DBWI: AH Challenge: Prevent Anglo Reunification

1812 is widely regarded as the climax of the fighting, and it was a year in which Canada had heavy losses. The continued Empire soldiers pouring to help help hardly made relations worse, and since many soldiers stayed on afterwards, the cementing of Canada into the Empire, and later the Commonwealth, was assured.

(OOC: Good save? :p)

OOC: Good enough. I really do want to see Chinese Zulus fighting Fijian Welsh though...:p:D:eek:

IC: Interesting point, but considering the conflicts against the Spanish in Mexico and Granada would last until 1818, 1812 isn't really a good date to say "The climax of the fighting" Anyways, basically, we all agree that the First French War is the only real hope for the Anglophone Commonwealth never to form...
 
OOC: Good enough. I really do want to see Chinese Zulus fighting Fijian Welsh though...:p:D:eek:

IC: Interesting point, but considering the conflicts against the Spanish in Mexico and Granada would last until 1818, 1812 isn't really a good date to say "The climax of the fighting" Anyways, basically, we all agree that the First French War is the only real hope for the Anglophone Commonwealth never to form...

It was a climax in terms of Canada, not everywhere else. And yes, the First French War would be a good POD.
 
What, by having the US join in on the side of France? The US was weak, and could hardly get an army to Europe over the Royal Navy. Canada would have been a tough fight for a woefully un-mobilized US, and for at best marginal impact on the British war effort. Why fight your biggest and best trading partners in a war you're already on a bad footing for? Much better to simply buy Florida from a struggling Spain on the cheap. No war, more influence in the Carribean, and by the time the money got to Spain Spain had become a British ally.
 
What, by having the US join in on the side of France? The US was weak, and could hardly get an army to Europe over the Royal Navy. Canada would have been a tough fight for a woefully un-mobilized US, and for at best marginal impact on the British war effort. Why fight your biggest and best trading partners in a war you're already on a bad footing for? Much better to simply buy Florida from a struggling Spain on the cheap. No war, more influence in the Carribean, and by the time the money got to Spain Spain had become a British ally.

Well consider, the French were pretty concerned with defending Louisiana to the last. If they'd say, sold it to the US, there would be no reason to get involved with the British in the First French War. Florida and Mexico could have been bought or conquered later...
 
Well consider, the French were pretty concerned with defending Louisiana to the last. If they'd say, sold it to the US, there would be no reason to get involved with the British in the First French War. Florida and Mexico could have been bought or conquered later...
*facepalm*
And to think, I wrote an entire essay on that one truth for History: that the US as a matter of policy was set on New Orleans that even Francophile Jefferson entered into the First Anglo-American Alliance for that purpose.

Sure, everyone in the US knew that Britain was just aiming for more Caribbean colonies on the off-chance we were in a position to help, but New Orleans was worth it. He who controls New Orleans, after all, controlled all water traffic in the Interior long before steamboats made up-stream river travel commercially viable.
 
Top