Girls: He's probably already forgotten me. Boys with a time machine:

Why does ever WW3 video has WTO invading NATO (for whatever reason), conquering most of Europe and then NATO somehow gets some magical power and beats WTO and pushes till Moscow. First of all, no realistic scenario would end up in a conventional war, it will always end up in a Nuclear War. Even we take a Hypothetical scenario of a conventional war, WTO would always win. The reasons are simple: USSR alone had more soldiers than NATO (4.9 million active, 12.750 million reserve; 17.65 million total). And NATO already losing the European theatre and almost losing in Turkey, there is no way they would be able to push back till USSR's border against these overwhelming numbers. USSR alone had the largest army in history by far, the Soviets possessed 64,000 (other sources put the number as high as 68,000), even in the late 1980s when it was at a decline, about 10 times more than US' inventory and 4.92 times the size of NATO's inventory. Also, WTO as a whole had 78,800 APCs and IFVs, 16.4 times the size of the US' and 2.6 times the size of NATO's. With 18,001 aircrafts across all branches, the USSR had 5.9 times the aircraft the US did at the time. WTO had 46,000 nukes at their peak, all of which coming from the Soviet Union, larger than the inventory of the rest of the world combined. Additionally, according to former Soviet Atomic Energy Minister Vladimir Mikhailov, the Soviet Union had produced 1,200 tons of weapons grade uranium, enough for some another 48,000-80,000 implosion based Nuclear Weapons. According to the Pentagon, from 1974 till 1982, the Soviet Union produced 5.9 times as many ICBMs as the United States, the only NATO member possessing ICBMs at the time(2,035 compared with 346, respectively). Many people like to say that NATO had better industry that WTO and therefore could outproduce them. First offs, WTO had such a large stockpile of Military equipment, that it would take years for NATO to produce enough of their own to compete with the numbers, by which time the war would already be over. Also, Pressure by the General Staff to meet the requirements of mobilization plans was especially pronounced in continuous-flow production (aluminum, coke, etc.). A good case in point was in the production of aluminum, of which the Soviet Union produced 4 million tons annually (To scale, Modern US only does 860k not counting the secondary production; with their peak reaching in 1980 when they produced 4 million as well). Aluminum was not exported since it was considered to be strategic material. According to the State Planning Agency, not more than one-fourth of total rolled aluminum products were used in military production. So WTO had a far larger industry than NATO and would outproduce them. Many people also like to say that NATO has better equipment that WTO. No. They don't. According to a CIA document named 'U.S. Intelligence and Soviet Armor, 1980' written by Maj. Gen. Paul F. Gorman: "The best Soviet armored vehicles are clearly superior to U.S. counterparts, less because of technological breakthrough than the resolute, relentless Soviet materiel acquisition process. Soviet industry, supported by procurement funds for land force arms which triple U.S. outlays, grinds out new models which outstrip ours in quality and quantity." (Summary, pg 1) and that: "The US Army the best current Soviet tank clearly superior to its main battle tank" and "The U.S. Army rates its current APC clearly inferior to its Soviet counterpart, the BMP"(The Question of Quality, pg 10 and 11) As many people like to counter the Soviet Tank superiority with NATO's ATGMs, the document also clarifies about that: "Antitank Missiles Does NATO's hope lie in more and better antitank guided missiles? In precision guided munitions? Here, too, near-future prospects are bleak As indicated above, even the numerous, once-formidable U.S. TOW ATCM is now a questionable asset. As the chart depicts, when the Soviets deployed their T-64 and T-72 tanks, they ended nearly two decades of US. ATGM superiority. While it is possible that an improved (larger, faster) TOW-like missile may redress this deficiency vis-a-vis these current tanks, Soviet armor the T-80 and T-801 could stymie this development as well" (Antitank Missiles, pg 18) And finally: "To summarize, through 1984 at least, large numbers of Soviet armored vehicles will weigh heavily in the balance of forces in Europe: 1. The Warsaw Pact will retain numerical superiority in armor and will increase their qualitative edge. 2. The Pact is building ever more effective counters to NATO ATGM in the form of both direct fire weapons on armored vehicles and on helicopters, and a preponderance of indirect (artillery) fires" (pg 23) It is clear that WTO would always win in a conventional war, pretty easily actually. TL;DR: Result in a Hypothetical Conventional war: Decisive Warsaw Treaty Organization, aka the Warsaw Pact victory. Result in a realistic Nuclear war: None.

I’m surprised that they didn’t attack the UK

"Pax Hispania - Una Linea Temporal Imperial."

Why would finland join nato? It was an soviet ally

Nuevo video?

God bless Moa

Thank God this never happened

Meanwhile at Saudi Arabia At April 1964: SURPRISE ATTACK!!

Austrian Painter: ❌️ Uruguayan Painter: ✅️

long live the kingdom

I think the treaty was too harsh...

Aragón state Cataluña county

Why is Kyiv-Rus counted as the history of modern russia? I see no connection between the two except maybe that Kyiv founded Moscow in it's latter days. But founding the village of moscow doesn't make it a country. Anyone knows?

Warsaw Pact invading Yugoslavia at the start of the war makes no sense for me

Incredible how you made this in 2016

Catalonia became a country for almost 200 years before unifying with Aragon…

Very nicee!!! This is most accurate one yet!

So the real Red Menace was a British

This doesn't actually makes many sense, specially in the nordic and middle eastern fronts

NATO on 19650321: *_Brothers... ASSEMBLE!!_*

You are just destroying France in this video, they fail everything while Britain succeed everytime and everywhere.

HEAVILY BIAS TOWARDS N.A.T.O.

We are allies you dumb fools

Beautiful video, but it's irrealistic that Jugoslavia occupy zara while italy is invade by germany

man the British got absolutely carried by the US lol

What's the song at 6:00?

Sejarah Indonesia 2024

Technically, War Plan Red was for the whole British Empire. There were sub plans for the dominions of britain. Crimson, in particular, covered Canada specifically. So this is crimson, not red.

The only reason why the advance from the Vistula to the Moskva was too fast (e.g. March 21 to May 30) was because of overextension in the Soviet armed forces after losing so much men in the battle for Europe.

There was one basic premise that was relied on to make any of these work: that America was a "nation" of money-grubbing mongrels who would cave at any threat to their ability to make a buck. If Manhattan or Boston was seized by German forces, it was reasoned, the Yankees would give in to any demand in order to get them back. Since it was confidently assumed that Germany had the best military on the planet, it was inconceivable that the United States with its puny regular army and amateur militia could ever defeat or dislodge them.

5:15 Why couldn't the Japanese have offered to hand over southern Sakhalin to the Soviets? in exchange for oil. Or maybe the Japanese simply saw German-Soviet cooperation and became confident enough to attack the Allies

3 years since last comment damn

Understanding the potential benefits of serving in a time of conflict, such as in WW3, is crucial for those who may be called to duty. Learning about the historical context, strategies, and humanitarian efforts can prepare individuals for the challenges they may face. Taking the "Veterans Benefits Mastery Series," a new course that delves into these topics, will equip future servicemen and women with the knowledge and skills needed to navigate complex situations effectively, ultimately contributing to their success and safety in the field. The course, set to launch around July 2024, will be priced affordably with discounts for high schools, colleges, active duty personnel, and Veterans alike.

How much population did america and England had??

"American pig was personal"

hitler would still invade and if he didn't the soviet union would

Saudi Arabia: MIDDLE EAST AND EGYPT FEEL MY F***ING WRATH

😂😂😂😂

The brits may have the Malvinas, but they'll never have Patagonia!

Some corrections: 1-Some territories of Yugoslavia would be annexed by the invaders, such as Kosovo to Albania, Macedonia to Bulgaria and Vojvodina to Hungary. 2-Israel would not be dominated easily, it would probably have been the same as the Six Day War, and then it would have turned into a bloody conflict without any progress. 3-Turkey and Iran would not be easily invaded either, as they have mountains and a powerful army. 4-San Marino, Andorra and Cyprus would not have been invaded, as they do not have any strategic value. 5-The war would end up becoming nuclear, whether when France saw that defeat was imminent, and especially when NATO forces began to enter Soviet territory, the USSR would use nuclear weapons as a last resort.

What’s the fucking game name why dose no one say

Finland was the ally of the USSR

Gran Historia la de la Corona de Aragón y de la Catalanidad en general tal vez en el futuro si el independentismo tiene éxito veamos un Renacimiento de la Corona pero esta vez bajo la forma de los Países Catalanes y cuya forma de gobierno sea una república confederal descentralizado donde el poder ejecutivo esté en Valencia el legislativo en Barcelona y el Judicial en Palma de majorca pero eso si manteniendo el país de Valencia el País de Cataluña y el País de Baleares y los otros territorios (Franja de Poniente,El Carche,Rosellón,Andorra y el pueblo catalonoparlante de Cerdeña su autonomía

yo

i love how you showed alexander the great in the begining, he is my favorite macedonian king! Thanks

Bro I at This point i might well start my own series of this at some point and continue it on once I get the equipment and such to do this at some point

Why would Sweden be on the side of NATO? Isn't Sweden a neutral country?

In hypothetical allied Italy scenario, why without the sovoet interreption Yugoslavia, Hungary and Bulgaria would be remained as monarchies (kingdom), and Bulgaria and Romania join EU earlier instead of real-world 2007?

This video have many mistakes: Yugoslavia that are communist allies with NATO? Turkiye and Israel invaded easy? Jordan allied with Warsaw Pact? Ireland and Austria in war, when both are neutral like Switzerland?