Post by The Horny Goat
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 10:49:52 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler Post by SolomonW
In 1864, the Confederates had about 250,000. The North had almost
600,000. That another 100,000 black troops even assuming that the Blacks
would join the South in large numbers are not likely to make much of a
Next if the South lose 100,000 workers where are they going to get
Finally, the Souths problems were not just human resources but also
equipment, food, etc. They were struggling to keep the army they had on the
And failing. Adding almost 50% to the army to have to feed and support
would just make it worse.
The CSA's only hope by 1864 was to demoralize the USA over the blood
shed and with the North starting to hit its stride with victories that
is very unlikely IMO.
I'm not sure that 'Black Pigeon Speaks' is even correct about an America
that signed an armistice with the CSA would never become a superpower.
It would hurt, some, but it would still have the majority of the
population and industry as well as the "Western Frontier" to expand into
and develop and wouldn't have to spend resources and capital rebuilding
so in a scenario like this where there's an armistice by some miracle
after Gettysberg (presumably as a result of McClellan denying Lincoln
a second term - still a long shot in my book) do Canada or Mexico
retain their independence? (Presumably Canada could only join the USA,
Mexico could be acquired by either or both could retain their
- Canada and Mexico BOTH retian independence
- Canada -> USA, Mexico independent
- Mexico -> USA, Canada independent
- Mexico -> CSA, Canada Independent
- both Canada and Mexico -> USA
- Canada -> USA, Mexico -> CSA
AND what happens to Alaska?
- US gains it in 1867 or thereabous
- Russia keeps it
I would argue a British / Canadian acquisition of Alaska is largely
ruled out by the naval resstrictions upon Russia that were imposed by
the Crimean wawr treaty - these restrictions were retained - I'm going
from memory here - until 1875-1880. I would think a Russia living
under those naval rules would be unlikely to want to sell anything to
either the UK or Canada (who like in our TL was seen at least until
WW1 as strictly a shill for Whitehall)
I see no chance at all of Japan acquiring Alaska in any scenario.
also think a United States that acquired Mexico, Canada AND Alaska
would inevitably eventually face a hostile alliance including (but not
limited to) Britain, Prussia/Germany, Russia no later than 1900 as
such an *United States would scare the **** out of a lot of countries.
On the other hand a United States like that is likely far LESS likely
to go to war with Spain as their greater power would produce a more
subservient Spain - possibly selling overseas posessions.
I think both Canada and Mexico would retain their independence.
Canada being annexed by the USA seems to me to have been more likely as
a result of the "54 40 or fight" dispute of the 1840s going bad. Once
the border was agreed upon at 49 degrees I think annexation of Canada by
the USA was effectively "off the table". I'm not saying its impossible,
just unlikely enough to be discounted.
As far as Mexico is concerned, from various "CSA wins the Civil War"
ATLs that have been discussed, the CSA would have been interested in
taking at least part of Mexico. But I think the USA would have
considered it in its own interest to prevent that. And US Army forces
in New Mexico, Arizona and California would have given them the military
stick to make diplomacy likely to work. And if it didn't, USA _and_
Mexico forces against CSA forces would have been even worse for the CSA
than the American Civil War was.
As for the Alaska Purchase, I have no idea. It could go either way, it
all depends on how the USA reacts in the immediate aftermath of a lost
Civil War. The US could be demoralized enough to not be interested or
could be feeling a need to over-compensate. I agree that there's no
chance Russia will willingly hand Alaska over to Canada or the UK (even
discounting that the UK had turned down an offer to sell it to them in
the late 1850s) and I can't see anyone else being in a position to be
considered. If the sale does take place, it may not be in 1867.
Considering how sparsely "settled" Alaska was I'm wondering what would
happen if Russia just walks away from it without officially turning it
over to anyone else. It was sold because the Tsar felt it was
indefensible, so what if he doesn't try to defend it? Could it have
just sat there, terra incognito until the 1890's? Presumably gold would
have still be discovered there at some point. What happens then?
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.