PC/WI: Napoleon-US alliance over Louisiana Purchase?

Is it plausible that a Franco-US alliance couldve been forged over the Louisiana Purchase in 1803?

Some general terms I could see would be the US purchasing the Louisiana territory for a much larger sum of money, with Napoleon offering to help the US militarily with the Barbary pirates.

If such a thing were to happen, how might it effect the balance of the Napoleonic wars?
 
Last edited:
By 1803, we were already in the middle of a war with the pirates and winning, so additional help hardly seems worth paying more for Louisiana.
 
It is unlikely. The US was already getting a simply phenomenal deal in terms of what they were recieving from the Louisiana Purchase OTL, an entangling foreign alliance would not have been a bonus.

Now if Napoleon resisted selling until later when issues with the British were starting to become contentious, Napoleon offering to sell the land on the cheap in exchange for American help against the British might have been a workable deal.
 
Now if Napoleon resisted selling until later when issues with the British were starting to become contentious, Napoleon offering to sell the land on the cheap in exchange for American help against the British might have been a workable deal.

Like "we'll give you Louisiana if you attack Canada"? Interesting...
What year do you think that couldve realistically occured?
 
Like "we'll give you Louisiana if you attack Canada"? Interesting...
What year do you think that couldve realistically occured?

1807. Continental System is up, and although the Chesepeake-Leopard incident could have been butterflied, it happening anyways would definitely provide the right moment.
 
1807. Continental System is up, and although the Chesepeake-Leopard incident could have been butterflied, it happening anyways would definitely provide the right moment.

That would be interesting. Presumably if the French are willing to go that far they'd supply or sell cheaply additional weapons and supplies so perhaps the invasion meets more success than our history?
 
That would be interesting. Presumably if the French are willing to go that far they'd supply or sell cheaply additional weapons and supplies so perhaps the invasion meets more success than our history?

I wonder if Jefferson in his second term could pull it off though. If im not mistaken, everyone in Congress hated him by then.
 
I wonder if Jefferson in his second term could pull it off though. If im not mistaken, everyone in Congress hated him by then.

A lot of that was a function of stuff involving James Burr and the Embargo Act that was only enacted in 1807. So really, if the former could be mitigated a bit, and the latter butterflied by the different strategic option of joining Napoleon, throw in a rally around the flag effect and Jefferson might do alright.
 
A lot of that was a function of stuff involving James Burr and the Embargo Act that was only enacted in 1807. So really, if the former could be mitigated a bit, and the latter butterflied by the different strategic option of joining Napoleon, throw in a rally around the flag effect and Jefferson might do alright.

OK.
So then let's say the above happens...

A 1807 Franco-US alliance would immediately put Washington at war with Great Britain.
Given that the continental system was in tact, we might see the UK sending a massive armada to New England to stave off an assault on Canada.
 
Top