Was George Washington an insurgent against the British?

No.

Simply because George Washington was an officer in an organized army that conducted conventional military operations.

George Washington commanded soldiers who carried arms openly, were subject to military discipline and obeyed the customs and laws of war that existed at the time.

Thus he was a general commanding an army - not an insurgent.

No because he was a General in the Continental Army of the United States.

The British were here to take back what they lost. It was an open war between nations at war. Granted many of the tactics the US used in fighting back then were not considered gentlemen like, doing ambushes and sneak attacks, it was a war none the less.

The insurgents in Iraq are destroying their own country because some people have different beliefs then they do. There is no open war like during the opening days of the fighting back in 2003. The US would like to help all the people, except for the people who keep blowing everything up, but if they'ld stop I am sure the US would be out of there much quicker.

No, most of the insurgents in Iraq are from other countries like Iran, Syria and Lebanon. Washington was born in the Virginia USA. He fought to keep this country out of the British hands of that time.

It does indeed sound funny! Thanks for the chuckle.

An insurgency is defined as an "armed uprising, or revolt against an established civil or political authority."

"Persons engaging in insurgency are called insurgents, and typically engage in regular or guerrilla combat against the armed forces of the established regime, or conduct sabotage and harassment in the land in order to undermine the government's position as leader."

---

Yes, I'd say George Washington was an insurgent.

However, the term "insurgent" isn't necessarily a bad thing. Insurrections in France, Poland and Hungary were done for reasons I'd consider perfectly just.

Big difference-- Washington was fighting those who wanted to keep us oppressed. In Iraq, the insurgents' first goal is to SPREAD harm and destruction. While what you say may be technically true, juxtaposing the two types of insurgents, while omitting all other circumstances, implies they are somehow equal.

COMMANDER OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDANCE CUT OUR HOLD THE BRITISH HELD ON US . WE CREATED AN ARMY TO REPULSE THE BRITISH FROM OUR LANDS.

yes. if you review history with the eyes of a British Empire royalist he was.

yes. it is funny though. because he was not following any of the rules that he set down. in order to set these rule (laws, constitutions, ideas for such) he had to break almost all of them in order to get away from great britain.

Yes. And the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism.

No, because, because, because-----ummm, He was a patriot!