 |
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:37
|
|
lets clarify. The initial POD (point of departure) is that Spain retains the territory, and that France (perhaps getting its sense that colonies arent worth it, earlier than in OTL) doesnt aquire it from Spain. Seems plausible.
Now the question then arises, what was Jeffersons motive for seeking to buy it. IIRC, it was NOT (pace Dr SL) to get the land for settlement - at the time the old northwest (ohio, Indiana, illinois,lower Michigan) had plenty of empty land. The principle concern was the city of New Orleans, which controlled the Missippi, the principle route for grain exports from the part of the old northwest that WAS being settled (southern Ohio, etc) The presumption had been that Spain was not a threat, but France would be ( I believe Jefferson said - If France takes New Orleans, we will have to marry ourselves to the Royal Navy)
So if Spain holds lousiana and New Orleans, its quite possible the US doesnt try to buy them. Or if they do, Spain may sell New Orleans only, and not toss in the rest of the territory, as Nappy did.
Now of course EVENTUALLY the old northwest WILL fill up and there WILL be pressure for the US to expand towards Lousiana. But that wont happen immediately, and a lot of history can happen meanwhile.
I dont see the end of the Napoleonic wars as being decisive. If the territory is held by Spain, then Spain would keep it at the Congress of Vienna, no?
Big question is how this effects the Mexican rebellion against Spain. Unfortunately I dont know enough about that to comment in detail.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SpencerH
|
 |
Co-Ruler of my patch of land south of Birmingham Alabama
Feb 2002 time: 23:37
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DanS
I think we stand rather well in such a comparison with how others obtained their territories, if you consider the fact that we also bought Alaska, a nice large chunk of territory. That is, of course, leaving aside the fact that the land was in many ways stolen from the Indians. |
Why would you leave that aside?
Not to mention of course, the annexation of Texas, the ceding of the Oregon Territory from Britain under threat from Polk, and the "purchase" of Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, and western Colorado following the Mexican War.
The doctrines of "Manifest Destiny" and the "Monroe doctrine" clearly illuminate the ideals of the american policies of expansionism in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Does that make them worse than the Europeans? I didnt say it did.
Last edited by SpencerH on 10-08-2005 at 00:45
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark
The principle concern was the city of New Orleans, which controlled the Missippi, the principle route for grain exports from the part of the old northwest that WAS being settled (southern Ohio, etc) The presumption had been that Spain was not a threat, but France would be ( I believe Jefferson said - If France takes New Orleans, we will have to marry ourselves to the Royal Navy)
So if Spain holds lousiana and New Orleans, its quite possible the US doesnt try to buy them. Or if they do, Spain may sell New Orleans only, and not toss in the rest of the territory, as Nappy did.
|
Ostensabley the reason that American settlers wanted New Orleans is because the French governor of Louisisana had been so arbitrary and capricious over granting Americans access to the port of New Orleans. That's the American side of the story, it'a also possible that French treatment of the American traders really wasn't that bad, but American entrepreneurs saw NewOrleans as a potential gold mine. The question is whether a Spanish governor have dealt with the American so differently as to diminish American desire for New Orleans. I suspect not. Something else to consider is that after 1808, when Napoleon installed his brother on the thronw of Spain the British severed Spain's links with her colonies. They began to revolt and the British took the opportunity to attempt to add a couple of them to the British empire. They were largely unsuccessful because they didn't have enough troops in the New World to adequately occupy any of the major Spanish colonies. More than likely the Americans would have felt obligated to seize Louisiana anyway, but if Louisiana had been a Spanish colony at the time who knows how the US would have gauged the boundaries of the colony.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote: Yes, but not a "killing". |
No single investment can be expected to do as good as 6% a yar for 400 years. A broad portfolio? Yes. An oft changing mix managed by a genius like Warren Buffet? Yes. Any one single stock or bond? Hell no.
DanS am I right?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999 time: 05:37
|
|
The people of New Orleans would be *****ing about the French president.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Brachy-Pride
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Something else to consider is that after 1808, when Napoleon installed his brother on the thronw of Spain the British severed Spain's links with her colonies. They began to revolt and the British took the opportunity to attempt to add a couple of them to the British empire. They were largely unsuccessful because they didn't have enough troops in the New World to adequately occupy any of the major Spanish colonies. More than likely the Americans would have felt obligated to seize Louisiana anyway, but if Louisiana had been a Spanish colony at the time who knows how the US would have gauged the boundaries of the colony. |
Well, the english during the Jenkins ear war sent almost 25000 men to attack Cartagena in Colombia, and were expelled with heavy casualties, during the napoleonic wars they also invaded Buenos Aires twice with the same result.
Unless they fight bushmen with spears or indians on war elephants the brits kinds suck fighting on land, their navy was great though.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37. Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|