ACH/WI: Keep The US East Of The Mississippi

What it says on the tin. With a POD no earlier than July 4th, 1776, keep the western border of the US at the Mississippi River until at least the late 1800's.

Bonus points if you can keep Canada/BNA as its northern border.
 
What it says on the tin. With a POD no earlier than July 4th, 1776, keep the western border of the US at the Mississippi River until at least the late 1800's.

Bonus points if you can keep Canada/BNA as its northern border.

Perhaps a worse showing in the revolution keeps the US behind the appalachian mountains to start, then when the US does manage to expand it's only to the Mississippi?
 
Perhaps a worse showing in the revolution keeps the US behind the appalachian mountains to start, then when the US does manage to expand it's only to the Mississippi?

Yeah. Once the US borders the Mississippi they will want to take it. So make the war worst. Maybe France and Spain focuses on Gibraltar and the Caribbean.
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
Either the US loses the war of independence, and is contained to the thirteen colonies, or it loses the war of 1812 very badly and does not encroach any further to the west. Alternatively Mexico expands north early on, and the USA, after a slightly different Mexican-American war, agrees to a boundary along the Mississippi.
 
What it says on the tin. With a POD no earlier than July 4th, 1776, keep the western border of the US at the Mississippi River until at least the late 1800's.

Bonus points if you can keep Canada/BNA as its northern border.

No Louisiana Purchase would do it; just a simple and minor change of circumstances may help cause a notably different outcome in the long run. For an example of how U.S. annexation might be delayed for a while, I can point to the situation that developed in my own "A Nation, Divided" TL(click the link).
 
The only way I can see this happening is if you somehow limit American expansion to the Appalachians. Once the Ohio is under the US flag, we won't stand having the mouth of the Mississippi controlled by someone else.
 
The only way I can see this happening is if you somehow limit American expansion to the Appalachians. Once the Ohio is under the US flag, we won't stand having the mouth of the Mississippi controlled by someone else.

But the US has done just fine bordering the Great Lakes and having the mouth of the St. Lawrence controlled by someone else, hasn't it? Since the Erie Canal was built OTL, couldn't the Americans similarly bypass New Orleans by building a canal between the Tennessee River and the Gulf of Mexico early on? This would at least require acquisition of another Gulf Coast port though.
 

U.S David

Banned
Easy, no Louisana purchase.

Maybe Jefferson only buys New Orleans, like what was his orinigial deal.
 
No Louisiana Purchase would do it; just a simple and minor change of circumstances may help cause a notably different outcome in the long run. For an example of how U.S. annexation might be delayed for a while, I can point to the situation that developed in my own "A Nation, Divided" TL(click the link).

No Louisiana purchase is definitely one way to do it, which would probably have fairly large butterflies for Europe (didn't Napoleon only go through with it because he was strapped for cash?).

The only way I can see this happening is if you somehow limit American expansion to the Appalachians. Once the Ohio is under the US flag, we won't stand having the mouth of the Mississippi controlled by someone else.

Even if the US still goes through with the Louisiana purchase, there are still a few ways that they could end up with control of the Mississippi Delta but not possess access to the Pacific Ocean. A Republic of California that manages to stick around would do it, as would an independent Texas.
 
The Louisiana purchase is determined to be incostitutional and is butterflied away.

Option 1: Napoleon flees to Lousiana and ends his life as King of New Orleans. The british are content of his exile. Short lived Napoleons offspring dynasty? Louisiana bought mid/late 1800's by the USA? becomes an autonomous republic?
Option 2: Post napoleonic France keeps control of Louisiana.
Option 3: Louisiana ends up in british hands, linking Canada to the Gulf of Mexico (I see real bad stuff in this case).

In all options, Mexico is left untouched until at least mid 1800's. California is isolated and might evolve in a completely autonomous state. John Wayne does not star in a movie about The Alamo :D.
 
No Louisiana purchase is definitely one way to do it, which would probably have fairly large butterflies for Europe (didn't Napoleon only go through with it because he was strapped for cash?).

IIRC, yes, that was a large part of that. In my TL, however, Louisiana remained French primarily because there were still many who didn't trust the Americans enough, but who didn't want to become Spanish again, either. Compromises were made, including those that allowed for eventual American expansion as both parties agreed. Of course, I will admit that this isn't the likeliest of scenarios, and the plan ultimately did have its flaws, but it was probably better than either of the alternatives.

Even if the US still goes through with the Louisiana purchase, there are still a few ways that they could end up with control of the Mississippi Delta but not possess access to the Pacific Ocean. A Republic of California that manages to stick around would do it, as would an independent Texas.

True, although that assumes the Americans don't still manage to grab the Oregon Country.
 
Top