Battle of New Orleans - Historum

Commander · July 5th, 2006, 12:29 PM

Was Andrew Jackson wrong in practically destroying New Orleans and killing a lot of British soldiers in a battle that happened after the War of 1812 ended? Should he have been tried as a criminal instead of being labeled a war hero?

old_abe · July 6th, 2006, 03:41 AM

It took news weeks if not months to travel back then. Jackson had no way of knowing he war was over. It was an unfortunate thing for so many British soldiers to die when there was technically peace, but I don't think he should have been tried as a war criminal.

Dr Realism · April 23rd, 2007, 07:21 PM

Tried as a war criminal?! For what? Winning? The British were trying to conquer an American City, he had an obligation to defend it whether or not a state of war existed. The American Victory at New Orleans was necessary for America to be able to walk away with its pride after such a poor performance during the war.
Besides. I don't think the term, "War Criminal," had been invented yet. There were just victorious winners and dead losers.

S_Chamberlin · April 25th, 2007, 03:15 PM

The question I have is this, we know that the news of the end of the war had not reached Andrew Jackson in Louisiana, but had the British soldiers gotten the news?

Vir0n · April 25th, 2007, 04:54 PM

The Treaty of Ghent was signed on December 24, 1814 in Belgium. The Battle of New Orleans was fought on 8 Jan. Given the nature of transatlantic travel in the early 19th century, there is no way either side could have known about the treaty at the time the Battle of New Orleans was fought. After the British lost in New Orleans they attacked and captured Fort Bower in preparation for an attack on Mobile, Alabama. The British did not find out about the treaty until 13 Feb after which they withdrew.

While I would not argue that his political ideology was without merit, I am really not a fan of Andrew Jackson the man. I think the political symbol of the jackass which supposedly originated because of Jackson's behavior is quite appropriate. However, even with my bias against him I cannot find any reason to criticize his military career generally or the Battle of New Orleans specifically.

**tjadams** · March 26th, 2009, 06:51 PM

Jackson provided much needed positive news as the battle has been portrayed in history. It was a vicious time, but, what he did for the time wasn't illegal or surprising. History would have judged him entirely different had he lost.