'1859 Pig War' leads to an Actual War Between the British Empire and United States?

[cerebropetrologist]

But blockades are invincible, or so we're told in this thread. Curious.

Feel free to dig out the quotes and post them, though of course there are none: you're simply misrepresenting the views of your opponents because you can't engage with the question. What you have been told is that the British blockade will be more efficient than the Union one at a similar point, because:

• The British have purpose-designed steam warships; the Union were using sailing ships and converted merchantmen
• The British have a lot more ships than the Union
• The British have experience of conducting blockades

With that strawman dealt with, would you care to actually answer the question: how do you conclude that the Union would have suffered a saltpetre shortage but the Union plus the Confederacy wouldn't, when the Confederacy also imported most of its saltpetre from Britain?

Which explains Russia's largely symbolic support for the Union when Britain was leaning toward the Confederacy in the 1860's...

You mean when they hid warships in American ports because they thought they were going to war with Britain over Poland?

Conflicts/points of concern for the British in 1859:

Mexico/Guatemala (Caste War, French intervention)
Xhosa conflicts
Zulu conflicts
Boer conflicts
Taiping Rebellion and Opium War in China
Second Maori War
Ashanti Conflict
Third Maori War
Issues with Japan

And that's assuming that other recent conflicts with Burma, Persia, or Afghanistan don't resume, and the tensions in India still newly pacified don't reignite. This isn't even starting to touch on concerns over the ambitions of Napoleon III.

Perhaps you should have read up on the background of those colonial conflicts rather than try and gish gallop us. For instance, why do you feel the British should be worried about the Xhosa when in 1857 the Xhosa massacred all their cattle and 40,000 of them starved to death as a result - an event which meant that "the dogged resistance to colonial expansion which the Xhosa had sustained for nearly eighty bitter years was abruptly broken" and which secured "clear domination for the British over a powerful African kingdom when eight costly frontier wars had been unable to"? Similarly, both the Zulu Wars and Boer Wars came twenty years later as a result of Britain attempting to conquer new territory in South Africa at the instigation of one man, Sir Henry Bartle Frere. Are you suggesting the governor in place at the time, Sir George Grey, who has been in place since 1854 and shown no aggressive intentions, will simply launch two simultaneous wars for the benefit of the United States? Given that both the first (1839) and the second (1878) Afghan Wars resulted from British invasions of Afghanistan, presumably we're also to understand that the British are going on the offensive there as well? And the French intervention in Mexico, which resulted directly from Mexico suspending debt payments in July 1861 in the aftermath of a civil war that isn't over in 1859 - how do you propose this comes about?

The suggestion that every minor imperial problem the British encountered in the four decades before and after the POD will become immediate and insurmountable in the event of war with the US is one that always gets trotted out in this discussion, and frankly it's not improving with repetition. It's interesting that the pro-British posters are confident enough in their position not to argue that Mexico will seize the opportunity to reclaim territory in the South, and it's equally interesting that the pro-American posters spend so long discussing irrelevant imperial conflicts that they never get round to considering the fact that in November 1859 Northern abolitionists and Southern militia are busy killing one another over slavery in Virginia and that within eighteen months the rest of the country will follow.

 

[Starforce]

Funny thing, I created such a scenario with Royalpsycho. Although it merged with the American civil war. The map as as shown is the modern era. Read the history!

The Silent War by RoyalPsycho on DeviantArt

www.deviantart.com

 

[Ficboy]

The posts in the escalated Pig War thread tends to boil down into two things: The capabilities of Britain and America in 1859 and to an extent whether or not Southern secession would even occur. There are at least two distinct scenarios from this hypothetical Third Anglo-American War:
1. America (North and South) fights Britain and Canada near the border.
2. America (the North only) fights Britain, Canada and the alternate Confederacy in a two-front war.

There are specific questions to ask regarding the effects of this conflict:
Who would win in an full-blown version of the Pig War between Britain and America?
It's a pretty close call given the resources and military strength of both sides. However since the British are an empire spanning entire continents they might have the edge over the Americans.

How would this affect the administration of James Buchanan and its reputation?
Well given the political mess that was Bleeding Kansas and his pro-Southern doughface beliefs, a war with Britain would only make him the national embarrassment of his country especially if things go very badly with the invasion of the British colony of Canada.

Would Southern secession still occur?
When the short-lived Pig War broke out in June, the violence in the Kansas Territory and the infamous caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks was still fresh in the minds of every American and this was before John Brown launched his infamous raid on Harpers Ferry in present-day West Virginia on October 16, 1859 which was one of the events that pushed the Southern states of South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee to secede from the Union and form the Confederacy alongside claimant shadow governments in the border states of Kentucky and Missouri. Whether or not the South still leaves the Union really depends on what happens during the war: If America is successful in beating back Britain then it is unlikely to even occur at all and it might even be delayed to another 4-6 years or even the 1870s but if the conflict goes really badly then they would likely prefer remaining neutral and choose stay out of the conflict especially given the cotton trade before eventually considering secession. The second scenario would spell bad news for the Union as they would be forced to put down a full blown insurrection whilst dealing with a world power.

How will the Republican Party fare during the conflict?
The Republicans were quite well-established even before the 1860 elections having run John C. Fremont as their candidate in 1856 and it was only a year until they would score their first victory by successfully getting Abraham Lincoln elected as President of the United States. An escalated Pig War would be very different and the Republicans would likely be the opposition party to the Democrats not to mention they would be seeking peace with Britain to avoid more bloodshed and waste of resources especially if it does not end well for America.

What major changes would occur after the war ends?
It would mostly result in a return to the status quo, America really wasn't interested in annexing all of Canada given that the entire point of the Pig War was that they wanted control of San Juan Island just as much as Britain. An American victory might result in them taking a portion of present-day British Columbia and maybe Nova Scotia but that would be the full extent of their territorial acquisitions. A British victory on the other hand would simply have Seattle and adjacent areas absorbed into Canada and possibly portions of Maine but everything else would remain as is. Any major changes in territory would likely come from an alternate Confederacy depending on how well it does against the Union.

Anglo-American relations would be undoubtedly worsened by the escalated Pig War since it started over the most petty and trivial incident: a wild pig being shot by neighboring soldiers and resulting in Vancouver Island governor James Douglas sending Royal Marines to attack America assuming if Robert Baynes wasn't the commander or if he accepted the orders. Especially if the Confederacy does still exist and successfully becomes independent Britain would forge an alliance which would anger the Union for obvious reasons.

What would the Confederacy look like in the Pig War (Scenario 2 only)?
It really depends on how many states join the new nation. It might as well be similar to OTL where 11 Southern slave states secede and form their own government alternatively it could be 13 instead if Kentucky and Missouri lean more favorably towards secession or even 14 if some or all of Maryland decides to join with the others. Richmond would still be the capital because of its rapid industrialization from the Tredegar Iron Works factory run by Joseph Reid Anderson. The earliest the Confederacy would be created is either in 1860 or 1861 depending on the progress of the war.

 

[Belisarius II]

The posts in the escalated Pig War thread tends to boil down into two things: The capabilities of Britain and America in 1859 and to an extent whether or not Southern secession would even occur. There are at least two distinct scenarios from this hypothetical Third Anglo-American War:
1. America (North and South) fights Britain and Canada near the border.
2. America (the North only) fights Britain, Canada and the alternate Confederacy in a two-front war.

There are specific questions to ask regarding the effects of this conflict:
Who would win in an full-blown version of the Pig War between Britain and America?
It's a pretty close call given the resources and military strength of both sides. However since the British are an empire spanning entire continents they might have the edge over the Americans.

How would this affect the administration of James Buchanan and its reputation?
Well given the political mess that was Bleeding Kansas and his pro-Southern doughface beliefs, a war with Britain would only make him the national embarrassment of his country especially if things go very badly with the invasion of the British colony of Canada.

Would Southern secession still occur?
When the short-lived Pig War broke out in June, the violence in the Kansas Territory and the infamous caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks was still fresh in the minds of every American and this was before John Brown launched his infamous raid on Harpers Ferry in present-day West Virginia on October 16, 1859 which was one of the events that pushed the Southern states of South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee to secede from the Union and form the Confederacy alongside claimant shadow governments in the border states of Kentucky and Missouri. Whether or not the South still leaves the Union really depends on what happens during the war: If America is successful in beating back Britain then it is unlikely to even occur at all and it might even be delayed to another 4-6 years or even the 1870s but if the conflict goes really badly then they would likely prefer remaining neutral and choose stay out of the conflict especially given the cotton trade before eventually considering secession. The second scenario would spell bad news for the Union as they would be forced to put down a full blown insurrection whilst dealing with a world power.

How will the Republican Party fare during the conflict?
The Republicans were quite well-established even before the 1860 elections having run John C. Fremont as their candidate in 1856 and it was only a year until they would score their first victory by successfully getting Abraham Lincoln elected as President of the United States. An escalated Pig War would be very different and the Republicans would likely be the opposition party to the Democrats not to mention they would be seeking peace with Britain to avoid more bloodshed and waste of resources especially if it does not end well for America.

What major changes would occur after the war ends?
It would mostly result in a return to the status quo, America really wasn't interested in annexing all of Canada given that the entire point of the Pig War was that they wanted control of San Juan Island just as much as Britain. An American victory might result in them taking a portion of present-day British Columbia and maybe Nova Scotia but that would be the full extent of their territorial acquisitions. A British victory on the other hand would simply have Seattle and adjacent areas absorbed into Canada and possibly portions of Maine but everything else would remain as is. Any major changes in territory would likely come from an alternate Confederacy depending on how well it does against the Union.

Anglo-American relations would be undoubtedly worsened by the escalated Pig War since it started over the most petty and trivial incident: a wild pig being shot by neighboring soldiers and resulting in Vancouver Island governor James Douglas sending Royal Marines to attack America assuming if Robert Baynes wasn't the commander or if he accepted the orders. Especially if the Confederacy does still exist and successfully becomes independent Britain would forge an alliance which would anger the Union for obvious reasons.

What would the Confederacy look like in the Pig War (Scenario 2 only)?
It really depends on how many states join the new nation. It might as well be similar to OTL where 11 Southern slave states secede and form their own government alternatively it could be 13 instead if Kentucky and Missouri lean more favorably towards secession or even 14 if some or all of Maryland decides to join with the others. Richmond would still be the capital because of its rapid industrialization from the Tredegar Iron Works factory run by Joseph Reid Anderson. The earliest the Confederacy would be created is either in 1860 or 1861 depending on the progress of the war.

The point of the thread is the United States fights Britain in 1859, not Britain along with the Confederacy fights the Union in 1859. John Brown's raised tensions over slavery, it didn't start the ACW. Without the election of Lincoln in 1860 the South wouldn't succeed. In your scenario the British start the shooting war why would the Republicans oppose it?

 

[Ficboy]

The point of the thread is the United States fights Britain in 1859, not Britain along with the Confederacy fights the Union in 1859. John Brown's raised tensions over slavery, it didn't start the ACW. Without the election of Lincoln in 1860 the South wouldn't succeed. In your scenario the British start the shooting war why would the Republicans oppose it?

Well here's the thing its only a second scenario from an escalated Pig War and does not apply to the first one. Plus, I only pointed out that John Brown's raid is one of the events that led to the Civil War and the Republicans would only turn to peace if the conflict does not end well for America.