Would America be much different if Mexico lost the Battle of Puebla?

Doesn’t sound like it. It sounds like the French were having enough trouble subduing the Mexicans on their own, let alone sending help to the Confederacy. Not to mention their combined armies in that article were 38,000 troops. For some prospective, the battle of Gettysburg had over 160,000 combined troops involved.

Not to mention if the French got involved, it probably would have drawn in the British…. and possibly other major European powers of the time, most notably Prussia.

I want to know where the writer of the wiki article gets that the French had the best Army in the world at that time? I couldn’t recall any, and a quick google search yields no evidence that France had even fought and won a foreign war of note since Waterloo.

Obviously French assistance to the Confederacy might have helped, but with the Union Blockade (Anaconda Plan) France had little hope of getting soldiers in areas that mattered (I.E. Virginia and the eastern seaboard). Most of the confederacy’s hope lied in England and was taken away by numerous factors including: the Indian cotton crop of 1860’s (which took England’s dependence off Southern cotton) and the failed invasions of the North.

i think mexico would have been the one that changed

France using mexico as a basement to destory american union… anyway… we won the battle of monterrey vs. usa, we won the independence vs. spain, we won the battle vs. france, we won to the government on the revolution… and we can not stop the drug cartels

i am from monterrey