As I say, and as most historians agree, it almost resulted in total defeat for the US and the secession of New England to the Crown at the behest of its own citizenry.

So it is against that background that it should be judged: that the British, having considerable naval and land forces suddenly freed up from the Peninsular War against France, ended up at the table with America, leaving the 19th century's superpower and the 20th century's superpower sitting down discussing peace and friendship - and it DID forge the beginnings of an enduring relationship, with a few hiccups along the way - is indeed one of the miracles of modern history.

The only good thing about the War of Independence from the British perspective at the time was that the Crown sent James Cook to the South Pacific to look for new territories and trade routes, leading to the birth of Australia and New Zealand as we know them today.

(Not sure how good the Poms think that is when they're mostly getting flogged at cricket and rugby by these two countries, but that's another issue).

So Ruve, in my view it was both conflicts and the defeat of Napoleon at Trafalgar and Waterloo (leading also to a genuinely free France) that actually set the parameters defining the modern world and the many subsequent outcomes of history.

It's unlikely that any other results would have brought about such an alliance of free spirits (imagine the 20th century without Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt) or given rise to the strong, brave, generous, fair and magnanimous America we all look to (most of the time), or the dogged Britain that had enough balls to stand up to Adolf Hitler on its own after fighting a war that literally took the flower of its youth just 20 years earlier. Would there have been an Israel? Doubt it.

Let's hope too we can all remember and learn from the lessons of history. It's fascinating stuff, and it lives right now.