What would it have taken to get the U.S. to grab additional Mexican territory during the Mexican Revolution?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,731
SoCal
Is there any realistic way to get the U.S. to grab and annex additional Mexican territory during the Mexican Revolution (which occurred in the 1910s)?

When the U.S. conquered the Southwest from Mexico in 1846-1848, there was a large-scale public and political movement in favor of Manifest Destiny. Is there any way to create a similar movement in the U.S. in the 1910s which results in the U.S. grabbing and annexing additional Mexican territory during this time?
 
Apr 2017
1,625
U.S.A.
This isn't during the Mexican revolution but their were other opportunities for America to acquire Baja California. In 1853 a soldier of fortune William Walker captures La Paz, declaring himself President of the Republic of Lower California. The Mexican government forced his retreat after several months. On December 11 1917, a prominent Mexican, close friend of President Carranza" offered to U. S. Senator Henry Ashurst to sell Baja California to the U. S. for "fifty million dollars gold." The likelihood of this I can't confirm.
 

Edratman

Forum Staff
Feb 2009
6,701
Eastern PA
Virtually all of northern Mexico adjacent to the US border is desert of little or no economic value. In 1910, both Arizona and New Mexico were still territories, not states, and each had a population of approximately 200,000 at the time, indicating that there was little interest in acquiring additional similar territory for no real purpose. Also, the Rio Grande works well as a definitive border.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,731
SoCal
This isn't during the Mexican revolution but their were other opportunities for America to acquire Baja California. In 1853 a soldier of fortune William Walker captures La Paz, declaring himself President of the Republic of Lower California. The Mexican government forced his retreat after several months.
Yep, I know about him. It was an interesting opportunity, though I am concerned that a new expedition to Mexico City would have been required to get Mexico to accept such a U.S. annexation.

On December 11 1917, a prominent Mexican, close friend of President Carranza" offered to U. S. Senator Henry Ashurst to sell Baja California to the U. S. for "fifty million dollars gold." The likelihood of this I can't confirm.
Would the Mexican parliament have actually approved of this, though?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,731
SoCal
Virtually all of northern Mexico adjacent to the US border is desert of little or no economic value. In 1910, both Arizona and New Mexico were still territories, not states, and each had a population of approximately 200,000 at the time, indicating that there was little interest in acquiring additional similar territory for no real purpose. Also, the Rio Grande works well as a definitive border.
Is there any river south of the Rio Grande that could likewise serve as a good U.S.-Mexico border?

Also, while AZ and NM had very little people back then, California and Texas both had much more people back then. This might be at least in part explained by their coastal location, but then again northern Mexico has a lot of coastline as well. Could the parts of northern Mexico with a coastline have accumulated a large population if they would have become a part of the U.S.?
 
Apr 2017
1,625
U.S.A.
Yep, I know about him. It was an interesting opportunity, though I am concerned that a new expedition to Mexico City would have been required to get Mexico to accept such a U.S. annexation.



Would the Mexican parliament have actually approved of this, though?
For an alternate history scenario you could say that after the Zimmerman note and Pancho Villa's incursion into America, the US uses it as an opportunity to either demand concessions from Mexico or just invade. Although America's entry into WW1 would make significant military action unlikely.
As for the Mexican parliament, I doubt it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,731
SoCal
For an alternate history scenario you could say that after the Zimmerman note and Pancho Villa's incursion into America, the US uses it as an opportunity to either demand concessions from Mexico or just invade. Although America's entry into WW1 would make significant military action unlikely.
Wouldn't the U.S. only need a few troops for Mexico, though?

As for the Mexican parliament, I doubt it.
Yeah, that's what I was also thinking.
 
Apr 2017
1,625
U.S.A.
Wouldn't the U.S. only need a few troops for Mexico, though?



Yeah, that's what I was also thinking.
Before American entry into WW1, the US army was a joke compared to Europe. To fight Germany and invade Mexico would take a significant military force that would have to be built from almost scratch. It would also tie down needed naval assets.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,731
SoCal
Before American entry into WW1, the US army was a joke compared to Europe. To fight Germany and invade Mexico would take a significant military force that would have to be built from almost scratch. It would also tie down needed naval assets.
As the World Wars showed, though, the U.S. can quickly build up a massive military.

Also, the U.S. can go for Germany first and play defense in Mexico only to invade Mexico after Germany is defeated.
 
Apr 2017
1,625
U.S.A.
As the World Wars showed, though, the U.S. can quickly build up a massive military.

Also, the U.S. can go for Germany first and play defense in Mexico only to invade Mexico after Germany is defeated.
At the time defeating Germany seemed like it would take years, invading Mexico over a political threat didn't seem like a priority. I suppose if America just occupied Baja, it wouldn't significantly effect the buildup against Germany.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist