Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Post Civil War US seeks revenge on Great Britain

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
Author
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Post Civil War US seeks revenge on Great Britain
    Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 18:34
Its 1868 and the US has decided to declare war for grievances during the Civil War. What do you think will happen?
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 19:20
Britain will sink the US navy, attempt to invade via Canada, and be repulsed near Washington DC. The Americans could try to take back the occupied states, but they will be overstretched and unable to gain much ground. Southerners might exploit the invasion and rise up to restore the Confederacy, fighting a guerilla war against the better-equipped US army. It will end in a similar way to the War of 1812, with a peace treaty restoring the status quo as eventually both sides will tire of fighting
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 19:28
I have to dispute that the US army and navy were huge. Besides the fact that the Southerners wont result to a guerilla war against their relatives again. They know they can't ein and they just went through an exhausting war. I'm sure theyd rather side with their Northerner brothers than the Brits. Lets not forget all those free blacks in the South either. The US has the leaders, experienced troops, and supplie to quickly take Canada and possibly the Carribean islands. I see a US acquisition of Canada and the Carribean islands and Bermuda.
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 19:29
Dont forget that this British force will have to ship all its supplies overseas into hostile territory across the ocean.
Back to Top
Kevinmeath View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16-May-2011
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 84
  Quote Kevinmeath Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 19:43
Was the 'northern' army paid off by 1868? so has to be re-raised from battle weary people.
 
Where does all this love for the Union suddenly come from in the South? may be they decide to take the opportunity to restart the Civil war.
 
Well the Canadians will welcome the Americans with open arms delighted to be releaved of terrible British opprerssion just like they did in 1812 and the American revolution-- oh hang on!
 
So we have war in the North -- war in the South-- and the largest War fleet in the world by the power of 2 attacking American trade/ coast.
 
Sounds a good scenerio.
cymru am byth
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 19:52
Its been 3 years. Why should the South side with the British? The slaves are all frees so thr biggest reason for fighting is gone. All confederate armies surrendered and NO guerilla movements were waged. Why should they fight each other again for a foreign people? There were plenty of troops left and however many eho were needed could be quickly called up before the war. The Canadians can't fight an army over 60,000 strong. The largest force in the last two wars to attack Canada wasn't over 12,000 men I'm pretty sure it was much less. The US has naval superiority for the beginning. There wasn't anything left for the south to fight for or anything to fight with. I think it was still occupied.
Back to Top
Kevinmeath View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16-May-2011
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 84
  Quote Kevinmeath Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 20:08
Its not a case of the South siding with the British as not siding with the North, you  really think the scars of the civil war healed  in a couple years?
cymru am byth
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Aug-2012 at 20:14
I think they didn't have the capacity to fight a war or guerilla war emotionally or physically. I think that since most had fought for slaves which were now all free they had no reason at all to fight against their nation. Not every Southerner was a Confederate and the British have huge supply lines to worry about plus they still have to fight their colonial wars and patrol the world and keepp a large portion of the navy in home waters. Russia wasn't very happy with GB nearly declaring war in 1863.they could side with the US technically :p.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 10:19
Take Southern guerrillas out of the equation (highly unlikely given their resentment of northerners and pro-British stance during the Civil War) and the Yanks would still only have half an army to fight the Brits as the troops would be stretched out occupying the south and protecting the frontier from Indian attacks. Even if the Americans did somehow manage to push the Brits back and advance into Canada, they wouldn't get very far as local garrisons, militias, loyalist settlers, and Indians would resist the advance until more British reinforcements arrive from England and the colonies
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 13:00
An 1868 invasion would be much more formidable than the 1812 fiasco, though Britain's responce would most likely not differ much and the US strategy be largely the same. 
 
A few years before the US had an experience battlehardened army which was largely unemployed and many would welcome the invite to reenlist. The US would invade Canada, it could do little else against Britain.
 
Britain would blockade the US navally. The US dropped out of the war of 1812 when in 1814 its economy went into bankrupcy after just 2 years, in WWI even Germany with its huge military advantage capitulated because of the Royal Navy blockade of 4 years, during the Napoleonic Wars Britain blockaded Italy for 7 years. Finacially the US would be bankrupted again, no migrants could come, no economic development possible, it would face year after year of bankrupcy, I wonder how long the south would stay placid with a bankrupted north and it feeling the worst of the economic devastation.
 
Britain would also supply groups like the large KKK and instigate a southern uprising, 1865-1870 there was astonishingly bitter feelings towards the north in the south. If the south did rise, Napoleon III wanted to intervene in on the south's side during the civil war but Britain wouldn't let him. This time a French army would land in Louisianna with a Royal Navy escort. Britain would also arm the Indian tribes and encourage them to attack. The plain Indians would most likely be fighting the US cavalry's mish mash of muzzle loaders and black powder weapons armed with Lee Enfields instead of bows and arrows.
 
Most likely the war would be in Canada with the US army trying to take Canada with its own country in disaray as insurrections in the south, by the indians and possibly a French invasion take place, but all this would be secondary to the naval blockade. 
 
A few intriging things about the war would be most likely Hope-Grant would get command of the British forces, who George McDonald Fraser rated as the finest general of his day, after having so competantly taken Beijing, so Hope-Grant vs Grant would have been an interesting clash. Also the Bengal Lancers on US soil!


Edited by Toltec - 15-Aug-2012 at 13:17
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 14:22
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LOLLOLLOLTongueTongueTongueBig smileBig smileBig smileBig smileBig smile
 
 
Still trying to save face, after all these years.  What makes you think that the outcome would be any different than New Orleans 1?
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 15:11
Originally posted by Kevinmeath

Its not a case of the South siding with the British as not siding with the North, you  really think the scars of the civil war healed  in a couple years?
 
 
The scars have not yet fully healed.  They were still festering in 1868.  However, don't dismiss the fact that the Brits would be invading the South as well as the North.  Southerners still have an attitude of "we'll take care of this ourselves, thank you". 
 
Virginia and other Southern states fought the Revolution, and were vital in the founding of the US, I don't think they would welcome any foreign incursions and the Brits would end up having to fight them as well.
 
Also, at one point toward the end of the war, the Army of The Potomac numbered almost 300,000 men.  That's not counting the forces in the West or Sherman's in the South.  Nor does it take into account the reserves in the North.
By 1868-1870, the North had built a Rail System that covered nearly the entire East Coast.  The Union could move substantial numbers of troops to almost anywhere in the East, much faster and easier than the Brits, having to move everything by ship. 
 
The question is, how would the Brits be able to transport a large enough force to be effective, and not get their butts kicked upon landing, and the 64 dollar question, how could they supply a force that size over a long enough time span?  If your thinking they could live off the land, think again.  The souths ability to feed themselves was almost nonexistent.  It wouldn't be until around 1875 before the Souths agriculture caught up.
 
As for blockading the US, the Union Navy had successfully blockaded the South's main ports for 4 years.  The Union Navy was, while not quite as big as the Royal Navy, more than a match.
 
Another lesser known fact.  Just before the start of the Civil War, union agents went to the UK and bought all reserves of Salt Peter.  They purchased all that was available in the west at the time. They then had it shipped to the US.  This created a severe shortage in Gunpowder in certain regions that wasn't corrected until the end of the war.  All of this was done before the Brits realized what had happened. 
 
In the Revolution and the War of 1812, the British suffered an inordinate number of casualties, an incredible expenditure of wealth, [which they really did not have] and an incalculable loss of face and status in the civilized world.  I don't think they would be up for a 3rd go round.
 
At the same time, the North had just fought a 4 year war, with enormous casualty figures.  The people were war weary.  I don't believe the Union leaders could come up with a strong enough case to get the public on their side.
 
 
 


Edited by red clay - 15-Aug-2012 at 15:25
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 15:30
Thank you red clay. Anyway how large would these armies and navies be? You have to account for soldiers who need to fight the colonial wars, police the colonies and such. Same for the navy. Effectively the whole US navy is concentrated in America.
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 16:04
A French invaison is plain impossible. They were defeated by the native Mexicans and thrown out,
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 17:42
Originally posted by red clay

Originally posted by Kevinmeath

Its not a case of the South siding with the British as not siding with the North, you  really think the scars of the civil war healed  in a couple years?
 
 
The scars have not yet fully healed.  They were still festering in 1868.  However, don't dismiss the fact that the Brits would be invading the South as well as the North.  Southerners still have an attitude of "we'll take care of this ourselves, thank you". 
 
Virginia and other Southern states fought the Revolution, and were vital in the founding of the US, I don't think they would welcome any foreign incursions and the Brits would end up having to fight them as well.
 
Also, at one point toward the end of the war, the Army of The Potomac numbered almost 300,000 men.  That's not counting the forces in the West or Sherman's in the South.  Nor does it take into account the reserves in the North.
By 1868-1870, the North had built a Rail System that covered nearly the entire East Coast.  The Union could move substantial numbers of troops to almost anywhere in the East, much faster and easier than the Brits, having to move everything by ship. 
 
The question is, how would the Brits be able to transport a large enough force to be effective, and not get their butts kicked upon landing, and the 64 dollar question, how could they supply a force that size over a long enough time span?  If your thinking they could live off the land, think again.  The souths ability to feed themselves was almost nonexistent.  It wouldn't be until around 1875 before the Souths agriculture caught up.
 
As for blockading the US, the Union Navy had successfully blockaded the South's main ports for 4 years.  The Union Navy was, while not quite as big as the Royal Navy, more than a match.
 
Another lesser known fact.  Just before the start of the Civil War, union agents went to the UK and bought all reserves of Salt Peter.  They purchased all that was available in the west at the time. They then had it shipped to the US.  This created a severe shortage in Gunpowder in certain regions that wasn't corrected until the end of the war.  All of this was done before the Brits realized what had happened. 
 
In the Revolution and the War of 1812, the British suffered an inordinate number of casualties, an incredible expenditure of wealth, [which they really did not have] and an incalculable loss of face and status in the civilized world.  I don't think they would be up for a 3rd go round.
 
At the same time, the North had just fought a 4 year war, with enormous casualty figures.  The people were war weary.  I don't believe the Union leaders could come up with a strong enough case to get the public on their side.
 
 
 
 
 
300K troops a piddling small number of troops to invade a land so vast as Canada with and a hell of a lot of mouths to feed over gigantically long supply lines too. I think most likely a Canucks would kick your butt like they did the time before, amn for man Canadians have proven themselves to be better soldiers than Americans. Britain like last time would have no trouble landing and being fed, Canada is a very safe and friendly place. Maybe send a few troops south to burn Washington again, just for fun. Most US Navy warships also weren't seaworthy and could only operate in coastal waters, not much use against a blue water navy.
 
 


Edited by Toltec - 15-Aug-2012 at 17:44
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 19:28
Why would the Brits invade the South? Their priority was sending troops to defend Canada and launching a punitive expedition to burn DC, not conquest of the USA
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Aug-2012 at 19:40
What makes you think this punitive mission would suceed? A force of over 60-80, could be stationed to defend it besides the navy and ironclads and mines.
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2012 at 20:03
The US can't defend the entire American coastline, plus the British had the finest navy in the world. They might launch an attack on both sides of the continent: English troops landing on Canada's east coast and joining with local forces to march on Washington, plus Indian troops (including Gurkhas, Sikhs, highly trained skirmishers and cavalry) landing on America's west coast and fighting alongside red Indians and Confederate veterans against the blue-coats. If the Brits capture the transcontinental railway they could transport men and supplies east to link up with the main force advancing from Canada. A naval blockade and advanced ironclad warships would prevent the Yanks from importing supplies or asking foreign allies for help
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Delenda est Roma View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 10-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 541
  Quote Delenda est Roma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2012 at 21:24
America showed she had the industry to build what she needed.
Back to Top
Kevinmeath View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 16-May-2011
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 84
  Quote Kevinmeath Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2012 at 09:54
Originally posted by red clay

Originally posted by Kevinmeath

Its not a case of the South siding with the British as not siding with the North, you  really think the scars of the civil war healed  in a couple years?
 
 
The scars have not yet fully healed.  They were still festering in 1868.  However, don't dismiss the fact that the Brits would be invading the South as well as the North.  Southerners still have an attitude of "we'll take care of this ourselves, thank you". 
 
Virginia and other Southern states fought the Revolution, and were vital in the founding of the US, I don't think they would welcome any foreign incursions and the Brits would end up having to fight them as well.
 
Also, at one point toward the end of the war, the Army of The Potomac numbered almost 300,000 men.  That's not counting the forces in the West or Sherman's in the South.  Nor does it take into account the reserves in the North.
By 1868-1870, the North had built a Rail System that covered nearly the entire East Coast.  The Union could move substantial numbers of troops to almost anywhere in the East, much faster and easier than the Brits, having to move everything by ship. 
 
The question is, how would the Brits be able to transport a large enough force to be effective, and not get their butts kicked upon landing, and the 64 dollar question, how could they supply a force that size over a long enough time span?  If your thinking they could live off the land, think again.  The souths ability to feed themselves was almost nonexistent.  It wouldn't be until around 1875 before the Souths agriculture caught up.
 
As for blockading the US, the Union Navy had successfully blockaded the South's main ports for 4 years.  The Union Navy was, while not quite as big as the Royal Navy, more than a match.
 
Another lesser known fact.  Just before the start of the Civil War, union agents went to the UK and bought all reserves of Salt Peter.  They purchased all that was available in the west at the time. They then had it shipped to the US.  This created a severe shortage in Gunpowder in certain regions that wasn't corrected until the end of the war.  All of this was done before the Brits realized what had happened. 
 
In the Revolution and the War of 1812, the British suffered an inordinate number of casualties, an incredible expenditure of wealth, [which they really did not have] and an incalculable loss of face and status in the civilized world.  I don't think they would be up for a 3rd go round.
 
At the same time, the North had just fought a 4 year war, with enormous casualty figures.  The people were war weary.  I don't believe the Union leaders could come up with a strong enough case to get the public on their side.
 
 
 
 
 
Well thats it I simply have to bow to your superior knowledge,
 
 The South suddenly 'shouts God bless the USA' and happily joins the Union-- all past forgotten between these brothers-- after all they are now fighting the Bad Bad Brits.
 
The Canadians throw off the terrible yoke of British imperial oppresion and become American, thank god at last.
 
The Royal Navy (more than twice the size of the 'Union one') will of course be swept from the sea because its ..................well its  not American and when during the period did the Royal Navy show any talent for naval warfare?
 
American privateers will of course destroy British trade, American trade will be left untouched because ummm .. well because.
 
America will out produce Britain at this time period (despite having a smaller industrial capacity) because well they're American damn it.
 
Its clear that throughout the 19th century the British hide in fear from invincible USA wcouldn't risk a third time.
cymru am byth
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.140 seconds.