Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#13 - zombiefacepuncher (09/01/2013) [-]
no they would be speaking the language of the native americans
#15 to #13 - pursh (09/01/2013) [-]
If Britain wasn't there to compete against their colonial rivals, France, then France would have dominated the North American continent. This is how much land France held in North America during the 18th century: You need to login to view this link
#17 to #15 - zombiefacepuncher (09/01/2013) [-]
oh im quite aware of the Louisiana purchase. i payed attention during american history. america bought the land stretching from Louisiana to Washington minus the south west which was owned by the Mexican government. actually France's territory stretched into Canada (which is they theirs a french part of Canada). what im saying is given the X amount of years the Indians spent fighting the Americans after they "bought" the land and proclaimed manifest destiny during those years of fighting (if they were fighting the french) the french would of lost because it would of been to costly to send troops over seas because their was no stable french military base. so once again i restate my comment about Americans speaking the native language of the native inhabitants
#20 to #17 - pursh (09/01/2013) [-]
I think the French would have been able to maintain order and fight the Native Americans effectively. They would have been perfectly capable of sending troops to America. After all, they sent thousands of soldiers to America (12,000 French troops were on American soil) in order to help the American revolutionaries win the war against Britain in the American Revolutionary War.
On an unrelated note, the war between Britain and France during the American Revolutionary War was pretty hilarious. Britain and France, at great cost, sent troops halfway across the world to fight each other when they could have just crossed the channel if they wanted a fight rofl.
#21 to #20 - zombiefacepuncher (09/01/2013) [-]
well if were using the arguments of should of, would of, could of. and the french could of maintained their hold for a while. but eventually multiple tribes,clans and nations of the american Indians would of fought them out. hell american nearly lost the Indian wars partially due to the Apache, Sioux, and Cheyenne nations fighting back for their lands. only reason the Americans won was due to the fact they had a established army bases,forts, and they had just come out from the civil war so they already had an established well trained army, not to mention colt had just come out with several new series of guns such as the repeating rifle and the classic .45
#22 to #21 - zombiefacepuncher (09/01/2013) [-]
all the native people had were bows and arrows,knifes, spears and tomahawks "primitive" compared to what they were fighting against
User avatar #23 to #22 - themasonrocks (09/01/2013) [-]
I really don't think much fighting would have gone on between the french and Native Americans, as often times they were on good terms unlike the British who thought of them as worthless and the Spanish who did more fighting than anything else, really the main bad part of the french coming (Other than stuff like disease) was they created a lot of drunkards out of the people.
 Friends (0)