Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Mexico had said "Agreed. If the US makes any move to go to war with you, Germany, then we will accept your offer and go to war with the United States."
With that out in the open, the US has two choices:
1. Not go to war with Germany
2. Declare war on Germany, but be unable to actually do anything beyond the declaration because now they're too busy fighting Mexico over Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
If Mexico had said "Agreed. If the US makes any move to go to war with you, Germany, then we will accept your offer and go to war with the United States."
With that out in the open, the US has two choices:
1. Not go to war with Germany
2. Declare war on Germany, but be unable to actually do anything beyond the declaration because now they're too busy fighting Mexico over Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
Either way, Germany wins, right?
Mexico was in a civil war at this time period and in no state really to declare war on anybody. They also had not acted on the note, so no reason to go to war with them.
I don't believe so as the United States military was far superior to that of Mexico's. If Mexico did invade the United States I would imagine the U.S. wouldn't have been involved in the war in Europe and instead taken the war into Mexico. We could possibly have more states if we were to annex parts of Mexico.
An attack/invasion of the U.S. by Mexico might have delayed our involvement in Europe, and prolonged that conflict, but I think we would have dealt with Mexico and still (eventually ) sent forces to Europe. It would not have ended well for the Mexicans. But as the other poster said, they weren't in any shape to start a war with us.
The impact of Mexico vs. the US militarily, even in 1915, would be equal to a fly on an elephant. The US drafted almost 3 million men for WW1, we probably could have taken on Mexico with 10,000 men.
Plus Mexico was having some serious internal problems.
If Mexico had said "Agreed. If the US makes any move to go to war with you, Germany, then we will accept your offer and go to war with the United States."
With that out in the open, the US has two choices:
1. Not go to war with Germany
2. Declare war on Germany, but be unable to actually do anything beyond the declaration because now they're too busy fighting Mexico over Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
Either way, Germany wins, right?
This post illustrates a classic problem with What If? threads.
The problem is that it fails to address the 'why' and the 'how'. In other words, what's in it for Mexico, and how do they plausibly do it?
The 'why?':
How, precisely, is Mexico going to benefit from gaining several hundred thousand square miles of land, more of it arid desert or rugged mountains than not, occupied by over five million English speakers? Bear in mind that in 1917 Mexico had a population of only around 16 million - trying to forcibly assimilate 5 million Americans would be quite an undertaking, for no perceivable benefit.
The 'how?':
Mexico in 1917 was political and socially unstable, wracked by several years of civil war. It was also only three years removed from having an American force of only 2000 seize the city of Veracruz - that doesn't sound like a nation in a position to forcibly seize three American states to me. The Mexican military was largely spent and exhausted by years of domestic strife, while the American military was gearing up to enter the World War. So the United States would be the far stronger military and playing defense; this is not a recipe for Mexican military success to the north.
Simply put, there was nothing in it for Mexico and they had no means to bring about the proposed conquest.
So the what-if is a non-starter. In the context of history, and this is a history forum, alternative histories need to be plausible. It is thus pointless to consider the possible historical impact of a development that is at best extremely far-fetched.
An attack/invasion of the U.S. by Mexico might have delayed our involvement in Europe, and prolonged that conflict, but I think we would have dealt with Mexico and still (eventually ) sent forces to Europe.
24 million men registered for the draft during WWI but only 2.7 million were actually ever inducted. How Mexico could even contemplate a war with the U.S. while in the midst of its own civil war just isn't plausible on any level.
24 million men registered for the draft during WWI but only 2.7 million were actually ever inducted. How Mexico could even contemplate a war with the U.S. while in the midst of its own civil war just isn't plausible on any level.
Yeah...and the population of Mexico was only about 15 million.
The whole idea of Mexico being any kind of threat was laughable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
