Octavian+Q4


 * ​ Why not just outlaw slavery altogether? Britain would of had a huge army waiting for them in the colonies? Explain your reaction to these British decisions.**

This to me was a bad Idea because they would have an advantage in infantry which would allow them to desimate their opponents to such an extent that they would have won the war.that in turn would have changed history dramatically.
 * Mohamad's Thoughts:** They chose not to do this because they thought slaves would rebel against them,like Haiti did 15 years later, and that they would have a disadvantage in their economy as well.

//What do you think would've happened if they(the British) had chosen to abolish slavery?// -Good question, the war might of had a different outcome. However, I think it would be really interesting to find some information about the debates in England (at the time) regarding the ending of slavery in the colonies. So I'll answer your question with another question: Do you think the value of winning the rebellion would of outweighed the economic factors/scarifies involved with the outlawing of slavery (because wouldn't the abolishing of slavery spread through all of their imperial holdings)? **- Mr. T**
 * Question:**

I do agree with you about that they would've had an economic disadvantage if they had chose this but the duty of a monarch is to spread his empire's reach as far as possible for as long as possible.I would also say that the war cost an extreme amount of money so if they won during a shorter period of time they would've not had to pay as much as they did before
 * Mohamad's thoughts:**

It seems that the British had a hard time making up their minds. What do you think about the decision of the British officers that promised freedom to all defecting slaves? They even went as far as allowing run-away slaves to board British ships at[| Tybee Island]. Discuss, discuss!
 * Mr. T's Thoughts**: Mohamad take some time to revisit your thoughts and explain what you mean by the impact it would have on their economy. Additionally, the Haiti example is a good one but I'd focus on explaining British fears and less about events from the future (since the British lack the ability to see the future).


 * David's Thoughts/Replies:** Do you think other people face the same fate? How is it similar? How is it different?


 * Mohamad's thoughts**:I would say any slave at that time because no matter which side they fought on they never really accomplished their goal of freedom.


 * Frank's thoughts:** British didn't outlaw slavery because (from what I believe) they maybe have thought that the slave would rebel upon them since they were larger;like Haiti.

Charly's thoughts: What I think is that the british were so afraid of giving the slaves so much power that they'll probably revolt. I think the British should have given them power so that they could win the war. Maybe the slaves would have not have revolted instead help them so much that they actually won the war. They, the British and the slaves, could have gotten along with each other after the war. .
 * Mr. T says**: Frank look at my comments to Mohamad about the British being "future seers." Haiti is not a bad reason but be careful how you word things. Focus more on the fear of empowering the slaves or the impact it might of had on their other imperial holdings. However, there were plenty of cases where the British did free slaves (they just never went as far as saying "all blacks are free in the colonies"). Such a decree could of done nothing or it could have brought about a swift victory, it is impossible to know. However, they continued to use black troops to fight, build fortifications, and aid in navigating the land. Some of the more famous and/or interesting examples are the King of England's Soldiers and a notable battle between the Rebels and the British when the France brought 545 black troops from Haiti to try and take back Savannah (it didn't work) but it is an interesting example of black troops fighting on both sides in the same battle.