Canada Wank (YACW)
- Thread starter Dathi THorfinnsson
- Start date
- Status
Umm.. No. The Brits buy most of the production in '43, which allows Dreyse to make a nice profit. But thereafter, they go with the KammerNorton. Prussia's jealousy of Britain taking 'her' guns actually gets them to buy more from Dreyse, earlier. In fact, the earlier adoption brings out some of the problems, so Dreyse has a chance to improve his gun a touch earlier.If the Prussians don't get their Dreyse Guns for the showdown with Austria we might see a Greater Germany, ruled from Vienna. *shudders*
Besides which, doncha know, a unified Germany is going to unite around a different pole yet... (maybe. depending. ymmv.)
Indiana 11 land (May-end of summer '43)
Wow, this took longer to beat into shape than I had wanted.
Indiana 11 land (May-end of summer '43)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Ft Brock[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Despite the dilution of effort, despite the best efforts of the rail raiders to interrupt supply and despite the inadequacy of the gunpowder supply, Ft Brock[1] simply was outclassed and out fought. The defenders were almost out of ammunition and totally out of safe food[2] by the time the US forces breached the walls and took the fort on 16 May. Indeed, the defenders had already been discussing whether to surrender, anyway.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]If the US had had adequate gunpowder and lead supply, they could have taken the fort two weeks or more sooner. Or they could have mounted a lower intensity siege, and still would likely have had the fort one week later, simply by starving them out. As it is, they used up lots of scarce supplies and only gained a week. When the US high command realized that they could have taken the fort with half the powder expenditure, there were some very unhappy campers, and this changed the policy on the siege of Liverpool (more on that below).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]After the fall of the fort, the US paused. They needed to move the prisoners from Ft. Brock east to safe prisoner of war camps, they had to restock and rebuild the fort, renamed as Ft. Clay, and then proceed down the RR towards St. Louis. Oddly enough, the Missouri forces had not destroyed the bridge over the Kaskadia when they retreated west, although there was some minor damage as if they had attempted to blow it up and failed. Reaching the Kaskadia meant that some of the US supply problems were eased – while others were worsened. The Kaskadia flows down to the Mississippi far enough south that its mouth is in the American Bottom (the better settled US portion of the Mississippi valley). This meant that they could send food north to help supply US forces in the area (except that food was the least of the US army's supply problems at the time). On the other hand, the settlers there couldn't provide much military help – in fact they needed it, which is another drain on US soldiers and gunpowder (the latter being particularly hard to come by). And the US also has to guard yet more miles of RR.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Moreover, the besiegers want to keep most of their guns and press on towards St. Louis. Of course, the decision had long since been made to move (most of) the siege equipment to Liverpool as the next major priority. But the besiegers of Brock/Clay wanted to get that decision reversed and managed to be fairly creative in their excuses why the siege equipment wasn't arriving back at Vincennes. This lost a couple of weeks, so by the time it arrives there, it's into June.[3] In fact the first guns are on the river being shipped north when the Canadian river attack comes and closes the river to traffic north.[4] Since there is no major attack being pressed on towards St. Louis at this time, another fort was built on the western side of the Kaskadia to firmly hold the newly expanded US position.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]All of this means that taking Ft. Brock didn't actually free up much in the way of resources for Liverpool.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Liverpool[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]After the fall of Ft. Brock, the forces besieging the place were then told to stop wasting so much powder, and see if Liverpool, too, would surrender for lack of food. Initially, the defenders tried to pretend to the US negotiators that they had lots and lots of supplies and could hold out forever, but then they put together a couple of chance remarks, and started 'admitting' and 'letting slip' that they were in dire straits. They started 'negotiating' terms of surrender – more hoping to string the US along and prolong the lull in battle. (The fighting wasn't stopped, as much as slowed down. The US official explanation is 'for the duration of the negotiations', but the main reason is to save resources, mostly gunpowder.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As mentioned earlier, the US now had some 20,000 new troops to use in the theatre (approximately half full timers and half temporary militia). Some of these troops were sent up the White River to reinforce there, some were sent along the rail line west past Ft. Clay (Ft. Brock that was), but most were sent north to join the siege at Liverpool. The fact that ammunition for their muskets was slow in arriving didn't matter so much, as most of them were put to work digging trenches and otherwise constructing siege work. With the added help, the trenches approaching the walls moved more quickly.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, they never managed to breach the walls. Firstly, the bombardment was eased (during the 'surrender' negotiations, to save powder), and then the balance of forces changed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]We have already discussed the loss of US control of the river, which made supplying the siege far more difficult, although at this point the Canadians certainly hadn't seized control either - it wasn't safe for either side on the river between Liverpool and Vincennes.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Then, the first lot of Irish troops finally arrived, 20,000 strong, and they were landed north of Liverpool, and marched south to relieve the town and fort.[5] This meant, of course, that many of the new US forces had to move north of the fort, and start constructing new earthworks, etc. facing the on-coming Canadian attack. Then, as June progressed, the Canadian summer militia flooded in, some 85,000 men. The much greater militia force was a result of the expanding and expanded Canadian rail system.[6] More rail meant that in a short summer campaign season (between planting and harvest), that more farmers were able to plant their crops, travel all the way to Indiana, fight for as little as a month, and return home for harvest. It's true that rail has not (yet, quite) reached Quebec City, for instance, but once a militia man boards a train, he can ride all the way to the front.[7][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Much of the militia were sent to join the Irish in the counter siege of Liverpool. But, since that whole mass wouldn't all fit in front of Liverpool, some were sent, instead, down the RR lines to Indianapolis where they marched down to Ft. Scott and took it. That fort was short of supplies, not well fortified (it was only thrown up that spring, and was mostly a palisade – not a modern fortification), and the Canadians could (and did) use the riverboats as artillery. So it fell quickly. For now, a token Canadian force was left at the fort, and the rest moved down the rail line to the forts facing each other on the Eel. Again, the US forces were steamrollered. Again, a small force was left and the rest continued on toward Liverpool, attacking the siege from the east.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Still other forces started from the Wabash and headed west into *Illinois, while others marched out of Coal City south and Prevost [OTL Peoria] east to clear (some of) the US forces out of *Illinois. Since each grouping can be a couple thousand strong, and few of the individual fortlets the US had in central *Illinois held more than about 100, any forts in their path are pretty quickly rolled up. (Those forts were meant mostly for holding down the locals, and had to be supplied from the south. So, several small forts handled the job better than a few larger ones.) To avoid being completely defeated in detail, the US pulls back even more forts, hoping to re-occupy them when the militia goes home, and leaves northern and western *Illinois completely.[8][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Again, by mid June, the Wabash between Liverpool and Vincennes was almost unusable for the purposes of supplying the siege at Liverpool, and sieges need LOTS of supply. The stalemate on the river means neither side properly controls that section of river, but it certainly isn't safe for unarmoured shipping. While the US forces weren't even getting (very) hungry yet, they were having to seriously conserve ammunition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In order to keep from being run over (can't fight without ammo, and that's being used up fast) the US Command discussed pulling their men out, along with whatever cannon and supplies they could get out, but that was considered defeatist. A compromise was march some of the extra men south (since not everyone could be supplied with ammunition or food), and to get some cannon and out, but to mostly stay and fight. The decision to remove any equipment seemed foolish when half those cannon were lost during loading/return to Vincennes. After all, the US can wait, surely, most of the new forces are Canadian militia, and they HAD to go home soon: so, if only the siege can last that long...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, the US forces at the siege are low on ammo and can't be resupplied easily, while the Canadian counter-siegers are well supplied with ammo and a couple of thousand have new breech-loaders. All the Canadians in this fight have caplock rifles now (even if most are muzzle loaders), while essentially all of the US have flintlocks. So, on a rainy night in early July, when the Canadian guns work (most of the time) and the US ones don't (most of the time), the Canadian forces poured over the defensive lines north and east of Liverpool, overwhelming the US forces with firepower, and relieved the fort/town. Not only did the Canadian rifles work, while the US ones didn't, many in the first wave of attackers had revolvers with an average of one reload each, while others had breech-loaders. Thus, the volume of fire seemed to the defenders to indicate a force many times bigger than actually was. At the same time, forces from inside Liverpool sortie, catching the besiegers between hammer and anvil, and they flee (east and) south, causing panic in the southern siege-lines. Hardly able to tell fleeing friend from attacking foe, the US forces in the southern lines are confused too long, and rolled up from both sides, they, too, flee south.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In the confusion of this night attack, the US besiegers broke and fled, but relatively were actually captured or killed. Three fourths of the US force successfully made it back to Vincennes, but they left all the siege equipment and and most of their supplies in front of Liverpool. Suddenly the decision not to pull out in a controlled fashion earlier, seemed like not such a good idea after all. And, again, the US Command was happy, now, that the siege equipment from Ft. Brock did NOT make it up to Liverpool, because now they needed it to build fortifications north of Vincennes...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As it happens, the Canadians didn't dare press far. Since their militia would soon need to return home, so they contented themselves with building fortifications south of Liverpool (largely re-purposing the old US siege lines), and settle in to wait. On this front.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]White River[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Once the siege of Liverpool was lifted, and the new lines established, some of the troops returned east to Indianapolis, and then proceeded down the White River to Standingpine[9], supported by the river ironclads, clearing out all US presence they found. There they quickly built a fort, which they named after General Standingpine, who had held out so well at Ft. Francis. By this point the summer militia needed to return home, so this marked the highwater point of the Canadian advance along the White this campaigning season.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Fort Brock, again[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Meanwhile, the forces released from the retaking of Tejas (infantry, and the cavalry freed up by the arrival of the Bavarian troops), have returned to New Orleans, and a little R&R, refit, and headed north. By now, they are ready to attack, and they know the attention of the US is focused north at Liverpool, not west to St. Louis.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So the attack of some 10,000 troops[10] down the rail line east towards the remains of Ft. Brock came as a total surprise. Since nothing like that force had been left west of Brock, and since the Canadians had a new weapon, armoured trains[11], they blew through the US forces, to Brock and past it, stopping at the Skillet Fork (river), where they stopped and built a fort on their side of the river. Fort Brock(/Clay) was well enough defended that taking it would have been tough with the resources at hand. The Canadians expected, correctly, that the US probably got enough food back into the fort to let it last a while, and the cannon that the Canadians themselves put there at before the war can now be used against them, but they expected that the ammunition, both for the muskets and cannon would probably be in short supply, again, correctly. Once the US troops realize their situation, they'll have to surrender (eventually). Better to besiege them with a smallish force to keep them tied down, and wait until they give up, instead of wasting lives on a mass assault over the walls.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]By the end of the summer, the Canadian summer militia have left to return home for harvest. But this is not as much of a break as the US hoped, as over 12,000 new troops have arrived in theatre – the bulk from Britain, but two thousand from Portugal and a regiment of colonials from South Africa. Which means that the Canadians can comfortably hold such land as they've gained, even if they can't advance any further.[12][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Moreover, other new troops have also arrived in Louisiana (two thousand colonial Portuguese troops[13], more West Indian troops and another regiment from Brazil). While most of these stay in Louisiana (which had been stretched rather thin), they do allow some more troops to move north (so Missouri gains another thousand or so). So, with the troops that arrived earlier, they can hold the line at the Skillet Fork, and take some of the burden of patrolling western *Illinois, which, in turn, means that the US doesn't reclaim nearly as many of its fortlets there as they had hoped.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Wabash[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]By the end of the summer, the Canadians had control of the Wabash down to, but not past, Vincennes. They shelled the fortifications north of town regularly, and the town itself occasionally, not quite with impunity. However, since the Canadian boats had shell-firing cannon and the US cannons were almost entirely solid round shot, the Canadians dealt out a lot more damage than they received. They didn't, however, dare go much below Vincennes. Above the town, when an ironclad is damaged another can take it in tow, and they can get out of range of the US guns. Below, if they tried that, they'd be under concentrated fire for long enough that the towing boat would run a serious risk of damage – and then they'd have lost two boats, not one, which might let the US contest the Wabash again. So the Canadians only go as far south as the town. After all, these are lightly armoured river boats, not full oceanic ironclads.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1 Ft. Brock, as you may or may not remember is in south central Illinois, near OTL's Centralia.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 Remember that the large cans of tinned goods weren't properly sterilized. The defenders have eaten all the bulk food (grain and meat), and all the small tins. They've also eaten all their livestock long since. They are now subsisting on the larger, often spoiled tins.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 “most of” the siege equipment. The weaponry that was already in Brock was kept in by the new owners, for defence should the British/Canadians/Allied troops try coming east. So the necessary new fortifications beyond Kaskadia need guns, which were meant to be and were taken from the attacking force. However, this only gives a defensive armament. Moreover, the opening of the Kaskadia, and the 'relief' of the US settlers in the American Bottom, means that some guns have to go there, too, as well as men and ammunition. So, some of the delay is actually necessary sorting out of what goes where, which cannon work best in which rôle, etc. Certainly, local enthusiasm for the push west contributed to the delay, but it wasn't quite as much of the delay as the author here is trying to suggest. There was also some simple incompetence at re-purposing those guns.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 Again, the author is being sloppy here. The river wasn't closed to US traffic. Men (who could swim to shore), food (which could be replaced) and ammunition (without which the existing guns would be useless) still made it up the river, but the heavy, bulky and very difficult to replace cannon were held back “Until such time as US forces more fully control this portion of the river”, as the report back to Washington stated. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 actually many of the Irish are put into forts, freeing up other soldiers for this advance. The advance is still about half Irish. Similarly, with the first wave of militia. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]6 some 35k from Quebec, 25k from Ontario (both up due to greater rail penetration), 17k Michigan (same), 10k Maritimers (technically, they mostly fill the eastern forts, freeing those troops to come west, rather than travelling the entire distance, but the effect is the same). [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]7 for a rather loose definition of the word 'front'. Many actually had to take boat from Fort Wayne, for instance, to head down the Wabash. 'In theatre' might have been more accurate, perhaps.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]8 furthest northwest left now is a medium-sized fort (with possibly 500 men) near OTL's Decatur in about the middle of Illinois, and it is pretty much an outlier. Again, the author is a bit carried away. He makes it sound like most of the US forces in the area were removed, whereas the reality was that the time limited nature of the militia flood meant that the Canadian effort had to be fairly targeted. Somewhat less than half the US forces in the area were actually captured or induced to leave, and some of those returned after the militia went home.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]9 near OTL's Gosport, well west of Indianapolis, ESE of Terre Haute (TTL's Liverpool).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]10 actually there's 13k come up from Louisiana, but only 10k head down the rail line. Some of the others help man the undermanned defences around St. Louis, and others join in the raids against the US fortlets in *Illinois. Also, there's 1.5k Métis and plains horsemen down from the north and north west who are doing the same from the middle of the Illinois river. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]11 These armoured trains weren't up even to OTL US Civil War Standards. They were a standard train with a box car armoured in thin plate in front of the engine, with firing slits for the attackers to shoot from, and several cars (armoured with thin sheet metal) full of soldiers behind. Think armoured car rather than tank. Still, it rendered the attacking force pretty much immune to bullets, even if not any sort of artillery at all. In fact, the effect was as much psychological as military, and the US soon developed reasonable counter-measures – but not until after they'd lost Ft. Brock/Clay.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]12 again, sloppy. In fact, the US is able to move back into several of the fortlets in *Illinois, recovering perhaps as much as half of the territory in *llinois that they had lost over the summer. However, it is true once again that Ft. Brock is Canadian, the American Bottom is cut off from the rest of the US, that the rail connexion all the way to Liverpool is relatively safe and usable, and that Liverpool itself is within Canadian lines.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]13 mostly Angolan.[/FONT]
Wow, this took longer to beat into shape than I had wanted.
Indiana 11 land (May-end of summer '43)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Ft Brock[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Despite the dilution of effort, despite the best efforts of the rail raiders to interrupt supply and despite the inadequacy of the gunpowder supply, Ft Brock[1] simply was outclassed and out fought. The defenders were almost out of ammunition and totally out of safe food[2] by the time the US forces breached the walls and took the fort on 16 May. Indeed, the defenders had already been discussing whether to surrender, anyway.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]If the US had had adequate gunpowder and lead supply, they could have taken the fort two weeks or more sooner. Or they could have mounted a lower intensity siege, and still would likely have had the fort one week later, simply by starving them out. As it is, they used up lots of scarce supplies and only gained a week. When the US high command realized that they could have taken the fort with half the powder expenditure, there were some very unhappy campers, and this changed the policy on the siege of Liverpool (more on that below).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]After the fall of the fort, the US paused. They needed to move the prisoners from Ft. Brock east to safe prisoner of war camps, they had to restock and rebuild the fort, renamed as Ft. Clay, and then proceed down the RR towards St. Louis. Oddly enough, the Missouri forces had not destroyed the bridge over the Kaskadia when they retreated west, although there was some minor damage as if they had attempted to blow it up and failed. Reaching the Kaskadia meant that some of the US supply problems were eased – while others were worsened. The Kaskadia flows down to the Mississippi far enough south that its mouth is in the American Bottom (the better settled US portion of the Mississippi valley). This meant that they could send food north to help supply US forces in the area (except that food was the least of the US army's supply problems at the time). On the other hand, the settlers there couldn't provide much military help – in fact they needed it, which is another drain on US soldiers and gunpowder (the latter being particularly hard to come by). And the US also has to guard yet more miles of RR.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Moreover, the besiegers want to keep most of their guns and press on towards St. Louis. Of course, the decision had long since been made to move (most of) the siege equipment to Liverpool as the next major priority. But the besiegers of Brock/Clay wanted to get that decision reversed and managed to be fairly creative in their excuses why the siege equipment wasn't arriving back at Vincennes. This lost a couple of weeks, so by the time it arrives there, it's into June.[3] In fact the first guns are on the river being shipped north when the Canadian river attack comes and closes the river to traffic north.[4] Since there is no major attack being pressed on towards St. Louis at this time, another fort was built on the western side of the Kaskadia to firmly hold the newly expanded US position.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]All of this means that taking Ft. Brock didn't actually free up much in the way of resources for Liverpool.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Liverpool[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]After the fall of Ft. Brock, the forces besieging the place were then told to stop wasting so much powder, and see if Liverpool, too, would surrender for lack of food. Initially, the defenders tried to pretend to the US negotiators that they had lots and lots of supplies and could hold out forever, but then they put together a couple of chance remarks, and started 'admitting' and 'letting slip' that they were in dire straits. They started 'negotiating' terms of surrender – more hoping to string the US along and prolong the lull in battle. (The fighting wasn't stopped, as much as slowed down. The US official explanation is 'for the duration of the negotiations', but the main reason is to save resources, mostly gunpowder.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As mentioned earlier, the US now had some 20,000 new troops to use in the theatre (approximately half full timers and half temporary militia). Some of these troops were sent up the White River to reinforce there, some were sent along the rail line west past Ft. Clay (Ft. Brock that was), but most were sent north to join the siege at Liverpool. The fact that ammunition for their muskets was slow in arriving didn't matter so much, as most of them were put to work digging trenches and otherwise constructing siege work. With the added help, the trenches approaching the walls moved more quickly.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, they never managed to breach the walls. Firstly, the bombardment was eased (during the 'surrender' negotiations, to save powder), and then the balance of forces changed.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]We have already discussed the loss of US control of the river, which made supplying the siege far more difficult, although at this point the Canadians certainly hadn't seized control either - it wasn't safe for either side on the river between Liverpool and Vincennes.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Then, the first lot of Irish troops finally arrived, 20,000 strong, and they were landed north of Liverpool, and marched south to relieve the town and fort.[5] This meant, of course, that many of the new US forces had to move north of the fort, and start constructing new earthworks, etc. facing the on-coming Canadian attack. Then, as June progressed, the Canadian summer militia flooded in, some 85,000 men. The much greater militia force was a result of the expanding and expanded Canadian rail system.[6] More rail meant that in a short summer campaign season (between planting and harvest), that more farmers were able to plant their crops, travel all the way to Indiana, fight for as little as a month, and return home for harvest. It's true that rail has not (yet, quite) reached Quebec City, for instance, but once a militia man boards a train, he can ride all the way to the front.[7][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Much of the militia were sent to join the Irish in the counter siege of Liverpool. But, since that whole mass wouldn't all fit in front of Liverpool, some were sent, instead, down the RR lines to Indianapolis where they marched down to Ft. Scott and took it. That fort was short of supplies, not well fortified (it was only thrown up that spring, and was mostly a palisade – not a modern fortification), and the Canadians could (and did) use the riverboats as artillery. So it fell quickly. For now, a token Canadian force was left at the fort, and the rest moved down the rail line to the forts facing each other on the Eel. Again, the US forces were steamrollered. Again, a small force was left and the rest continued on toward Liverpool, attacking the siege from the east.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Still other forces started from the Wabash and headed west into *Illinois, while others marched out of Coal City south and Prevost [OTL Peoria] east to clear (some of) the US forces out of *Illinois. Since each grouping can be a couple thousand strong, and few of the individual fortlets the US had in central *Illinois held more than about 100, any forts in their path are pretty quickly rolled up. (Those forts were meant mostly for holding down the locals, and had to be supplied from the south. So, several small forts handled the job better than a few larger ones.) To avoid being completely defeated in detail, the US pulls back even more forts, hoping to re-occupy them when the militia goes home, and leaves northern and western *Illinois completely.[8][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Again, by mid June, the Wabash between Liverpool and Vincennes was almost unusable for the purposes of supplying the siege at Liverpool, and sieges need LOTS of supply. The stalemate on the river means neither side properly controls that section of river, but it certainly isn't safe for unarmoured shipping. While the US forces weren't even getting (very) hungry yet, they were having to seriously conserve ammunition.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In order to keep from being run over (can't fight without ammo, and that's being used up fast) the US Command discussed pulling their men out, along with whatever cannon and supplies they could get out, but that was considered defeatist. A compromise was march some of the extra men south (since not everyone could be supplied with ammunition or food), and to get some cannon and out, but to mostly stay and fight. The decision to remove any equipment seemed foolish when half those cannon were lost during loading/return to Vincennes. After all, the US can wait, surely, most of the new forces are Canadian militia, and they HAD to go home soon: so, if only the siege can last that long...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, the US forces at the siege are low on ammo and can't be resupplied easily, while the Canadian counter-siegers are well supplied with ammo and a couple of thousand have new breech-loaders. All the Canadians in this fight have caplock rifles now (even if most are muzzle loaders), while essentially all of the US have flintlocks. So, on a rainy night in early July, when the Canadian guns work (most of the time) and the US ones don't (most of the time), the Canadian forces poured over the defensive lines north and east of Liverpool, overwhelming the US forces with firepower, and relieved the fort/town. Not only did the Canadian rifles work, while the US ones didn't, many in the first wave of attackers had revolvers with an average of one reload each, while others had breech-loaders. Thus, the volume of fire seemed to the defenders to indicate a force many times bigger than actually was. At the same time, forces from inside Liverpool sortie, catching the besiegers between hammer and anvil, and they flee (east and) south, causing panic in the southern siege-lines. Hardly able to tell fleeing friend from attacking foe, the US forces in the southern lines are confused too long, and rolled up from both sides, they, too, flee south.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In the confusion of this night attack, the US besiegers broke and fled, but relatively were actually captured or killed. Three fourths of the US force successfully made it back to Vincennes, but they left all the siege equipment and and most of their supplies in front of Liverpool. Suddenly the decision not to pull out in a controlled fashion earlier, seemed like not such a good idea after all. And, again, the US Command was happy, now, that the siege equipment from Ft. Brock did NOT make it up to Liverpool, because now they needed it to build fortifications north of Vincennes...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As it happens, the Canadians didn't dare press far. Since their militia would soon need to return home, so they contented themselves with building fortifications south of Liverpool (largely re-purposing the old US siege lines), and settle in to wait. On this front.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]White River[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Once the siege of Liverpool was lifted, and the new lines established, some of the troops returned east to Indianapolis, and then proceeded down the White River to Standingpine[9], supported by the river ironclads, clearing out all US presence they found. There they quickly built a fort, which they named after General Standingpine, who had held out so well at Ft. Francis. By this point the summer militia needed to return home, so this marked the highwater point of the Canadian advance along the White this campaigning season.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Fort Brock, again[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Meanwhile, the forces released from the retaking of Tejas (infantry, and the cavalry freed up by the arrival of the Bavarian troops), have returned to New Orleans, and a little R&R, refit, and headed north. By now, they are ready to attack, and they know the attention of the US is focused north at Liverpool, not west to St. Louis.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So the attack of some 10,000 troops[10] down the rail line east towards the remains of Ft. Brock came as a total surprise. Since nothing like that force had been left west of Brock, and since the Canadians had a new weapon, armoured trains[11], they blew through the US forces, to Brock and past it, stopping at the Skillet Fork (river), where they stopped and built a fort on their side of the river. Fort Brock(/Clay) was well enough defended that taking it would have been tough with the resources at hand. The Canadians expected, correctly, that the US probably got enough food back into the fort to let it last a while, and the cannon that the Canadians themselves put there at before the war can now be used against them, but they expected that the ammunition, both for the muskets and cannon would probably be in short supply, again, correctly. Once the US troops realize their situation, they'll have to surrender (eventually). Better to besiege them with a smallish force to keep them tied down, and wait until they give up, instead of wasting lives on a mass assault over the walls.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]By the end of the summer, the Canadian summer militia have left to return home for harvest. But this is not as much of a break as the US hoped, as over 12,000 new troops have arrived in theatre – the bulk from Britain, but two thousand from Portugal and a regiment of colonials from South Africa. Which means that the Canadians can comfortably hold such land as they've gained, even if they can't advance any further.[12][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Moreover, other new troops have also arrived in Louisiana (two thousand colonial Portuguese troops[13], more West Indian troops and another regiment from Brazil). While most of these stay in Louisiana (which had been stretched rather thin), they do allow some more troops to move north (so Missouri gains another thousand or so). So, with the troops that arrived earlier, they can hold the line at the Skillet Fork, and take some of the burden of patrolling western *Illinois, which, in turn, means that the US doesn't reclaim nearly as many of its fortlets there as they had hoped.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Wabash[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]By the end of the summer, the Canadians had control of the Wabash down to, but not past, Vincennes. They shelled the fortifications north of town regularly, and the town itself occasionally, not quite with impunity. However, since the Canadian boats had shell-firing cannon and the US cannons were almost entirely solid round shot, the Canadians dealt out a lot more damage than they received. They didn't, however, dare go much below Vincennes. Above the town, when an ironclad is damaged another can take it in tow, and they can get out of range of the US guns. Below, if they tried that, they'd be under concentrated fire for long enough that the towing boat would run a serious risk of damage – and then they'd have lost two boats, not one, which might let the US contest the Wabash again. So the Canadians only go as far south as the town. After all, these are lightly armoured river boats, not full oceanic ironclads.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1 Ft. Brock, as you may or may not remember is in south central Illinois, near OTL's Centralia.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 Remember that the large cans of tinned goods weren't properly sterilized. The defenders have eaten all the bulk food (grain and meat), and all the small tins. They've also eaten all their livestock long since. They are now subsisting on the larger, often spoiled tins.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 “most of” the siege equipment. The weaponry that was already in Brock was kept in by the new owners, for defence should the British/Canadians/Allied troops try coming east. So the necessary new fortifications beyond Kaskadia need guns, which were meant to be and were taken from the attacking force. However, this only gives a defensive armament. Moreover, the opening of the Kaskadia, and the 'relief' of the US settlers in the American Bottom, means that some guns have to go there, too, as well as men and ammunition. So, some of the delay is actually necessary sorting out of what goes where, which cannon work best in which rôle, etc. Certainly, local enthusiasm for the push west contributed to the delay, but it wasn't quite as much of the delay as the author here is trying to suggest. There was also some simple incompetence at re-purposing those guns.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 Again, the author is being sloppy here. The river wasn't closed to US traffic. Men (who could swim to shore), food (which could be replaced) and ammunition (without which the existing guns would be useless) still made it up the river, but the heavy, bulky and very difficult to replace cannon were held back “Until such time as US forces more fully control this portion of the river”, as the report back to Washington stated. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 actually many of the Irish are put into forts, freeing up other soldiers for this advance. The advance is still about half Irish. Similarly, with the first wave of militia. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]6 some 35k from Quebec, 25k from Ontario (both up due to greater rail penetration), 17k Michigan (same), 10k Maritimers (technically, they mostly fill the eastern forts, freeing those troops to come west, rather than travelling the entire distance, but the effect is the same). [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]7 for a rather loose definition of the word 'front'. Many actually had to take boat from Fort Wayne, for instance, to head down the Wabash. 'In theatre' might have been more accurate, perhaps.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]8 furthest northwest left now is a medium-sized fort (with possibly 500 men) near OTL's Decatur in about the middle of Illinois, and it is pretty much an outlier. Again, the author is a bit carried away. He makes it sound like most of the US forces in the area were removed, whereas the reality was that the time limited nature of the militia flood meant that the Canadian effort had to be fairly targeted. Somewhat less than half the US forces in the area were actually captured or induced to leave, and some of those returned after the militia went home.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]9 near OTL's Gosport, well west of Indianapolis, ESE of Terre Haute (TTL's Liverpool).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]10 actually there's 13k come up from Louisiana, but only 10k head down the rail line. Some of the others help man the undermanned defences around St. Louis, and others join in the raids against the US fortlets in *Illinois. Also, there's 1.5k Métis and plains horsemen down from the north and north west who are doing the same from the middle of the Illinois river. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]11 These armoured trains weren't up even to OTL US Civil War Standards. They were a standard train with a box car armoured in thin plate in front of the engine, with firing slits for the attackers to shoot from, and several cars (armoured with thin sheet metal) full of soldiers behind. Think armoured car rather than tank. Still, it rendered the attacking force pretty much immune to bullets, even if not any sort of artillery at all. In fact, the effect was as much psychological as military, and the US soon developed reasonable counter-measures – but not until after they'd lost Ft. Brock/Clay.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]12 again, sloppy. In fact, the US is able to move back into several of the fortlets in *Illinois, recovering perhaps as much as half of the territory in *llinois that they had lost over the summer. However, it is true once again that Ft. Brock is Canadian, the American Bottom is cut off from the rest of the US, that the rail connexion all the way to Liverpool is relatively safe and usable, and that Liverpool itself is within Canadian lines.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]13 mostly Angolan.[/FONT]
Tejas 4 (July- early September '43)
Tejas 4 (July- early September '43)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Santa Anna was FURIOUS at the results of the Battle of the Colorado, and ordered Gonzales to return to Mexico City and 'explain'. Since he was well aware that this “discussion” would most likely involve a blindfold and firing squad, Gonzalez ignored the order. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Santa Anna sent out a party to arrest Gonzales. He declined to be arrested, instead holding most of the party and sending one back with the message that 'he politely declines to return and be shot, but thank you for the offer'. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What could Santa Anna do? He had full-blown rebellions both in his northern provinces and in the Yucatan[1], and he was afraid that if other provinces might rebel if he couldn't keep a lid on things. Sending a small force to arrest Gonzales didn't work, since his men supported him rather than the President's henchmen. Even if he COULD scrape up an army big enough to take Gonzales – which might have to be 40 or 60 thousand strong, how would he ever get them there – and supplied.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]One thing he CAN do is cut off supplies. This should bring Gonzales to his senses, and if it didn't, why, his soldiers would revolt when they started starving, and take the alternative of turning in their [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]patrón[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. He started slowly, to let the situation sink in.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Heck, maybe the so-called Republic of Rio Bravo would return to obedience, once the Mexican army stopped seizing their food and supplies (which, of course, were being used to feed and supply Gonzales's force). That and a strong boot-heel, of course.[2][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Sighting a wonderful opportunity, British diplomacy went into overdrive.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approached Gonzales and some his senior officers: the army COULD return to Mexico, but wouldn't be very trusted or respected. Many of the officers might get shot, even. They CAN'T stay where they are, not without food. The Allies propose – “Gee, why don't you become the new Army of the Rio Bravo? Any of your troops that insist on returning to Mexico, well, we'll return them there – eventually. Meanwhile they can survive on what food Mexico manages to send. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll feed and supply you until you move into Rio Bravo. No one gets executed. See how you win!”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approach the rebels in the nascent Republic of the Rio Bravo[3]. “Gee, we've got a whole army, trained and equipped and everything, that you can use to secure your independence. Shucks, sorry, we can't actually provide any of our real troops, but, hey, ya do what can, eh? Of course, you'd have to become our protectorate, but we'd guarantee your independence from Mexico. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll even get those soldiers here and provide them with equipment. See how you win!”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approach members of the Mexican government. “Gee, look, you've got a whole army of rebellious troops out in San Antonio. This is a PR disaster for you, and is ruining the stability of your country. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll go talk to these guys, and clear up the whole mess for you. Sure, a few of them will stay rebel, but we'll even take care of THEM for you, we'll remove them from Tejas, from Mexican territory completely. The loyal ones, if you want, we could transport to the Yucatan. You've got a major rebellion there, and you don't have enough troops. You wouldn't trust these guys in the heartland anyway, so why not use them to put down the revolt. Then, once they've proven themselves, you can trust them in the future. See how you win![4]”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Each of the three parties wipe the slime off their hands and carefully count their fingers to make sure they still have them all after shaking hands with the British diplomats. They think very, very hard about these proposals, and basically:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo agrees – on condition that, instead of being a 'protectorate' of the British Empire, that they get to be part of Canada – they don't trust the Brits. This would get them the support they need, especially against Mexico, while maintaining a degree separation from the nasty sharks...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Gonzales agrees – on condition that any of his men that want to return home to Mexico can.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico agrees – on condition that the Brits don't recognize Rio Bravo independence.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]On this basis, Gonzales's troops are moved. Troops loyal to Gonzales form the core of the professional Rio Bravo army, troops loyal to Mexico are transported to the Yucatan.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Gonzales (and those of his troops that left) feel betrayed because Yucatan is not 'home' (“Gee, we said we'd take you 'home to Mexico – this IS Mexico'...”). Mexico feels really betrayed because Britain promptly recognizes Rio Bravo as the newest province of Canada. (“Gee, we just said we wouldn't recognize their independence. They aren't independent, they're part of us...”) Also Mexico had thought that Gonzales and his men would be moved to Indiana or Florida for the fight there. (“Gee, we said 'we'd move them out of Mexico', Rio Bravo is now no longer part of Mexico...”)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo doesn't exactly feel betrayed, just a bit slimy, but rather thankful, as well. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Still, presented with the [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]fait accompli[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], no side dares complain too much, since there's really nothing any of them can do to make the British live up to what they THOUGHT had been promised.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico, suddenly presented with 10,000 professional troops on the side of the rebels, knows it can't pull that many from elsewhere (there are other provinces that are starting to make noises). So, after a few more weeks of fighting, it starts pulling its troops out of Rio Bravo and arranges an armistice with the British, with the aim of making peace on the best terms they can arrange. At least the revolt in the Yucatan is under control, now.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
1 this was actually a three sided fight, the Whites vs the Indios vs the central Mexican authority. Earlier on, Britain attempted to intervene, or rather to get the UPCA to, and the latter basically said 'Are you nuts, no way we're sticking our fingers[5] into THAT meat-grinder'. So the Brits supply arms to both rebel sides just to help keep Mexico occupied. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 umm... be nice and mean at the same time, this is really going to work? Well Santa Anna (either this one or his 'brother' iOTL) isn't very well grounded in reality.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 note that Rio Bravo is the name that the Mexicans call the river. The very fact that the earlier revolt called itself the 'Republic of the Rio Grande' suggests it was a Texan (led) effort. (iTTL and iOTL)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 the one party they HAVEN'T tried this line on is the Yucatan rebels. They're going get dropped like a hot brick.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 'finger' may not have been the body part mentioned in the original quote.[/FONT]
Tejas 4 (July- early September '43)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Santa Anna was FURIOUS at the results of the Battle of the Colorado, and ordered Gonzales to return to Mexico City and 'explain'. Since he was well aware that this “discussion” would most likely involve a blindfold and firing squad, Gonzalez ignored the order. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Santa Anna sent out a party to arrest Gonzales. He declined to be arrested, instead holding most of the party and sending one back with the message that 'he politely declines to return and be shot, but thank you for the offer'. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What could Santa Anna do? He had full-blown rebellions both in his northern provinces and in the Yucatan[1], and he was afraid that if other provinces might rebel if he couldn't keep a lid on things. Sending a small force to arrest Gonzales didn't work, since his men supported him rather than the President's henchmen. Even if he COULD scrape up an army big enough to take Gonzales – which might have to be 40 or 60 thousand strong, how would he ever get them there – and supplied.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]One thing he CAN do is cut off supplies. This should bring Gonzales to his senses, and if it didn't, why, his soldiers would revolt when they started starving, and take the alternative of turning in their [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]patrón[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. He started slowly, to let the situation sink in.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Heck, maybe the so-called Republic of Rio Bravo would return to obedience, once the Mexican army stopped seizing their food and supplies (which, of course, were being used to feed and supply Gonzales's force). That and a strong boot-heel, of course.[2][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Sighting a wonderful opportunity, British diplomacy went into overdrive.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approached Gonzales and some his senior officers: the army COULD return to Mexico, but wouldn't be very trusted or respected. Many of the officers might get shot, even. They CAN'T stay where they are, not without food. The Allies propose – “Gee, why don't you become the new Army of the Rio Bravo? Any of your troops that insist on returning to Mexico, well, we'll return them there – eventually. Meanwhile they can survive on what food Mexico manages to send. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll feed and supply you until you move into Rio Bravo. No one gets executed. See how you win!”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approach the rebels in the nascent Republic of the Rio Bravo[3]. “Gee, we've got a whole army, trained and equipped and everything, that you can use to secure your independence. Shucks, sorry, we can't actually provide any of our real troops, but, hey, ya do what can, eh? Of course, you'd have to become our protectorate, but we'd guarantee your independence from Mexico. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll even get those soldiers here and provide them with equipment. See how you win!”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The diplomats approach members of the Mexican government. “Gee, look, you've got a whole army of rebellious troops out in San Antonio. This is a PR disaster for you, and is ruining the stability of your country. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we'll go talk to these guys, and clear up the whole mess for you. Sure, a few of them will stay rebel, but we'll even take care of THEM for you, we'll remove them from Tejas, from Mexican territory completely. The loyal ones, if you want, we could transport to the Yucatan. You've got a major rebellion there, and you don't have enough troops. You wouldn't trust these guys in the heartland anyway, so why not use them to put down the revolt. Then, once they've proven themselves, you can trust them in the future. See how you win![4]”[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Each of the three parties wipe the slime off their hands and carefully count their fingers to make sure they still have them all after shaking hands with the British diplomats. They think very, very hard about these proposals, and basically:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo agrees – on condition that, instead of being a 'protectorate' of the British Empire, that they get to be part of Canada – they don't trust the Brits. This would get them the support they need, especially against Mexico, while maintaining a degree separation from the nasty sharks...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Gonzales agrees – on condition that any of his men that want to return home to Mexico can.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico agrees – on condition that the Brits don't recognize Rio Bravo independence.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]On this basis, Gonzales's troops are moved. Troops loyal to Gonzales form the core of the professional Rio Bravo army, troops loyal to Mexico are transported to the Yucatan.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Gonzales (and those of his troops that left) feel betrayed because Yucatan is not 'home' (“Gee, we said we'd take you 'home to Mexico – this IS Mexico'...”). Mexico feels really betrayed because Britain promptly recognizes Rio Bravo as the newest province of Canada. (“Gee, we just said we wouldn't recognize their independence. They aren't independent, they're part of us...”) Also Mexico had thought that Gonzales and his men would be moved to Indiana or Florida for the fight there. (“Gee, we said 'we'd move them out of Mexico', Rio Bravo is now no longer part of Mexico...”)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo doesn't exactly feel betrayed, just a bit slimy, but rather thankful, as well. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Still, presented with the [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]fait accompli[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif], no side dares complain too much, since there's really nothing any of them can do to make the British live up to what they THOUGHT had been promised.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico, suddenly presented with 10,000 professional troops on the side of the rebels, knows it can't pull that many from elsewhere (there are other provinces that are starting to make noises). So, after a few more weeks of fighting, it starts pulling its troops out of Rio Bravo and arranges an armistice with the British, with the aim of making peace on the best terms they can arrange. At least the revolt in the Yucatan is under control, now.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
1 this was actually a three sided fight, the Whites vs the Indios vs the central Mexican authority. Earlier on, Britain attempted to intervene, or rather to get the UPCA to, and the latter basically said 'Are you nuts, no way we're sticking our fingers[5] into THAT meat-grinder'. So the Brits supply arms to both rebel sides just to help keep Mexico occupied. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 umm... be nice and mean at the same time, this is really going to work? Well Santa Anna (either this one or his 'brother' iOTL) isn't very well grounded in reality.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 note that Rio Bravo is the name that the Mexicans call the river. The very fact that the earlier revolt called itself the 'Republic of the Rio Grande' suggests it was a Texan (led) effort. (iTTL and iOTL)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 the one party they HAVEN'T tried this line on is the Yucatan rebels. They're going get dropped like a hot brick.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 'finger' may not have been the body part mentioned in the original quote.[/FONT]
Canada is going to be so multilingual that its not even funny. In the long runne it will make absorbing spanish land more easy. The British now can transfer a lot of soldiers to the american front because mexico is taken out of the war. I wonder when will they decide to start raiding and burning down small costal american citys to force the americans to diverte even more soldiers from the front
That presents a potential problem down the road. Unless the francophones and hispanophones (and the other language communities) willingly accept English as the language of communication, as is the case in OTL India, there will be a lot of separatist movements.
Still, Canadian land in *Mexico is beautiful.
That presents a potential problem down the road. Unless the francophones and hispanophones (and the other language communities) willingly accept English as the language of communication, as is the case in OTL India, there will be a lot of separatist movements.
Still, Canadian land in *Mexico is beautiful.
Well, one thing is that the telephone will be invented slightly earlier - as a translation tool for Parliament. (Translators speak into microphones, every MP has a phone/speaker/headset connected with his language.)
In the meantime, there will be pressure for MPs to be fluent in at least 2 languages, and have aides that can translate for them for the others. I think. That's not entirely determined yet.
Initially, the translators might be connected to telegraphs that print out at every MP's desk? ??
But, yes. English is going to be dominant, and if a Rio Bravan MP wants to be properly heard, addressing Parliament in English is probably going stand him in good stead.
Parliament is going to be even messier than OTL's. Did I mention that it's tricameral?
I'm not sure you mentioned that, and if you did it has slipped my mind. How would a tricameral legislature work exactly?
And that is a neat solution to the language issue. I like it. Though I still fear it may lead problems down the road, if/when nationalism becomes a global cancer as it did OTL.
This already happened in the Austro-Hungarian empire OTL and it dident work. Why do you think that it will work elswhere?
?? What did they try that didn't work? the telephone thing? Could you give me a place to look? I don't know how I want things to go, yet, in any kind of detail, and I would appreciate more information on things parallel to what I'm looking at.
Just 'cause they try something, doesn't mean it will work, and I'd love to see some good examples of things not working.
I can see the collective UltraCanada working, but I really think it will be a) Asymmetric in organisation with a core region and a multi-track periphery and losts of special exceptions and b) stable only as long as America and Mexico remain serious threats. If you get to a good feelings era, or something like the post-WW1 environment when annexing became passe the linguistic regions will drift further away.
One thing UltraCanada will have that austro-Hungary lacked, is a influx of immigrants. These will linguistically assimilate to whatever the dominant political and economic language is - which in the cities of quebec and the Hispanic areas will be English.
One thing UltraCanada will have that austro-Hungary lacked, is a influx of immigrants. These will linguistically assimilate to whatever the dominant political and economic language is - which in the cities of quebec and the Hispanic areas will be English.
Tejas 5 (Mexican Peace Talks)
Tejas 5 (Mexican Peace Talks)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Negotiations[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Britain started off demanding all of northern Mexico, basically from Rio Bravo west (this would include California, Baja California, Chihuahua and points north. This was an opening bid and not realistic.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico demanded the return of all occupied territory, including Tejas. This was an opening bid and not realistic.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What they ended up settling for, after hard negotiations, was close to [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]uti possidetis[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] ('ya keeps what ya gots') with compensation. The negotiations were made easier by the fact that Britain really had the upper hand – but didn't want to push things. Better to make peace here and concentrate on the real war – with the US; well, that and get back to the business of making money. Since Mexico never invaded any territory that was (at the time) British, there wasn't any felt need for 'payback', and the huge British gain in territory more than compensates for war costs, etc.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Treaty provisions[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The four main provisions of the treaty are:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I Britain gets Alta California north of 35[/FONT]° N and west of 118[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° W, which gives them the entire Central Valley, and most of the eastern watershed draining into it, but leaves Mexico with a token foothold in southern California, which includes Los Angeles and San Diego. Since Britain occupied the whole thing, that's a concession. (When gold is discovered in the coming decades, Britain/Canada will be very happy. Mexico will have regrets, but many will realize the huge influx of Anglo settlers would have meant she would have ultimately lost that territory anyway.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]II Mexico keeps the dry barren central part of northern Mexico [OTL's Arizona, New Mexico, and most of Colorado, Utah, and Nevada]. Since the British didn't occupy this, that's a no brainer. It makes for a very strange looking map, though.[1] The fact that New Mexico was pretty loyalist was also a consideration.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]III Rio Bravo and the Duchy of Tejas are recognized as being provinces of Canada.[2][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]IV In exchange, Britain is to pay a large sum in compensation for the new land, and not support rebels in any part of (the reduced) Mexico.[3] Britain also agrees to support development in Mexico (e.g., but not limited to, railways).[4][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The treaty is signed on 2 November 1843[5] in Matamoros in the new Canadian province of Rio Bravo, with signatures of Britain, Mexico, and for the first time ever on an international treaty, Canada (signing under Britain, but still).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Controversies resulting from signatures[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As a result of the bad feelings left by the initial British negotiators, the Rio Bravans exact minor revenge. They insist that they are the “Republic of Rio Bravo”. Yes, that is a province of Canada, but that's their name and their governmental structure. Britain says “You can not be a republic and part of a Monarchy, that's logically impossible”. Rio Bravo says “We ARE a republic, we're now part of Canada by this treaty. So your logical impossibility [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]exists[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. You should have thought of that before hand, if you didn't like it.” Canada says “Oh my aching head!”[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Speaking of aching heads, however, Canada used the treaty to bolster her own international status.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the list of signatures appended to the treaty went roughly as follows:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Fernando Miguel de Ortiz y Hermosa, Republic of Mexico [SEAL][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Anthony Armstrong, Empire of Great Britain [SEAL][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
--Duke William Ramsey, Kingdom of Canada [personal SEAL, maybe][/FONT]
------Manuel María de Llano Lozano[FONT=Arial, sans-serif], Republic of Rio Bravo [personal SEAL][/FONT]
------[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Count Theodore von Wittelsbach, Duchy of Tejas [personal SEAL][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Canada is listed as a Kingdom – but doesn't have a national seal on the document (or does it, see below). Is it a full signatory or not? Similarly, William's signature is under Britain's ambassador's – but is it indented or not? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo and Tejas are clearly indented and clearly subordinate, and the seals used are clearly personal. Moreover, they are understood to be signing partly to sign AWAY their independence, which explains their presence. That argument, clearly, doesn't apply to Canada.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Legal scholars will have a heyday over this over the coming years.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What, if any, instructions did William bring from their Majesties of Canada? Peter and Sophia backed him up completely after the fact, and claimed that Canada signed in her own right, as a partner, if a junior partner[6]. There is no written documentation ahead of the signing supporting this intent, however, which leads many to believe that William got … enthusiastic. On the other hand, given the consequences of his previous impulsiveness, it seems unlikely that he had NO sanction ahead of time. There is also the matter of the seal he used. The British and Mexican signers used national seals. Rio Bravo and Tejas signers used personal seals. William used... his arms quartered with Canada's. Did he do that as a 'Canadian Royal' (brother to the Queen), or as national ambassador? Again, it seems unlikely that he would have had that seal made without her consent, but what did SHE mean by allowing it.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Consensus seems to be developing among modern scholars that the ambiguity was deliberate. Sophia may well have encouraged William to use his judgement to create the best possible claim, ambiguous enough that could be used in future years as precedent, but that could be … slid under the carpet as it were, at the time. The annoyance factor of not having been consulted about the addition of Rio Bravo as a province may have been the tipping point that pushed either Sophia or William to make a stronger claim.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It is quite obvious, too, that the other signatories understood the wording 'Republic of Rio Bravo' to be the claim that was signed AWAY, not established.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1 Note that Santa Fe (in OTL New Mexico) was a Mexican Loyalist stronghold. Rio Bravo and Tejas wanted to leave, so they left. New Mexico didn't, so stayed Mexican. No need for anyone to station troops to hold down hostile territory. California didn't have enough people to matter. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 whether Canada wants them or not. Since Canada wasn't consulted, but rather told, this creates some ill-feelings. Nothing dramatic, exactly, yet. Actually, there had been an understanding that Tejas would have some connexion to Canada once things settled down after the war, but Rio Bravo was a bit of a shock. It's also going to be a lot harder to integrate.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 Britain doesn't actually admit that they were running guns and supplies to rebels (mostly in [Rio Bravo and] the Yucatan), but everyone knows they were. Here, they agree they won't do any such thing in the future (without admitting what might or might not have happened in the past.) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 There is a commercial agreement that lays out details as an appendix to the treaty. Britain is happy with this. Basically, there is no formal commitment of government funds or anything, and it's just a new place for British businessmen to do business. Mexico is happy because the British will 'encourage' banks and businessmen to build up the Mexican economy. Win-win, really. And no one feels slimy, for a change.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 For the Mexicans, the fact that this could be part of the “Día de Muertos” celebrations seems only appropriate.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]6 Clearly Canada did not sign as one of the 'high contracting parties'. The text explicitly talks about 'the two high contracting parties', which are obviously Britain and Mexico, not Canada. On the other hand, some clauses, especially dealing with Rio Bravo and Tejas do talk about 'The Parties'...
NB: I can't get the indentation of the signatures to work. Imagine the dashes are spaces
[/FONT]
Tejas 5 (Mexican Peace Talks)
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Negotiations[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Britain started off demanding all of northern Mexico, basically from Rio Bravo west (this would include California, Baja California, Chihuahua and points north. This was an opening bid and not realistic.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mexico demanded the return of all occupied territory, including Tejas. This was an opening bid and not realistic.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What they ended up settling for, after hard negotiations, was close to [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]uti possidetis[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] ('ya keeps what ya gots') with compensation. The negotiations were made easier by the fact that Britain really had the upper hand – but didn't want to push things. Better to make peace here and concentrate on the real war – with the US; well, that and get back to the business of making money. Since Mexico never invaded any territory that was (at the time) British, there wasn't any felt need for 'payback', and the huge British gain in territory more than compensates for war costs, etc.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Treaty provisions[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The four main provisions of the treaty are:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I Britain gets Alta California north of 35[/FONT]° N and west of 118[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]° W, which gives them the entire Central Valley, and most of the eastern watershed draining into it, but leaves Mexico with a token foothold in southern California, which includes Los Angeles and San Diego. Since Britain occupied the whole thing, that's a concession. (When gold is discovered in the coming decades, Britain/Canada will be very happy. Mexico will have regrets, but many will realize the huge influx of Anglo settlers would have meant she would have ultimately lost that territory anyway.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]II Mexico keeps the dry barren central part of northern Mexico [OTL's Arizona, New Mexico, and most of Colorado, Utah, and Nevada]. Since the British didn't occupy this, that's a no brainer. It makes for a very strange looking map, though.[1] The fact that New Mexico was pretty loyalist was also a consideration.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]III Rio Bravo and the Duchy of Tejas are recognized as being provinces of Canada.[2][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]IV In exchange, Britain is to pay a large sum in compensation for the new land, and not support rebels in any part of (the reduced) Mexico.[3] Britain also agrees to support development in Mexico (e.g., but not limited to, railways).[4][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The treaty is signed on 2 November 1843[5] in Matamoros in the new Canadian province of Rio Bravo, with signatures of Britain, Mexico, and for the first time ever on an international treaty, Canada (signing under Britain, but still).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Controversies resulting from signatures[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]As a result of the bad feelings left by the initial British negotiators, the Rio Bravans exact minor revenge. They insist that they are the “Republic of Rio Bravo”. Yes, that is a province of Canada, but that's their name and their governmental structure. Britain says “You can not be a republic and part of a Monarchy, that's logically impossible”. Rio Bravo says “We ARE a republic, we're now part of Canada by this treaty. So your logical impossibility [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]exists[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]. You should have thought of that before hand, if you didn't like it.” Canada says “Oh my aching head!”[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Speaking of aching heads, however, Canada used the treaty to bolster her own international status.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]the list of signatures appended to the treaty went roughly as follows:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Fernando Miguel de Ortiz y Hermosa, Republic of Mexico [SEAL][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Anthony Armstrong, Empire of Great Britain [SEAL][/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
--Duke William Ramsey, Kingdom of Canada [personal SEAL, maybe][/FONT]
------Manuel María de Llano Lozano[FONT=Arial, sans-serif], Republic of Rio Bravo [personal SEAL][/FONT]
------[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Count Theodore von Wittelsbach, Duchy of Tejas [personal SEAL][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Canada is listed as a Kingdom – but doesn't have a national seal on the document (or does it, see below). Is it a full signatory or not? Similarly, William's signature is under Britain's ambassador's – but is it indented or not? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Rio Bravo and Tejas are clearly indented and clearly subordinate, and the seals used are clearly personal. Moreover, they are understood to be signing partly to sign AWAY their independence, which explains their presence. That argument, clearly, doesn't apply to Canada.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Legal scholars will have a heyday over this over the coming years.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]What, if any, instructions did William bring from their Majesties of Canada? Peter and Sophia backed him up completely after the fact, and claimed that Canada signed in her own right, as a partner, if a junior partner[6]. There is no written documentation ahead of the signing supporting this intent, however, which leads many to believe that William got … enthusiastic. On the other hand, given the consequences of his previous impulsiveness, it seems unlikely that he had NO sanction ahead of time. There is also the matter of the seal he used. The British and Mexican signers used national seals. Rio Bravo and Tejas signers used personal seals. William used... his arms quartered with Canada's. Did he do that as a 'Canadian Royal' (brother to the Queen), or as national ambassador? Again, it seems unlikely that he would have had that seal made without her consent, but what did SHE mean by allowing it.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Consensus seems to be developing among modern scholars that the ambiguity was deliberate. Sophia may well have encouraged William to use his judgement to create the best possible claim, ambiguous enough that could be used in future years as precedent, but that could be … slid under the carpet as it were, at the time. The annoyance factor of not having been consulted about the addition of Rio Bravo as a province may have been the tipping point that pushed either Sophia or William to make a stronger claim.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]It is quite obvious, too, that the other signatories understood the wording 'Republic of Rio Bravo' to be the claim that was signed AWAY, not established.[/FONT]
–
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1 Note that Santa Fe (in OTL New Mexico) was a Mexican Loyalist stronghold. Rio Bravo and Tejas wanted to leave, so they left. New Mexico didn't, so stayed Mexican. No need for anyone to station troops to hold down hostile territory. California didn't have enough people to matter. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2 whether Canada wants them or not. Since Canada wasn't consulted, but rather told, this creates some ill-feelings. Nothing dramatic, exactly, yet. Actually, there had been an understanding that Tejas would have some connexion to Canada once things settled down after the war, but Rio Bravo was a bit of a shock. It's also going to be a lot harder to integrate.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3 Britain doesn't actually admit that they were running guns and supplies to rebels (mostly in [Rio Bravo and] the Yucatan), but everyone knows they were. Here, they agree they won't do any such thing in the future (without admitting what might or might not have happened in the past.) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4 There is a commercial agreement that lays out details as an appendix to the treaty. Britain is happy with this. Basically, there is no formal commitment of government funds or anything, and it's just a new place for British businessmen to do business. Mexico is happy because the British will 'encourage' banks and businessmen to build up the Mexican economy. Win-win, really. And no one feels slimy, for a change.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5 For the Mexicans, the fact that this could be part of the “Día de Muertos” celebrations seems only appropriate.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]6 Clearly Canada did not sign as one of the 'high contracting parties'. The text explicitly talks about 'the two high contracting parties', which are obviously Britain and Mexico, not Canada. On the other hand, some clauses, especially dealing with Rio Bravo and Tejas do talk about 'The Parties'...
NB: I can't get the indentation of the signatures to work. Imagine the dashes are spaces
[/FONT]
Last edited:
Heh, if Canada wants to play with the big boys maybe they should pay some of the bill for the new lands gained from Mexico? Oh wait, are they happy to let Britain do the actual work - how surprising
Well if they had asked for the lands, maybe. But when it's a (forced) gift......
Heh, if Canada wants to play with the big boys maybe they should pay some of the bill for the new lands gained from Mexico? Oh wait, are they happy to let Britain do the actual work - how surprising
Honestly, I hadn't thought about this, but it does need to be addressed.
Ming777
Monthly Donor
Perhaps there may be a growing sense among Canadians somewhat akin to "Great Britain, I know you're trying to be a good parent for the empire, but seriously, can we at least be told about stuff like this and at least let us give our opinions then you can do whatever you like?"
Canada may go a bit independent minded but still be faithful member of the empire; loyal, but will sometimes disagree on matters with Britain. (ie, Alright, we follow your lead, but I'm just pointing out something we can do better on this issue. Etc.)
Last edited:
Why would it? The OTL US acquired French and Spanish territories yet is solidly English-speaking today.
- Status