Could the USA conquer South America and Mexico?

All of Mexico and South America? No. Much of Mexico and Central America? Maybe.

Overlooking the problem of the racist and anti-Catholic US absorbing these majority black, Indian, metzio, Catholic peoples into it's system via conquest just look at two major things: Logistics and disease.

Conquering Central America would be a nightmare for the US, mountainous, easy home to guerrilla warfare, and lots of delightful local diseases that the invaders aren't accustomed to. Then we have the issue of logistics, the US is not going to dominate the Gulf anytime soon after 1830 and would not be on equal footing with the European powers (even many SA ones) until probably 1865 (and that's because of the Civil War) so transporting armies south and inland then supplying them over this rugged terrain is an issue.

Politically it is an issue too as most Latin American nations have developed a national identity at this time and are more than ready to resist people who try to conquer them.

To put this all in perspective though, look how long and bloody it was for the US to simply digest all the parts of Mexico it took in the Mexican American War, these were mostly unpopulated or filled with tribes of various loyalties.

Now imagine taking all of Mexico into that mix with its attendant populations and political/cultural differences. Not a pretty sight (three way Civil War anyone?).

Put simply, it is logistically difficult to the point of ASB intervention and politically so as well for the US to outright conquer all of the Western Hemisphere, however, it is not impossible for them to gain more of it than they did OTL, but gaining all of it is so unlikely as to be ASB.
 
The most plausible way to do this, it seems to me (and I use that term advisedly) is to set things up so that an *EU-like organization forms that incorporates the United States, South American, and Mexico into a single more or less overarching structure. Of course, quite a number of things would have to change for this to be plausible; racial and political attitudes in the United States towards Hispanics would obviously need to be more benign, the United States would probably have to be physically smaller and weaker (no Mexican-American war, perhaps), and most likely South American and Mexico would have to be much stronger so that any such organization wouldn't feel like a mechanism for American domination but instead a partnership of equals. Additionally, it wouldn't really be a conquest, and it probably wouldn't be a real government, but that's just what you have to deal with.

Here, making the fallout from the collapse of Spanish domination over South American less severe and shorter-lived, leaving behind larger and more coherent states might be useful. Gran Colombia, a united La Plata (including Paraguay and Uruguay, perhaps), Brazil, the USCA, Peru-Bolivia; if these states are formed or survive, and do better in the 19th century than they actually did, then you might have a chance.
 
Militarily speaking, the U.S. could have done by 1900 (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Wars)(out of this forum, anyways)), and they beat the piss out of Mexico in the 1840s. Excluding the short-lived American imperialism, and the fruit companies, the incentive to do so was gone by 1865 as the South had wanted to create an American empire of slavery stretching across Latin America.

As others have pointed out, Latin America had already developed a sense of independence and nationalism, and the U.S. would have to deal with unrest and rebellion.
 
How do you invade :/ I'm seriously asking, where do you attack from? The coast I suppose? Because I think moving an army through South American jungle would be a fucking nightmare, let alone maintaining supply lines... You'd need some countries in SA on side of the USA right?
 
Id say if the US wasnt in such a bad state of affairs right now they could do it tomorrow.
Think about people from central america and mexico would risk death to come here. So why not just extend the puerto rico treatment to the south?
Teach em english, how to be murrican, and give em citizenship
It would boost the economy of those latin american countrys and hopefuly make life a bit easier. Then in like 100 years lol they could apply to be states.

Plus you could coop nationalism with something like "You may be Nicaraguan, or californian or yucatanian but youll always be an AMERICAN."
It could works in the US with the whole im a [INSERT STATE] when in the country but im american when its outside the states.
Plus the states system is TOP TIER for adding territory.

Also nationalism is the be all end all.
 
How do you invade :/ I'm seriously asking, where do you attack from? The coast I suppose? Because I think moving an army through South American jungle would be a fucking nightmare, let alone maintaining supply lines... You'd need some countries in SA on side of the USA right?

If they took Mexico and Central America first they could just go in through that land until the US navy got good enough to perform amphibious invasions of coastal areas. Having Brazil on their side until near the end could be a good idea. Eventually they'd have to stab Brazil in the back though.

Stopping the Civil War would be paramount for any massive American imperial expansion. I also read that some Southerners wanted a slave-based cotton empire, so giving the slave holding part of the US more political power could lead to more desire for expansion into South America. This of course does lead to a rather grim picture-an oppressive, slave-holding empire expanding for no reason but greed and racism.
 

jahenders

Banned
Not South America, but certainly Mexico. Even if it came to a fight, the Mexican Army, Navy, and Air Force would all be hopelessly outclassed. However, if the US were to invade, I don't think Mexico would offer too much resistance until/unless the US approached Mexico City or, perhaps, Monterrey. I think in the North, the Mexican Army would just keep falling back and many of the people wouldn't be too strongly opposed. One could argue that hundreds of thousands of Mexicans "vote with their feet" to join the US every year and likely many more would if it wasn't a tough, expensive trip.

So, I think the US could take much of Northern Mexico with very little fight. It would get tougher as forces headed deeper into Mexico, but they could overwhelm the Mexican forces in a few weeks (generally easier than Iraq). There would be problems with guerilla forces in rough terrain, but seizing the main objectives would be fast.

Going beyond Mexico into big, deep jungles would be harder and less profitable.
 
Where does America get the budget for maintaining massive occupational armies? The Ameriwanker's dreams, or something with a foundation in reality? Because pre-ACW the Whigs would be against such a venture, just like OTL many (including that Lincoln guy) were against any territorial gains from Mexico.

You'd have to break the back of Northern based political parties until only splinters remain. I'd assume the Democrats would be the major party, with perhaps minor support from Doughfaces. To accomplish this I don't know how to do without handwaving the political process that eventually created the Republican party.
 
What do you mean by conquer?

If you mean to ask if the USA could defeat South America and Mexico militarily then it might be possible (though unlikely - we are talking about an enormous area with a large population).

If you mean could the USA hold and absorb South America and Mexico then I would have to say no.

The differences in culture, religion and language, and the fact that Mexico and the South American countries had already developed their own national identities would make holding the territory virtually impossible.
 
ive always been curious about this. I think people are operating too much within the confines of OTL American culture. As a conquering nation, generally there has to be the incentive of wealth. However, i think the US could come to occupy all of South America if you take it to one extreme or the other. The first being a kind, inclusive US where people are billingual and the only work that needs to be done is "hey, if you like democracy, come on in." Of course this is so theoretical its hard to imagine.

The other option, which seems to be seldomly explored on this forum (and thankfully so) is if Americans perpetuate a massive, (more) horrifying version of Manifest destiny. Remember, this is a country that whittled sovereign nations into impoverished reservations. Our moral compass isn't that strong, especially when the "Us" vs "Them" is present. And so conquering South America, and absorbing it into an Anglo dominated union? Probably not. People don't like trading one colonizer for another. But straight up ethnic cleansing? I could see it in the darkest of American timelines.
 
afaik some politicians endorsed the idea to annex all mexico during the us-mexican war. getting nicaragua, guatemala and so on would by so easy it's hardly worth mentioning.

south america is a lot harder.
 
The population of Latin America is too big and too rebel. Take a look at the history of Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, they are full of civil wars against the central government, even the smaller countries exist just because the bigger countries (Gran-Colombia, Federal Republic of Central America) couldn't resist to these movements. I think that USA would need to really exterminate the latin people in order to control their territory...
 
Top