The United States lost the War of 1812

I believe McClellan's quote simply tells us that he had to much pride to admit that he lost the battle that President Lincoln was displeased over. I would agree that wars differ from our daily friendly games racing, and Football. However, war can be thought of like boxing. Do we say that no one won a boxing match if neither boxer is knocked out (capitulate or surrender)? No, we look and analyze and compare performances. Who dodged and blocked blows (defend) and counter punched (offense) most efficiently? Which side had been knocked down most ect? I will also disagree with my opponents definition of lose. Its merely an attempt to discard the victor and loser of this war and the real meaning of losing or winning war. Not that it doesn't mean surrender or capitulate but that isn't the only way one side can lose and therefore shouldn't ignorantly stick to the most extreme and humiliating form of lose. The more sensible definition from the most humiliating and extreme type of loss than my opponents definition is simply, "failed to win". Wars are not only won or lost when one side surrenders or capitulates, they are won or lost when one FAILS TO WIN, fail to achieve their objectives that one went to war to achieve. My opponent, like McClellan, simply seems to have to much pride to admit that, we, the United States of America sometimes loses. In the Korean War when North Korea invaded South Korea with the sole intention, objective, of conquest of South Korea, neither side surrendered nor capitulated. Does that mean it was a draw?... No, the main and or sole objectives of that war was the conquest or defense of South Korea and therefore though there were no surrenders, there were losers and winners. One side achieved 0% of objectives and the other at least achieved 50%. Therefore, despite no surrenders from either side, one side lost and one side won. When one side fails to achieve their objectives in the war and the other side does, you know who wins and who loses. That is the case for the War of 1812 and any war. Simply ask yourselves a few questions. Who declared war? The United States of America Why? To force the British Empire to renounce their 'rights' of impressment and the trade restrictions. How? By invading, defeating enemy forces, and capturing Canada. Those were the objectives of the United States. Most important question is, what was the outcome? I feel I did quite will in the first round in explaining that just as con concedes to that. The United States indeed surrendered the Michigan territory and lost Maine over 40,000 square km and felt a crushing blockade on our coast and these territories were returned not because the United States was just defeating Britain left and right. It was due to the fact that Britain deployed a minuscule force of manpower to defend Canada, that they were more concerned with Europe than with North America. The war also was started cause Britain refused to renounce the rights they were exercising against the United States so they were also fighting to protect those rights as well. In the treaty of Ghent, the British still wasn't going to listen to the demands from the United States that brought about the declaration of war in the first place, the rights that molested the United States. The United States knew that and not only dropped those demands but never even mentioned them nor Madison's suggestion to hand over Canada due to the fact the United States was in no position to make ANY demands. whereas the British who controlled 40,000 km2 of the United States' territory, occupied the White House and ate the president's dinner before destroying his home, achieved their military objectives on the battlefield more than not, and inflicted more causalities did. Status Quo Ante Bellum was a desired outcome for the British Empire from day one of the War of 1812, the British didn't want war, they wanted peace. It was the United States that wanted change by means of war. The United States didn't continue the war cause they were losing, the British didn't pursue the war cause they wanted normal relations with the US like they wanted it from day 1 of the War of 1812 so that they can focus on France. I'll try to summarize this. Objectives of the United States. `88; Force the British Empire to renounce the right of impressment. (Failed) `88; Force the British Empire to renounce the right to impede American commerce (Failed) `88; The acquisition of Canada (Failed) `88; Defeat British Native American allies to continue westward expansion (Achieved) Objectives of the British Empire. `88; Defend Canada (Achieved) `88; Retain the right of impressment if needed (Achieved) `88; Retain the right of impeding American commerce if needed (Achieved) `88; End the war ASAP to focus on European affairs (Achieved) `88; Establish an Indian buffer state for their Native American allies. (Failed) Due to the Indian coalition defeat, not British. The United States achieved 25% of their objectives, most important ones were not even mentioned cause they no longer wanted war. The British achieved 80% of their objectives and didn't want to pursue the war cause it was never their interest nor intention to go to war with the United States. American aim to take possession of Canada led to them surrendering Michigan, led to them losing Maine, and to the nation's capital to fall to the enemy. American aim to protect their commercial interest led to a devastating blockade that ruined their commercial interest and led to near bankruptcy. American aim to force the British to renounce impressment never happened and they didn't even have the stomach to demand that it to never happen again cause they had considerable difficulty dealing with around 8% of British military strength, they didn't want to deal with say 50% or 100% and leave defeated France to the rest of Europe. https://webapps.towson.edu... http://www.history.army.mil... http://www.nps.gov...