Kaptin Kurk
Banned
Not to mention a lot of Canadians at this time are transplanted Americans, who would probably not be all that upset at seeing the Stars n Stripes marching by.
AHC/WI: British join ACW, US still wins
- Thread starter Zuvarq
- Start date
Not to mention a lot of Canadians at this time are transplanted Americans, who would probably not be all that upset at seeing the Stars n Stripes marching by.
Robert
Banned
The U.S. has to fight the British from Canada and on the Seas, as well as the Confederacy. While this does put considerable pressure on the North, the result of the South alining itself with a Foreign invader might have caused the border states and some in the South to change sides. Furthermore, the U.S. was producing Ironclad ships fairly early in the war, and the British relied on wooden ships.
The end result would have been a longer war with the U.S. invading Canada and taking all of it except Quebec, which would have won it's independences as a U.S. ally. It's possible France might have attempted to join the U.S. in order to keep Mexico, an alliance that would have ended as soon as the British and South were defeated.
The end result would have been a longer war with the U.S. invading Canada and taking all of it except Quebec, which would have won it's independences as a U.S. ally. It's possible France might have attempted to join the U.S. in order to keep Mexico, an alliance that would have ended as soon as the British and South were defeated.
Not so much, the RN will choke off foreign nitrate supplies, and gold shipped from California that funded the Union war effort. Unpaid Union troops with limited ammunition shouldn't be too much of a problem.
I guess everyone past the first rank could be armed with a pitchfork and zerg rush the Brits while shouting "America, fuck yeah!"
deathscompanion1
Banned
Yeah because the Royal navy can blockade thousands of miles of coast line without bases.
Something to consider: the OP at no point states that Britain joins on the side of the CSA. Just saying
Superaquaspiderbatman
Banned
Is that even a realistic outcome here? Beating the CSA is one thing. Steamrolling the British Empire so thoroughly as a conquest of Canada would necessitate, and keeping Canada occupied for decades, is quite another.
Weren't those transplanted Americans, refugees from the 13 colonies who were loyal to Britain? I think they'd very much object to being conquered by the "rebels".
I think y'all are making the British out to be a lot weaker than they really are. There's a reason why a good chunk of the planet was colored in "British red" at this time.
Of course, the question is how enthusiastic and committed the British people would be for propping up a state that explicitly promotes chattel slavery.
Yet if Britain were truly determined to knock the US down a peg and put forth a considerable effort to prop up the Confederacy, the Union would probably lose. The British Navy is the best in the world at the time and could break up a US blockade. If the British reinforce Canada, the US won't be able to do much to it actually.
However, the British would still have to expend quite a bit of capital and manpower, as the Union Army by the late stages of the Civil War would be one of the most experienced armies in the world backed by a modern (at the time) Industrialized complex. Also, it leaves a seething US who would be building up furiously for revenge against the British whenever alt WWI occurs.
Of course, if this thread was made about a year ago, it would be inundated with 67th Tigers Pax Brittanica tirades of how the Royal Navy would have every US city burning in flames by day one, Abraham Lincoln declaring himself a dictator, and all the militia trash would flee at the very sight of the invincible Redcoats, well, except for the savior of the Union George McClellan of course.
Yet if Britain were truly determined to knock the US down a peg and put forth a considerable effort to prop up the Confederacy, the Union would probably lose. The British Navy is the best in the world at the time and could break up a US blockade. If the British reinforce Canada, the US won't be able to do much to it actually.
However, the British would still have to expend quite a bit of capital and manpower, as the Union Army by the late stages of the Civil War would be one of the most experienced armies in the world backed by a modern (at the time) Industrialized complex. Also, it leaves a seething US who would be building up furiously for revenge against the British whenever alt WWI occurs.
Of course, if this thread was made about a year ago, it would be inundated with 67th Tigers Pax Brittanica tirades of how the Royal Navy would have every US city burning in flames by day one, Abraham Lincoln declaring himself a dictator, and all the militia trash would flee at the very sight of the invincible Redcoats, well, except for the savior of the Union George McClellan of course.
If it lasts for more than 6 months the unions is out of powder...
The crisis breaks out in November 61, nobody is going to invade Canada in Winter. that gives both sides time to organise. If you base the numbers available in otl, bye the spring of 62, there should be ca 50-60.000 British regulars and about 40.000 Canadian militia, the British regular being of a much higher quality than the union troops, and the Canadians should be very similar to the union troops. This is for Canada and not the Maritimes.
This force can be supported bye the British by sea, and are in defensive positions. This is what the union needs to attack and defeat on land, they will have no source of gunpowder, and still need to import weapons. This is cut off due to a RN blockade.
Now, if we follow the 3-1 ratio of attackers to defenders in order to conduct a successful attack, that means that the union is going to need 300.000 troops to invade Canada. They need to be armed and supplied, and recruited. Or you need to take them from the fight against the south, and that means that the Confederates are free to act. They will also be free to trade now that the blockade is lifted.
Well they sources are in this time period Indian (British controlled) and the Guano in Chile (and RN will make imports difficult to put it mildly), the union can make nitrate beds, but that takes time, and a substantial effort not only in setting them up, but also with gathering the waste. Union farms are not small and close together either. The lack of nitrates is bigger than just gunpowder as well, it will hurt other war critical industries. But yes the union will be able to produce nitrates, but i do not believe they will be able to produce enough and fast enough. It will not be as difficult for the British to find wheat from a different source (or another source of calories, even if that does mean importing from Russia.)
Kaptin Kurk
Banned
Well, ignoring the most important part of the scenario, which is the hows and whys this happens, the British Contributions will probably be primarily Naval, with the American Response probably being primarily to try and increase naval strength on the Lakes, fortify the coastal cities, and buy commerce raiders and blockade runners from any nation willing to sell them. Ironically, the Confederates probably won't invest much navally in this scenario, so it'll be the British and Confederates running around trying to stop Yankee ships from being built in foreign ports.
Historically, I'm not sure exactly what strategy the Union Principles would come up with, but politically it'd probably make more sense, especially in an early decleration of war, to try and tell the Confederates what they want to hear if it can freeze the front, and focus on Canada. I suspect Lincoln and his Cabinet might prefer politically "Negotiating" with Southern states, while fighting the nation that actually declared war on the Union if possible. The question becomes, if Lincoln is holding negotiations with the South, Does Jefferson Davis order troops to invade the North or not?
I'm sure the British would encourage him to, but an early Southern invasion of the north might not be completely feasible either. Eitherway, I suspect from the moment of the declarition, the Union will begin focusing more on trying to take Canada / Knock Britain out of the war, than even re-union. Might not be possible, but I doubt Lincoln could justify a Southern Campaign over a Northern politically.
Hell, OTL, it seemed the Northern public was more keen for a fight with England than the South.
Kentucky, anyone?
But yeah, taking Canada . . . no. Giving Britain a bloody fight, possible. Beating the CSA anyway, possible. Beating Britain as in victory? Not possible.
Britain is at the height of its (relative) power. The US is fighting a significant war just in facing the CSA at the same time.
Is this hypothetical war starting in 1863 now?
More to the point, Britain can send more troops than are currently in Canada, and the US doesn't exactly have armies sitting around that can be sent into Canada right away - even sending troops from largely uninvolved areas (say, divert Burnside's Army of the Ohio) takes troops away from fighting the CSA, which is more important than attempts at taking Canada.
The population of the US in 1860 was 31 million. The population of Britain at the same time was 23 million. More relevantly to the US, the population of Canada in 1867 was 3.4 million.
There is no way Britain is bringing over more than 80,000 or so troops, so the only thing they can really do is naval harassment. Any British invasion will end in defeat.
Bavarian Raven
Banned
and the population of the british empire at this time was at least 200 million
if not significantly more.There is no way Britain is bringing over more than 80,000 or so troops, so the only thing they can really do is naval harassment. Any British invasion will end in defeat.
And America is already fighting a significant war in the south. There is a reason nations avoid fighting two-front wars at all costs. Especially during the super power of those days. America would put up a good fight, but the chances of her coming out ahead during this era while fighting the Confeds. is doubtful at best, assuming Britain is committed to winning the fight.
Faeelin
Banned
and the population of the british empire at this time was at least 200 million
I know! They can draft the Irish.
Bwahahaha.
You know, British "superpowre" stauts during this period is kinda underwhelming. A lot of troops dying in the Crimea, the Boer war...
Woo?