I never said that Napoleon was a 'victim' or that the allies were 'jealous' of him. They were scared of him, especially when facing him in the field, but you're incorrect here.

As for the US in the War of 1812, the British were guilty of high-handedness in dealing with a neutral United States. Their policy of taking both ships, with their cargoes, and seamen from the American merchant fleet, the Chesapeake-Leopard affair of 1807, and the arming of Indians in the Old Northwest by English traders and the Anglo-Canadian fur companies in what was US territory had as much to do with causing the War of 1812 as the land-hunger of Americans in the western states.

The British orders in council regarding American merchant vessels caused the 'total derangement' of US overseas trade, and the British also interfered with American coastal trade. And the British had much to do with supporting the Tecumseh-inspired Indian confederation before the war began. The British treatment of the US was arrogant and unjust.

The British finally exercised some common sense in the situation by revoking most of the restrictions imposed on American commerce on 23 June 1812. Unfortunately the US had declared war on 18 June.

The Americans were the ones to declare war and definitely lusted after Canada. However, the British had long supported an aggressive stance against a weaker neutral nation, just as she had attacked the Danes twice, in 1801 and 1807, a neutral nation that was not at war. Once again Britain's aggressive actions, and the last with a terror bombardment of the Danish capital of Copenhagen, provoked a neutral to go to war with Britain.

So, your comments are incorrect in these two instances.

Sincerely,
K