Republic of Texas

Maybe.

But, as a sovereign nation, they very well may have tried to stay officially neutral while many of their native sons faught for one side or the other.

 

Before the WBTS can be considered, the main point is the Mexican War, and how Texas joining the USA, and the USA's excuse to fight Mexico not only to keep Texas, but to take Mexico's northern territories, would have impacted history. Would Texas have fought to increase its territory?(couldn't possibly have been successful for many decades, at least)? Would the USA have fought Mexico anyway to get its land sea-to-sea to keep there from being any more 'Texases?' Might a 3-way war have been fought for what became the Rocky Mountain states, between Mexico, USA, and Texas?

But, if Texas had maintained its independence until a WBTS was fought, if it was-- and we can't assume it would have been in the same time frame because we can't gauge exactly how the Texas annexation and the ensuing Mexican War had impact on that time frame-- how likely is it Texas would have allied itself with the southern states with the same result as actually was, and the USA then forcibly brought Texas into the Union? Actually, that may be a half-truth as it was, since advocates of a continued Texas republic pointed out that Texas was originally admitted with a clause that it could withdraw from the Union at any time [I don't remember all the details of White v. Texas, in which the Supreme Court ruled that a state (even admitted on Texas' terms) could not withdraw from the Union].

 

In the scheme of the WBTS, Texas really played a minor role.

The debt that Texas rolled up becoming independent would have make it extremely difficult to help with the CSA's greatest need, money. Besides without the help of the US, Texas would have still been fighting Mexico on some level, fighting Indians/ Native Americans (whatever the proper word is) and trying to get more then failed business men and politicians to move to Texas.

I could imagine a far-fetched scenerio where they became a channel for another country trying to provide arms and other goods to the CSA.

 

Texas was admitted to the States by "TREATY", rather than Annexation.

Many "States", in their "Agreement" to join the union, plainly stated they will only join "SO LONG" as it's beneficial to the people of that particular state.

I suggest reading "VA" statement, as it reflects the common held view of joining the "union".

It shouldn't be hard to find on the "web".

 

I think you are right. Sam Houston was adamantly against secession, correctly predicting it would be a disaster for Texas. Secession was by no means overwhelmingly approved, with East Texas and the Hill Country (with many Czech and German settlers) firmly opposed. There were battles fought between Texans over the issue.

If Texas had not been part of the Union, they would likely have stayed neutral. I suppose they would have been somewhat like the border states that favored slavery, but remained loyal Americans.