What chance does American history have against the congressional dealers of pork? Getting re-elected ai'nt enough anymore, they want immortality to surpass the people who actually built out the land with their bare hands.

After the tough battles at Emuckfau/Emuckfaw and Enitachopco Creeks and the near total devastation of the Red Stick Creeks at Horseshoe Bend, Jackson ordered all of the Creeks to report to Fort Jackson on 1 August 1814 to discuss terms of a comprehensive treaty. Jackson was a new Major Genral in the U.S. Army due to the resignation of William Henry Harrison, the hero of Tippecanoe, and was in no mood for compromise and stood firm with all of the Creeks, including the US frendly White Sticks.

Campaign, Theatre or War?

The war involving the United States of America (USA) and the Creek Indians of 1813-1814 has its fingers in many historical pies. Does one consider the fighting a mere theatre or campaign of the War of 1812 or a separate war on its own? Were the Creeks part of an American Indian confederation or acting out a long festering civil war? If part of a confederation, were they allied with the British like their northern confederates? If so, should the British have forced the Americans to honour the Treaty of Ghent’s provisions on restoring land after the cessation of the War of 1812 as they did in the north? These are all legitimate questions, but the subtleties of the causes and effects of the War of 1812 make them almost indiscernible definitively.