Napoleon doesn't invade Spain

Rockingham

Banned
WI, instead of (foolishly in retrospect) invading Spain, already a French ally/sattelite, to install his brother on the throne, Napoleon concentrates on defeating Austria, and later Russia? Would his chances of victory in the Napoleonic wars be higher? What effects would this have on military strategy, without an early example of guerilla warfare and Wllingtons ascendancy? How would Britain participate in the war without a major front to fight on? Would it focus on the funding of potential Coalitons instead?
 
Napoleonic France would likely, in the long-run, hold onto much more of NW and Central Europe. Without the guerilla bleeding their forces they would have been much more successful in the italian and germanic states.

Guerilla war would still develop somewhere, though obviously under a different name. Somewhere where a populace has a strong national identity, a unfying and directing religious leadership, and the dispersal of mass-manufactured weapons of war. Perhaps in Turkey.

A cold war of sorts may have developed on the Portugese/Spanish border, with masses of British and French troops eyeing each other, but both too far from home to make the first move, at least for the short-term.

The Brits would likely be unable to blockade all French-allied ports, so they wouldn't have control of the seas. In fact, they'd likely be ejected from the Med and blocked out at Gibraltar. This would make the French campaign in Egypt easier to support, and more successful.

Nap might still make the same error in the Moscow winter, but may be able to come back with another force and eventually defeat the Russians with forces freed up from the western front.

After that, he may turn south to take on the Turks and Holy land to link up with his Egyptian possessions.

At some point, there will probably be an attempt to invade England. This would probably be unsuccessful, at least in a first or second attempt. But with all of Europe at his back, Nap can try, try again. Evenutally the isolated Britain would fall. Canada would revert to Quebec. India would become French, as would Australia, Sud Afrique, and the other British possessions.

Long-long-term you'd have a devolution from French Empire to an Union d'Etates some 150 years earlier than OTL. Probably with a super-French super state, Dutch/German state, Austrian, Italian, Polish, Greek, Russian states - much larger than OTL countries, and probably constitutional monarchies within the larger union (led by Paris of course).
 
With no power vacuum in Spain, the South American independence movements are seriously harmed. Unfortunately, and with the idiots, incompetents, Carlos IV and Fernando VII in power, the colonies will sooner or later ask for independence or home rule.

Anyway, if Spain is a french satellite and Napoleon imposes a liberal Constitution similar to OTL 1812 constitution, there may be a chance...
 
The Brits would likely be unable to blockade all French-allied ports, so they wouldn't have control of the seas. In fact, they'd likely be ejected from the Med and blocked out at Gibraltar. This would make the French campaign in Egypt easier to support, and more successful.

I never understood this. How does control of Gibraltar give you control of the Mediterranean?

I think you see changes way before Moscow, though. Without the fate of Spain before it, Austria may not launch another war in 1808 (I think). Russia might still be a bit provocative, but an invasion may not be necessary, and Britain, without its ability to influence things on the continent, may be forced to come to terms.
 
I never understood this. How does control of Gibraltar give you control of the Mediterranean?

I was saying that with all the Spanish ports as well as the French ports to cover, the Royal Navy wouldn't be able to blockade the entire French Fleet. So, with French and Spanish ships on the move, they're able to push the RN out of the Med and then bottle it up with a strong fleet at Gibraltar/Algeciras/Cadiz/Cueta/Tangiers. Call it a reverse blockade, keeping the RN out of the French 'port' of the entire Med.
 

Thande

Donor
Neutral Spain does not = French fleet being able to use Spanish ports. That would required French-allied Spain, which while not impossible, seems fairly unlikely given the losses during the previous alliance for not much benefit.

Britain would still dominate the Med IMO, but we'd have a hard time finding a land front to bring the battle to France without the Peninsular War.
 
Neutral Spain does not = French fleet being able to use Spanish ports. That would required French-allied Spain, which while not impossible, seems fairly unlikely given the losses during the previous alliance for not much benefit.

I dunno. It certainly seems like it was a French ally; it let French troops pass through to occupy Portugal, after all. Certainly Spain wanted to get out of the Alliance, but as long as Boney appears unstoppable, they won't.
 

Thande

Donor
I dunno. It certainly seems like it was a French ally; it let French troops pass through to occupy Portugal, after all. Certainly Spain wanted to get out of the Alliance, but as long as Boney appears unstoppable, they won't.

Good point, but the more Spain cleaves to French wishes, the more chance that the Spanish people will get increasingly pissed off.

Although it was precipitated by Ferdinand's capture, the Madrid rising was primarily an anti-French popular movement, after all.
 
Providing access to Spanish ports to French ships is fairly 'distant' from the general populace, so it probably wouldn't agitate them much, similarily closing ports to the Royal Navy. So even if Spanish ships didn't participate in battles, that port access alone would change the nature of the war. The French built very good ships at the time (the RN loved to capture them), but they were forced to languish and their crews became increasingly untrained as they were bottled up in port - Boney kept swiping the gunners for his Armies as well.

If they were active instruments of war, they may very well have been able to meet the RN on equal terms (I know, that's sacrilege!).

If the RN loses it's ports in the Med (Malta, Girbraltar) they would be in a hard place...
 
Providing access to Spanish ports to French ships is fairly 'distant' from the general populace, so it probably wouldn't agitate them much, similarily closing ports to the Royal Navy. So even if Spanish ships didn't participate in battles, that port access alone would change the nature of the war. The French built very good ships at the time (the RN loved to capture them), but they were forced to languish and their crews became increasingly untrained as they were bottled up in port - Boney kept swiping the gunners for his Armies as well.

If they were active instruments of war, they may very well have been able to meet the RN on equal terms (I know, that's sacrilege!).

If the RN loses it's ports in the Med (Malta, Girbraltar) they would be in a hard place...

How would the French actually be able to take Gibraltar though? It's an excellent defensive position, it would be stretching supply lines of the French to the max, the French have very little Naval strength at this time and I hardly think the Spanish would be comftable with a large French Army sitting in their territory.
 

Valamyr

Banned
How would the French actually be able to take Gibraltar though? It's an excellent defensive position, it would be stretching supply lines of the French to the max, the French have very little Naval strength at this time and I hardly think the Spanish would be comftable with a large French Army sitting in their territory.

All of these problems can be solved with one stone if Napoleon can convince Madrid to let them use their land to take Gibraltar with the promise of giving them the territory as soon as it was captured from Britain. Of course, the Spanish would let the French use it, but it would fly spanish flag and any British attack to take it back would bring Spain that much closer to Paris.

Any retaliatory British action against Spain's empire could be met with a franco-spanish invasion of pro-English Portugal, which would fall swiftly.
 
Good point, but the more Spain cleaves to French wishes, the more chance that the Spanish people will get increasingly pissed off.

Although it was precipitated by Ferdinand's capture, the Madrid rising was primarily an anti-French popular movement, after all.

This is a good point, but plenty of powerful people in Spain were afraid of the mob and the excesses of the war. Even Godoy, frex, was disturbed initially. If Nappy plays his cards right, he could be the one restoring order to a nation infected by runaway jacobinism.
 
All of these problems can be solved with one stone if Napoleon can convince Madrid to let them use their land to take Gibraltar with the promise of giving them the territory as soon as it was captured from Britain. Of course, the Spanish would let the French use it, but it would fly spanish flag and any British attack to take it back would bring Spain that much closer to Paris.

Any retaliatory British action against Spain's empire could be met with a franco-spanish invasion of pro-English Portugal, which would fall swiftly.

There WAS a joint French-Spanish invasion of Portugal in OTL. And it didn't go all that great neither. And why would the Spanish actually let the French iuse their land for such a prolonged amount of time? There were severe anti-French feelings in Spain, the only reason they were actually able to pass through in OTL was because Spain was under the belief France was going straight to Portugal.
 
There WAS a joint French-Spanish invasion of Portugal in OTL. And it didn't go all that great neither. And why would the Spanish actually let the French iuse their land for such a prolonged amount of time? There were severe anti-French feelings in Spain, the only reason they were actually able to pass through in OTL was because Spain was under the belief France was going straight to Portugal.

But that's the whole point of this thread - France doesn't invade Spain, so at a nation-level at least they are friendlier.

Restoring Spanish soveriegnty of Gibraltar would be a powerful incentive to Madrid. I could see them allowing French troops in to assist such an assault.
 
I was saying that with all the Spanish ports as well as the French ports to cover, the Royal Navy wouldn't be able to blockade the entire French Fleet. So, with French and Spanish ships on the move, they're able to push the RN out of the Med and then bottle it up with a strong fleet at Gibraltar/Algeciras/Cadiz/Cueta/Tangiers. Call it a reverse blockade, keeping the RN out of the French 'port' of the entire Med.
Except that OTL the Royal Navy did manage [for the most part] to keep both the French and the Spanish fleets bottled up and out of the war.

So Joe stays in Naples,
In 1806 Britian began attacking Spains American Empire, this stopped in 1807 with the King of Spain [Ferdinand] joining the anti French Alliance.
With Spain remaining a French Ally, I see another attemp on Argentina, and maybe one on Cuba. Plus support for the Rebels in Mexico.
 
I doubt this ends with Britain being invaded. More likely, the lack of the Peninsular Campaign, leaves Napoleon able to recover from the invasion of Russia. At some point, the British are forced to make peace as Napoleon wants to consolidate his power, but retain all seized posessions abroad. Napoleon seems checked by Russia and Austria and Britain can find no more allies against the Corsican Tyrant. Concern also runs high that continued failure may provoke revolt in London.

I'm curious as to how this might affect the War of 1812. The Lousiniana Purchase is made on schedule, but perhaps if Spain may decide to follow Napoleon's example and sell large swathes of Northern Mexico (ie. Texas plus the Mexican cession, all relatively empty and unproductive) to the USA, probably at a much higher price (say $30 million). This instantly Manifest US prompts some raised eyebrows in London, still wary of the Lost Colonies. Two ends of a specturm here:

1) being harder pressed by a continued stalemate with Napoleon's Alliance, the British can deveote few resources to the war in the America. America nonetheless fails in the invasion of Canada...twice. A daring naval expedition to France brings back military advisors who suceed in helping the Americans take Canda, in exchange for an independent Kingdom of Quebec under a Bonaparte dynasty. At the prospect of having conquered almost all of North America in a few decades, the Americans gladly agree. The British are then forced to make peace, lest the French find more ways to turn the world upside down. Peace prevails until the Wars of Indepencia begin in 1820, when war breaks out between the USA and Spain over the US assitance to Anglo Rebels in Florida. In the course of the War, the US also pledges assitance to rebels in Mexico. At some point, Napoleon pleading about the balance of power, the status quo and dangerous republicans declares war on the USA in concert with the Kingdom of Quebec. At the peace settlement, the US does gain Florida, but loses much of its Canadian gains to an enlarged Quebec. After the US defeat, Aaron Burr starts to get some ideas....

OR

2) The British already fought to a standstill in Europe, quickly make peace on the basis of the status quo with Napoleon, who doesn't seem to be quite that bad, know that he's settled down and been thrashed in Moscow, even if he is a tyrant. They devote all their resources to teaching the colonies a lesson and quickly force the US into protectorate status or at least strip all of their post 1783 gains. A widely expanded British Empire embarks on a speedy Reform process, both politically and militarily due to the continued Great Game with Napoleon on Europe's borders. After the US defeat, Aaron Burr starts to get some ideas....
 
I doubt this ends with Britain being invaded. More likely, the lack of the Peninsular Campaign, leaves Napoleon able to recover from the invasion of Russia. At some point, the British are forced to make peace as Napoleon wants to consolidate his power, but retain all seized posessions abroad. Napoleon seems checked by Russia and Austria and Britain can find no more allies against the Corsican Tyrant. Concern also runs high that continued failure may provoke revolt in London.

I'm curious as to how this might affect the War of 1812. The Lousiniana Purchase is made on schedule, but perhaps if Spain may decide to follow Napoleon's example and sell large swathes of Northern Mexico (ie. Texas plus the Mexican cession, all relatively empty and unproductive) to the USA, probably at a much higher price (say $30 million). This instantly Manifest US prompts some raised eyebrows in London, still wary of the Lost Colonies. Two ends of a specturm here:

1) being harder pressed by a continued stalemate with Napoleon's Alliance, the British can deveote few resources to the war in the America. America nonetheless fails in the invasion of Canada...twice. A daring naval expedition to France brings back military advisors who suceed in helping the Americans take Canda, in exchange for an independent Kingdom of Quebec under a Bonaparte dynasty. At the prospect of having conquered almost all of North America in a few decades, the Americans gladly agree. The British are then forced to make peace, lest the French find more ways to turn the world upside down. Peace prevails until the Wars of Indepencia begin in 1820, when war breaks out between the USA and Spain over the US assitance to Anglo Rebels in Florida. In the course of the War, the US also pledges assitance to rebels in Mexico. At some point, Napoleon pleading about the balance of power, the status quo and dangerous republicans declares war on the USA in concert with the Kingdom of Quebec. At the peace settlement, the US does gain Florida, but loses much of its Canadian gains to an enlarged Quebec. After the US defeat, Aaron Burr starts to get some ideas....

OR

2) The British already fought to a standstill in Europe, quickly make peace on the basis of the status quo with Napoleon, who doesn't seem to be quite that bad, know that he's settled down and been thrashed in Moscow, even if he is a tyrant. They devote all their resources to teaching the colonies a lesson and quickly force the US into protectorate status or at least strip all of their post 1783 gains. A widely expanded British Empire embarks on a speedy Reform process, both politically and militarily due to the continued Great Game with Napoleon on Europe's borders. After the US defeat, Aaron Burr starts to get some ideas....

Don't think the British would really want a war if Napoleon is considating on the Continent. They most surely don't want to push the Americans closer to France which was the whole point of the USA being rewarded with a whole bunch of land west of the Applachians and the Ohio Valley in the first place. Granted the USA and Britain might fight a war but I don't think Britain would want to run the risk of losing to many troops. It could into the British verison of Spain.
 
With Spain remaining a French Ally, I see another attemp on Argentina, and maybe one on Cuba. Plus support for the Rebels in Mexico.

What rebels?

Nicomacheus said:
I'm curious as to how this might affect the War of 1812. The Lousiniana Purchase is made on schedule, but perhaps if Spain may decide to follow Napoleon's example and sell large swathes of Northern Mexico (ie. Texas plus the Mexican cession, all relatively empty and unproductive) to the USA, probably at a much higher price (say $30 million). This instantly Manifest US prompts some raised eyebrows in London, still wary of the Lost Colonies. Two ends of a specturm here:

Stupid AH Cliche number 456788: No matters what's the POD, in a handful of years after it Spain allways goes insane and sells herself to the USA without any reason.
 
Top