AHC: American Colonies in Africa

Yes Algeria was a department of France.
“ From 1848 until independence, the whole Mediterranean region of Algeria was administered as an integral part of France, much like Corsica and Réunion are to this day”

Okay, so that’s completely different from what we’ve been discussing. Thanks for the info.

Both cases the areas were integrated just like the US.

Looking up both ‘department’ and ‘dominion’, the former isn’t what we’re discussing and the latter isn’t what you’ve just claimed.
 
Okay, so that’s completely different from what we’ve been discussing. Thanks for the info.



Looking up both ‘department’ and ‘dominion’, the former isn’t what we’re discussing and the latter isn’t what you’ve just claimed.

So if France make Algeria apart of France its different to the USA making a territory apart of the USA

And i know what a dominion is, i used it as an example of how you can have colony just nt use the name

Territory
Dominion
Protectorate

All forms of colonies

And you still havn't explained the USA colonialism against the native Americans
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The Tydings-McDuffie Act (Phillippine Independence) was approved by the US Congress

I would argue the fact that we let the phillipines go otl had more to do with the encroaching decolonization of most of the colonized areas of the world. Had World War II not happened we would not have let them go like that. And for some perspective we quite literally committed genocide to keep them part of the US thirty years earlier, that shouldn't be forgotten.

More like 45 years earlier - 1902 maybe, for the end of the "Philippine insurrection" in any real sense.

The Tydings-McDuffie Act (Phillippine Independence) was approved by the US Congress in 1934; "encroaching decolonization" had nothing to with it, since the only "colonial" territory any of the powers had given up at this point was Weiheiwei, in 1930.

The biggest reason why, frankly, was the expense and strategic risk US possession of the PI entailed; everyone knew (and had known) the islands could not be defended against Japan since the 'teens.

And yes, given the result, one can only wish the US had made the same decision in 1898 that was made in 1934, for both Filipinos and Americans.

That's actually an interesting possibility; have an equivalent to the Cuba-US relationship come into being in 1898, rather than what actually did occur, which leads to a US withdrawal with (minor) basing rights. How do a Philippine Republic and the US interact for the next century, and what impact does that have on great power politics in the Western Pacific, all other things being equal?

Best,
 
Last edited:

TFSmith121

Banned
Which was my point regarding conflict between nation states umpteen posts ago

Nice point. Mexico between seperation from Spain and 1848 would certainly qualify. Possiblly after as well. In that context the conflict between the republics of Mexico and the US were of two imperialistic states vs each other.

As was the decades-long conflict between the US and Spain over possession of the (current) US Gulf Coast and (by extension) the Caribbean Basin, or the US and UK over the Oregon Country or the Aroostook Valley; the list goes on and on...these were all "inter-state" conflicts between nation states; something as simple as the fact the combatants had diplomatic relations with one another makes that clear.

Overall, this was my point regarding conflict between nation states umpteen posts ago. Words have meaning; one can indict US (or Mexican) foreign or domestic policy in the Nineteenth Century quite accurately without conflating meanings.

Best,
 
Regarding the original topic, would it possible for the US to be given control over the Congo after everyone figured out what Leopold was doing there?
 
Regarding the original topic, would it possible for the US to be given control over the Congo after everyone figured out what Leopold was doing there?

If the US was involved in Africa and not avoiding affairs there, it might come up, although I'm not sure who would support it.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
In 1908?

If the US was involved in Africa and not avoiding affairs there, it might come up, although I'm not sure who would support it.

I don't see a natural constituency for US territorial control of any part of Africa, but certainly not the Congo basin; this is the era of dollar diplomacy, but the US had more than enough on its hands in the Caribbean and Central America; Central Africa seems like a colony too far...

The general policy toward Liberia seems a pretty good indicator; economic control was more than enough. No need to land troops.

Cripes, Arizona, New Mexico, Alaska, and Hawaii were all still territories in 1908, and Puerto Rico, the Phillippines, etc gave plenty of scope for anyone in the US with actual "imperial" ambitions.

Best,
 
Top