WI the American colonist beat the British in Canada

And from a US perspective, it's also better in a sense to hand Quebec over to France as this by itself guarantees the British have to disperse their troops to put a stop to *that* which all by *itself* is a major strategic dividend. It'd be a perfect quid pro quo.

Yeah. Meanwhile, having it in American hands means American troops have to be tied up to accomplish the same thing - a bad investment of very scarce US military resources.
 
Yeah. Meanwhile, having it in American hands means American troops have to be tied up to accomplish the same thing - a bad investment of very scarce US military resources.

Which is another reason not to keep Quebec if the USA gets it. As usual, the problem is the other side in the discussion thinks more territory = power, and in war in particular that ain't always so.
 
By that logic, the 1820 US would be like the 1918 US.

Pretty much so, yes. The problem with taking more territory in a war is you need troops to maintain a near-constant garrison there, troops vulnerable if the enemy decides to reduce that garrison. And leaving Continental Army soldiers that exposed is just the kind of brilliant idea to win the UK the war.
 

anamarvelo

Banned
We're not discussing OTL, we're discussing a Crack!TL where the USA suddenly drops all pretense of being a settler-colonialist state and decides to let Native Americans somehow be treated as human beings worthy of treatment through adherence to rule of law. That being said, in a scenario where the USA occupies Canada on an OTL schedule with that offensive in 1776, for the USA to get French aid during the aftermath of the ATL Saratoga Campaign, or perhaps earlier if the colonials shown an ability to engage in conquests on that scale means France can say "Give us this" and the colonials have zero choice in the matter.



Funny how the only citation you provide for that is your inability to accept a megastate when you can actually see the consequences one produces. Trist's refusal to go for all-Mexico was why Polk wanted him sacked. Perhaps you've missed that we're discussing an alternate history scenario and the butterflies of a successful US conquest of what's a French territory still and not very far removed at all from French rule? Oh, wait, you only want to resort to "it's an AH timeline" to explain how the USA can take over the world. My mistake.



I find it amusing that you accuse me of being a Red Army fanboy by virtue of admiring the people that win wars over the ones that lose them. I happen to admire winners, you like losers.

That being said, the context of a scenario where the Americans are able to win victories like this arguably accelerates Bourbon desire to intervene to screw the British, and both you and Faeelin need a good reason as to how the USA occupying this territory screws the British worse than the Bourbons, especially if they see this as a means to provide a superficial end-run to their defeat in the last war. But I forget, the only states where people invariably follow magical mental programming to favor them are Germany and the United States.

And hold it just a minute here: given everything I've said about admiring the Russian state's successes and ability to expand as a large state, how does this translate into disliking big states again? Have you ever by any chance looked at a map of Russia from Kievan Rus to now? It's always been the Big Damn StateTM in European terms. It always has been, it will always be. And I have zero shame in admiring a state that pretty much was the European 900 lb gorilla. Now, if that happens to mean to you that not thinking Germany being a Big Damn StateTM means I think said states are unnatural, so be it.

the point of this thread is if america beat the brits in candad and britan gave them the claims to the land in the peace treaty
nothing more nothing less
the native are still not even considerd human
 

anamarvelo

Banned
Pretty much so, yes. The problem with taking more territory in a war is you need troops to maintain a near-constant garrison there, troops vulnerable if the enemy decides to reduce that garrison. And leaving Continental Army soldiers that exposed is just the kind of brilliant idea to win the UK the war.

qubec did not like britian if given the oppertunity qubecians whould join the war on the american side so haveing to mainan garrison in qubec and canada
at least until the revltionary war is over is unnesasary
 
qubec did not like britian if given the oppertunity qubecians whould join the war on the american side so haveing to mainan garrison in qubec and canada
at least until the revltionary war is over is unnesasary

Except that they kind of were, and even if they get a better opportunity than OTL, the garrison is to defend it against the British taking it back, not against the Quebecois.

And discussing "what if this almost impossible event happened?" without discussing why and how ti actually managed to work leaves without much to work on - a Quebec that actually supports the AR is very different than OTL.
 
And from a US perspective, it's also better in a sense to hand Quebec over to France as this by itself guarantees the British have to disperse their troops to put a stop to *that* which all by *itself* is a major strategic dividend. It'd be a perfect quid pro quo.

There's no way the Americans are going to be eager to hand Quebec back to the Bourbons when having possession of the entire continent is within their grasp. Also, in the event of the Americans taking Quebec in 75/76, the willingness of Quebecois to join in the Revolution is going to be greatly over-emphasized, so that handing them over to an absolute monarchy is likely going to be seen as scandalous.

That, and there's the fact that France showed virtually no interest in reclaiming Quebec in OTL.
 
There's no way the Americans are going to be eager to hand Quebec back to the Bourbons when having possession of the entire continent is within their grasp. Also, in the event of the Americans taking Quebec in 75/76, the willingness of Quebecois to join in the Revolution is going to be greatly over-emphasized, so that handing them over to an absolute monarchy is likely going to be seen as scandalous.

That, and there's the fact that France showed virtually no interest in reclaiming Quebec in OTL.

France: You can hand New France back to us, or forget about the alliance.

American diplomats: . . . gulp.

Eager or not, what can they say to that? "We can win our own."?

OTL, France wasn't offered the chance of getting it with the US having paid all the costs of retaking it, without France even having to ask, so that doesn't mean it it wouldn't take a chance at getting it if it didn't have to.
 
France: You can hand New France back to us, or forget about the alliance.

American diplomats, 1779 onward: Fuck you, we can reconcile with the British if you really fucking piss us off.

Oh course they won't, but they can threaten it. From 1779 onwards, or really, once the battle of Saratoga is won, all the cards are in the Americans' hands. The British have mostly abandoned New England to focus on the more loyalist South. The Spanish are close to declaring war. The French are preparing for an invasion of Great Britain itself. The British offered the colonists anything they'll accept short of independence in the winter of 1778. The only thing keeping the British Prime Minister from resigning (which would virtually end the war) is George III's pleading for him to stay. The Americans are in increasingly bad shape, financially, but they've really already won. The worst thing that can possibly happen to them is losing total independence or some of the southernmost states, which would require a total reversal of fortune. They're not going to be in the mood for giving up Quebec to France.
 
American diplomats, 1779 onward: Fuck you, we can reconcile with the British if you really fucking piss us off.

Oh course they won't, but they can threaten it. From 1779 onwards, or really, once the battle of Saratoga is won, all the cards are in the Americans' hands. The British have mostly abandoned New England to focus on the more loyalist South. The Spanish are close to declaring war. The French are preparing for an invasion of Great Britain itself. The British offered the colonists anything they'll accept short of independence in the winter of 1778. The only thing keeping the British Prime Minister from resigning (which would virtually end the war) is George III's pleading for him to stay. The Americans are in increasingly bad shape, financially, but they've really already won. The worst thing that can possibly happen to them is losing total independence or some of the southernmost states, which would require a total reversal of fortune. They're not going to be in the mood for giving up Quebec to France.

The worst thing that can happen to them is having foreign aid cut off,t he alliance die, and their armies wither and the British taking advantage of that to achieve success in both theaters (North and South). There is damn little the colonists can do to make France stay on their side - they have to have France want to stay on their side.

Besides, '79 onward is after securing that alliance - which will not be secured except on terms France finds acceptable. Ultimately, if the American rebels/Patriots/traitors/whatever want French help, they'll have to accept that France is not doing this for altruistic reasons.

So if the Americans want to be belligerent idiots, they can - but they're going to be the ones suffering from this, not France.
 
There's no way the Americans are going to be eager to hand Quebec back to the Bourbons when having possession of the entire continent is within their grasp. Also, in the event of the Americans taking Quebec in 75/76, the willingness of Quebecois to join in the Revolution is going to be greatly over-emphasized, so that handing them over to an absolute monarchy is likely going to be seen as scandalous.

That, and there's the fact that France showed virtually no interest in reclaiming Quebec in OTL.

IOTL, yes. ITTL they have a way to regain a North American empire on the cheap. ITTL Quebec has only recently fallen to the British, so they have a much better claim to it. While ITTL also if the Americans want a consistent gunpowder supply and a means to drain off British strength, they either cough it up or their movement is destroyed.

qubec did not like britian if given the oppertunity qubecians whould join the war on the american side so haveing to mainan garrison in qubec and canada
at least until the revltionary war is over is unnesasary

So they conquer something, leave, and the British have no ability to march right back in? How's that work again?

the point of this thread is if america beat the brits in candad and britan gave them the claims to the land in the peace treaty
nothing more nothing less
the native are still not even considerd human

In which case France is like "We're back, and the UK's screwed, what's not to love about this?". A realistic outcome of a Quebec victory for the Patriots is a France-wank.

American diplomats, 1779 onward: Fuck you, we can reconcile with the British if you really fucking piss us off.

Oh course they won't, but they can threaten it. From 1779 onwards, or really, once the battle of Saratoga is won, all the cards are in the Americans' hands. The British have mostly abandoned New England to focus on the more loyalist South. The Spanish are close to declaring war. The French are preparing for an invasion of Great Britain itself. The British offered the colonists anything they'll accept short of independence in the winter of 1778. The only thing keeping the British Prime Minister from resigning (which would virtually end the war) is George III's pleading for him to stay. The Americans are in increasingly bad shape, financially, but they've really already won. The worst thing that can possibly happen to them is losing total independence or some of the southernmost states, which would require a total reversal of fortune. They're not going to be in the mood for giving up Quebec to France.

Actually ITTL all France does is say "Fine, no gunpowder, no regular army allies, and you go ahead and handle this all by yourself." Then the British win and the Founders are either exiled and/or hung.
 
Top