Size of the CSA

Groan.
More seriously, Spain never sold colonies so unless you can explain an absolute change in Spanish policy over a matter of centuries...

If I remember correctly, Spain sold its remaining Pacific territories to Germany following the conclusion of the Spanish-American War.
 
Ariosto, a single island chain useless without the other colonies which the US apparently didn't even know to request at the negotiations.
 

Quatermain

Banned
More seriously, Spain never sold colonies so unless you can explain an absolute change in Spanish policy over a matter of centuries...

Saying that because a country or government or person never did X in our history means they'll never do X in any other history for any other reason kind of defeats the whole purpose of alternate history, doesn't it?

I never said that outright purchase was the only way, either, or that all of the Caribbean islands would become Confederate possessions outright.

Maybe in this timeline, the political troubles that lead to Spain losing all it's colonies except for Cuba and Puerto Rico stretch just that much further, and they lose those two as well. The CSA takes a hefty political/economic interest, and before long either/both islands apply for statehood.

Or the above scenario happens, and the two countries never do apply for statehood, but given the poltical/economic interest the CSA takes, the two countries never have much trouble figuring out which side their bread is buttered on, so to speak.

Maybe in this timeline, the same thing happens to Cuba that happened in Texas. You get more and more and more Anglos moving in, and they rebel against Spain, which has already lost almost all of it's other colonies and is facing political upheaval at home. They win, and either petition to join the CSA, or maintain their independence and develop a relationship with the CSA much like the American/Canadian relationship of the 20th C.
 
I wasn't trying to make it sound like they would've, but, I honestly couldn't remember if it were true or just me spending too much time on AH.com..

I understood you. I think Grimm was being sarcastic. Although I am not sure. I believe in 1895 Wilhelm made the offer to the Spanish and Spain refused as they always did.

Edit: my point was that Germany made the offer and therefore the reasons would be different than Spain offering. Which never did.
 
Last edited:
Color in what you think should go to what

World%202009.png
 
No change from that map that I can see. The Union had by that time secured the Border States and the claimed Confederate territories. Later on though, there are the following to consider:

- Sonora and Chihuahua: Mexican states that would grant the Confederacy access to the Pacific Ocean through their own territory, rather than having to depend upon either Mexico or the United States.

- Cuba and Puerto Rico: I would only be a matter of time before a Confederate President or some incident lead to a war between the Confederacy and Spain, with the Confederacy winning. While their navy would not be large, it would easily be more advanced than the Spanish Navy. Of course, it is not set in stone, and may not come to pass. It is a definite if the Confederacy can get either the British or the French to join in the venture in return for the Philippines.

- Panama: Just to mention this before it is brought up. The United States will not allow for the Confederacy to have a naval advantage over itself, and would threaten war if the CSA sought to try and construct a canal. Therefore, it is more likely that the Panama Canal is a French-Confederate Project, or the Nicaragua Canal is a British-Confederate Project, with the former in both cases being the main controller, forcing the United States to acquiesce.
 
No change from that map that I can see. The Union had by that time secured the Border States and the claimed Confederate territories. Later on though, there are the following to consider:

- Sonora and Chihuahua: Mexican states that would grant the Confederacy access to the Pacific Ocean through their own territory, rather than having to depend upon either Mexico or the United States.

- Cuba and Puerto Rico: I would only be a matter of time before a Confederate President or some incident lead to a war between the Confederacy and Spain, with the Confederacy winning. While their navy would not be large, it would easily be more advanced than the Spanish Navy. Of course, it is not set in stone, and may not come to pass. It is a definite if the Confederacy can get either the British or the French to join in the venture in return for the Philippines.

- Panama: Just to mention this before it is brought up. The United States will not allow for the Confederacy to have a naval advantage over itself, and would threaten war if the CSA sought to try and construct a canal. Therefore, it is more likely that the Panama Canal is a French-Confederate Project, or the Nicaragua Canal is a British-Confederate Project, with the former in both cases being the main controller, forcing the United States to acquiesce.
Makes sense, though i would like someone to divide the brder regions
 
Quatermain, the Spanish troubles you mention are decades past by the time ACW has begun so the idea of them spreading to Cuba or Puerto Rico in, say, the 1870s, after a forty plus year absence is a non-starter.

As for settlers, consider that Texas was a huge territory with a minsicule population while Cuba is an island with more people than any state in the CSA. Ignoring Spain being able to veto such settlers it would take tens of thousands to form a tiny minority in Cuba.




Ariosto, as I mentioned the topic has been raised and there isn't the slightest chance of the CSA being able to match for the Spanish at sea for decades to come, if ever. For that matter, based on available revenue, the CSA won't be able to field a fleet close to Spain's in this century. If the CSA is stupid enough to start a war they will be lucky not to lose the Florida Keys.



As for Panama, what would the British or French gain by giving the CSA a partial interest in a canal? The British or French will seize the area if they wish regardless of the CSA's position, build it with no need of CSA support and the CSA can't even invest more than a pittance. When do the British or French give away valuable properties for nothing?
 
Ariosto, as I mentioned the topic has been raised and there isn't the slightest chance of the CSA being able to match for the Spanish at sea for decades to come, if ever. For that matter, based on available revenue, the CSA won't be able to field a fleet close to Spain's in this century. If the CSA is stupid enough to start a war they will be lucky not to lose the Florida Keys.



As for Panama, what would the British or French gain by giving the CSA a partial interest in a canal? The British or French will seize the area if they wish regardless of the CSA's position, build it with no need of CSA support and the CSA can't even invest more than a pittance. When do the British or French give away valuable properties for nothing?

As for Cuba......meh. The Confederacy may not be smart and try anyway simply because they believe they can whip them, and then end up with a bloody nose, with Status Quo Ante Bellum.

When I mentioned Panama and Nicaragua, I did not mean that the Confederacy actually controlled the canal in any capacity, rather that they would be able to use it, whereas it could be denied to the United States.
 
What would be the most reasonable size of the confederacy if the war ended in Union armistice in september of 1863? It involved the army of the potomac being destroyed in the Seven days' battle and putting Lee in a position to siege Washington. Lincoln is unable to pull troops out of the wesern theater because he dosen't was the CSA invading the Midwest. The confederates surround Washington in early September but before they begin the siege Lincoln requests an armistice. That is why I started this thread, so I could create a reasonably-sized Confederacy.
 
What would be the most reasonable size of the confederacy if the war ended in Union armistice in september of 1863? It involved the army of the potomac being destroyed in the Seven days' battle and putting Lee in a position to siege Washington. Lincoln is unable to pull troops out of the wesern theater because he dosen't was the CSA invading the Midwest. The confederates surround Washington in early September but before they begin the siege Lincoln requests an armistice. That is why I started this thread, so I could create a reasonably-sized Confederacy.

If I may point out, the Seven Days Battle was in 1862 not 1863. I have not seen any ATL using it, but I am a newbie to this forum. It certainly seems possible seeing how it was McClellan in command.

If you want a September 1863 armistice I'd recommend either having Lee listen to Longstreet @ Gettysburg and not attack Little Round Top and instead counter-marching to get between the Army of the Potomac and Washington. Or perhaps have Stonewall not be shot by his own men @ Chancellorsville and goes on to lead a successful night-attack that finishes off the Army of the Potomac.

HoC
 

archaeogeek

Banned
What would be the most reasonable size of the confederacy if the war ended in Union armistice in september of 1863? It involved the army of the potomac being destroyed in the Seven days' battle and putting Lee in a position to siege Washington. Lincoln is unable to pull troops out of the wesern theater because he dosen't was the CSA invading the Midwest. The confederates surround Washington in early September but before they begin the siege Lincoln requests an armistice. That is why I started this thread, so I could create a reasonably-sized Confederacy.

An Armistice in 1863 is too late to get the border states, which have since then thrown their lot entirely with the union seeing attempts by the CSA to mess with their own politics as invasion, so their best bet is to get New Mexico territory and that's about it.
 
The problem is that by 1863 not only have the CSA been driven from New Mexico but they've laid waste to much of the western border of Texas to stop the Union from invading.
 
Top