WI No Louisana Purchase

Would Jefferson want to invade? What was his view on the idea of U.S expansionism anyway?

In the case of New Orleans, practically all of America wanted the place (the rest of the LA territory was regarded by nearly one and all as useless)... but the city was a very important port for US exports, and thus, the US really wanted control of it... so, I was speculating that, in the event of no clear settlement of the region after Napoleon's defeat, the US might just annex the city (if it can find the military forces to do it)... and then have to deal with Spain's claims afterwards...
 
In the case of New Orleans, practically all of America wanted the place (the rest of the LA territory was regarded by nearly one and all as useless)... but the city was a very important port for US exports, and thus, the US really wanted control of it... so, I was speculating that, in the event of no clear settlement of the region after Napoleon's defeat, the US might just annex the city (if it can find the military forces to do it)... and then have to deal with Spain's claims afterwards...

O.K, point conceded (I remember reading somewhere that one of the reasons Jefferson had doubts about the purchase was that it meant recognising a French right to be in Louisana).

What would change from the use of war to acquire New Orleans instead of settlement? I can think of some, but what else?

(Ones I have thought of:
-No institution of the territory (which existed in areas before they became states
-Strict interpretation of the constitution less discredited, as the Louisana Purchase is not cited against them. This isn't that important, though, as in OTL I can't think of it being cited much)
 
I suppose Spain could demand payment for the territory, which the US is likely to grant... after all, the US had been trying to buy the city for years... they'd like to have ownership all neat and tidy..
 
If Jefferson (as the POD suggests) sticks to his guns on the question of purchasing New Orleans in the first place, why would he accept what was effectively a purchase later?
 
If Jefferson (as the POD suggests) sticks to his guns on the question of purchasing New Orleans in the first place, why would he accept what was effectively a purchase later?

in this instance, I think practicality will override all other considerations, and the US will take NO if it has a chance to do so... and if Spain demands payment, I think he'd do it, to get the 'title' free and clear, so to speak... although, I do wonder at what the country might think; after all, they already occupy NO, and might decide that payment for it is unnecessary...
 
Wouldn't that make Jefferson less likely to do it? He could reason that it was best to take NO by force, thus both keeping his political interests in better shape and being more consistent with his principles.
 
Top