How would the War of 1812 have culminated had Wellington, immediately after winning the Peninsular War in 1814, been dispatched to America to take command of British forces fighting the Americans, including had he been in command at New Orleans in Jan 1815 ? How much better would he have done than his brother-in-law Pakenham (who was killed by an American sniper at New Orleans) did OTL ? Likewise, who could've been in charge of the Allied forces at Waterloo instead of himself, had Wellington been in America ?
Wellington leads in War of 1812 at New Orleans
- Thread starter Melvin Loh
- Start date
David S Poepoe
Banned
I very much subscribe to the opinion that Wellington would have been far better at New Orleans than Picton. There most likely wouldn't have been any frontal assault against the American lines. At least one AH essay, I think in What If? 1, suggests that Wellington learned of the unlessness of frontal assault from his campaigns in India.
My bets are on the British and I think with Wellington the odds heavily favor them.
By coincidence just earlier this week I had a quick look at a short report of Wellesley's campaign in India. It was a small little pamphlet published in 1805 and somebody has requested it through our Interlibrary Loan office. It was in fairly good shape for a nearly 200 year old document.
My bets are on the British and I think with Wellington the odds heavily favor them.
By coincidence just earlier this week I had a quick look at a short report of Wellesley's campaign in India. It was a small little pamphlet published in 1805 and somebody has requested it through our Interlibrary Loan office. It was in fairly good shape for a nearly 200 year old document.
Wellington
Was in Belgium fighting Napoleon, at a place called Waterloo, and if he was in Louisiana instead, doesn't that give Napoleon a better chance of winning?
Napoleon winning at Waterloo, is a far worse (for Great Britain) outcome than losing to ANdrew jackson at new Orleans!
The fighting in America was for the British, a MINOR sideshow, whereas the war in Europe was critical! I wouldn't send the best general off to the boondocks to fight a meaningless and minor battle, when defeating Napoleon was still a concern.
Was in Belgium fighting Napoleon, at a place called Waterloo, and if he was in Louisiana instead, doesn't that give Napoleon a better chance of winning?
Napoleon winning at Waterloo, is a far worse (for Great Britain) outcome than losing to ANdrew jackson at new Orleans!
The fighting in America was for the British, a MINOR sideshow, whereas the war in Europe was critical! I wouldn't send the best general off to the boondocks to fight a meaningless and minor battle, when defeating Napoleon was still a concern.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Well, the thing is timing. Wellington could have been dispatched to America if it was deemed necessary. However, it probably wouldn't be too hard to consider that Wellington is shipped off to New Orleans late 1814 and attacks and defeats Jackson on January 8th, 1815. In March or so he's brought back to Europe in order to head the army at Waterloo on June 18th, 1815. Thats a real stretch.
David S Poepoe
Banned
DMA said:
Quite true. Tho if something could come along to deep six any potential political viability for Andrew Jackson I'm sure the Cherokee Indians wouldn't mind.
David S Poepoe said:
I'm sure they wouldn't!
What could work, though, is if the war hadn't ended before the Battle of New Orleans but continued. With Wellington victorious at New Orleans, Washington DC in a mess, & pressure coming to bare along the Canadian border, could the USA be defeated sometime later in the year, even if Wellington is rushed back to Europe after Napoleon's return? Could have America been defeated & brought back into the British Empire?
Mark Ford said:
I know what the OTL War was about, but as a war goes on the original intentions always change. So instead of it being a move by the USA to take over Canada, the British see it as a chance to take over the USA.
Of course the British need many more troops if this were to happen. But if we change the circumstances behind the war, the 1812 War could become part of the main stage & thus involve the British to a higher degree.
So lets say Napoleon & the Americans do a deal & become allies & coordinate their respective campaigns of 1812 in order to split the anti-Napoleon powers. Thus we get the 1812 War against the British whilst Napoleon launches his war on Russia.
Napoleon is still defeated due to the retreat from Moscow, as per OTL, but the British rush many more troops to Canada to battle it out with Napoleon's new ally...
JLCook said:
Actually, the Battle of New Orleans was fought in January 1815. Waterloo was in June 1815. Wellington could actually have fought in both (if he survived the Battle of New Orleans, obviously. British officers at said battle took very heavy casualties).
David S Poepoe said:
It's in More What If with POD being disease doesn't decimate French troops at Haiti and hence french take more active role in Carribean and don't sell Luisiana. French form biracial Carribean-American empire. After Nappy flees Elba he goes there and is warmly welcomed by both black and white troops. Also there is strong pro-French sentiment on US side of border. Burr convinces Nappy to invade Mexico (Spain is no longer French ally). Wellington is also aided by strong RN presence. If brits win battle of NO they hold Luisiana and can prevent Us westward expansion.
aktarian said:
OIC, this is the book More What If I gather. Well I haven't read it.
To me it'd be more interesting if the Americans & French become close allies & split the duties where the Americans keep the British busy whilst Napoleon keep Russia et al busy. Napoleon's objective is to defeat Russia whilst the American objective is to capture Canada. France may even get Quebec back while the USA gets the rest.
David S Poepoe
Banned
aktarian said:
Actually no. Westward expansion simply can't be held back because of the length of the border and the lack of manpower the British have. That America would have been spoiling for a second war if Britain held New Orleans is debateable, yet probably likely. The US would still expand westward beyond the Mississippi since the British simply can't stop them.