"Fifty-Four Forty or Fight"

[Raymann]

What if Polk kept his campaign promise and decided to fight for all of Oregon? He would wait until the war is over with Mexico and also justify the annexation with saying there would be more room for free states in the Pacific Northwest. This was all planned in secret and he build up a larger army and navy under pretext they were needed for use against Mexico.

The country is still united and supported him over Oregon, Polk was elected over the Oregon issue, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed, and the military was ready. What happens?

[wkwillis]

Originally Posted by Raymann

What if Polk kept his campaign promise and decided to fight for all of Oregon? He would wait until the war is over with Mexico and also justify the annexation with saying there would be more room for free states in the Pacific Northwest. This was all planned in secret and he build up a larger army and navy under pretext they were needed for use against Mexico.

The country is still united and supported him over Oregon, Polk was elected over the Oregon issue, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed, and the military was ready. What happens?

Canada becomes American. It's a matter of logistics. They have to send them 3,000 miles by ship. We can build a 300 mile railroad to Halifax within a year. It's settled areas all the way, with food and fodder and housing virtually every mile. It's not like the five years it took us to build the transcontinental railroad.
Once the war with Mexico is over and the US forces are on the ground in Texas with supplies, and our troops are no longer hanging on a limb in Mexico and can't be cut off, we are home free. What are the British going to do about it?
For the same reason we lose California. Britain can transport far more Mexicans to California 200 miles by ship, than we can send 2,000 miles by horse and wagon. And of course we aren't transporting any troops by sea. Or any colonists, either, to compare with the ones that Britain is sending from Canada to the Oregon territory in the North.
Now that is an interesting ATL. Lots of Mexicans digging up the gold before we get there, and all we have to show for it is some Catholic French Canadians and Episcopalian Limeys. Lots of cod, of course. Some beaver. God knows how many trees.
Brits are happy. They have Newfoundland with lots of trees and cod for themselves. If we want to grab the settled areas of Canada and have them vote in American elections, so what? The ones that don't like it will move to the Columbia river basin and I guess the Alaska peninsula if they feel like it. What is the Czar going to do about it?
So we gain Canada and lose the west coast. Is this necessarily a bad thing from their point of view? Or do they just figure that's the breaks?

[Raymann]

California is too important to let go like that and gold will prob be discovered ('49) before the end of the war. I think the US will grab all of Canada and the Maritimes and maybe Bahama during the War and trade back Newfoundland and Bahama for California. Some troops will prob be kept in Mexico just to make sure they don't join in. Also, with a major commitment in the Americas, Britian might have someone else jump on her while they're not looking.

[David S Poepoe]

"Canada becomes American. It's a matter of logistics. They have to send them 3,000 miles by ship. We can build a 300 mile railroad to Halifax within a year. It's settled areas all the way, with food and fodder and housing virtually every mile. It's not like the five years it took us to build the transcontinental railroad. "

Are you sure wkwillis that it would be that easy in the 1840s? I though in a previous discussion on the board that Halifax was a fairly hard place to get through via land until the late 19th century.

I think the British will certainly remember the events of this war when the American Civil War breaks out. The US may keep Canada but would it be able to keep the Union intact with British aid to the South?

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by wkwillis

Canada becomes American. It's a matter of logistics. They have to send them 3,000 miles by ship. We can build a 300 mile railroad to Halifax within a year. It's settled areas all the way, with food and fodder and housing virtually every mile. It's not like the five years it took us to build the transcontinental railroad.

What years was the trans-con built?

The Trans-con also wasn't built through defended and fortified area's.

Would the New England support the Pres once the British start bombarding the defences along the coast? And threaten raids against towns and cities?

You ridiculusly underestimate the British and Canadians, as well as the British ability to draw heavily on large manpower reserves.

You also forget that once the US is blockaded, it will feel the effects quickly, as the people who depend on trade will let the Pres. know.

[wkwillis]

The US coastline in 1848 was way to long for Britain to blockade. There were railheads to many ports and industrial plant to ramp up production of steel for ships. We also had so many people that we could swamp any British army. We had a small navy, but a large and experienced army after the Mexican war. Commerce raiders were always a threat to Britain, and blockade runners were pretty good back then.
I don't know what Polk thought about the British bombarding the Boston forts. He probably thought it was a good idea no matter who won.
Building a railroad to Halifax (the only possible British base on the American coast, and almost as well located as Bermuda) would take a year assuming that the British put their whole army outside Halifax and defended against the Americans all the way, scortching the earth behind them.
Otherwise it would take less time. The US had a steel industry by 1848. And a railnet to haul it around. This isn't 1776, or even 1812. The US had twice gotten hammered because it was unindustrialized. They decided after 1815 that it wasn't going to happen again, which is why the tariffs were so high.