Why not just have them put more money into Maximilian's Mexico instead of supporting the Confederacy?
This is pretty difficult to do if you actually know anything about Second Empire France. It was a much more stable regime than most people, even on this site, give it credit for. It lasted longer than the four previous regimes did.
have the united states side with the Republicanists in Mexico after the civil war (probably shorten it) against the French backed empire and draw in France by seizing its colonies....granted asb, but part from that situation, theres nothign else that could destroy france at the time without involving the prussians
Which colonies? the only French colonies in the Americas was French Guiana and some assorted islands in the Caribbean. I doubt that the US could occupy any of these territories, and even then, I doubt that the US would want to get into a war with France over a few islands.
like i said, it was a asb idea...just there doesnt seem to be much else that couldve crashed france besides the prussians or a situation where the usa takes a more proactive stance in their helping the mexican republicans
In SilverSwimmer's The Discord that Follows he combines the success of the 2nd Mex Empire and the economic crash of 1873 to create a Socialist revolution in Paris. Could country wide revolution be created with the addition of other changes?
The problem with this one is that the crash of 1873 was triggered by Prussia getting an indemnity in gold from France at the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian War and going off the silver standard.
I suggest an Austria and South German Confederation who beat the Prussians and then have a dispute with their erstwhile collaborators, the French, and end up defeating the French in the Austro-French War.
Going off topic, but this perked my interest. France intervenes in the Seven Weeks War, then Napoléon IV & Franz Joseph later clash over spheres of influence and economic preference in the south German states? Without a FPW the Savoyards wouldn't hold Rome yet; whichever side could promise them to gain the capital would likely sway them to join their alliance.
Maybe France loses to Austria in the Second war of Italian independence? That could work, though I'm not sure if Austria could beat France.
There would be a lot more of what would be considered Italia irredenta in Austria than in France at this point. Corsica and Savoy weren't even being considered and Nice had been given away and was becoming French quite rapidly due to internal immigration. I think the French would be more able to sway the Italians with promises of Austrian territory. Plus the historical enemy thing.
But it's French troops guarding Rome. If Vienna can convince Florence that they can give them the ancient capitol the Savoyards might take the offer.
Yes, well if the French had any sense they'd be handing over the keys to Rome right quick because the Italians would occupy it in any case when the French garrison would have to be withdrawn to fight the Austrians, as per the Franco-Prussian War.
Except that the French garrison in Rome was only withdrawn on the orders of the Government of National Defense, which only came about because a) the Emperor had been captured, and b) the Prussians were closing in on Paris. You're not likely to get a similar scenario ITTL, and thus you're not going to have the Italians take Rome.