Wet Coast, I've barely touched the absurdity of the British calling into serious question the reliability of diplomatic agreements with London just as they are sitting down to determine the future of all Europe and more.
As for New Orleans...the treaty has been signed, the British(and Americans) have agreed to return to the pre-war boundaries and New Orleans lies within American territory so that would about as credible as the British finding out that the Americans, in the last days before signing the treaty, moved into Canada and are recognizing the decision by the occupied piece of Canada to become independent and expect the British to go along.
However the difference here is that the existing population of the region, which were never actually given a choice on joining the US, have decided to leave it. Apart from anything else there are probably a number of elderly survivors from the 1780's who would feel some affinity with them.
stevep, he had reintroduced conscription for the classes of 1814(never called up) and 1815(he just returned) but no others. Unfortunately that alone was an alarming number of men. As for Belgium, they're being assigned to Holland so a certain level of support for France is assured.
Interesting. As I said I had heard otherwise. Do you have a source please? Afraid I don't as this was one of those things I read somewhere a decade or more back.
The British are distracted at an unfortunate time. However I can see them seeking to mobilise against Napoleon very quickly, calling back disbanded regulars, seeking mercenaries to help fill the ranks, offering funds and equipment to allies. They will be caught off balance but definitely won't be seen as unreliable.As for Austria, the British are obviously distracted and looking unreliable so it might occur to Austria that a continent where Russia and Prussia dominate, if they defeat Napoleon, may not be so desireable and if France is offers a reasonable settlement, perhaps leaving Austria all the gains in Italy...as for gains Prussia certainly did better in 1815 than did Austria.
Actually while I could see Britain sending some forces west as a precaution and possibly trying to get Wellington to go, although he would at least have objected very strongly I can't see the mass shipment of forces that seems to be suggested. This is more I think than in late 1814, after Napoleon was defeated and when we were formally at war with the US].
By this time I think Boney's credibility is shot. He's gone back on his word and proved too aggressive too many times and all the great powers will be determined not to let him go on the warpath again. [Especially if as you say he's mobilising a vast new army. That will have everybody twitching]. After all he has at least as much chance of success in taking the Italian lands from Austria than he has of taking the Rhineland from the barely established Prussian presence.
I agree that compared to ~1790 Austria came out a lot worse than Prussia, especially since that was because it had fought France more than any other continental power. However it's still widely seen as the more powerful state and the leader of the German Confederation. Furthermore politically if France, which is not trusted at this point even under the Bourbons let alone Napoleon, is to be restrained there needs to be a strong presence on the Rhine. This can't be Austrian as that would raise too many concerns about Hapsburg power so it's got to be Prussian as other German states are too weak or have been associated with Napoleon.