Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If the Colonists take Quebec?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16

    OK Arnold is as successful at Quebec as Montgomery was at Montreal .
    Now the Continental Congress has to look at garrisoning occupied territory. I don't think this would have worked. The Continental army was expecting the French population to join the revolution .Forgetting that there had been anti Catholic, anti French statements made by some
    politicians in the USA . These would have been known in Quebec City & Montreal and probably in the countryside as well. Add to that the fact
    that they were quite comfortable being British subjects . And they would not have been willing to go against the British. Indeed the main
    pro American elements in Montreal were english merchants who looked
    to the states for trade .
    Another factor was that Arnolds forces were not in great shape after their march across Maine & Quebec in dead of winter. I doubt werther Arnold could have launched an attack without being reinforced .
    for the record I grew up in Montreal and am somewhat aware of some of the conditions Arnold faced

    "To all who serve , have or will serve , Thank You"

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Minuteman21 View Post
      Even with the capture of Quebec, I don't believe much would have changed. The British would have diverted their troops to Quebec to retake the city anyway. If anything it would have been a short lived victory. Statement none the less, but the British would have reinforced and retaken the city.

      Which possibly could have lead to the complete destruction of Arnold's army. If THAT happens, then what would have been the outcome?
      We would have a bigger problem then, and at the very least he might not have been called "America's First Admiral of the Navy". If he were killed Carlton would not have been delayed in linking up at Albany, the NE colonies would have been split off from the rest, we might have lost Saratoga, ultimately the war, the Vietnam War may not have happened and Mr. Obama may not have become president. But then we would also play the "what if" game, which, while it may be fun for a while, doesn't go anywhere. Thanks for your thoughts Minuteman.
      "We fight, get beat, rise and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Forgottenwar View Post
        Is it possible that the growth of America was a necessary part of a divine plan?

        I am afraid that I must admit lacking a great deal of knowledge regarding world history but my study of America history leads me to conclude that many things that happened should not have happened, save for luck, or divine intervention.

        As an American I feel I must state I am not saying that god has a greater affection towards Americans than any other nationality, only that America is necessary for the “Grand Plan”.
        Pride comes before the fall.

        i think the US would have separated from England for one reason or another. The distance and local issues would have compelled an independence movement. It happened in Canada even when our early English speaking population was defined entirely by their opposition to independence. Canada did it through decades of dull legal process instead of war. However the notion of US manifest destiny is deeply and tragically flawed.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by lynelhutz View Post
          Pride comes before the fall.

          i think the US would have separated from England for one reason or another. The distance and local issues would have compelled an independence movement. It happened in Canada even when our early English speaking population was defined entirely by their opposition to independence. Canada did it through decades of dull legal process instead of war. However the notion of US manifest destiny is deeply and tragically flawed.

          I agree with you. Not Thomas Paine's exact words, but he said something to the effect that, in all of nature the satelite is always smaller than the mother body, so it is natural that Great Britain cannot be the mother body of America. Eventually all colonies break off from their motherland.
          The flaw in Manifest Destiny is illuminated when we look at it through 21st century eyes.
          "We fight, get beat, rise and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

          Comment


          • #20
            As to the outcome of the Revolution being a part of a divine plan. Sorry I deeply disagree . The God that I worship wouldn't take sides that way .
            As to the outcome being inevitable well maybe given that Britain had its hanmds full dealing with the French elsewhere and running an Empire. But if the Revolution hadn't happened I suspect that the USA would have evolved along the lines that Canada , Australia etc did parts of a comnmenwealth of nations .0 Of course it means Adams Et Al don't get as big a page in the history books and maybe the civil war never happens either .

            "To all who serve , have or will serve , Thank You"

            Comment


            • #21
              I have to say, to believe that the outcome of the American Revolution was down to divine intervention (for whatever reason) is dangerous thinking.

              Yes, many Colonists will have believed that they were fighting for a cause sanctioned by God himself, but then many of the British will have been God-fearing people also, who will have no doubt believed that they too were fighting a 'just' war. Are we to believe that the same God both sides worshipped favoured one side over the other?

              Luck, as I'm sure everyone here is aware of, is at least as important a factor in military campaigns (past and present) as any training, equipment or leadership qualities you care to mention. Every war, battle or skirmish that has ever been fought has hinged on such pivotal turns of luck. To attribute such good fortune to anything more leads us down a very dark path indeed..
              Goering: What can I do for you?

              Moelders: Upgraded engines for my Bf 109s.

              Galland:
              A squadron of Spitfires.

              It is said that Goering then lost his temper.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Minuteman21 View Post
                Even with the capture of Quebec, I don't believe much would have changed. The British would have diverted their troops to Quebec to retake the city anyway. If anything it would have been a short lived victory. Statement none the less, but the British would have reinforced and retaken the city.

                Which possibly could have lead to the complete destruction of Arnold's army. If THAT happens, then what would have been the outcome?
                I agree with you 100%. I can't see how the Continental Forces could have prevailed, given their long logistics supply line, and especially after British reinforcements were diverted into the region.
                "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

                Comment


                • #23
                  Thread moved to Alternate Timelines Forum

                  ACG Staff
                  On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

                  ACG History Today

                  BoRG

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Lastly, something that was has been aluded to earlier. I'm not sure that American Colonials would be so understanding as the British were about the French Quebecois habitants embracing and maintaining their Catholic Faith, considering that most of the Americans of the day were rock ribbed Protestants.
                    "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
                      Lastly, something that was has been aluded to earlier. I'm not sure that American Colonials would be so understanding as the British were about the French Quebecois habitants embracing and maintaining their Catholic Faith, considering that most of the Americans of the day were rock ribbed Protestants.
                      This was a big factor in the loyalty of the French Canadiens . The British in the Quebec Act 1763 garunteed freedom of the Roman Catholic Church
                      and the pratices thereof in Quebec . This at a time when an English Catholic was committing a crime by going to mass , now full scale anticathiolic persecution had eased off a lot by the late 18th century but the law was still on the books and was til the mid 19th century. Also in that was garunteed the French language , customs etc. To the Americans these would have been an abomination . Anti catholic feeling ran high and inspite of a pledge to respect the church & language there were politicians in the USA posturing with anti catholic legislation.
                      Also the French Candiens had lived through 1 change of ruling people and didn't relish another change. Yes there were from revolutionaires
                      in Quebec mainly in Montreal and they were the buisness class .Not really a nice lot according to the history books.

                      "To all who serve , have or will serve , Thank You"

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X