Talk:Treaty of Ghent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Ghent
There are a couple of cities called Ghent. Is this the Belgian one ? Lvr 08:39, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- For an international treaty, it is undoubtedly the one in Belgium rather than any of the U.S. places. older ≠ wiser 11:09, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Treaty
There are certainly a large number of examples of encyclopedic articles that include original text, and even complete texts, and I'm sure readers would find the actual text of the treaty very useful. I understand though if this is your article. --Atticus 02:10, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
- No, it is not my article. It is Wikipedia convention that articles do not contain the entire original text of source documents. That is precisely what Wikisource it for. If you want to add the text there and put a link to it here, that would be just fine. older ≠ wiser 02:41, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I took the text of the Treaty and added it to WikiSource as Treaty of Ghent. Lvr 10:00, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
................................ The negotiators of this treaty included Jonathan Russell and not John Holmes as listed.
In the revision of 22:45, 10 January 2007, user Rjensen added the statement "The U.S. never wanted to annex Canada, only to seize parts for bargaining over other issues." and deleted text from previous revisions that conveyed the opposite view. Rjensen's assertion regarding U.S. intentions towards Canada certainly appear to be at odds with statements made by U.S. "war hawks" preceding the war. In order for Rjensen's change to stand, Rjensen must provide specific references to support his/her assertion about U.S. intentions towards Canada.
R. A. Hicks 07:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Britain had not made any significant gains, except for the burning of Washington D.C.
wtf? Burning down the WHITEHOUSE is insignificant? Sure, according to U.S. textbooks perhaps... which don't even mention the war surprisingly ;)
-G
[edit] Annex, no; conquer, yes.
There is something weird going on here. Rjensen's statement in the section above appears unattributed, but he did sign it. And some minor vandal has a comment that doesn't show on the page. Can anyone clear this up?
- To the main point. It is noteworthy that Rjensen's last cite (Burke, 1940, I believe) was at the heighth of the lend-lease program, when the UK was desperately trying to enlist US involvement in the war against Nazi Germany. Wouldn't do to accuse the US of territorial aggression then, would it? However, the official history of the US Army states that the conquest of Canada and Florida were definite goals of a Congress dominated by war hawks. I have added the appropriate ref to the article. A
fuller (brush?)more complete discussion can be seen on Talk:War of 1812 Now, I hope this shows up. - Esseh
[edit] Sites
What were the sites of the negotiation and signing? Have they been preserved as historical landmarks? Dynzmoar 11:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

