North America Buildup

[Borys]

Ahoj!

I will be lucky to have one port that doesn't require icebreakers and explosives to keep open more than 5 months out of 12.

I feel blessed ...
Borys

[Guinness]

The border in an about Arizona originally was drawn to follow the Colorado whenever possible. This was what I thought would be a good idea, nothing less and nothing more. I'd hoped it would mean that neither California nor Mexico could control the flow of the Colorado.

[TexanCowboy]

Well, uh, he didn't really have a choice for one of them as enemies.

Guys, I still believe the San Juan would be a good boundary. Gives Blooded about half of the disputed territory.

[ctwaterman]

Boundry Disputes Aside.....

Ok,

For the History of most of the Eastern North America and Even Texas we need to look for our Point of teparture most likely around the Time of the 7 Years Wars and the Napoleonic Wars.

Texas is formed by the "rejects" most likely of either the NER or the UCAS drive to move west.   The Sad part is Texas and several other parts of Mexico were good Cotton territory in several places and as such the Southern US states wanted to seize all of this terriroty after the Mexican American War.

The Drive to expand King Cotton and Slavery to feed the Mills of England and the Northe East United states will probably remain the vector that controlls both UCAS and Texan Economy right up to the present day of 1880.

So we need to determine the following.

1.  England is not totaly victorious in the 7 years wars leaving France with a Colonial Empire to become  Acadia some time after the the Napoleonic Wars.

2.  Do the 13 US Colonies fail in their bid for independence or only partially succeed.  Do they form the United States and then fracture durring the War of 1812 ????

I have lots of useful information we can use such as the Aroostook War in the late 1830's to allow the NER and Acadia to adjust their boundry to the Great Lakes / St. Lawrence River boundries.

This might very well leave the players of England, NER, Texas, and the UCAS as nations seperated by a common language.  ::)

Now quietly builds a flood way project to channel the Mississippi flood to the West and South durring the next 100 year flood....  Gonna was them Texans right out of my Hair.... 8)

[TexanCowboy]

Most of that sounds good to me.

I need some French people tho; Darman, would you be willing to exile some of your Acadians? Jef, could I take perhaps your Hugonauts, or some other exiled group from France?

[ctwaterman]

New Orleans was French we can assume the British Managed to at least take the French Southern Colonies in North America.   So with the British occupation of Louisianna that leaves at least some portion of the Creole and French Population of that area to migrate to Texas.

In addition there was a group of Former French Army officers and troops exiled by Napoleons defeat who came to New Orleans.  Im trying to remember their names.  Anyway they could move on to Texas and form the basis for French immigartion from France to Texas durring the 1820 and 1830's.

[Carthaginian]

New Orleans was French we can assume the British Managed to at least take the French Southern Colonies in North America.

Just go for the historical thing if you want the least trouble... Spain got the colony of New Orleans after the 7 Years War; then the some time later, the colony is purchased- though rather than having France buy it back, it could be bought by the UCAS and then have part secede and join Texas.

[Desertfox]

Er.. California, nevada, utah, and Idaho are mostly desert. Just like Mexico, not a whole lot happens there without water being provided. very little of that land was worth a damn without alot of blood, sweat and tears.

But the California coast and central valley is prime real estate.

OTL and 130 years difference. Apples and Oranges. I fully believe that if Mexico had the 1849 Gold Rush, better leaders and the rest of the US backing it up that Mexico would be number 5 in the world economies.

Maybe so, but Mexico doesn't have California. And you still have the greater potential and the gold...

Go look at some maps. That applies perfectly to mexico as well. Behind a river(Rio or Colorado), Desert, Mountain ranges.

Mountain range splits the country. Invaders can move down either coast without worrying about mountains. Your mountains are perfectly placed to defend your heartland. Mine make it difficult for me to move troops east and west.

I see the Baja Peninsula as a giant breakwater. Any small military bases could be supported from the water on the backside if you build some transports. Great for defense, It could act like Italys boot in WW2, drag things on without any major committment on your part.

Not really, east west movement is very difficult. La Paz works cause it can be resupplied from the mainland after a short boat ride.

You chose your nation. Make someplace else your main port or better yet have several smaller ones. Too many eggs in the basket are bad.

Maybe but thats where it was in OTL, and the new history hasn't caused any changes that would require moving it.

No... but it is not just arizona is it, you want your cake as well. I suggested...

So in exchange for getting a bunch of worthless desert, you want me to completely screw myself over?

Our economies will be equal... yes I gather that is true as well.
But... California currently shows as 18 provinces. Mexico has 40ish? If they go HOI style and assign a number to each province(say we start with 100 economy points) my provinces are worth 5 each yours 2.5. We go to war, We each capture 5 provinces before stalemate. I have lost 25% of my economy, you have lost 12.5%. So we really arent equal are we?

Are we having each province be worth the same? That sounds weird and stupid. Again I can't see an easy way for me to get any of your critical provinces. Meanwhile losing Sonora or Nuevo Leon (Monterrey) would be significant for Mexico. No we are not equal, you hold the better position.

You really did pick your poison, choosing exactly what you wanted as a nation.
And you can make the nations on your borders allies or enemies- it is all up to you.

No one feels for you at all.

I know. I like having two separate oceans. I'm not complaining. Just pointing out that any slight advantage I would have from having Arizona, is more than outweighed by my overall strategic position.

Deal with the anchorages you have; this is fictional you know... if something isn't perfect in the Real World, that don't mean you can't spread some BS around and MAKE it perfect.

That's cheating. Makes it too easy. I'm not doing it.

I just can't see why California would want or be able to get anything east of the Colorado.

[Carthaginian]

I just can't see why California would want or be able to get anything east of the Colorado.

For the same reason that you feel you should get everything you want, Desertfox...
HE WANTS IT.

Dude, you picked Mexico as your nation.
You chose to have it set up in such a way as to have two large, open coastlines which had to be defended; as this is fictional, you could have allowed Texas to have some of the Gulf Coast or anything else that reduced your commitment.
You decided that you wanted some of Arizona- and now are loath to turn loose of something that is "worthless desert" which you "can't understand why anyone would want." At the same time, you are defending your own 'makes perfect sense' claim to it to the death!

And:
1.) You ARE complaining- there is no other name for what's going on.
2.) 'Changing' is not 'Cheating'- my CSA dredged a ship canal in Mobile Bay 40 years early... SO WHAT! I WANTED a naval base there, and saying that I had dredged a channel in a bay where the average depth is about 6-8' depending on tides was the only way I could get it.

[Desertfox]

Actually I wasn't around when the picking was made. I was placed in Mexico, thought I do agree with that decision and would have made the same (only change would have been southern Mexico for southern California).

There is one reason why I want Arizona. It's where I'm from, I've lived there my whole life and not just in one part of it. I grew up in the Southern Part of it, went to high school in the NE corner, and now live in the central-north region. At the moment I will be two months in Albuquerque, which will be the only other place outside Arizona I have reside in.

[miketr]

Are we at an impasse here?  IE is it time for a lightening bolt to crash down to earth from Mount Olympus and the Gods to make their will known?

Michael

[Darman]

New Orleans was French
-snip-

New Orleans was French because the dreaded New England militia captured Novia Scotia from the French during a war (forget which) and basically ethnically cleansed it of the French colonists (the Acadians) who moved down the Mississippi.  At least that is what I learned in French class....(and my history class, and from my own personal family history where an English ancestor living in RI joined the militia and went up north and kicked the French out then settled up that way). 

[ctwaterman]

New Orleans was officially founded in 1718 by a French Charter.  It was  Ceded to Spain in 1763 and reverted to French Control in 1801.  Prior to this the French had been in the area since the 1690 and built the first fort in the area in 1701.  So New Orleans was French prior to the French and Indian Wars and the treaty ending those wars in 1763 giving the Louisiana territory to Spain.

Part of my Family moved to Nova Scotia after the American Revoloution.  That would be the Torry side of the Family. ;D who reamined loyal to the crown.  Eventually they moved back to Mass area once some of the Ill will and several generations had passed.

[Blooded]

Howdy,

Are we at an impasse here?

OK, since DF will not suggest any alternatives, and is incapable of seeing anothers POV then I guess it will go to the MODS. I will not continue a pointless conversation. It takes two to tango.   ::)

Unfortunately, I believe all conversations with DF end up this way. I honestly can't recall his ever conceding any point in any debate, but compromise does not exist here. It is a miserable process to rediscover his inflexibility. I keep thinking a rational spark must be in there somewhere.

DFs reasoning lacks substance and he avoids the basic issue. It boils down to Guinness mistakenly gave a bigger slice of the North American Pie to the wrong guy(anyone else could have come to a solution by now). I don't have it in me to let DF just have it anymore. DF gets away with too much.. too often.

Perhaps the best solution at this point is not to split the offending pie piece between us(it has his cooties all over it now!  ;D  ) but to create an Apache Nation in the offending area(200,000 miles)? Perhaps a breakaway Mexican Nation(Loyalists?) of around 400,000 miles in the southern Mexico area(or confining DFs Mexico to one side of the peninsula). Making the Baja Peninsula neutral would be nice as well(since he apparently does not care for it   ;) ).

That could buffer our states reasonably(or better yet keep us from touching at all), And whittle his national size down to a fair level(Since he feels my nation is plenty large @ 450,000 miles).

[Darman]

My ancestor fought under Captain* Benjamin Church during King Phillip's War and later at Acadia.  My apologies, he was with Church in 1690, during the first attacks on Acadia.  I don't believe there was a mass exodus in 1690 but I know it provided an incentive for the Acadians to leave. 

*In the family history I have he is marked as a "captain".  I guess that was what he was during King Phillip's War.