WWI: Global War

They shall fight and lose, same as OTL everywhere in the Americas, same as with any successor state of the European colonial empires, due to massive technological inferiority and limited numbers.

Here it is advocated a different outcome must happen, just because the ATL opponent is a slaver state, everything else being the same, even if militaries of OTL states with similar counter-insurgency-focused organization and similar social issues (peonage instead of chattel slavery - not that different) always won.

A different outcome "must" happen because the ATL opponent is a generally f--ked up mess with enough issues to overload the ship of state to the point of sinking before it starts trying to send its pitifully undersized and overstretched regular army out to chase Apache on their home ground.

The idea that the CSA failing to do what the USA only accomplished with difficulty is an Apachewank is kind of hysterical.
 
A different outcome "must" happen because the ATL opponent is a generally f--ked up mess with enough issues to overload the ship of state to the point of sinking before it starts trying to send its pitifully undersized and overstretched regular army out to chase Apache on their homeground.

Exactly. And if that army is larger, it's still going to be predominantly employed in repressing slaves and anti-CS Whites. This'd be more the North American version of the Caucasian War than a "victory" for the Apaches and Navajo as it is.
 
Exactly. And if that army is larger, it's still going to be predominantly employed in repressing slaves and anti-CS Whites. This'd be more the North American version of the Caucasian War than a "victory" for the Apaches and Navajo as it is.

Not a pleasant situation for anyone including the natives - but not CSA territory in any sense worth taking seriously. It might claim it, it might be legally acknowledged as controlling it by all white observers, but those on the ground will curse Richmond for sending them out to die for "a few acres of desert".

And that situation kept up for too long is not something the CSA can sustain, because the support of Poor White Soldiers for the planter class is not nearly as strong as the support of the Russian people for the Tsar.

Which, all things considered, is not a pleasant thought. The CSA does not need more internal dissent.
 
Not a pleasant situation for anyone including the natives - but not CSA territory in any sense worth taking seriously. It might claim it, it might be legally acknowledged as controlling it by all white observers, but those on the ground will curse Richmond for sending them out to die for "a few acres of desert".

And that situation kept up for too long is not something the CSA can sustain, because the support of Poor White Soldiers for the planter class is not nearly as strong as the support of the Russian people for the Tsar.

Which, all things considered, is not a pleasant thought. The CSA does not need more internal dissent.

Exactly. The primary reason the Apaches have this grace period is because Richmond is a very weak society by comparison to Washington, or even to Mexico. Which let's not forget has been a society where civil war is the national pasttime depending on when we're talking about.
 
Exactly. The primary reason the Apaches have this grace period is because Richmond is a very weak society by comparison to Washington, or even to Mexico. Which let's not forget has been a society where civil war is the national pasttime depending on when we're talking about.

What makes Mexico stronger than the CSA? Stronger in this regard, at least.

My knowledge of Mexican internal history is too limited to compare it to the CSA, so I'm all ears.
 
What makes Mexico stronger than the CSA? Stronger in this regard, at least.

My knowledge of Mexican internal history is too limited to compare it to the CSA, so I'm all ears.

Mexico abolished slavery at the time of independence, the CSA cannot ideologically abolish it as this renders its entire existence a ridiculous irrelevancy.
 
Top