American Falklands
- Thread starter Nicole
- Start date
Imajin said:
Maybe Jones Island after John Paul Jones. It would have been useful as a whaling station in the South Atlantic.
But unless a permenant colony is established there with a substantial American population [and not immigrants from Argentina] it would probably be sold to the Argentinians sometime later (after WWII would be my guess).
Shadow Knight said:
They'd have to establish a settlement there quickly, Argentinian settlers were removed in 1831 and the British returned in Jan 1833. What is likely to make the US so keen on the islands to send ships and men to settle and defend the islands in such a short space of time?
I doubt the US would have sold it back to the argies, since 1940 the US has acquired far more overseas bases than it has relinquished.
How about Britain turns the islands over to the US as part of destroyers for bases?
An American Falklands seems plausible. It could get America into the Whaling/Coaling station race in a big way, and lead to a more small colonies in remote places around the world. Perhaps it would also cause America to get more involved in South American politics, maybe putting forth a claim on Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego, or on the mainland. The whole free state/slave state balance thing would come into play, as well. Slave territory in the South Seas?
I could easily see a Falklands/Isla Grande de Tierra Del Fuego combination granted statehood around 1900. Would American ownership of these territories have an impact on the development of a canal in Central America?
I could easily see a Falklands/Isla Grande de Tierra Del Fuego combination granted statehood around 1900. Would American ownership of these territories have an impact on the development of a canal in Central America?
Imajin said:
That would be the most likely situation. But what is the likelihood of it being a permanent settlement? It could be just a seasonal one or one that exists for several years then packs up and goes home until the next whaling season.
I'd imagine that settlers from Argentina would return and you'd end up with those settlers being the main population of the islands (maybe becoming American citizens at some point) with the whalers being a cyclical population (a few would intermarry of course).
really? Since the area was technically British, why didn't the Brits oust them... and what did the Brits say about the US action in what was their domain?Imajin said:
