Nocrazy
Banned
Mate, it isn't Nelson's death alone that causes Britain to pull out. Out of control mutinies, cut off from the Baltic, etc.
What if Nelson had died before Trafalgar?
- Thread starter Nocrazy
- Start date
Mate, it isn't Nelson's death alone that causes Britain to pull out. Out of control mutinies, cut off from the Baltic, etc.
unprincipled peter
Donor
magically take Britain and its navy out of the war. Magically give Nap some reason to attack the US with a large invasion force.
result? US gets whipped this way, that way and every way up and down, regardless of whether Nap decides to go the long way in, instead of simply landing any darn place he pleases on the eastern coast. true that guerrilla warfare will be a thorn in the French side, but French troops are not losing straight up to raw militia troops.
But, I don't think you can classify US-French relations as overly friendly. In the 1790's they were at each others throats.
result? US gets whipped this way, that way and every way up and down, regardless of whether Nap decides to go the long way in, instead of simply landing any darn place he pleases on the eastern coast. true that guerrilla warfare will be a thorn in the French side, but French troops are not losing straight up to raw militia troops.
But, I don't think you can classify US-French relations as overly friendly. In the 1790's they were at each others throats.
Nocrazy
Banned
Exactly. This tension would have increased if Napoleon attempted to create a North American Empire. And while America would have gotten whipped, there is always that one moment where the heroes of this story decide to stop taking a beating, and hold their ground. The RN isn't magically defeated. Instead, a combatipn of thongs force Britain out of the Napoleonic War. They are as follows:
The mutiny of 1797 get of control, and turns into a slaughter.
The French navy isn't as badly screwed over by the revolution, and many officers keep their heads.
Without Nelson, (let's he died in the early 1790's) an incredibly incompetent commander takes over. Say, a guy who has no experience, and ignores any advice he is given. Basically, someone who manages to lose the RN in one battle, along with himself.
Threats of revolution also force Britain out of the, and of takes a while for her to deal with it. By then, France is the dominant power in Europe.
The mutiny of 1797 get of control, and turns into a slaughter.
The French navy isn't as badly screwed over by the revolution, and many officers keep their heads.
Without Nelson, (let's he died in the early 1790's) an incredibly incompetent commander takes over. Say, a guy who has no experience, and ignores any advice he is given. Basically, someone who manages to lose the RN in one battle, along with himself.
Threats of revolution also force Britain out of the, and of takes a while for her to deal with it. By then, France is the dominant power in Europe.
Last edited:
This is nonsense since the british admiralty never engaged the whole of the british navy in a single battle or in a single engagement.
Strategically, you can't expect one government to use so stupidly the platinum life insurance in which it has been investing so much for more than a century.
Tactically, every decent sailor knows that it is a nonsense to have a fleet with too many units. Everybody knex it since the time of Xerxes and Alexander the great.
What you could have is the peace of Amiens to last.
Or you can have some kind of political turmoil or revolutionary movement in England.
In this case, Britain could in some way be out of the game for several years and will not push for a new coalition on the continent and you can have Napoleon try a military campaign in north America to rebuild a french empire on the continent.
There was a thread on this theme, quite recently on this forum (with the french canadians rebelling and supporting the french army).
Strategically, you can't expect one government to use so stupidly the platinum life insurance in which it has been investing so much for more than a century.
Tactically, every decent sailor knows that it is a nonsense to have a fleet with too many units. Everybody knex it since the time of Xerxes and Alexander the great.
What you could have is the peace of Amiens to last.
Or you can have some kind of political turmoil or revolutionary movement in England.
In this case, Britain could in some way be out of the game for several years and will not push for a new coalition on the continent and you can have Napoleon try a military campaign in north America to rebuild a french empire on the continent.
There was a thread on this theme, quite recently on this forum (with the french canadians rebelling and supporting the french army).
The Spithead mutiny were quickly resolved – the men were asking for more pay, not for a revolution. The Nore mutiny was more ambitious but still collapsed quickly once pay was raised and once it was realised that the men had no support onshore. When its leader was stupid enough to hoist a signal for the ships to sail to France no-one obeyed it and he was promptly handed over to the authorities for a quick trial and execution. Maybe if you make the authorities more insanely heavy-handed you might get a worse set of mutinies, but you’re stretching it more than a bit.
As for access to the Baltic, the moment that 1805 turns up and the Czar declares war on Boney then the Baltic’s going to be prised open at both ends.
I’m sorry but the only way you can get a large French army led by Napoleon to America is just after the Peace of Amiens, when he actually did send a force to Haiti, where most of them died of Yellow Fever. As for Napoleon in Louisiana, congratulations, you just guaranteed a bolstered British presence in Canada, the sending of more aid to Tecumseh and some very nervous American eyes looking at the South-West.
You can never under-estimate human stupidity though.If a more up-stuck aristocrat was placed in charge of resolving the issue,it could turn the mutiny into a much messier business.Just look at how the British Government tried to deal with the American Revolution initially.
What you said is what I truly meant by the mutiny getting out of hand.If the British Government refused to negotiate and tried to arrest some of the mutineers with the British army,things can go really messy.It's also likely that if the government is dumb enough to do it,the mutineers might gain the support of the public.
Last edited:
Oh, I agree, you can never account for human stupidity and the negotiations to end the Spithead mutiny broke down once due to intransigence on the part of the authorities. But the Admiralty dealt with the whole thing in a month – it was really a strike over pay and conditions. Once pay was raised (for the first time in more than a century I’d like to point out, so someone in power must have realised that the men had a point) it collapsed. I don’t think that there was a plan to use the Army to suppress it. Marines probably, but with the officers still living on the ships that would have been a massive mistake. The Admiralty wasn’t stupid and listened when it needed to. As for any residual grievances, the Battle of Camperdown happened not long after this, a nasty and hard-fought action but one that the Nore fleet won hands down.
I know the admiralty isn't dumb enough,what I am talking about is the British Government.The British Government was heavily dominated by aristocrats.Some of them might want to make an example out of the mutineers out of the assumptions that bowing down to pressure might make the government look weak.
Yes, but the PM at the time of the mutiny was William Pitt the Younger, who wasn’t an idiot. The Admiralty was left to deal with the Spithead mutiny, which it did so successfully. The Nore mutiny could have been more serious but fell apart once it was clear that public sentiment was against them. Once the pay and conditions were improved the causes fell away. To get a more repressive reaction against the Spithead mutiny you need a different PM. Come to that you also need a different Admiralty.
What about King George?What if he saw the mutineers as no different from the same colonists who rebelled against his rule?He seems to have a strong grudge against people he sees as insolent towards authority.What are the chances that he overrules Pitt?Pitt's post as PM heavily depended upon George's continued patronage after-all.It's not the first time George overruled Pitt.
Last edited:
Nocrazy
Banned
So, now that I have a good amount of reasons for Britain pulling out, (Mutiny getting out of hand, King George butches it, public sentiment turns against him, no Nelson, internal problems) let's get to work on the Napoleonic invasion of America.
Napoleon, having set up French dominance on Europe, except for Russia, turns his eyes to a greater prize: North America. Purchasing Florida and Cuba from Spain, he then takes back French Control of Haiti, which leads to increased tensions with America. With America hastily updating her military in case of war, Napoleon decides to show to America that he is the dominate power in North America, and invades out of New Orleans. What's going to happen? Well, Napoleon would probably be using 30,000 men in the attack, with his most trusted and loyal troops, the Old Guard. He would have to end it quick, before Britain got involved, which is a given. Thus, he would have to recruit from Louisana and what not if he wanted to keep the campagin going. America would just have to hold out until Britain showed up, with maybe 10,000 men? Is that right? Anyway, the American military would be getting whipped for the most part, while Napoleon marches towards Washington. Andrew Jackson is charged with the city's defense. He thus builds a make shift defense on the edge of Fairfax county, manned by regulars, milita, and some cavarly. He is of course outnumbered, but has been able to build a pretty effective defense, with guerillas buying him time. Of course, the guerillas would be smashed. In the end, the Battle of Fort Jackson would be the key battle of the war, with Jackson holding out for as long as he can, while waiting for the British under Wellington to arrive. The formations involved are as follows:
France:
Two units of cavarly, 10,000 of the Imperial Guard, 150 cannons are various sizes, 2 units of infantry, (about 30,000)
America:
10,000 militamen, manning the fortifactions, 100 cannons, 5,000 cavarly, under Henry Lee, 5,000 regulars
The insueing battle is bloody for both sides, with Jackson's fortifactions proving very dangerous to both cavarly and infantry. The cannons are divided in two, with some used in the defense of the fortifactions, and others used to draw the French cannons fire. In the end, with the center on the verge of collapse for the Americans, Napoleon sends in the Old Guard, who charge straight at the Militamen, who now number about 7,000. Jackson personal leads the militamen against the Old Guard, using grapeshot to try to cut down their numbers as much as possible until they reach the milita,a nd his presence helps boost the moral of the milita. What ensues is a bloodbath, with the milita fighting for their lives. It's at this point, however, that Henry Lee launches an attack into the rear of the Old Guard, having driven off the cavarly. Meanwhile, the Regulars hold down the flanks, keeping some of the other infantry off Jackson's back. IN the end, the Old Guard are defeated. This concedes with the arrival of Wellington, who leads the British in a flank attack on the French. Napoleon is forced to retreat, pursed by the Anglo-American Alliance.
Napoleon, having set up French dominance on Europe, except for Russia, turns his eyes to a greater prize: North America. Purchasing Florida and Cuba from Spain, he then takes back French Control of Haiti, which leads to increased tensions with America. With America hastily updating her military in case of war, Napoleon decides to show to America that he is the dominate power in North America, and invades out of New Orleans. What's going to happen? Well, Napoleon would probably be using 30,000 men in the attack, with his most trusted and loyal troops, the Old Guard. He would have to end it quick, before Britain got involved, which is a given. Thus, he would have to recruit from Louisana and what not if he wanted to keep the campagin going. America would just have to hold out until Britain showed up, with maybe 10,000 men? Is that right? Anyway, the American military would be getting whipped for the most part, while Napoleon marches towards Washington. Andrew Jackson is charged with the city's defense. He thus builds a make shift defense on the edge of Fairfax county, manned by regulars, milita, and some cavarly. He is of course outnumbered, but has been able to build a pretty effective defense, with guerillas buying him time. Of course, the guerillas would be smashed. In the end, the Battle of Fort Jackson would be the key battle of the war, with Jackson holding out for as long as he can, while waiting for the British under Wellington to arrive. The formations involved are as follows:
France:
Two units of cavarly, 10,000 of the Imperial Guard, 150 cannons are various sizes, 2 units of infantry, (about 30,000)
America:
10,000 militamen, manning the fortifactions, 100 cannons, 5,000 cavarly, under Henry Lee, 5,000 regulars
The insueing battle is bloody for both sides, with Jackson's fortifactions proving very dangerous to both cavarly and infantry. The cannons are divided in two, with some used in the defense of the fortifactions, and others used to draw the French cannons fire. In the end, with the center on the verge of collapse for the Americans, Napoleon sends in the Old Guard, who charge straight at the Militamen, who now number about 7,000. Jackson personal leads the militamen against the Old Guard, using grapeshot to try to cut down their numbers as much as possible until they reach the milita,a nd his presence helps boost the moral of the milita. What ensues is a bloodbath, with the milita fighting for their lives. It's at this point, however, that Henry Lee launches an attack into the rear of the Old Guard, having driven off the cavarly. Meanwhile, the Regulars hold down the flanks, keeping some of the other infantry off Jackson's back. IN the end, the Old Guard are defeated. This concedes with the arrival of Wellington, who leads the British in a flank attack on the French. Napoleon is forced to retreat, pursed by the Anglo-American Alliance.
I think you need much,MUCH more than just 30,000 soldiers to defeat the US in a serious war.Five times that number and maybe you've got a chance,and even that's pretty slim.During the war of 1812,the Americans can summon at least 500,000 militiamen.Granted most of them are poorly trained and can't leave their state,but there's no way you can occupy any territory with just 30,000 soldiers and fight any large armies sent by Washington.Not to mention,the Americans will most likely use guerrilla warfare.Not to mention,the US is HUGE even without Louisiana.It's going to be almost the same as invading Russia.
Last edited:
BlondieBC
Banned
I think you are misunderstanding the French strategic position; and therefore, the naval needs of France. Leading up to Trafalgar, the French were winning on land with no easy/clear way for the UK to win the land battles. The reverse was true at sea, and much of this has to do with resource allocation. The money, best men, and artillery went to the French Army. The RN had priority for the UK.
The French have won on land. They need a negotiated, lasting peace with the UK cement the French gains. Each naval battle won by the French will make a given French peace offer look better to the UK. So the benefit of winning Trafalgar is that a win is one step of the many needed for the UK to accept lasting peace.
So lets take some ASB win as another poster listed, fleshed out. The French drive the British Fleet from the waters around Trafalgar by sinking 8 UK ships while only losing 4. Then a freak storm means most of the remaining UK fleet does not return to port. What happens? Well, it will be harder for the UK to find allies. It may cost the UK more on bonds. The UK will need to pull ships out of reserve, which cost treasure and men. So in and off itself, it is not a big deal. But get enough wins, and you will eventually get a big butterfly which could be almost anything. Lack of Portuguese enthusiasm, changes in the Tsar behavior, diverted spending on the replacement ships means fewer ground troops means more lost battles (say less subsidies for the Prussians or setbacks in North America in the War of 1812). And big enough butterflies mean the French dominate continental Europe in the 1900's.
Das_Colonel
Banned
Sorry I'm still trying to process how the French transport 600 000 across the North Atlantic.
Defeating the US in a land war would be ASB.There's no way Napoleonic France can transport an army big enough to conquer the US (or at least large portions of it) as well as provide the means of supplying the expedition.Point is that you can't conquer large parts of the US with only 30,000 soldiers. It's just impossible.
Never.It's just not feasible.If Napoleonic France couldn't defeat Russia,why did you think it can defeat the US,which is much further from France?It's just logistically impossible.
The RN's blockade Fleet WOULD happily and EASILY sink Nappy's invasion fleet. The RN was WAY too big for the mutinies or anything else to've killed it. And he had fewer transports that could make it far.
Escape Zeppelin's right ESPECIALLY YOU NEED A REAL REASON FOR THAT KIND OF CHANGE of continents, when nobody European cared about us then except as resources. And it's far and he'll get sunk, and he'd know it.
The other Nappy threads were him getting away from exile, after he's lost, 100% different.
Remember, motive's a basic responsibility of an author, and yours needs tons of work.
Escape Zeppelin's right ESPECIALLY YOU NEED A REAL REASON FOR THAT KIND OF CHANGE of continents, when nobody European cared about us then except as resources. And it's far and he'll get sunk, and he'd know it.
The other Nappy threads were him getting away from exile, after he's lost, 100% different.
Remember, motive's a basic responsibility of an author, and yours needs tons of work.