Happy Birthday Uncle Sam

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

What I'm understanding from your posts , here and in other threads, is that I should either completely shut up, or totally embrace everything you say.

Well, maybe that's the problem...

Let's drink a beer virtually, forget this stupid dispute and both expect from now on only the best from the other. By doing so, we'll both show more tolerance, patience and understanding than we did so far!

That works for me! May I buy this round? What'll you have? [:D]

[JWE]

Woof! Two people I like going at it. Gosh, that wasn't good. So glad it's done. I'll buy the virtual beer for both ya'll.

Ciao. John

[Historiker]

Fine beer from Passau, Bavaria.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: JWE

Woof! Two people I like going at it. Gosh, that wasn't good. So glad it's done. I'll buy the virtual beer for both ya'll.

Ciao. John

Only if you 'll join us John! As always, good to hear from you! [:)]

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Historiker




Fine beer from Passau, Bavaria.

[:)] Cheers! [:)]

[ckammp]

deleted

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: ckammp

ORIGINAL: Jaroen

ORIGINAL: captskillet

its a day early but what the heck......................here's to the 233rd anniversary of our little republic! [&o]

Rant mode on . . .

How political is this congratulating a country's foundation???
Two points of my own and than I'll shut up and let the festivities continue.

1. It is political. Congratulating it means it's something worth celebrating. Thereby the values and politics of said country are raised as something to be valued and are set apart from other countries which foundation is not celebrated. How would you feel about congratulating/celebrating the foundation of Myanmar (former Burma) just to put the case in a sharper contrast . . .

2. Accepting it is a political statement than it doesn't have a place on this forum like all other politics.

Of course I'm a total sourpuss putting in this opinion, I do realize that.

It's just that I feel a bit uncomfortable with this sometimes quite apparent US perspective I sometimes find on this forum. Myself, and perhaps all forum participants, accept this for what it's worth, not harmful in any way. But if we do allow for this sometimes strong US perspective we should also allow non-US views just as easily. This is not perse put into practice all the time . . .

Rant mode off . . .

Please continue celebrating the foundation of the US of A! [:)]

Perhaps us Dutch should be more proud of our own indepency!? Some historical background on the Dutch independance:
Seperation from Spain is usually dated on 26 juli 1581 with the "Acte van Verlatinghe" or "Act of Seperation", a one-sided declaration of independance. Couldn't find the foundation date for the Dutch Republic (1588), another one-sided affair by the than Dutch government at war. Must have been more of a process instead of a one-day signing. At finish of the 80-year War (the Münster Peace agreement) the Dutch Republic was formally recognized by foreign states on 24 oktober 1648.

Later edit (1 hour later):
After reading some of the latest posts on other subjects I'm afraid I could be seen as pooring oil on a fire. That was not my intention! My first reply is strictly a one person opinion based on the OP's congratulating Uncle Sam. Having said that, my reply does of course touch on some people's postings concerning patriottic/nationalistic feelings. I just wasn't aware it was so recent. Utimately, that's why I think such congratulating is political.

Best wishes to all,

Jaroen.

IMHO, simply celebrating a countries' independence is not political, just patriotic. I don't believe any of the OPs are saying the US is better than other countries, just that they're proud to be Americans. Nor are any OPs denying anyone from another country the right to celebrate their countries' independence. On the contrary, I believe most would offer congratulations. In that spirit, here is a list of some significant dates in Dutch history:

13 March 1567 - Battle of Oosterweel. Start of Eighty Years' War.
26 July 1581 - Act of Abjuration. Netherlands declares independence from Spain.
15 May 1648 - Treaty of Münster. End of Eighty Years' War
24 October 1648 - Treaty of Osnabrück. European powers recognize Republic of the United Netherlands
19 January 1795 - Batavian Republic. Popular revolution results in government based on French Republic.
5 June 1806 - Kingdom of Holland. French puppet kingdom, with Louis Bonapart as king.
16 March 1810 - Kingdom of Holland annexed by France.
2 December 1813 - Following Napoleon's defeat at Battle of Leipzig, William I proclaimed Sovereign of The Netherlands.
16 March 1815 - Creation of United Kingdom of the Netherlands.
4 October 1830 - Belgium declares independence from United Kingdom of the Netherlands.
19 April 1839 - Treaty of London. Netherlands recognizes Belgium independence; sets present-day borders of Netherlands.
10 May 1940 - Germany invades Netherlands.
17 May 1940 - Start of German occupation.
2 May 1945 - Queen Wilhelmina re-instates Dutch government at Breda.
5 May 1945 - German Gen Blaskowitz surrenders 117,000 soldiers to Canadian LTGen Foulkes. End of occupation.

You forgot the most important date of all....On what day did The Dutch start brewing beer?
That's a crucial date for any country. No-beer=No civilization! [:D]

[Historiker]

You forgot the most important date of all....On what day did The Dutch start brewing beer?
That's a crucial date for any country. No-beer=No civilization!

So that's why the US had "operation Iraqi Freedom"! They wanted to liberate the nation that invented the beer! [&o]

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
You forgot the most important date of all....On what day did The Dutch start brewing beer?
That's a crucial date for any country. No-beer=No civilization! [:D]

US Independence and The Netherlands are linked in another interesting way.

The first formal salute by a foreign government to the Continental colors was given by order of Johannes de Graaff, governor of St. Eustatius, to the Continental Naval brigantine Andrew Doria, on November 16, 1776.

Dutch brew some pretty good beer, too.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

You forgot the most important date of all....On what day did The Dutch start brewing beer?
That's a crucial date for any country. No-beer=No civilization!

So that's why the US had "operation Iraqi Freedom"! They wanted to liberate the nation that invented the beer! [&o]

That and to let them drink it legally again. The most important part of freedom is the right to drink beer. [:D] (As Ben Franklin said "beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!"). [:D]

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Historiker

You forgot the most important date of all....On what day did The Dutch start brewing beer?
That's a crucial date for any country. No-beer=No civilization!

So that's why the US had "operation Iraqi Freedom"! They wanted to liberate the nation that invented the beer! [&o]

That and to let them drink it legally again. The most important part of freedom is the right to drink beer. [:D] (As Ben Franklin said "beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!"). [:D]

All right, that makes sense!

God bless America (and bavarian beer)!

[ckammp]

deleted

[Hornblower]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Hornblower
the North Carolina tossed more weight of broadside, (both exceded that of a british first rate by a few hundred pounds) .. BUT, According to all accounts the Ohio was a magnificent sailer making over 12knots.

In keeping with the eclectic content of the thread,

Howard Chapelle, “The American Sailing Navy”, wants to give the prize to Ohio. Chapelle thinks “ the Ohio, long considered one of the finest vessels of her rate in the world, if not the finest, and by far the best liner in the American navy.”

North Carolina was designed by William Doughty, Ohio by Henry Eckford. Ohio was slightly larger in lpp and moulded beam, and had quite a bit more draught and so carried her guns a good deal higher as a result; handled like a frigate and stowed her allowances with ease. Both of them darn good ships though. I've always really liked Eckford's ships.

JWE - well put..
This flippen thread is all over the place! I lost my copy of Chapelle in the last move.. it was an old one too, damnnn.. I see a trip to Amazon in my future now.. Sir. Thomas Slade (designer of HMS Victory and the first true 74's in the British Navy) needs to be mentioned for his skill in design.

and lastly i am glad everyone seems to be getting along now that the virtual beer is flowing...

[Mynok]

I still say the French made better ships. They weren't as skillfully manned by any means, but they were fine designs and the fact that the British grabbed all they could get a hold of tells a lot. IMO, the British became too dependent on the carronade for broadside weight.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Hornblower
JWE - well put..
This flippen thread is all over the place! I lost my copy of Chapelle in the last move.. it was an old one too, damnnn.. I see a trip to Amazon in my future now.. Sir. Thomas Slade (designer of HMS Victory and the first true 74's in the British Navy) needs to be mentioned for his skill in design.

and lastly i am glad everyone seems to be getting along now that the virtual beer is flowing...

Oh, Lawsy, my hobby, second profession, first love is sailboat design. I have very annotated copies of Chapelle (both American Sailing Navy and Search for Speed Under Sail) and the Gardiners. Can scan and pdf them. Another really good guy (except he's quiet lately) is BigB (Brian). Anybody who knows the name of even one designer of these perfect expressions of functional artistry is a friend in my book.

Virtual beer, all virtual year long, for you, pal.

[Mynok]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: USS America

Mynok knows his beer! [:)]

I happily drink almost anything. [:D]

I hope there'll be the chance to find out whether Mynok has a good taste [;)]

Heh...well, to be honest, I lean towards the ale side of things rather than the lagers you Bavarian types are deservedly famous for making. I don't think we get a lot of good German beers over here. We do get a lot of really good Belgians though, so I usually end up in that camp.

But you could always arrange to ship some of your finest my way and I'll be happy to both pay for it, and give it a thorough review. [;)]

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Mynok
I still say the French made better ships. They weren't as skillfully manned by any means, but they were fine designs and the fact that the British grabbed all they could get a hold of tells a lot. IMO, the British became too dependent on the carronade for broadside weight.

Ok, well, let's drag it OT one last time. I wish there was someplace u & me and Hornblower and all could go and wring this out. If anybody has a suggestion, let's go there and get gnarly Mars-boy.

Yeah, French ships were hot, maneuverable, fast, and skillfully manned (don't believe that post-war English, my dick was bigger, crap. The French were good). But there was a reason that the Brits did better one-on-one, and a reason they examined and copied certain French designs closely, and a reason they dumped the French build philosophy after several years of testing.

And despite what ya might have seen on the web, the American ship designers did NOT follow French hull forms.

God, I love this stuff!!

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Mynok
I still say the French made better ships. They weren't as skillfully manned by any means, but they were fine designs and the fact that the British grabbed all they could get a hold of tells a lot. IMO, the British became too dependent on the carronade for broadside weight.

Ok, well, let's drag it OT one last time. I wish there was someplace u & me and Hornblower and all could go and wring this out. If anybody has a suggestion, let's go there and get gnarly Mars-boy.

Yeah, French ships were hot, maneuverable, fast, and skillfully manned (don't believe that post-war English, my dick was bigger, crap. The French were good). But there was a reason that the Brits did better one-on-one, and a reason they examined and copied certain French designs closely, and a reason they dumped the French build philosophy after several years of testing.

And despite what ya might have seen on the web, the American ship designers did NOT follow French hull forms.

God, I love this stuff!!

Having read every single book written by Patrick O'Brian, and related technical books, I have an appreciation now for sailing ships that I would otherwise never have had. Not that I know much, just appreciate them.

When you say "....and a reason they dumped the French build philosophy after several years of testing. " to what are you referring to ?

[thegreatwent]

Stuman, the French Iphigénie class that had 32 guns and displaced 600 tons. The American designs by Joshua Humphreys and William Doughty were (USS Constitution etc...)36 - 44 guns and displaced in excess of 1,500 tons. The size difference allowed for larger guns and ships that were very tough to sink at the time. Being much longer and with nearly a 30% larger beam the American ships were much more comfortable to sail in, less likely to spill your drink[;)].

IIRC these designs were contemporary, but I don't have that info in front of me.

Cheers

P.S. I'm not an expert just an enthusiast.

[Mynok]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Mynok
I still say the French made better ships. They weren't as skillfully manned by any means, but they were fine designs and the fact that the British grabbed all they could get a hold of tells a lot. IMO, the British became too dependent on the carronade for broadside weight.

Ok, well, let's drag it OT one last time. I wish there was someplace u & me and Hornblower and all could go and wring this out. If anybody has a suggestion, let's go there and get gnarly Mars-boy.

Yeah, French ships were hot, maneuverable, fast, and skillfully manned (don't believe that post-war English, my dick was bigger, crap. The French were good). But there was a reason that the Brits did better one-on-one, and a reason they examined and copied certain French designs closely, and a reason they dumped the French build philosophy after several years of testing.

And despite what ya might have seen on the web, the American ship designers did NOT follow French hull forms.

God, I love this stuff!!

[:D] One primary reason they dumped the French build designs was they did not have access to the necessary timber to make them! France still had access to old-growth timber even in the Napoleonic days. Britain did not. That dramatically affects the way one executes masts and keels, primarily, and other things secondarily. Indeed, it was one of the primary reasons the Brits when the carronade route: more broadside weight for less tonnage, but with a necessary loss in weight at range.

The primary reason they British did better one-on-one was training. Period. Compared to the British, the French simply did not execute as efficiently. Lots of reasons for that, but it was primarily a situation of too much transition at the time. They went through numerous governments and lots of strategic changes of direction at the time and that doesn't bode well for a navy. They were, in a word, hoist by their own petard.

That's not an aspersion on French skill at sea. They certainly had a long and storied tradition of maritime quality. There were large bases of quality seaman in Brittany and Aquitaine during all the long years of revolutionary conflict. But maritime skill and battle skill are two very different things, and the French fell down in the latter area. Repetition is the key here and they simply didn't make or have the time to do it justice, as the British did and insisted upon in their crew.