The United States lost the War of 1812

In 1862 at the end of the Peninsula campaign President Lincoln was highly displeased with the performance of General in Chief George McClellan. The general defended himself famously telling the President, that he had, "not lost the battle, but merely failed to win." This quote from McClellan well describes the resolution of many military engagements throughout history, but perhaps none better than the ultimate result of the War of 1812 between the United States and the British empire.Wars differ from most contests we are familiar with in civilian life. Most sports require a clear winner and looser, and they also have very clear rules. War is not so neat and tidy.My opponent raises some very good examples of American setbacks, and points out that it was the British Empire that gave better than they took in terms of casualties and numbers of battles won. Nevertheless, those examples don't constitute a win or a loss for either side in the overall conflict. For example, during the American Civil War there were several battles where the rebels took less casualties than the Union, nevertheless the Union ultimately prevailed at that war's conclusion. This also applies to the example of number of battles fought and won by the British. During the American Civil War, particularly in the east, Joe Johnston and Bobby Lee won the majority of battles between 1861 to the first half of 1863. Winning more battles doesn't necessarily mean winning the war. Lee surrendered to the Grant and the Union without conditions on April 9th 1865. Johnston surrendered to Sherman seventeen days later. The war was over and the Confederacy no more, despite some of the most amazing generalship in history and despite every victory of the South.To evaluate this kind of debate we need a definition for loosing a war, and my opponent did not provide one. As such I have offered one below.To lose a war: surrender or capitulation to a foreign military This was not the result of the war of 1812 for either side. It was the final outcome of conflicts like the American Civil War and WWII (Robert E Lee surrendered to Grant, Karl Doenitz surrendered to Eisenhower, Hideki Tojo to MacArthur) In reality the war of 1812 ended as a draw, however the British Empire arguably got the shorter straw in peace negotiations. The British demanded a UK sponsored Midwestern "buffer State" along with control of parts of the Mississippi River, and quickly dropped the conditions in order to normalize trade with the American States and focus on war in Europe, the net result was to return to antebellum conditions between the US and British Empire. A quote below of then American President James Madison very well summarizes the situation upon concluding peace with the Crown."I think you have no right, from the state of war, to demand any concession of territory from America ... You have not been able to carry it into the enemy's territory, notwithstanding your military success and now undoubted military superiority, and have not even cleared your own territory on the point of attack. You cannot on any principle of equality in negotiation claim a cessation of territory except in exchange for other advantages which you have in your power ... Then if this reasoning be true, why stipulate for the uti possidetis? You can get no territory: indeed, the state of your military operations, however creditable, does not entitle you to demand any."Simply put, the British were in no position to level demands, especially after General Andrew Jackson's victory in New Orleans and in consideration of the state of British forces in America at the time, and the imperative to focus attention on France and Europe. In fact the only real change from antebellum status quo at the end of the war was British concession to America, of fishing rights along the St Lawrence River. Perhaps not greatly significant, but it goes to show that the US in the end walked away with some level of concession whereas the British did not. The US also garnered a less material but highly significant "win" from the conclusion, of national pride and identity. The war at the time of conclusion was seen by most Americans as a victory, galvanizing national pride and separating once and for all the sovereignty of the American States from the Empire. It also gave Americans a new song, " The Star-Spangled Banner."In the final analysis of history it's probably fair to say neither side won, but the young American nation took away a renewed sense of nationalism, pride and independence; along with some fish. The British made no gains whatsoever.Given the definition of "lose a war," surrender or capitulation, we cannot conclude that either side "won" per se. What we can conclude is that the American Nation, despite any setbacks inflicted upon them during the war, got the better end of the deal when the treaty of Ghent was signed. It's arguable in full scope fo teh war, the in fact teh Americans, not the British, took better than they gave, if you will.Considering the definition of losing a war that is so critical for judging this debate, and the examples of positive American outcomes, a negative ballot is strongly urged.