The Convention Fails

What do you think of what I did with France, Highlander? Should I give a different officer a shot, or is Ney good with you too? I'm trying to work out some stuff for Europe, until about 1820's ish, so it'd be good to know which guy you want in charge.
 

Highlander

Banned
What do you think of what I did with France, Highlander? Should I give a different officer a shot, or is Ney good with you too? I'm trying to work out some stuff for Europe, until about 1820's ish, so it'd be good to know which guy you want in charge.

Sounds fine, though I'm not too knowledgeable of French officials from this period. I'll look into it though.

From what you posted before, the US could act as something like a buffer between the southern and northern states, and a convenient mediator. It would be interesting to achieve something of a neutral mindset their, with little interest in admitting new territory (perhaps due to a rebuff in the Northwest Territory, making something similar to a North American Switzerland.) Along the same line, it would be interesting if that same area was left in conflict until the 1840s or '50s. Especially if the competing claims of New England were combined into one.

A North and South Carolina Union, that may be a bit iffy. They were so different culturally that it may cause issues, unless there was some sort of outside stimulus to unite them.
 

Highlander

Banned
Also, another thought, Nek: without the War of 1812, I wonder if Canada would still develop a national identity?
 
Also, another thought, Nek: without the War of 1812, I wonder if Canada would still develop a national identity?

As much/little as the 13 colonies did in TTL I imagine.

Perhaps, in time, the nation-states north of the Mason-Dixon Line, the Maritime and Quebec (Upper+Lower Canada) will congiel into one nation, purchase Rupert's Land and push west as Canada did OTL in the late 19th Century.
 
From what you posted before, the US could act as something like a buffer between the southern and northern states, and a convenient mediator. It would be interesting to achieve something of a neutral mindset their, with little interest in admitting new territory (perhaps due to a rebuff in the Northwest Territory, making something similar to a North American Switzerland.)

So, essentially Neutral Ground. *idea* Britain and USA end up going to war over the Lower Peninsula, and USA loses heavily for it, crippled. Hawks are thrown out of Congress, and USA focuses on rebuilding and trade over territorial ambitions - strict neutrality on military affairs.

Along the same line, it would be interesting if that same area was left in conflict until the 1840s or '50s. Especially if the competing claims of New England were combined into one.

Hmm... Of course, the difficulty will be in preventing one of the sides from simply deciding it in a peace treaty after a war. Could we bring it forward to 1830's or so?

A North and South Carolina Union, that may be a bit iffy. They were so different culturally that it may cause issues, unless there was some sort of outside stimulus to unite them.

The outside stimulus I was going for was the potential for losing their western claims to Virginia, but I see your point. I might go for South Carolina befriending Georgia and Britain instead, given the issues between NC/SC. A Southern Confederation?


Canada - that could be... interesting. The way I see it is like the 13 after the F&I War: the strong outside threat has been removed, but Britain doesn't want to remove its influence. Whereas IOTL a Canadian identity was forged by US action against the region, with a pro-British bent, here we could see it created by a strong British rule...
 
Top