Lincoln's Revenge

[Grimm Reaper]

Here's a quick basis:

1862, Lee defeats McClellan at Antietam. While Union forces are able to rally thanks to the DC fortification and Grant being brought east, the British and French enter the war on the CSA's side.

1863, US sues for peace, CSA gains Kentucky and Indian Territory, possible minor territorial adjustment on Canadian border.

1864, Lincoln loses to Democrat -----.

1872, Republican President Blaine elected, begins military buildup.

1881, Second War between the States. US loses western third of Washington State, half of Maine(where did I get that idea from?), Alaska.

1914, WWI erupts with CSA immediately moving to support Allies. Allies suffer horrifying losses on Western Front over next two years. In surprise development USA maintains a cold neutrality, refusing to provide items of military utility to any country involved.

Considering the size and scope of the US army and navy, this is wonderful news for the Allies.

December 1916, Russia sues for peace, followed by Romania.

February 1917, US ambassador announces to British press that he is ordering the British PM to meet with him immediately.

So. What's on the US ambassador's mind?

 

[MrP]

Surely in the pre-1900 PoD forum?

Anyway . . . to whom does the USA lose Maine and Alaska? UK, one presumes? Subsequent local and geopolitical ramifications?

I can't help but feel that the US economy will be kinda shafted if it refuses to sell to any outside sources. The OTL US was annoyed to lose the German market, I think the ATL US would be kinda pissed to lose the whole European market. Numerically, the US was a vital supplier of TNT for shells for the Allies. Granted, the English might be able to produce enough TNT.

Problem is this: I don't know enough chemistry to be certain, but I do recall that TriNitroToluene is derived from coal (could still be wrong). The UK produced a lot. The OTL USA produced nearly twice as much (off the top of my head).

This could grant the Allies the horrific casualties they've taken in 1916 in OTL, but I feel a bit iffy. Put this down to the vodka I've just imbibed if you will, but still . . .

To the final point: I'd still expect the British and Empire to get highly shirty if the North's ambassador was so blatant about things. Maybe a little more tact . . .

 

[David S Poepoe]

The territorial losses in 1881 could conceivably have gone to the Confederacy since it appears that in this second war they are still the winners. The acquisition of parts of Maine and Washington would gain them the means to blockade the US itself.

One could speculate that the US Ambassador will demand a cessation of hostilities and that they will broker a peace in which they will declare war on those that refuse the offer. This would imply that there may be a US President that is the Northern counterpart of Woodrow Wilson since that was the same stance his Administration first took.

 

[LordKalvan]

Here's a quick basis:


February 1917, US ambassador announces to British press that he is ordering the British PM to meet with him immediately.

So. What's on the US ambassador's mind?

And I was thinking that this was an ATL

 

[Alratan]

February 1917, US ambassador announces to British press that he is ordering the British PM to meet with him immediately.

So. What's on the US ambassador's mind?

The British press fills with demands for the ambassador to be given a severe telling off for his temerity, and the British governement has the tact to ignore the issue until the US quietly appoints a diplomat who is even vaguely capable whilst sidelining the incompent incumbent. Whatever message the US wants to deliver is delayed by a couple of months by this embarrassement.

I mean, this isn't the most tactfull way to plead for economic aid after deliberatly causing sections of your economy to implode in an attempt to hurt the very people you now want to help from.

 

[Max Sinister]

Maybe the CSA was allied to Britain in the 2nd war? I somehow doubt that they could master a second victory alone, esp. since the US built militarily up and their economy would grow much faster than the CSA's, and they have more coal and steel.