South of the Rio Grande: what if the U.S. asked for a few more provinces from Mexico?

Exactly, so there's no explanation for it not to have happened.

Oh, there's an explanation, all right, but it has nothing to do with economics or politics. Simply put, White America was pretty racist then (people who think today's situation compares need to read more). Mexico being full of Mexicans was a problem. Too many brown skins, from that point of view.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
They basically TRIED this IOTL, and it totally fell on its ass. The most that the USA is going to annex is some of the Northeast, like the cotton/ranching belts. Maybe they can get a garrison in Veracruz if they're really tough.

Durango and Zacatecas is too much, to say nothing of Sinola.

Yucatan and Tabasco: no way Jose.

Sonora and Chihuahua aren't going anywhere, and the US was never truly interested in Baja; it had all the good parts of California.
 
Oh, there's an explanation, all right, but it has nothing to do with economics or politics. Simply put, White America was pretty racist then (people who think today's situation compares need to read more). Mexico being full of Mexicans was a problem. Too many brown skins, from that point of view.

Interestingly, that is the opposite of true.

In fact the only accurate part is "it has nothing to do with economics or politics."

It was Trist's fellow-feeling and sympathy for the common humanity of the Mexicans, and his embarrassment at the naked landgrab launched by his homeland that decided events. This attitude - rather bizarre for its time - overcame any allegiance to nation or race to limit Mexico's loss to only half of its territory, where it might have been three quarters.
 
They basically TRIED this IOTL, and it totally fell on its ass.

Really? I've never heard of it. Do you mean the wartime occupation? Please cite; this matches nothing I've read.

The most that the USA is going to annex is some of the Northeast, like the cotton/ranching belts. Maybe they can get a garrison in Veracruz if they're really tough.

Well if they go and take that land, they're sure to keep it. It'll fill up with ambitious cotton farmers in no-time. I agree with that much, at any rate.

Durango and Zacatecas is too much, to say nothing of Sinola.

Why?

I mean, what almost happened wouldn't include any of those in their entirety. Only about half of the first and last were above the line, and a negligible section of Zacatecas. But why would you argue against the possibility of holding them?

Incidentally, I see I wrote Coahuila where I meant Sinaloa, a couple posts back. To edit!

Yucatan and Tabasco: no way Jose.

Oh, I could manage Yucatan fairly easily. If the US had accepted their request for aid in the Caste War instead of Mexico, for example. But you're right, that's another timeline entirely. It's not a reasonable outcome of OTL's war, and certainly wasn't one of the instructions Polk sent. No one was terribly interested at the time.

Sonora and Chihuahua aren't going anywhere, and the US was never truly interested in Baja; it had all the good parts of California.

Why? Your authoritative sentiments are only as valid as your justification for them. I assume you have some knowledge to back this up, but if you're not going to share, it's not really a contribution.
 
Top