This first skirmish between these two sides happened in 1755, when a young officer by the name of George Washington and his militia tried to take down one of the French’s main forts, Duquesne. However they failed as the French proved to be a much greater force than expected, and Washington was forced to surrender and retreat. The French had the Indians on their side which was a big advantage to them, and more Indians who had been kicked out by the British colonists also saw this as an opportunity to settle some old scores. This resulted in a second loss for the British as they once again tried to take Fort Duquesne. This time though, they lost 70 percent of their men, and their general, Edward Braddock.
This tells us that he had firm control of the country, and was allowing change in the safest of manors. On the other hand the lack of rebellions may have been due to Northumberland’s ruthless nature during previous rebellions making people afraid of repeating the same outcome. The movement to Protestantism can be attributed more to the Kings wishes, and not represent what Northumberland himself wanted. Northumberland’s social and economic ideas were primarily aiming towards getting the government’s finances back to stability. After Henry VIII’s erratic spending the crown and country were in financial crisis and this systematic and logical approach made by Northumberland towards the crisis shows his ability in this area of ruling.
M.L Bush said that ‘It was interconnected regional rebellions rather than one fluid movement’ because once the rebels had gone back to where they lived dotted across the North of England they would all have to meet up rather than go down to London in one group. Also the rebels outnumbered the King’s army 4:1 when they were confronted at the River Don. Instead of accepting the King’s pardon they should have risked battle once they dispersed they were no longer a threat to Henry. They were the stronger force but they tried to negotiate before they had achieved anything. This is another point towards poor leadership because there was no clear plan in how they were going to get their terms accepted only what terms they wanted.
General Ewell, of the Confederacy, faced a difficult decision over whether or not he should attack the Federals on Cemetery Hill. Lee had ordered him to attack, but only if he thought there was good chance of success. Ewell could not be certain of that. His men were tired and disorganized after their victory. They had lost momentum while pursuing the Federals through the town, and needed to be reorganized before continuing.
All of his evidence really points to the Indians being good warriors but not getting the appreciation they deserve after the war is over. He does not give much evidence that is against his thesis, everything seems to point back to his thesis. He is very opinionated with the support that he gives for his thesis. Robert S. Allen really uses his evidence very well to support his thesis. He is always giving more evidence stating that the Indians were not being taken care of unless the British needed them for war.
In my opinion his health was the only factor causing him to gradually lose control. It was evident that Henry was still in control, I say this because in 1544 Henry proved he was willing to send soldiers into battle against the French. Furthermore in my opinion I think that Henry could clearly make decisions and take control, for example his attempts to even consider trying to help the economic issues, even though debasement was not a logical means of helping the economy Henry still looked through many options to help the
The British public, army and the government themselves were not expecting such a strong resistance by the Boer tribes. This made the public question the current government. It seemed to them that the government had allowed the British army to become weak and send them into battle without preparation and also without them being healthy enough to fight, this began to give the Tories a bad name. Also the Boer war may have been a reason and incentive for Chamberlain, the sectary of state for the colonies, tariff reform campaign, which had a huge part to play in the Unionist split.
President Theodore Roosevelt juxtaposes that athletic proficiency as a “good servant, a mighty bad master” will serve few but variant purposes such as companionship and good health but causes good character deficiency, which he believes to be more important than his sons wishes to play football. He comprehends his son’s wishes to play football but does not allow because the brutality of football may cause Ted to lack the good character, which is so highly prioritized by President Roosevelt. He alludes to the letter from Pliny to Trajan, in which he explained the Greeks absorption of sports, allowing them to be distracted from their primary objective to disrupt Roman society. He uses historic evidence to intensify his juxtaposition with his son, whom President Roosevelt expostulates to, an analogy of Bleistein, their horse, unable to hurdle the obstacle but tries again and succeeds to never giving up and showing that perseverance is key in building character. President Theodore Roosevelt exceeds in his attempt to argue his message using different forms of rhetoric such as allusion and analogy.
Stanza six and seven tell readers the reason about his feeling towards Crazy Horse. In Custer’s mind, Crazy Horse was the same as him—a brave, born warrior and leader for wars. He thought maybe Crazy Horse was better than him. The fact proved that Custer’s worry was reasonable. Crazy Horse’s forces didn’t have advanced arms, but he had better wisdom and tactics of war.
After all this praise of Washington, I want to draw your attention to a few things he did that I can’t say I agree with. While he had a good grasp of politics, his strengths/weaknesses, and how to commandeer and army, I don’t care for how he treated one race of people: the Iroquois. While I do not deny that the Iroquois were becoming pests and causing harm to the newly born U.S.A., it doesn’t say anywhere that the government tried to negotiate with them. To me, if one of the first acts of a new country is to wipe out a civilization, that says very bad things about their character. If it were me, I would have tried to negotiate.