History Channel starts series on American Revolution tonight 6-04-06

[hillbilly]

The History Channel starts a series on the American Revolution tonight.

I plan on watching it.

Yes, I realize it's the History Channel, and often, they do more Channel (television) than History.

But I think it will be good to see this series.

Too often, I think Americans take the Revolution for granted.

Too often, I think Americans forget what a complicated, drawn-out, messy, and sometimes downright ugly process it was.

The Boston Massacre was in 1770. Open combat didn't start until 1775. The Declaration of Independence wasn't issued until 1776.

And then the fighting had to go on and on and on and on.

And the Continental Army, to put it bluntly, sucked.

George Washington lost a lot more battles than he won.

The rebels got hammered and butchered and slaughtered and defeated and kicked over and over and over and over.

But they persevered. They overcame. And they outlasted.

I think revisiting this historical period, even through a History Channel program, is always a good thing.

Check it out. Starts Sunday night. See your local listings.

hillbilly

 

[Jeff]

Thanks for the heads-up, I think I will watch it.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

Thanks hillbilly, I'll give it a watch. The Hitler oops I mean History Channel is actually one of only a handfull of cable channels I watch. And I always liked that era of American history.

 

[FPrice]

They had a two-hour special on George Washington last Monday. It was pretty good and from what I have read about him, pretty accurate also. People who wonder why he is called the "Father of our country" don't realize just how much the revolution depended upon his leadership and tenacity. He was indeed "the right man, at the right time, in the right place".

 

[hillbilly]

I caught the replay of the Washington program last night.

George's first time to lead troops into battle, he killed French soldiers before the French-Indian war had actually started. If fact, he ambushed a "diplomatic party" and might have contributed to the murder of a wounded French officer who'd been leading that party.

Then, at Fort Necessity, he got 31 of his men killed, and wound up having to surrender to the French.

With results like those today, Washington would have been immediately "put on the shelf" so to speak, and never allowed to command men in combat again.

hillbilly

 

[1wildbill]

+1 on the Washington story, it was good, and accurate. He did make a couple of early small mistakes, guess there wasn't much competition for the job. Missed tonight's show but will check it out.