1  2  3  4  5  Next

If the American Colonials had not gotten agitated and rebelled? If the French hadn't tipped the scales?

Canada and America would not have been split.

Would I be sitting here in Canada? Or, would you be sitting in America?

Hmmmm... Russian would probably own Alaska. Mexico would probably own the Amerian Southwest. No, Texas would now be the Republic of Texas, extending to California.

In a parallel universe somewhere........

I suppose that Amerian Colonials were just too obnoxious not to rebel.

Happy American Independence Day! July 4th.

BTW. I love it the way it is. I love traveling to B.C. and Victoria and getting a different perspective on things. Yes, High Tea at the Empress Hotel just wouldn't be the same. I wish the Canada that I see would never change... but.

   

I think they would be seperate, but very similar. Great cooperation between the two. Consti-Monarchy

   

The Colonials of the Thirteen Colonies would have been agitated no matter the circumstances. The path of the Thirteen Colonies was merely pre-ordained by the taxation policies of the British monarchy. In all fairness, the British were correct to impose those taxes upon the Colonies. Canada at the time faced the very same taxes although they were not quite as high as those of the Thirteen Colonies with good reason. It was costing the British Empire a lot of their budget to provide protection for the Thirteen Colonies to protect them. King George had to cover those costs somehow. One must remember it was the people of Great Britain who were paying the freight before the Empire decided the Thirteen Colonies need to pay their fair share. When the new taxes were introduced, the Colonials became enraged which is puzzling since at least they were still alive in order to voice that rage against the Empire. Had it not been for the redcoats they would have perished at the hands of the Amerindians and the French long ago. The Empire just did not have the resources to protect such vast territory on their own. They required another source of tax income other than the homeland.

I am quite unaware that Canada and the Thirteen Colonies were ever joined. They were separate territories. Never were they joined.

Russia would have gotten rid of Alaska regardless. The Czar had mounting debt. Alaska provided him with a means to repay much of that debt. It also cost too much to keep the territory. To the Russians, it was merely an asset to be used as a means of payment. They did not much care for Alaska.

The French most certainly did tip the scale to favour the Colonies. If not for their assistance the Colonies would have been soundly defeated. Cornwallis was winning and winning handily before the arrival of the French. It was not until that arrival of the French that the tide turned. You must remember why Cornwallis could not retreat via Yorktown where he was severely outnumbered by combined French frontline forces and American militia. Many people talk of Americans armed with farm implements defeating the greatest Empire the world had ever seen. Never happened. The Americans were very well-armed. They received the best training at the hands of the French and many mercenary Prussian officers. One must also realise this was the first time the redcoats had ever faced guerilla-type warfare. The British, with their bright scarlett uniforms, would march along Colonial roads out in the open only to be ambushed by American militia. The Americans of the Revolution would be similar to the insurgents of Iraq with this type of fighting. It is true Americans faced the British on the open field and won a couple of battles where they severely outnumbered the British forces but those battles were much too close to be called. It was the French who made the difference in open battle. These were the cream of the French forces.

One must remember the American Colonials were not the only foe the British were fighting at the time. They were fighting other major European powers of the day. The mere fact the British almost defeated everyone at the same time is in itself astonishing. This would today be the equivalent of the USA fighting 4 world superpowers or 4 Soviet Unions of the day. The USA of that era would never have stood a chance which makes the British feat all the more remarkable.

   

*yawn*

   

had the british repealed thier taxes and gave the money back to the colonies this would had made it possible for other things....however, many things would have changed but somethings would have been the same... there still would have been a drive West.. there still would have been displacement of the first nations people. Still believe there would have to be two seperate countries Canada and America.

   

Had American Independence failed, like Western Canadian Statehood did at Batoche, then NA today would be like a macro Canada with recent additions subservient to the more established regions.

   

And Atlantis would rise from the Atlantic Ocean and would become part of the Canadian Empire.....




Sorry, I just had to put that in there....

   

The British would never have repealed their taxes. The cost of maintaining their Empire was just too high. Had the Thirteen Colonies not revolted it is conceivable that the British would have united the colonies of Upper and Lower Canada with those of the Thirteen Colonies. Had this happened the new combined territory would have eventually been granted its own independence free of war just as Canada did in 1867. This would have created a monstrosity of a nation. It is my estimation this new nation would have been called Canada or just America. This would have become a superpower the likes of which the world has never seen. The availability of resources would have rendered this new nation utterly indestructible. The wealth of Great Britain during the period up to the eventual independence of this new united super-state would have been inestimable. As a result, Britain would have been far too strong for the Germans to have ever challenged. France would have been history, thankfully.

   

The cost to the British for the 13 colonies pales in comparison to the current cost to Albertans for the Maritimes and Queerbec!

   

Tell ya what boy. When Alberta contributes the same percentage of its population to military service as does Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec we can talk. Loose those 5 provinces from the mix and we have about 12000 folks in uniform instead of 62,000. We all could have gone west and got jobs in your wonderous oil patch but decided on service instead.

My dad was born in Landis, Sask. and attitudes like yours used to piss him off to no end. He could remember going down to the local rail siding to get apples, potatoes and dried fish that were sent west for FREE from the very people you seem to loath, so that the folks in the prairies would not starve to death during the Dirty 30's. Guess we should have let em starve eh? Sorry not the Maritime way.

   

It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.

   

When exactly did it change from lebensraum (living space), racial purity and national prerogative that historians overwhelmingly subscribe to.......to the destruction of the US?

   

What is it with some people and their comic book history. Had the American Revolt failed, North America would likely have formed a loose confederation, much like the pre Confederation Canada. Areas with higher population densities would have been granted self governing provincial status and perhaps even an eventual seperate dominion status. Other areas, with lower population densities, would have only been granted territorial status.

The Anglo Saxon thirst for new frontiers would have ensured eventual conflict with Mexico in the push westward and Russia couldn't afford to administer its Noth American territories. While different than it is today, I can't see North America ever having been ruled as one political entity, even if they had remained loyal to the Crown.

   

Though the US was certainly a significant power, at that time in history there was arguably no definitive 'superpower'. The British Empire somewhat in tatters, still existed. Japan was certainly a power house in Asia. Germany was able to commit 3 million men to the invasion of the USSR which was far more than the entire US military in 1941. Based on that alone I would not call the US a superpower.

But I am sure the history buffs will correct us both.

   

Pretty much correct Grainfed...

I'd agree that there was no 'superpower' before WW2, but a collection of Great Powers (as there had been for centuries). The UK was a waning power, but one of the dominant oceanic powers, the US was very powerful but of a far more isolationist and peacetime sentiment than the Brits. The USSR and Germany were the world's two most powerful continental nations, and Japan was a major regional power (western Pacific), but not a true Great power (IMO), although the Washington and London Arms treaties treated them as a great power (on the same scale as Italy).

The USA didn't become a superpower until after WW2, when most of Europe and Asia was a shambles and North America stood alone as the only untouched industrial region on the planet.

BTW, that was one reason why Canada was such major political force after WW2. France, Italy, Germany, Japan and UK had all suffered a fair bit of devastation and could not compete, but by 1960, Canada's influence was waning, not because of lack of will, but because of the re-emergence of those nations.

   

1  2  3  4  5  Next