they did have the power of the purse and could threaten to withhold funds and thus topple the entire government so their objection wasn’t to be taken lightly. > [@](#): > > But my main point was that the governors were chosen in London not in America. And due to the fact that the governor had a veto over legislative actions and there was no equivalent lever the legislature had over the governor, that gave the governor full control if he chose to exercise it. Governors only had control of how to run things under the current laws. They could not make new laws themselves. They had a veto but so did the colonial legislatures since they could refuse to enact the desired laws or appropriate funds for whatever the governor wanted done. Essentially they were balanced when it came to getting things done. London was basically OK with this balance. Even the Massachusetts Government Act which altered the charter of that colony so that the governor and council were no longer elected didn’t attempt to remove the ability of the legislature to legislate. What London objected to was how much control the colonists had over how they were governed after laws were passed. They considered governing the prerogative of the King and his ministers. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/66 "2012-05-01T02:37:50Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Spies, loyalist sympathizers, informants, etc. > > If I recall my history right, the populace was divided about evenly between people who were revolutionary, ambivalent, or loyalist. Even if the numbers skewed in favor of revolutionaries, it’s still likely that you have 50% of the general populace who could be used as sources of information. > > Offer loyalists the land and properties of revolutionaries and you’ll have people jumping over each other to help you. At the **outset** of the war the populations were divided into rough thirds. The problem is, having a foreignish army occupy your land, requisition your food, and stop your trade tends to polarize a population. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/67 "2012-05-01T03:18:50Z")
> [@MichaelQReilly](#): > > At the **outset** of the war the populations were divided into rough thirds. The problem is, having a foreignish army occupy your land, requisition your food, and stop your trade tends to polarize a population. I’ll put this idea out there; would barracking the German soldiers outside the cities help with PR? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/68 "2012-05-01T04:19:48Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Well, there’s official and unofficial power. The colonial legislatures turned out to have a lot of the latter. As far as a colonist was concerned, they had **all** the power; the Crown’s power would hardly touch your life, unless you were a merchant and British mercantilist policies interfered with your business. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/69 "2012-05-01T13:19:29Z")
Target and assassinate the military and political leadership. Shoot down anyone giving speeches in the street. Kill the elected local assemblymen. Knock off the the heads of colony and local militias. Any time you see two or more people together with weapons, shoot them. Get a team of crack British scientists working on inventing the machine gun. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/70 "2012-05-01T13:30:11Z")
Say “Stop! Or I’ll say stop again!” ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/71 "2012-05-01T16:01:51Z")
I’d simply send Washington a set of exploding dentures “from an admirer”. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2012, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/72 "2012-05-01T16:45:19Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > As far as a colonist was concerned, they had **all** the power; the Crown’s power would hardly touch your life, unless you were a merchant and British mercantilist policies interfered with your business. Simon Schama once pointed out this was the most stupid part of the Stamp Act. By charging a tax on documents, Parliament was directly taxing lawyers, publishers, clergymen, teachers, small business owners, etc. As Schama said, these were the most influential people in America - it’s like somebody designed a tax to specifically target the most effective resistance to its enforcement. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2012, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/73 "2012-07-20T18:19:12Z")
Some good ideas already. If I were George III, I would: - Find a smart, capable, gung-ho general and make him the unquestioned top soldier in the colonies. Likewise an admiral for American coastal operations, taking care that he and the general have a good rapport and a common understanding of what’s expected of them. The general’s in overall command, though - this rebellion will be put down primarily on land, after all. Maintain unity of command, so that the various feuds and poor coordination (seen most notably during the Saratoga and Yorktown campaigns) wouldn’t be so much of a problem. - Order that general to do his damnedest to catch and destroy Washington’s army, not letting up until final victory is won. Capturing cities and holding territory isn’t going to put down the rebellion. - Capture and execute Washington and the other top troublemakers: Hancock, the Adamses, Franklin, Jefferson, etc. Offer a blanket amnesty to everyone else willing to swear an oath of loyalty to the Crown. Create an American system of honours so that the colonial aristocracy feels even closer ties to the mother country. - Offer each colony representation in Parliament on a roughly similar basis to British cities and shires, so no one can complain about unequal treatment (any worse than, pre-reform, it already is, of course). It was a key demand of the rebels, and granting it will (a) remove a major irritant and (b) lead to them being outvoted at virtually every turn anyway. - Raise loyalist regiments to keep the peace in the colonies. - Structure tax policy such that the Americans are taxed just as much or as little as those in the British Isles, knowing that their MPs will at least have made their voices heard in Westminster. - Eventually offer dominion status, much as Canada later got. John Adams himself estimated that only about a third of Americans wanted independence, a third were Tories, and a third just wanted the revolution to end so they could get on with their lives. Any British victory would include a mix of military and political measures. Check out Stanley Weintraub’s _Iron Tears_ for a good exploration of British politics, society, military culture and public opinion. I do believe that the Revolution was winnable for the UK - they just went about it (mostly) all wrong. ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/74 "2012-07-20T18:53:42Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Forget about. It’s hopeless. When there’s an imperial power that wants to permanently occupy and control a certain nation, while the people of that nation are determined to fight for their freedom, the imperial power usually just can’t win. > > From the imperial power’s perspective, involvement is a question of cost. If the benefit of keeping the nation as a colony is greater than the cost of fighting the war, then they’ll keep on fighting. But when the cost of fighting grows larger than the benefit of keeping the colony, then the imperial power will give up out of its own self-interest. > > On the other hand, from the perspective of the natives, it’s fight for freedom. It’s worth dying for and it’s worth fighting endlessly for. Consequently, they will continue fighting for as long as it takes, and the cost to the imperial power will continue to rise. Eventually the cost will rise high enough that the the imperial power will pack its bags and go home. > > That’s why the British couldn’t win the American Revolution. It’s also why the United States couldn’t permanently rule Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq. It’s why the French eventually left Algeria, and why the Soviet Union eventually pulled out of Afghanistan. While this is true, it isn’t ALWAYS true. If one is truely ruthless and without any morals, one can get control over territory so long as one is will to kill everything one sees. Go into a city and demand complete surrender. When anyone resists kill everyone and burn everything down. Salt the earth. Eventually the locals will be united enough to kick you out, or terrified enough to surrender completely or simply become too few in number and then you can move your own people in and repopulate. Brits wouldn’t have done that in 1775 though…but had to contest your belief that the ‘Empire’ can’t win. ---
**Author:** ![Boswellia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@Boswellia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boswellia)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/75 "2012-07-22T13:05:51Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > …When there’s an imperial power that wants to permanently occupy and control a certain nation, while the people of that nation are determined to fight for their freedom, the imperial power usually just can’t win. The Mongols just emailed me, and they say otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Boswellia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@Boswellia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boswellia)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/76 "2012-07-22T13:08:25Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > While this is true, it isn’t ALWAYS true. If one is truely ruthless and without any morals, one can get control over territory so long as one is will to kill everything one sees. Go into a city and demand complete surrender. When anyone resists kill everyone and burn everything down. Salt the earth. Exactly. The Mongols. Once established they were surprisingly tolerant of all sorts of things within their Empire, but they made it very very clear from the word go that any attempt to resist would mean the wholesale slaughter of every man, woman, young child, livestock and eradication of all agriculture…oh, and leaving pyramids of severed heads on the outskirts of towns who had attempted to defend against them. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2012, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/77 "2012-07-22T14:10:47Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > - Offer each colony representation in Parliament on a roughly similar basis to British cities and shires, so no one can complain about unequal treatment (any worse than, pre-reform, it already is, of course). It was a key demand of the rebels, and granting it will (a) remove a major irritant and (b) lead to them being outvoted at virtually every turn anyway. > > [snip] > > - Structure tax policy such that the Americans are taxed just as much or as little as those in the British Isles, knowing that their MPs will at least have made their voices heard in Westminster. > > - Eventually offer dominion status, much as Canada later got. May I point out that if you offer these, you don’t need anything else. You wouldn’t need military force, because this was even mroe than the Americans were asking for in 1775. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2012, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/78 "2012-07-23T01:01:41Z")
Knowing George III’s sentiments, he would insist on a military victory before agreeing to reforms. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304/79 "2012-07-23T16:50:25Z")
Divide and conquer. Offer concessions to the loyalist states to keep them in the fold. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/april-1775-you-are-in-command-of-all-british-forces-devise-a-winning-strategy-vs-the-colonials/619304.md?page=3)