Quasi War turns to a Total War - Likely outcome?

What is the most likely impact of a full American War against France (& maybe Spain) in 1790s?

  • America gets defeated at sea, and subverted, raided or invaded at home

    Votes: 9 17.6%
  • America wins and seizes Florida & New Orleans

    Votes: 9 17.6%
  • America wins and seizes all Florida and all Louisiana

    Votes: 23 45.1%
  • America wins and seizes all Florida, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico and California

    Votes: 4 7.8%
  • America wins and seizes Florida, Louisiana and Spanish or French Carribean territories

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • America wins and seizes Florida and Louisiana and invades/liberates Mexico or Venezuela

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • America winss and seizes Florida, Louisiana, Cuba, Texas, New Mexico, California and the Philippines

    Votes: 2 3.9%
  • America gets defeated at sea and actually loses some territory on land

    Votes: 3 5.9%

  • Total voters
    51

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I don't know with any specificity what French goals would have been, but there's testimony to American goals had the Quasi-War escalated to declared, all-out war:


"Alexander Hamilton, Washington’s aide-de-camp and secretary during the American Revolutionary War and later Secretary of the Treasury had grown ever more ambitious. Hamilton dreamed of military glory by commanding an army to defeat a possible French invasion. Instead, President Adams, under Washington’s influence, made Hamilton a major general who ranked second to Washington. In the event of a land war, Hamilton’s plan included the seizure of Louisiana and Florida."

From the man himself: "We should certainly look to the possession of the Floridas and Louisiana, and we ought to squint at South America"

What is the most plausible outcome if Adams, or someone in his place, decided that declared war with France, and possibly war with Spain [guilty by association w/ France & guilty by the presumption to own territory the US was interested in] was necessary and ought to proceed?
 
Assuming the U.S wants to fight the war, that is to say it has popular support, than I think it is fairly inevitable that the U.S conquers most of the Louisiana territory, and Florida. The U.S can mobilize enough troops and militia used to fighting in similar terrain than France or Spain can. Not to mention Revolutionary France will soon be occupied in Europe dealing with everyone else in Europe. However the U.S lacks a real Navy especially compared to the Marine National or the Armada Espanola. So I think seizure of Caribbean territory is unlikely. I also think, while New Orleans may be a realistic goal along with Florida, anything beyond that is simply too far in logistical terms for the U.S at that time in my opinion. Of course they can try but an invasion of Mexico will not end well so far from resupply and with so many more Indians in the way.
 
Louisiana and Florida are Spanish at the time, there are no more continental french colonies in north America. If the US declare war with Spain only by its association with France, thus appearing as the aggressor, it may in fact enhance Spain's relation with its colonies, as New Spain is clearly next on the US list. Maintaining the links with the motherland, its navy and its ally, would seem more important than regional autonomy. Second butterfly : if there is a full-fledged war in Northern America on July 7 1798, the French had a fleet and an expedition force just entering Alexandria. Diverting that force to America will seem doable to the Directory. Gen. Bonaparte surely would not listen, but Adm. Brueys could. If Brueys pulls out his fleet, he can avoid a Nile. If he is lucky, he may even reach the Caribbean and simply outgun the US Navy. After Acre, Bonaparte himself may think his talents may be more useful elsewhere, but by that time, the US surely would have controlled both Louisiana and Florida.
 
the Federalists are pleased beyond measure.... they were pro British, and almost certainly a de facto alliance with the British comes about (seeing as they have the same enemies)

Which ultimately means the Americans get pretty much anything they want in North America (except obviously Canada)
 
the Federalists are pleased beyond measure.... they were pro British, and almost certainly a de facto alliance with the British comes about (seeing as they have the same enemies)

Which ultimately means the Americans get pretty much anything they want in North America (except obviously Canada)

Agree, an out and out declaration of war would probably migrate into an alliance with Britain.

The US would likely move on New Orleans and/or Florida, perhaps with British help.

It is possible that Britain itself may try to take these territories but they never seemed a priority to them.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Because of proximity factors I would tend to agree with a favorable outcome on land over the long term.

however I remember reading a scenario at some point not sure when or where or what it was called, but I'm that the French did infiltrate/invade the American south with at least a small force and tried to get a jacobin slave revolt going.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Since the French Navy would (if it tried to send over troops) get the sh*t shot out of it by the Royal Navy, I think the US probably wins that one.

It could have interesting effects on US-British relations, actually, they'd be rosier than OTL for quite a long time - and it might avoid the OTL War of 1812, actually.
 
Since the French Navy would (if it tried to send over troops) get the sh*t shot out of it by the Royal Navy, I think the US probably wins that one.

It could have interesting effects on US-British relations, actually, they'd be rosier than OTL for quite a long time - and it might avoid the OTL War of 1812, actually.

Beware the Royal Navy, though efficient, is not an invincible war-machine : they did not prevent the French fleet going to Ireland in 1796 (a storm prevented it to act, so it was useless) nor did they prevent Bonaparte's fleet from storming Malta and landing in Egypt in 1799.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Beware the Royal Navy, though efficient, is not an invincible war-machine : they did not prevent the French fleet going to Ireland in 1796 (a storm prevented it to act, so it was useless) nor did they prevent Bonaparte's fleet from storming Malta and landing in Egypt in 1799.
True, though sustaining an operation at oceanic distances in spite of a superior enemy blue water navy is probably going to require the French getting lucky repeatedly.
Point taken, though - I'd lay odds on the RN hitting the French fleet, especially if it's a big expedition following a predictable path (OTL the Egypt expedition wasn't intercepted because Nelson, being too efficient, got there so soon he was bored and left before Napoleon showed up...)
 
True, though sustaining an operation at oceanic distances in spite of a superior enemy blue water navy is probably going to require the French getting lucky repeatedly.
Point taken, though - I'd lay odds on the RN hitting the French fleet, especially if it's a big expedition following a predictable path (OTL the Egypt expedition wasn't intercepted because Nelson, being too efficient, got there so soon he was bored and left before Napoleon showed up...)

I'd also bet on the RN ;). But the Nile is really the turning point in the naval war. If Brueys received orders to sail west in order to resupply at Cadix and then goes to the West Indies, he can ditch Nelson who, at the time, was quite clueless. On July 24, Nelson sailed east from Syracuse and went into northern eastern Mediterranean. If the french fleet goes the other way, it is quite safe, Nelson or not. Admittedly, the French navy (and the Spanish) would still be inferior to the RN, but having Nelson called back in disgrace and grounded could be a major asset. They would loose, not be utterly crushed.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I'd also bet on the RN ;). But the Nile is really the turning point in the naval war. If Brueys received orders to sail west in order to resupply at Cadix and then goes to the West Indies, he can ditch Nelson who, at the time, was quite clueless. On July 24, Nelson sailed east from Syracuse and went into northern eastern Mediterranean. If the french fleet goes the other way, it is quite safe, Nelson or not. Admittedly, the French navy (and the Spanish) would still be inferior to the RN, but having Nelson called back in disgrace and grounded could be a major asset. They would loose, not be utterly crushed.
Well, what I mean is more that the RN often did have the rough idea of where to go, so it's sort of chance on any given occasion if an intercept takes place.
Let's just say I wouldn't want to be a sailor on one of those missions.
 
If the US did get involved at this time, might it change Napoleon's and France's success in Europe? Would France gain as much success through the 1800's-1810's?
 
the French disaster in Haiti (the American ally, the Mosquito.. the most decisive weapon in the Caribbean for 4 centuries!) really is hard to prevent.

I have seen discussions that the effective destruction of an entire French Army (and for that matter Napoleons brother in law) was a major factor in persuading Napoleon that North American adventures weren't worth the cost. Roll that back a few years to the Revolutionary period and I suspect a similar result would occur. To do anything meaningful the French need to position troops in the Caribbean (their nearest base) plus a fleet and all of the French islands are disease ridden nightmares in this era. Even in earlier wars no one hung around long to limit as much as possible their losses, and toss in hurricane season and things can get exciting in a disastrous way quickly. Now if for some reason the French had kept Quebec and the British had taken some French Caribbean territory instead in the treaty ending the Seven Years War and now we are talking in terms of useful bases (of course that also might very well have butterflied the American Revolution and Quasi War entirely out of existence)

Assuming of course the French can get past the Royal Navy who don't want French fleets and armies wandering about the Atlantic for any reason at this point in history. (As the Quasi War is taking place at the same time as the First Phase (pre treaty of Amiens) of the Napoleonic Wars
 
I don't see much distinction between the second and third options, given how empty Louisiana was.

the Federalists are pleased beyond measure.... they were pro British, and almost certainly a de facto alliance with the British comes about (seeing as they have the same enemies)

Which ultimately means the Americans get pretty much anything they want in North America (except obviously Canada)

One complication is that the Federalists were anti-Westward expansion, so an annexation of Louisiana would have them be ambivalent, at best. They saw the whole enterprise as an agrarian-centric distraction from the country's industrial future, which is why they opposed things like the National Road.
 
Last edited:
Top