Andrew Jackson And The Battle Of New Orleans Analysis

Words: 930
Pages: 4

Confirmation of “Andrew Jackson and the Battle of New Orleans” by

Facts from Refutation.
Unclarity: Andrew Jackson was the only one who could have saved New Orleans.
Implausibility: The unprofessional American army was victorious over the larger, well trained British army.
Impossibility: General Pakenham mocked his own soldiers.
Inconsistency: The British soldiers were panic-stricken.
Impropriety: Andrew Jackson sought to take revenge for the death of his mother and brothers.
Inexpediency: General Pakenham had his soldiers march in the open towards the Americans.

Credit
(Statement) Anyone who decides to shame the authors of history, in my opinion, shames history itself. (Statement) If you criticize the brilliant authors who write accounts of historical events, (Chorographia) then it would be very difficult to attack these people without attacking the history that they write about. (Thesis) As for myself, I praise those who compose historical accounts, and in particular, the mortal that recorded the grand retelling of "Andrew Jackson and the Battle of New Orleans."
Clarity
…show more content…
(Chronographia) How is this not clear? (General Truth) For there have been many events in the history of the planet in which a particular human proved that they were qualified to deal with certain situations that nobody else could have accomplished. (Rhetorical Question of General Truth) It it strange that an unlikely victory could have only been accomplished by an interesting and unique man? (Statement) Then it is easy to see that Andrew Jackson possessed the qualities needed for the American army to achieve victory, if he was indeed needed to lead the Americans to