Mexican intervention in the American Civil War?

Hashasheen

Banned
had the french not invaded mexico under pretence of debt collection (i think) what would have it taken for the mexicans to intervene in the civil war? and on which side? would they go for california or texas?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
I am not really sure they would have bothered. Even if Nappy III had not intervened Mexico would still be quite disorganized and not prepared for a foreign adventure.
 
If and I do mean If, as I don't think its plausible, I would say that Mexico would be more likely to aid the Confederate States. After all the United States had beaten the Mexicans fairly recently in world-historical terms and the U.S held more land and better land (California, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah....) with more useful resources that were once Mexican rather than the CSA which held only Texas and some part of Arizona (if memory serves me right)
 
geographically, assuming a confederate victory, wouldnt the CSA in a better position to claim California, et al and become mexicos rival? wouldnt the mexicans see this?
 
I believe that the Mexicans actually went to Montgomery Alabama before the Battle of Fort Sumter and tried to do a deal with the Confederates but were turned away. I also seem to remember that very early on Davis and his government were drawing up plans for future expansion into Mexican territory...though I might be wrong on this.
 
I believe that the Mexicans actually went to Montgomery Alabama before the Battle of Fort Sumter and tried to do a deal with the Confederates but were turned away. I also seem to remember that very early on Davis and his government were drawing up plans for future expansion into Mexican territory...though I might be wrong on this.

I can't think of a source at the moment, but the CSA did have longterm plans for expansion south. So a mexican alliance will be one of convenience..
 
If and I do mean If, as I don't think its plausible, I would say that Mexico would be more likely to aid the Confederate States. After all the United States had beaten the Mexicans fairly recently in world-historical terms and the U.S held more land and better land (California, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah....) with more useful resources that were once Mexican rather than the CSA which held only Texas and some part of Arizona (if memory serves me right)
And much of the impetuous for this war (and the strife in Texas) came from southern Democrats (including Polk) filled with notions of racial superiority and eager to expand slavery westwards. This was an attitude carried over by the Confederate leadership who had designs on seizing much of northern Mexico - primarily for the mines of Chihuahua and Sonora

In contrast the Mexican-American War was not perceived in a nationalist light by most Mexicans. Liberals remained effuse in their praise of US (or at least the principles that it was founded on) and in turn Washington was more than willing to provide military aid to Juarez during the French Adventure. The monarchists obviously looked less favourably on their northern neighbour but even then I see no grounds for an alliance with the CSA. Indeed the only possible case that I can imagine for such an arrangement is the return of a santanista lobby that views intervention as being in the national interest. Of course even this requires some significant rewriting of prior history and the structure of the Mexican state

And that brings us back to the OP. At the end of the day the Mexicans were too busy fighting each other (as they had since 1810) and in no position to make any major contribution to the ACW
 
Top