WI No War of 1812?

I doubt if there would be any change of significance apart from a Lonnie Donegan song about the Battle of New Orleans not being written and no reference to the Rocket's Red Glare in the American National Anthem.



my first thought was to quip that we wouldn't be ruling all of Canada. now I'm wondering what kind of anthem the US might have ended up with if not for the poem set to the tune of a German drinking song.

a different anthem could have some effects on how Americans conduct themselves. imagine if the national bird was a turkey instead of an eagle.
 
now I'm wondering what kind of anthem the US might have ended up with if not for the poem set to the tune of a German drinking song.

a different anthem could have some effects on how Americans conduct themselves. imagine if the national bird was a turkey instead of an eagle.

Hail Columbia, I'd guess, would remain the national anthem.

Interesting if this butterflied into our nation being colloquially known as "Columbia" today instead of America.
 
Well, minus the War of 1812, I truly believe the United States would have been at war with Spain no later than 1820. There were numerous disputes between the two countries that had led to continuous tension since immediately following the 1783 Treaty of Paris.

--Status of West Florida
--Cost of Trade down the Mississippi
--Spanish support for Native state in both Northwest and Southwest portions of the US.
--Spanish support for secessionists in Kentucky region

After the Louisiana Purchase a number of other conflicts arose.

--Agreeing on a border encompassing the Mississippi Watershed
--Control of New Orleans
--Settlement and control of Florida
--Control of the eastern portion of Texas
--American access to the Pacific Ocean

Furthermore American support for the independence movements occurring throughout Latin America angered Spain.

If the problems between Britain and the United States were solved peacefully then the US would have been free to turn its full attention towards Spain. After occupying Florida, American adventurers almost certainly would have attempted to capture New Orleans. The city was the key to the Mississippi and controlling the river trade was vital for the prosperity of those states west of the Appalachians.

Also, with reduced tensions between the US and UK, trade would have increased and New England would have prospered. The entire nation would have had reason to support a war against Spain. Spain though was in a bad position having been pounded by the Peninsular Campaign and facing rebellions in Mexico and South America. I think the US would have done well in this war and may have been able to build up better relations with Latin America by directly assisting their wars of independence.

As for Andrew Jackson, a war with Spain would have given him opportunity enough to make a name for himself.

Benjamin
 
If the problems between Britain and the United States were solved peacefully then the US would have been free to turn its full attention towards Spain. After occupying Florida, American adventurers almost certainly would have attempted to capture New Orleans. The city was the key to the Mississippi and controlling the river trade was vital for the prosperity of those states west of the Appalachians.

The US already owned New Orleans and the whole Louisiana Purchase territory before this aborted war in 1812. 'Gunning for Spain' would be more a matter of getting Texas and the Southwest that much sooner...in OTL, Spain allowed Americans to settle in Texas, due to a tiny population there that was barely growing... Mexico later affirmed this (for a while)...
 
The US already owned New Orleans and the whole Louisiana Purchase territory before this aborted war in 1812. 'Gunning for Spain' would be more a matter of getting Texas and the Southwest that much sooner...in OTL, Spain allowed Americans to settle in Texas, due to a tiny population there that was barely growing... Mexico later affirmed this (for a while)...

Yes, as per the agreement with France, but Spain was slow to recognize American land claims. Spain claimed all of West Florida which extended to the Mississippi and in their eyes included New Orleans. While they never militarily contested American occupation of New Orleans, they did not completely cede the region until 1819. Prior to that they continued to attempt to charge duties to American transportation traveling the River and threatened to cut New Orleans off.

Along with Florida and the Mississippi questions a war with Spain would have settled the problems that the Transcontinental Treaty of 1819 addressed in OTL. It is likely that the US would have gained far more of what would become (at least until 1848) northern Mexico. As it would most likely include San Francisco Bay the push to control the Puget Sound would have been lessened. This would bring about a different 1818/9? US-UK agreement over the joint occupation of the Oregon Territory. though with Lewis & Clark Expedition and Astor's fur trade American claims to the lower Oregon Territory were at least as strong as British claims. In this scenario the US probably would have accepted the Columbia River as the boundary, especially if this meant keeping Britain neutral during a war with Spain.

Benjamin
 
Papers!

As a life long New Englander, I can put some minds to rest on the question of America's DoW against the British Empire. Granted there was "childishness" in America's political thinking at the time. Not to mention arrogance. But was there any less arrogance, or indeed not far more in the halls of the Admiralty? IIRC, the British government didn't enjoy the complete command/control over the senior service that it does today. If the Admiralty wanted to impress American seamen, they did, without consequence. Often, the impressed seamen were hanged as disciplinary examples to the British crews. After all, it's not like the captains had to worry about angry families waiting for them with pitchforks and torches in Southampton over executing Americans.


By the time of the start of the War of 1812, more Americans were in the Royal Navy than in the US Navy. I don't recall the exact numbers, but it was between 1100 and 1200 men! When presented with complaints from the US State Department, the British Government would always defer to the Admiralty. The Admiralty, in without a doubt the most galling of statements one could imagine, would reply that the men in question, having no proper documents to prove their nationality, would not be released. This announcement, used repeatedly, could not be designed better to infuriate the US populace, since every American seaman had been carrying such documents to sea for many years (for obvious reasons). When the documents were produced, the British captains would simply destroy them.


It was impressment, and only impressment, that united the American people over the war. Yes, those who had designs on the west or Canada WERE engaged in very childish imperialism. And it was they who sparked the fire. But it was the limitless arrogance of a Royal Navy, apparently beyond the control of its' own government(?), that provided the fuel for that fire.
 
Last edited:
--Spanish support for secessionists in Kentucky region

--Spanish support for Native state in both Northwest and Southwest portions of the US.


Benjamin
Seccesionists in Kentucky at that time???? and above all: a Native state in both Northwest and Southwest portions of the US!!!!!!??????? What do you mean with that? because it seems really interesting
 
Top