What if Napoleon III started pulling out of Mexico from December 1864, with a withdrawal completed by early 1866? Could/would Louis Nap have intervened in the Austro-Prussian war and to what effect?
The question is why, as in, is it because it was such a disaster or an absolute success?
The other bit is that the 1866 war was simply over too fast for France to have an impact. AFAIR France didn't have the time to mobilise before Austria was crushed...
Not convinced here. He will not move just because of some upstart nation embroiled in its own conflict, that would be a massive loss of face!Because Napoleon III comes to the conclusion he should be committed to getting out once Lincoln wins reelection in November 1864 and Sherman reaches the sea in December 1864, making a Union victory overdetermined. Possibly reinforced with some sterner or more explicit words from Seward.
He will not move just because of some upstart nation embroiled in its own conflict, that would be a massive loss of face!
Ill have to check but my understanding of the Mexican expedition but as fans I remember, he left with at least the excuse of having put the guy on the throne.I wonder if OTL's situation was any less humiliating. That was pulling out due to combination of threats from an upstart nation and increasing fatigue fighting a mestizo rebel force.
Look at the situation of the CSA in December 1864, with Sherman's march to the sea it was visibly ugly, and irretrievable. It wasn't just bisected, it was cut into three parts!
View attachment 292185
What if Napoleon III started pulling out of Mexico from December 1864, with a withdrawal completed by early 1866? Could/would Louis Nap have intervened in the Austro-Prussian war and to what effect?