Uber-Canada ?

Magnum

upload_2017-10-10_15-40-47.png


18th Century goes slightly differently, including
- a conflict with the USA following the Oregon Crisis
- more competition over whaling that sees the Russian Far East annexed
- the incorporation of Hawai'i
- a British Panama Canal

as well as the consolidation of most British territories in the area into a single political entity.

Is this workable?
How would this country function?

(I figured 'pre-1900' was appropriate, since the PoD is before 1900. Also, ignore the absence of the Great Lakes and just pretend they're there)
 

Ultima Ratio

Annexing the Russian Far East? That will have some extremely far-reaching consequences, especially in Central Asia (Great Game and all).

Why would the Pacific Islands be part of Canada and not Australia?
 

telynk

Ultima Ratio said:
Once Russia pulls together, they will take it back though, the area is indefensible, especially if this is after the TSR is completed.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that. looking at the map the part of the far east that was taken was kamchatka, not vladivostok. AFAIK Kamchatka still has no rail link to the TSR even in 2017 and is only reachable by boat. I'm assuming that this Canada is still close enough to the UK that the RN would defend Kamchatka from any Russian sea-borne attack.
 

Summoner

Uber-Canada would have started winning earlier than the gains depicted in the map suggest. Im talking about needing to neutralize the potential of the usa earlier in her history. A win in the 1812 war and possesses of the American northwest at the time (michigan, ohio, indian areas) plus revisions to the northers borders of several new england states in canada's favor.
 

Fed

telynk said:
I'm not so sure about that. looking at the map the part of the far east that was taken was kamchatka, not vladivostok. AFAIK Kamchatka still has no rail link to the TSR even in 2017 and is only reachable by boat. I'm assuming that this Canada is still close enough to the UK that the RN would defend Kamchatka from any Russian sea-borne attack.
Click to expand...

Which leads to a second problem - why would Canada take the Russian Far East? It's literally depopulated, extremely hard to actually occupy, and doesn't really have anything worth the hassle. Plus it essentially means Russia will perpetually hate Canada's guts.
 
SealTheRealDeal

SealTheRealDeal

Fed said:
Which leads to a second problem - why would Canada take the Russian Far East? It's literally depopulated, extremely hard to actually occupy, and doesn't really have anything worth the hassle. Plus it essentially means Russia will perpetually hate Canada's guts.
Click to expand...
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky was besieged by Anglo-French forces durring the Crimean War, should it fall, and Alaska also fall due to no HBC-RAC agreement the two could perhaps be treated as a single negotiating point.
 

The Gunslinger

More Oregon is easy, the Caribbean is pretty straight forward, even the Russian Far East is easy enough. Hawaii is hard though. The HBC had a small presence there, but Canadian interests bordered somewhere between none and of so little consequence it wasn't worth mentioning.
 

Guardian54

Banned
You might like my two Canada wank TLs then. One is total ASB, the other is slightly less so (though still requires basically goddamned Immortals in de facto charge of the country).

...Though in SI Archives, territorial gains commensurate to what you depict will take until post-Korean War (client states include Mexico, North Japan, North Korea (by force of conquest and convincing the Chinese to let the North American powers glare at each other on their doorstep), Palestine, and eventually Algeria and Cameroon) unless you count Mexico alone as being enough (in resources, it IS) to match, in which case 1914 is enough.
 

Arkenfolm

Any uber-Canada should include the Old Northwest. Set that border with the US at the Appalachians and Ohio River, and maybe grab Louisiana Territory north of the Arkansas River too.

Fed said:
Which leads to a second problem - why would Canada take the Russian Far East? It's literally depopulated, extremely hard to actually occupy, and doesn't really have anything worth the hassle. Plus it essentially means Russia will perpetually hate Canada's guts.
Click to expand...

How is it hard to occupy? If you have naval superiority, you can keep it away from other powers, regardless of how effective your control is in the interior. Marching overland to occupy it is almost impossible logistically.

Resource-wise, the Soviets weren't just putting gulags there to laugh at people suffering from frostbite. Although compared to Alaska (which has not been strip-mined of resources like Siberia in large part due to environmentalism), it might not be as worth it.
 

The Gunslinger

Fed said:
Which leads to a second problem - why would Canada take the Russian Far East? It's literally depopulated, extremely hard to actually occupy, and doesn't really have anything worth the hassle. Plus it essentially means Russia will perpetually hate Canada's guts.
Click to expand...

Kamchatka is essentially an island, there are no roads of any sort up there and the terrain is so mountainous that everything happens by sea. If Britain rules the waves Russia can't do anything about it. It might ruffle feathers, but no more than Japanese Sakhalin or Chinese Manchuria.

I honestly think that Canada would be even more racist to the Japanese in such a scenario though. Canada loathed the Japanese when they were half a world away, God only knows how Canadians would be when the Japanese were almost right next door.
 

Napoleonrules

Banned
What makes any of you think that the British would allow, let alone go along with, such Uber-Canada ideas, wars, conquests, and colonization schemes? Let alone that the British would then hand over Caribbean islands and the Panama Canal (which how do you even get that to be British, not French?). Many of these ideas seem very far-fetched and while NOT ASB, they border it and are ASB in the fact that no explanation and just handwavium to make it so. Please explain the process otherwise you just have ASB God made it so explanations. Not everything British becomes Canadian, and in fact the more the British win the War of 1812, the less likely for Canada to be one nation.
 

The Gunslinger

Napoleonrules said:
. Not everything British becomes Canadian, and in fact the more the British win the War of 1812, the less likely for Canada to be one nation.
Click to expand...

The road to Confederation was started well before the event took place and was almost inevitable. If there's a Britain that wins 1812 that results in a far more populous and wealthy Canada then the processes is accelerated. There's going to be four Great Lakes provinces (Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Michigan, Wisconsin) and a bridge to the west that isn't cut off by the rocky shores of Lake Superior. Now there's no guarantee that Canada gains everything of Britain's in the western hemisphere, but a Canada that's more wealthy and powerful is going to work within the British Empire to achieve its goals. Places like the Bahamas, which OTL waffled about joining Confederation are going to have much pressure exerted on them by Canada to join up instead of the lukewarm attempt historically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top