What if Britain Kept All of Oregon?

What if through some reason, britain kept all of oregon. Would this make canada a more powerful country today? (Military and population wise; that is).
 

FDW

Banned
What if through some reason, britain kept all of oregon. Would this make canada a more powerful country today? (Military and population wise; that is).

To a certain degree, yes, as they would have more warm water ports in the Pacific. And population would most certainly be larger, though likely consisting of different amounts of the groups that settled the region IOTL (fewer Germans, more Brits). Also, you'd see a much larger and faster growing San Francisco, as that's one of the few Pacific ports that the US would be left with besides San Diego. In fact, you;d also see a faster growing San Diego and much more development in far northern California, particularly in the area around Eureka/Humboldt Bay.
 
To a certain degree, yes, as they would have more warm water ports in the Pacific. And population would most certainly be larger, though likely consisting of different amounts of the groups that settled the region IOTL (fewer Germans, more Brits). Also, you'd see a much larger and faster growing San Francisco, as that's one of the few Pacific ports that the US would be left with besides San Diego. In fact, you;d also see a faster growing San Diego and much more development in far northern California, particularly in the area around Eureka/Humboldt Bay.

But the Oregon issues predated the Mexican War didn't they? How do we know it isn't butterflied?

That said, I don't think it would be. The Americans are going to be hungrier for land now that they've lucked out in Oregon, so perhaps they go for a much more annex-y route than OTL. Britain keeping Oregon has some strange consequences regarding American expansionism and the whole 'manifest destiny' bull.

It will probably cool relations between the US and Britain in later years, that may come to a climax during the inevitable civil war.
 
I agree with you NZ, that manifest destiny was bullshit to justify land grabs by the US, but it was there (the justification, not the actual destiny from god to annex everything in sight).
Gotta admit it though, it does make Ameriwanks a lot easier.
That said, w/o Oregon the US may look further south to scratch its expansionism itch, be it more of Mexico or the Caribbean.
Canada will definitely focus a bit more to the west. Did the US still claim the non-straight northern border of the Louisiana Purchase up until the Oregon dispute was 'resolved'? Maybe butterfly away that straight line.
 

FDW

Banned
But the Oregon issues predated the Mexican War didn't they? How do we know it isn't butterflied?

That said, I don't think it would be. The Americans are going to be hungrier for land now that they've lucked out in Oregon, so perhaps they go for a much more annex-y route than OTL. Britain keeping Oregon has some strange consequences regarding American expansionism and the whole 'manifest destiny' bull.

It will probably cool relations between the US and Britain in later years, that may come to a climax during the inevitable civil war.

The Oregon issue and the Mexican war happened more or less at the same time, and given the tensions in Texas, the war would've likely gone down regardless of how Oregon was resolved.

I agree with you NZ, that manifest destiny was bullshit to justify land grabs by the US, but it was there (the justification, not the actual destiny from god to annex everything in sight).
Gotta admit it though, it does make Ameriwanks a lot easier.
That said, w/o Oregon the US may look further south to scratch its expansionism itch, be it more of Mexico or the Caribbean.
Canada will definitely focus a bit more to the west. Did the US still claim the non-straight northern border of the Louisiana Purchase up until the Oregon dispute was 'resolved'? Maybe butterfly away that straight line.

The straight border dates to 1818, when the British and the US did a territory swap to straighten out the border on the 49th parallel.
 
With a much larger power centre on the West coast, I would imagine BNA would become two federations rather than one.
 
With a much larger power centre on the West coast, I would imagine BNA would become two federations rather than one.

Quite possible. Oregon would be much more able to survive on her own that just British Columbia.

It's also possible that we see a tripartite Confederation, Oregon, Canada and Quebec all under a single unifying British North America with a fourth Plains Confederation added when the area's settled.
 
Quite possible. Oregon would be much more able to survive on her own that just British Columbia.

It's also possible that we see a tripartite Confederation, Oregon, Canada and Quebec all under a single unifying British North America with a fourth Plains Confederation added when the area's settled.

If you're dividing it up like that, you'd probably have a confederation of the maritime as well.
 
The problem is that Britain can CLAIM it all as much as it likes, but unless it is able to back up this claim by settlement, by investment, by treaties with the Indians and by force, the US is NOT going to accept it.

Obviously, if the British DO do this, then somewhere else is not going to be getting its OTL attention - maybe no Sikh Wars and let Afghanistan go hang? Thus a stronger Russia down the line quite probably.

But even that might not get the USA to accept the now-reality of the situation without a war

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
This is the gridlock I've run into for my TL at the moment :eek:

So far I've had the British and Americans unwilling to risk war over the territory but the British are much more belligerent as President Cass is more concerned about Mexico than he is Oregon and is more than willing to allow the British to take the land they want if it allows a hasty downing of tensions.

I just can't decide on whether they will take their minimum claim or all of it.
 
I think you'd have to change the fact that Americans were moving overland to OR to settle the place, which is partly why the Brits accepted the OTL agreement... we had 'boots on the ground' there already. POD this away, and you have a better chance for Britain to claim the whole place...
 
I think you'd have to change the fact that Americans were moving overland to OR to settle the place, which is partly why the Brits accepted the OTL agreement... we had 'boots on the ground' there already. POD this away, and you have a better chance for Britain to claim the whole place...
<shameless plug>A PoD in the War of 1812 (or that changed the results thereof) and kept the US confined east of the Mississippi would keep Oregon British </shameless plug>
 
The British can certainly claim it. However, the American drive to expand west was a bit more forceful than the British one. This could actually result in America owning more of the Oregon territory, as wayward Yankees end up outnumbering Brits and eventually, perhaps, pulling a Texas.
 
The British can certainly claim it. However, the American drive to expand west was a bit more forceful than the British one. This could actually result in America owning more of the Oregon territory, as wayward Yankees end up outnumbering Brits and eventually, perhaps, pulling a Texas.
Should James Douglas become governor, as he did OTL, we need not worry about that. American immigration levels would be kept small and the rights of those Yankees would be limited. The Americans already in Oregon would be offered a choice: swear allegiance to the Crown or leave.

With big empty lands in the Louisiana Purchase area (and soon, the Mexican Cession) readily available for them, Yankees wouldn't be much of an issue after a while.
 
Top