What if Japan Never Attacked Pearl Harbor? By Alternate History Hub | A History Teacher Reacts

Original Video: • What if Japan Never At...
Sub to Mr. Terry's Gaming channel! - / @mrterrygaming
You can support the channel through:
Discord - / discord
TeeSpring - teespring.com/...
Patreon - / mrterry
Streamlabs - streamlabs.com...
PayPal - paypal.me/mrte...

[@simohayha4152]

honestly a battle between Imperial Japan and the U.S.S.R would’ve been probably the deadliest battle in history neither of them hesitated to sacrifice their own soldiers or civilians and are some of the major powerhouses during this era

[@daswordofgork9823]

It would have been glorious to see Japanese Troops charging at the Russians yelling BANZAAAAAAAAAAAAAI!!!!!!!!!!!!!! While the Russian Troops charge back yelling URAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@tenofprime]

Yea, to me that is why I can see the Soviets winning there eventually. Japan would run out of bodies first.

[@Feffdc]

@@tenofprime Soviets also were far more tecnhnologically advanced and could outproduce japanese in everything so japan would run out of people much faster

[@mohdghazali3473]

@@tenofprime In the Asian mainland, yes but it would still be impossible for the USSR to invade Japan or even set up a puppet state in Japan Archipelago. It would still be a harsh war for USSR in the Asian mainland as they need to faced a two front war with the German in Europe and Japan would keep the Siberian front busy. Manchurian, the puppet state of Japan would most likely be forced by Japan to intervent in Siberian and contained the Chinese. Also the Japan would most likely be more ready than German when they fight the USSR in Siberia, Japan have taken into account a war with USSR in Eastern Siberian before they invaded China. Lastly, without US support USSR would have a much harder time fighting the Japanese and most of the factories and military bases in Eastern Siberian was within the Japanese reach to be destroyed or bombard. USSR could still win, but they would be severely weaken by the two front war with Japan and US. Also remember without the US involvement, Japan navy would still in tact and one of the most powerfull and German would still have a chance fighting against the British and French. The D-Day inavsion would also failed without the US. If the US didn't enforced an oil embargo onto Japan as stated by the video "something out of sudden that out of US president control", Japan would have oil resourcess its needed for it's war effort.

[@mohdghazali3473]

@@tenofprime Again, USSR would still be able to win but it would a brutal war for the USSR and they would be weaken by the two front war with both German and Japan with Japan keep the Siberian front busy and invading Japan would be almost impposible.

[@azorahai7837]

Big flaws in this alternative history. 1)Japan would hardly lose its navy without US involvement. Soviets can't invade Japan without dealing with Japan navy first. The thing is, Soviets simply had nothing to counter the Japanese navy. No ships, no subs, no carriers. 2)Soviets hardly had enough transport ships to invade Japan. If you think that German invasion of UK was a very hard task, USSR invading Japan is near-impossible; especially when US keeps supplying Japan with oil and their navy is still afloat! The only remaining option is to use planes to drop troops, but how can the soviets supply their men or how can they send tanks and equipment there? No-how! 3)Soviets hardly had sufficient long-range bombers to burn Japanese cities; US were successful since 95% of Japan airforce was lost in the east and the US had total air dominance. Soviets would have a very hard time. 3) Russians would have to invade Korea too. Not an easy task as well, considering how Japanese can supply this front faster than the soviets. 4) Japan would not capitulate even when invaded. It would be insanely bloody and i have doubts that even russians would break from constant kamikaze charges and overly fanatical enemy. Even though both soviets and Germans had fanatical troops, Japan is arguably the most fanatical of them all, and Russians, fighting a totally different enemy, so far from home, would lose moral quick. 5) Soviets might actually succeed, but the war would drag on for 10-20+ years! And cost soviets a ridiculous amount of men! The bigger question is, would soviets actually care this much, considering they own Europe already? 6) Soviets can't actually control central Europe while at the same time losing millions of soldiers on the Eastern front. Instability in occupied regions results in revolts, and hundreds of armed grouos conducting sabotage, ambuashes and so on. Soviet union might even collapse sooner! Unlike land invasion of Germany, invading Japan would cost just too much money, time and resources and what would Russia gain from it? 7) Japan wasn't worth it! Soviets declared war on Japan because the Japanese were already beaten and just like US took a slice of europe and Germany from the soviets in our timeline, Soviets wanted a slice of Japan/Koreas from US too. Stalin wanted to grab as much land as possible. Japan has no natural resources and is very far from the most important parts of Russia. I believe that Stalin would gladly accept peace with Japan, perhaps after beating them in Russia and Korean soil, but never invade, preferring to divert troops and resources towards ubstable west instead. 8) Without US involvement and Dday, Russians would already be quite weak and exhausted fighting much stronger German forces, so it is, in total, quite unlikely that soviets would succeed in defeating and conquering Japan. Russia wasn't a OP powerhouse with unlimited resources. It's not possible for them to win so big on both fronts, especially when both Japan and Germany aren't weakened by US and are much stronger and better fit to wage a long and deadly war against them.

[@Ishlacorrin]

100% agree, without the pacific campaign the Japanese would now control one of, if not THE strongest navy in the world at that time. The US would have no reason to rapidly expand it's navy like they did and the British navy was exhausted from the war already. What little Navy and air power the Soviets possessed would be useless vs the Japanese. Japan would probably accept a peace agreement after the fall of Germany as continues fighting would no longer be 'to the advantage of the Empire of Japan'.

[@ashalunam.9972]

Also japan bombed Pearl Harbor because the us was refusing to give oil and help the war continue

[@lordredlead2336]

well you're wrong that the Russians have no subs are ships they had ships and subs and they were building battleships until the German invasion but the thing is the Japanese would eventually lose because they took over Germany right date they have full power to build up their forces and also if you look at the distance between Japan and well the part where they lose because Japanese army is garbage I mean everybody knows that like their tanks are no match for Soviet tanks remember this would make the war longer so those weird designs or those really big designs like the is three would be in service by that time and by that time it'll just one tap everything chef pan again the Russian air Force can and will destroy Japanese ships kind of like how the Americans died in the Battle of Midway but the Russians will just have an endless stream of planes and battleships wouldn't do much for that time because planes I mean any country especially the size of USSR by that time can invade Japan but it would take several years to prepare and mobilize again alternate history does not go into detail how long the war would be

[@lordredlead2336]

well you're wrong that the Russians have no subs are ships they had ships and subs and they were building battleships until the German invasion but the thing is the Japanese would eventually lose because they took over Germany right date they have full power to build up their forces and also if you look at the distance between Japan and well the part where they lose because Japanese army is garbage I mean everybody knows that like their tanks are no match for Soviet tanks remember this would make the war longer so those weird designs or those really big designs like the is three would be in service by that time and by that time it'll just one tap everything chef pan again the Russian air Force can and will destroy Japanese ships kind of like how the Americans died in the Battle of Midway but the Russians will just have an endless stream of planes and battleships wouldn't do much for that time because planes I mean any country especially the size of USSR by that time can invade Japan but it would take several years to prepare and mobilize again alternate history does not go into detail how long the war would be

[@Ishlacorrin]

@@lordredlead2336 In that possible timeline tho, the Soviets never get to build their good tanks because the area where they designed and built them does not get built itself. Without the US help they could not move their factories the way they did and even if they found a way with manpower where would they move too? The Japanese would be attacking that very spot. Basically everything that made it so the Soviets could stop Germany so easy would not be there so their victory over Germany is no longer assured. Their Siberian troops would be needed to halt the Japanese advance and thus not be available for the western front (of Russia that is). Soviet Russia in this timeline would be fighting a war on two fronts just like Germany and we already know that at this time they are NOT prepared to even fight Germany alone. The Japanese had already beaten Russia once by this point as well so I would not say their army was worse.

[@TheSentientsix]

I really like alternate history hubs videos. But i wasn't so sure about this one. Thanks for your input though. Great as usual! :)

[@Riftimmortal]

I agree, their videos are though provoking but i think Stalin's chances were a bit too optimistic on this one. With the purges, he wouldn't have capable officers on BOTH fronts of the war and let's face it Japan had a very dangerous Navy so landing troops on the island nation of Japan without dealing with them first would be impossible. It'd be a turkey shoot for the Japanese Navy.

[@CookiedoughProductions]

I love them there videos are very entertaining and cool

[@justinstrong9595]

@@CookiedoughProductions their*

[@Arthion]

I'd assume it'd take years for the USSR to pacify Japan. Given how hard they dug in and fought to keep their archipelagos the struggly to take control of the mainland would be a meatgrinder unlike any other. I also heard some statistics suggesting that up to 30% of USSR's arsenal of vehicles consisted of lend-lease aquired from the Allies (mainly the US of course), I'd assume the US would take notice and possibly stop further weapon deliveries seeing Communism potentially dominating most of the world. Not to mention with the neccesity to devote equipment to man both fronts this would have taken a far higher toll on the Soviet industry, in particular the air force having to contend not only with the Luftwaffe but also the Imperial Japanese Air Force. And without a hostile Allied navy I'd assume the Japanese would have had a far easier time trading with Germany and potentially aquiring technology developed by the Germans in a much more complete state than what could be smuggled in submarines

[@brandonproductions8401]

Not to mention that there wouldn’t be an American navy to destroy the Japanese navy which would greatly help Japan

[@hecticfreeze]

It would have been a meat grinder certainly, but a meat grinder that Stalin would have been totally willing to send his soldiers into. It would have been brutal, but I just dont see a scenario where a Stalin led USSR doesnt win that war

[@daswordofgork9823]

Maybe a tsunami or Kamakaze will happen to the Russians like the Mongols.

[@huchung9886]

Josefie Krakowski Agreed. Japan at the time was likely in the top 5 naval powers of the world at the time. The Russians without gaining ground in Manchuria would have no feasible way to project their power onto japan without a warm water point, meanwhile the dozens of aircraft carriers and battleships could keep them at bay. Seeing as how transportation through Siberia is difficult and that the soviets outnumbered the Japanese at the time only more than 2 to 1, the likeliest outcome would be that japan and russia form some treaty to divide the east like with Poland.

[@danillosheslem6507]

I think soviet would still win like stalin would probably just abandom the japanese front and focus on germany even if japan takes all of the vladivostock thats it siberia would stop japan to get closer to the european part of russia

[@ccdsah]

Soviet Navy was crap. Japanese Navy would prevenit them from invadind exactly as British Navy prevented Sealion

[@Just0wnedEsport]

@RadTheLad Japan, probably

[@V-V1875-h]

@RadTheLad Japan, a shit ton of aircraft , even jets, since the subs that did a tour around Afrika could have delivered some jet engines and a manual, Italy could have started to produce the G55( an aircraft considered to be better then the newest BF109s of 1944 by German engineers) a lot faster, by still being involved in the war. Aircraft carrier Aquila wouldn't have been sunk. Italy would take the territory of the former Roman empire( exept Europe of course ) and then just sit on the sidelines since that was their only reason to be involved.

[@Feffdc]

@RadTheLad Soviets

[@ednabirkdale7403]

british airforce prevented sea lion not the navy

[@V-V1875-h]

@@ednabirkdale7403 Ithink everything prevented that mad operation. A mix of really bad coincidences

[@DaGreatRV0]

I can accept japan being defeated in Asia, but without the war with the US they have their huge navy intact and it is fueled. It would take years before the soviets could build a navy that is large enough to take on the japanese navy and preform a massive amphibious invasion of the home islands. Also in this scenario, is the US still lendleasing to the USSR? Probably as they started doing that even before pearl harbor. They would need it, a USSR fighting a two front war without lend lease sounds like a tall order.

[@erichvondonitz5325]

the USSR situation is basically Germany figuring out how to invade Britain due to its strong navy

[@trathanstargazer6421]

This Alternate History video is mis-titled. It should be, What if America never embargoed Japan?

[@timothy2992]

Trathan Stargazer Agreed but they would definitely get less views lol

[@jjnn2]

Gotta get that coin

[@XCutie782]

How the hell was the soviet supposed to invade japan if japan's navy is a thing

[@nicholashe1198]

Right? The US Navy barely beat the Japanese navy, and probably would have lost the Battle of Midway without code breaking

[@SCP.343]

Throwing away the lives of their soldiers as if they didn't care about them.

[@debsnjim]

@@SCP.343 Just build a bridge across the Sea of Japan with the bodies of Soviet soldiers.

[@lordredlead2336]

Yep but the Soviet air Force destroyed more ships than any other unit in our timeline so I mean that's really the whole point why Russians never built aircraft carriers because it where they are they don't need it because their aircraft have really long reach and the Japanese Navy sorry I meant air Force they focus on speed and maneuverability and because of that the pilots were unprotected and that's why they lost the Americans against them more rugged and protected hellcats if you didn't know the Russian have a plane that is actually the most numerous planes built in the war the il-2 sturmovik which was called flying tank that thing could destroy zeros easily and is 0 shoot back it won't be shot down easily either the whole point it got its nickname

[@przemekkozlowski7835]

The Soviets would have defeated the Japanese in mainland Asia but would have to deal with the Japanese Navy if they wanted to invade Japan. When the Americans were planning on invading Japan in 1945 they had already destroyed the Japanese Navy and Airforce. The Soviets would need to bring a powerful Navy into the Pacific and wreck the Japanese Navy before they could invade. Alternatively they would have to build airbases in Siberia with the hopes of bombing the Japanese Navy into oblivion. Without that they would be facing the same issue that the Germans had with Sealion.

[@brandonproductions8401]

Then again, as long as Japan has the Kido Butai they’ll mitigate whatever Russia throws at them

[@hanjizoe2648]

Plus with the US still supplying Japan with Oil, the Soviets wouldn't be in Japanese soil for quite some time

[@mattguellec]

Even if the soviets build air bases in east Siberia, the Japanese navy could just move their fleet outside of reach in their naval bases in the Pacific. And even with bases in place, Soviets would have an hard time to beat the japanese air force since they didn't suffer their terribles losses in the Pacific. Even if the japanese army's airforce had been beaten, the IJN airforce (which was completely separated from its IJA counter part) could have been saved. If we assume that the Soviets try to invade in may 1945 (it probably would be much later), the Japanese would still posses all their CVs and their airwings to protect their surface fleet that could easily raid any amphibious assault and retreat before getting overwhelmed. In the CVs departement we count the 6 standards carriers which attacked Pearl Harbor plus at least the advanced armored carrier Taihou plus the converted carriers Hiyou and Jun'you. At that you add the 4 light aircraft carriers and possibly 6 new ones from conversions. An night invasion would be even worse since that's mean no air protection and the fact that IJN ships and crews were very efficients in night battles. All that without counting the submarine threat that is very real since Japan had a large number of submarines and very diverse one at that. They would be much more efficient that in reality since they would have a lot less area to cover and their doctrine (search and assassinate capital ships) would probably change (kill convoys) since the soviet navy threat is basically inexistent.

[@efancording6363]

Really don't think the Soviets could do everything they do in the video. They could defeat the Nazis without help, but it'd probably take a couple more years, meaning they'd be even more drained. And if the Japanese were attacking the East, with their superior Navy at the same time, I just can't see the Soviets winning. Even if they did the war would probably have gone on until the early 50s, and the Soviets would have uncountable casualties which would probably take a decade to recover from, as well as the enonomic strain. But an invasion of Japan? Very silly, especially with no atomic weapons. Japanese Navy would obliterate any invasion attempt.

[@V-V1875-h]

Dude, it's a wargaming title, the Soviets had a way better navy and much better trained soldiers and higher quality weapons.....

[@V-V1875-h]

Paratroopers would have never gotten through the Defensive screen of land based and carrier based aviation. And lets not forget that the Germans could have successfully given the Japanese Jet engines. No chance the Soviets could win in any way

[@ruedelta]

While they might be more drained, they'd be able to bear what was left of China and the industry in Manchuria and Korea. Japanese aviation was good in the beginning of the war, but gradually became obsolete as they couldn't replace their own planes with their industrial power, even with Manchuria and Korea. Without those factories, they'd be running at a much slower build pace than the USSR. The Yaks would slowly catch up and surpass the Zeros. Let's not forget, Japan was also drained, especially conducting its last ditch attempt to fully invade China with Operation Ichi-Go. And sadly for them, their competent officers were in the IJN. The IJA was full of fanatical idiots. With a primarily land-based war, the IJN would lose their influence and the IJA would dominate. And that means more stupid tactics and victory by kiai. And frankly speaking all of the excellent aircraft of the IJN would be rendered relatively useless since the IJA contracts would dominate. The IJN would be formidable in defending Japan, but all it takes are a bunch of nukes from land-based aircraft, and the Soviets get the nuke in 1949 in our timeline, so... Japan's screwed.

[@Davitofrito]

Plus you don't have the strategic bombing of German factories or Polesti Romanian oil fields. The uptick in German war production occurs in 1942/43. American lend lease aid now has to go over land routes or through convoy raids near Finland. The soviet economy was near collapse in 1942 and kept afloat by allied help. The soviets and Germans could well sign a peace treaty in 1942. Meanwhile the British might decide to attack japan because they underestimated the Japanese who would be bleeding red in the Siberian snow. The Japanese could still take southeast Asian territories but probably not threaten India. The soviet T-34 had american built engines and the americans provided everything from spam to rubber.

[@eodyn7]

@@V-V1875-h Soviets barely had a navy...

[@brianheyn2833]

First, the Japanese would likely have focused more south than on invading Siberia. That is more where there interests lay. Second, any attempt by the Soviets to invade Japan would have been doomed. They showed paradrops while mentioning it, but they would have needed a lot more troops than paradrops would have allowed for. Any naval invasion attempt would have led to another Battle of Tsushima. Japan had and would continue to have absolute naval dominance in the Sea of Japan. In an imagined war with the Soviets, Japan would potentially have lost Korea and their other holdings on the mainland(though even that is pretty questionable), but that is as far as the Soviets would get. A Japanese navy/airforce without being ground down by the US would be really formidable.

[@henryquecabral9357]

There is no way paradroping could have done it, I totaly agree with you, you could not paradrop tanks, AA, AT, Arty and other heavy weapons by 1941~1945. And you can't win a war with just a common soldier and its rifle.

[@ednabirkdale7403]

true but i feel like if anyone was gonna conquer mainland japan, it would be the soviets. They have more than enough manpower to do it. and as you see with operation barbarossa, stalin's not afraid to lose large numbers of troops, in order to eventually defeat an enemy. secondly, the soviets had superior tanks( soviet T-34) as opposed to the very weak japanese Ha-go tank and the soviets also had superior artillery ( soviet howitzer). Lastly your point about the japanese navy is not really true. in the time slot that soviets would've most likely invaded mainland japan, japan's navy was almost completely demolished by the americans. even the legendary japenese battleship the yamato was sunk by the US.

[@Piratejoe44]

@@ednabirkdale7403 You...You do realize that this is in a timeline where Japan *wasn't* at war with america, right? Additionally you forget that the japanese had the Type 4 Chi-To, something they would likely have built in much more numbers given the obvious fact that they would be dealing with a primarily land based war than a sea based one. Additionally, you fail to recognize the fact that the soviets would need to actually build the transport ships to actually get to the Japanese mainland. Stalin might not care about throwing soldiers to their deaths like they were a crumpled up bit of paper, but even so, that can only get you so far. Additionally, you don't realize that in the defense of the home islands, the Japanese were preparing to actually get practically every civilian armed and ready to fight an invader, and would especially do so in the case of a communist threat seeing how their way of life would be completely destroyed by soviets if they were successful. Lastly, an america which doesn't get involved wouldn't give massive amounts of supply such as the trucks that the soviets actually used for their rockets or to pull their howitzers and artillery, and with the japanese in the east, even if they were still sent shipments, the main route utilized in the pacific just wouldn't be utilized due to the fact the ports there would be occupied. 26 milion and a half soviets died (just under 14% of the entire soviet population at the time) in our actual ww2. In this hypothetical where japan focuses on the soviets, they'd suffer much more, especially without the supply the soviets gave, or the detraction of german forces from the soviet front a successful D day did. They had a massive ammount of manpower, but even then, it wasn't endless and population alone wouldn't save them, especially with an axis that doesn't need to worry about so many fronts of the war.

[@jarl8815]

The Russians are too OP here I think.

[@novaizrap3071]

Sorta Japan went to war to Russia and Japan won just like Japan vs Russo war of 1908

[@Vincrand]

@@novaizrap3071 But that wasn't against Stalin. I still doubt heavily that they could statsion troops in west and central Europe and beat Japan with th remaining force. However if Russis didn't station as much in Europe, then I think they could kick Japan out off Siberia and Manchuria. Then it kinda depends how much troops Japan is willing to throw at Russia. Since they already had a lot of succes in the rest of Asia they might settle for either a neutral peace or a peacedeal with little impact.

[@novaizrap3071]

@@Vincrand idc

[@novaizrap3071]

@@Vincrand well that was a waste of time reading that

[@V-V1875-h]

This video was sponsored by Gaijin and Wargaming

[@henryquecabral9357]

I hope Mr. Terry reads this so here goes my ten cents: I do not belive that the soviets could have invaded Japan, I mean, sure they could have defeated Japan(remember that japan never capitulated China they were losing to poor and divided China) and yes they have a good shot at defeating Japan and Germany at the same time. But invading Japan takes one thing that the soviets didn't have A NAVY. Yes nowadays with helicopters and giant planes we think of parashooting as some easy task, but, by 1945 you couldnt move heavy equiment usying planes, how would the Soviets invade japan if they lacked a navy to carry their tanks, AA, AT, Food, ammo etc... No matter how big is your airforce by 1945 relaying entirely on a airforce to move such a huge amount of troops was impossible. By 1941 Japan had 10 battleships and 6 large fleet carriers(large aircraft carrier) while Russia had 3 Battleships and no fleet carriers, soviets had half of the Destroyers and one third of japanese cruisers. I dont see a landing in japan without a Navy and Japan was YEARS ahead of Russia navy-wise, ships dont take just expertise to build but time some battleships may take up to five years to be build...

[@tomon8327]

Thats what i belive but i think it would happen just slowly. The video mentions how much american is a weapon making machine but the soviets were pretty much on par with the industrial might of the us. I think it would just be japan is slowly killed with russia slowly becoming more of a navel power and probably would either just destroy the navy and go for an invasion or just isolate and strangle it like what the germans tried to do with great Great Britain. But without the us i think they would fall but probaly in the late 40s

[@shindari]

@@tomon8327 The "myth" of Russian superpower being somehow inevitable, is entirely based in fantasy. We seem to have this idea in our heads that the Soviet Union, under Stalin, was some kind of unbeatable "demon," whom was destined to win WWII, even without American help and resources. This idea completely ignores reality. Russia, facing a two-front war, with no American involvement, and no "Western Front" opened by a D-Day Invasion (which would have failed spectacularly, if only Britain and Canada tried it), would have been CRIPPLED in their attempts to beat back the Axis powers. Germany alone? Sure, they could probably still do that (because Hitler was an arrogant dumbass, who didn't even equip his invading army with winter supplies, because he was "SO confident" that Germany could beat Russia in less than six months... only an idiot would think that...). But with Japan occupying literally ALL of Russia's Eastern/Siberian military units, and resources (as well as more than likely being savvy enough to prepare for the Russian winter, unlike the Nazis), there is simply no chance in Hell that Russia manages to prevent the Nazis from reaching the critical oil fields east of Stalingrad. Especially if the Nazis are not otherwise occupied with trying to fight allied invasions of both Italy and France. With the odds flipped (USSR fighting a two-front war, instead of Nazi Germany, and Japan) the Soviets would be far less capable of turning the tide of war. More than likely, post-war Russia would be a lot smaller than the Soviet Union actually became. Assuming they even managed to not surrender to either enemy (doubtful). Both D-Day, and the attack on Italy, were only possible because of American resources, manpower, and money. Without all that... The Allies would have been "boned" like fish on the Western Front. And Russia would be fighting multiple military superpowers...all by herself! There is simply no outcome, not involving the United States, where both Nazi Germany, and Japan, are defeated in the same war. I'm sorry if that bursts certain people's "fantasy bubble." At the very best, Nazi Germany and Japan are defeated, but not absolutely. Nazi Germany would probably go into the 50's, under Hitler's control, thus condemning the entire population of European Jews, and Slavs, to death by the Holocaust (which would have continued happening in this alternate world. You think 6 million dying people is horrifying? Multiply that number by about three or four times, and that's how many the Holocaust would claim in this alternate history. The only surviving Jews would be the ones who managed to escape to either England, or the United States, for shelter.). In Japan's case, even if Japan's military expansion is halted at a certain point, it is never completely pushed back either. Without US aid, half of China likely collapses to Japanese rule. And a significant portion of Eastern Russia would remain under Japanese occupation. Without a navy, Russia could never invade Japan. And without the US, Japan still very much has a fully intact, and operational, Navy and Air Force, by 1945. Finally, the assumption that Russia would eventually have nukes is completely false. Russia only started researching nuclear capabilities BECAUSE OF Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And they were only able to eventually pull it off, in the 1950's, because of German scientists they abducted after they sacked Berlin. In this alternate timeline, Berlin is never sacked. No German scientists are abducted into Soviet control. Without the United States involved in the war, nukes are never realized by anybody. So perhaps if Japan had never attacked Pearl Harbor... the world might be a slightly better place??

[@V-V1875-h]

Old ass Battleships that were stuck at Leningrad the whole war

[@V-V1875-h]

@@shindari well, the Germans would have marched into Leningrad since the Tank factories that were "transported" to eastern Russia would have been bombed out of existance by the Japanese airforce, so no t34 and KV1 bias machines for papa stalin anymore

[@henryquecabral9357]

@@shindari I do agree with you, it wouldnt be an easy fight for Russia, but I can still belive that it can be done(it's not likely but possible), what I dont belive by ANY CHANCE is total victory for Russia, the ideia of Russian soldiers marching into occupied Japan to establish a puppet state. There is no military chance of Russia doing so.

[@PuckishAngeI]

The main reason Soviets pushed nazis back was reinforcements from the east, if Japan attacked they couldn't send those troops and would need to send more to the east to defend against Japan, the success of ussr seems unlikely

[@danieldelaney1377]

ha thats what i wanted to say

[@GavinTheGrape]

I think they forget that Japan would still have a very large navy to defend against the Soviet’s

[@thegreatteaman]

It doesn't really matter that much, considering that Japan's ground forces being defeated would be more than enough for them to start making peace.

[@debsnjim]

@@thegreatteaman The Soviets would've demanded the removal of the Emperor as a required part of any peace terms. The Japanese would never have allowed that (it's why they held off peace with the USA for so long, since the Americans wanted to remove the Emperor for a while) and would've fought on even harder against the hated communists than they did against the Americans.

[@thegreatteaman]

debsnjim even still, if Japan fought on after the defeat of Germany, and the loss of their best ground forces, Japan defending the home islands would only delay the inevitable. The soviet Air Force would be enough to land an invasion, and if the Japanese defended successfully, the soviets would be able to launch another attack over and over and over again. Once that happened, the Japanese would be doomed. The naval battle isn’t everything once the air battle begins. In an air war, Japan loses to soviet industry. Period. Plus, they might just run out of recourses and food by the time Germany fell. As German generals pointed out, if the Germans (or in this case Japanese) destroyed 12 russian divisions, the Russians would replace them with 12 more.

[@ruedelta]

@@thegreatteaman And of course USSR gets the nuke in 1949.

[@NoSkill123]

@@thegreatteaman Japan would've definitely defended their home island to the bitter end, they were willing to do that in this timeline.

[@atzistudios1375]

Hey Mr. Terry, theres this youtube video called "Medieval Ages Portrayed By Minecraft" by a youtube called Danymok

[@deanwillis1500]

If I remember correctly Stalin actually was going to invade japan and it influenced the use of nuclear weapons. Don’t remember for sure though.

[@hiredgun7186]

the Soviets did not have resources to invade Japan by this Time, i think if the Yanks had not got into it by this time, I believe the Map of Asia will have had to be redrawn

[@dimitri7857]

Also, watching this chat replay where Kronos is saying that everyone else except the USA did all the work makes my head hurt and feel bad for Honorable Chairman Meow.

[@V-V1875-h]

The US had an extremely critical role for the Success of the Allies. The oil fields of the middle east could have been taken too, as the Shelling by Japanese Ships could have helped the Africa core and the invasion that was planned to happen before a certain mustache man decided:" oh no I want Stalingrad and not those war critical oil fields!!!!"

[@oalskad]

Can you please react to The Great Northern War videos by extra credits

[@cactitiger]

hjalmaR agree

[@archerking0221]

I agree

[@davidfuller581]

I think the Soviets would have had a real bear of a time getting to Japan. As of Pearl Harbor, the only navies larger than the IJN were the USN and the Royal Navy (and even then, it wasn't a huge gap). Unless they could've done something about those ships... There wouldn't have been anything they could do to get there, not without exceedingly heavy losses even by Soviet standards.

[@gavros9636]

Not to mention the Red Fleet was a complete wash.

[@ellaser93]

The problem I generally have with these sorts of videos is that it is predicated on two things: 1. That the Soviets had virtually unlimited manpower and resources. It's the idea that they absolutely always have more than enough soldiers and stuff to throw around anywhere they want. 2. That the Soviet military was mobile and agile enough to be where it is needed. They may have had great supply chains, but it still takes time to transport stuff from one part of that country to another.

[@83athom]

12:50 My issue is that it is assuming the US is still supplying the Soviets to the same extent as we have in our own timeline. One key issue that I have with this alternate history is that it assumes wartime production and export of equipment in the US ramped up its industry the same way it did when we entered the war. A full quarter of the Soviet armored force and a full third of their air force was US built (why you see the Soviets rolling into Berlin with M4 Shermans and their top aces piloting P-39s and P-63s), not mentioning how much of their ammunition or industrial capacity was given by the US. Stalin, Kruschev, and several Soviet generals (including the one that defended Stalingrad and planned the Kursk offensive) have stated that without US intervention they would not have been able to push the Germans back. Some were of the opinion they might have stalemated them, like in the first world war, while others were adamant about a full defeat of the Union. Against the Germans and Japanese without that level of military aid however... I highly doubt the Soviets could have pushed Germany all the way to France or be able to invade the Japanese homeland.

[@VictouffeVideos]

The way I see it, from the moment the german troop staled in Russia, it was over already. The german war machine was fast and efficient, but it could not last in an extended war. And the fact that they were stopped in Russia was not due to the US. The other thing is the soviets did not have to push all the way to france, but just all the way to Berlin. I think that's why they say France does not become under the USSR influence in the aftermath. But I hav to agree that I don't know if the USSR could win against Germany while defending against Japan at the same time. It's a weird situation, because I don't see Japan or Germany succesfully invade Russia, and I don't see Staline and Hitler suddenly going back to a statu quo as they hated each other and just broke their alliance. So the only possibel outcome is USSR troops in Berlin.

[@daswordofgork9823]

It would have been glorious to see Japanese Troops charging at the Russians yelling BANZAAAAAAAAAAAAAI!!!!!!!!!!!!!! While the Russian Troops charge back yelling URAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

[@Japinoyboi2004]

They gon' be like bayonett each other

[@Japinoyboi2004]

But at least Japan can do kamikaze attacks

[@daswordofgork9823]

Kenji Takehara yeah the Japanese planes are like, can we join in on the charge too?

[@NoelNolNull]

Castle Itter was where Germans & Americans fought together. It was a video by Simon Whistler on his Geographics channel

[@alonsoquijano51]

One great mishappening was in translation of a note from the State Dept to Japan. They came up with ideas to be presented as a "modus vivendi"; but in the translation it was mistranslated to "modus operandus" and that was a huge differennce. After the war, Prince Konoye was told this and said , "if we had known this was given as a modus vivendi instead of modus operandus, we could have lived with those conditions. A simple mistranslation, but a huge misunderstanding and result.

[@LordBaldur]

I think it would be brutal for the Russians, but there is no way Japan can sustain a supply chain in Russia. The one thing I would be skeptical about is the invasion of Japan. [edit] Also I have to add that it’s unrealistic that the US would not embargo oil to Japan and it would most certainly seal the deal if they attacked the USSR.

[@mohdghazali3473]

Agree, USSR might still be able to win but it would be a brutal war for the USSR. Japan invassion would be unlikely, Imperial Japan Navy which is seperated from Imperial Japan Army and even have it's own seperated Air Force would still be one of the most powerfull Navy without the US to weaken it. Well, i agree the US didn't embargo oil to Japan sound unrealistic, that would probbaly the least US would do if they decided not to enter the war. But considering Japan would keep Siberian front busy, German might have chance to take control over Stalingrad and might be to supply Japan with oil and it's technology. The fact that Siberian bases was within the Japan reach would make it harder for USSR.

[@matrixphotodesign]

9:46 It was a Navel defat , but later border conflicts taught the Japanese that Soviets were difficult to defeat on land .

[@emperornguyen]

I don't know much about military history, I do find the Soviets fending off two fronts plausible. While I understand that the USSR fighting Germany took a major toll on their lives and that they were really only then rapidly developing their technology for armored vehicles, I also understand that Japan's forces were a bit more rudimentary, it'll be primarily be infantry attacking Russia with little armored and aerial support. Nor would they have the resources like oil to do so. I don't see Japan being able to handle to Chinese front, South Eastern Asian front, and them threatening Australia. I don't think they necessarily have to attack the Philippines which would've ensured USA involvement to threaten Australia. Because of this, I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility for USSR to fend off 2 fronts. However, there's no way for the USSR to launch an invasion after exhausting much of their resources in the western front, especially if the war drags on longer. I also don't believe USA would sit idly when Japan essentially surrounds their territorial islands (talking about the Philippines) which would prompt USA to declare war on Japan. On the other hand, if USA chooses to remain out of the conflict, I can only assume that'll only last until Germany was taken. At this point you have a very imposing communist threat, and having them attempt to invade Japan might actually prompt USA to defend Japan to prevent the spread of communism. I just don't see USA sitting idly when the Soviet Union already took most of Europe and is proceeding to spread into Asia.

[@bitcores]

I'm with the people wondering how Russia would have dealt with the Japanese Navy to effect an invasion of the home islands. Was the British Navy supposed to take care of it? Japan would have had long years of technological progress and production if they didn't have America sinking their ships. Russia wouldn't have been able to attack Japan until after dealing with Germany, which would have taken longer than it did in our timeline and in that time Japan would have solidified their hold on the resource areas they held. I think Britain certainly would have come for them considering the regions that Japan held and the danger to their own empire, but it was going to be a tall order for them to fight naval battles that far from home with the depleted resources they had, so the Pacific conflict, if it happened, probably would have really started a year, two years, three, after the defeat of Germany and itself would have taken years. Despite the relative proximity of Russia to Japan, it's still basically the same problem as Sealion.

[@mattguellec]

I don't think the Uk would ally with Russia to fight a perceived threat to their colonies. If Japan declare war on the USSR, they would not attack the british empire at the same time. I would rather see the US and the British aiding Japan than a Stalin that conquered most of Europe which the UK always advocated for balance.

[@bitcores]

@@mattguellec If Japan still attacks Singapore in this timeline, I don't see Britain allying with them, especially with how Japan tended to treat prisoners. Japan might not have declared war on USSR, but they had already fought some battles as early as 1939 so Russia may have taken care of that themselves, particularly if Britain had declared war. Likely a similar "Germany first" agreement would have been made.

[@ruedelta]

@@bitcores Japan wouldn't attack Singapore or other British holdings. They attacked Pearl Harbor because the Philippines were too much of a threat to their operations. In this timeline, they pursue a northern strategy instead. The UK would just not declare war with Japan, preferring to lick wounds to heal its empire.

[@Makapaa]

@@ruedelta I guess it all comes down to how well (or not) the "western" embargoes were enforced. Would Japanese need to conquer those southern resources from the recently "conquered" Allied nations at some point or could it remain resource-independent enough that the Commonwealth/The Allies and the Empire never come to blows. Where are they able to focus? China maybe; would that change something and to what scale? Could've gone either way there, I'd think. There are so many moving pieces in and out of Japan. And we can not forget its internal rivalries. Hell, who knows - maybe the Army/Navy split ruptured into a conflict/civil war with no need for even a tenuous co-existance?

[@ruedelta]

@@Makapaa Resource independent - no. The embargoes were enforced pretty well because despite the general realpolitiking of the era, people still felt pretty outraged when press about the Nanjing Massacre unfolded. That was the real impetus behind those actions. Japan not being starved out is actually a key factor in Zipang, a manga/anime that really explored this period quite well. I do recommend you check it out since it seems like you have the prerequisite knowledge to really get a kick out of it.

[@Rwscienceguy]

Could you react to Extra history's "South seas bubble" or the "Broad street pump." Both are quite interesting.

[@jacobp8306]

I think the most important part of this is focusing on Japan with oil and achieving their Pearl Harbor goals of not having to worry about the US's navy. They took over so many smaller islands along with a giant chunk of China and Korea. The eastern front only started pushing them back when they lost their navy and couldn't focus on expansion anymore. Russia only steam rolled Japan....after they where extremely weakened and had next to nothing left.

[@kabbosarker526]

The USSR could never invade Japan because defeating the Imperial Japanese Navy was almost impossible for them.

[@elischultes6587]

You have also remember that Germany was working on nuclear too. In Norway the British helped destroy 800 kg of heavy water. The water was necessary to refine the uranium. But they didn’t seem to have a long term development plan thought out.

[@Doomguy2163]

I read a very good book about the espionage and development of the nuclear bomb, and the USSR was not super far behind the Americans due to all the espionage, like you mentioned. Therefore I think it might be possible that the USSR might use it whenever they had fully tested it. However the Manhattan project started before the US joined, back in 1939. It might have been possible for the Soviets to steal enough info to build and use one on Japan. It would simply depend on how long the war between the USSR and Japan would last.

[@Birch37]

Japan may have continued to invade the South Pacific, including the Northern halve of Australia (the Townsville Line)

[@Hidan1107]

I think it would be a fun to watch how Mr. Terry reacts to some songs of Sabaton :D

[@sgtmayhem7567]

There’s no way the USSR would have defeated Nazi Germany without western aid, no way against both. At the end of WW2 Stalin stated “without Spam the Red Army would have starved, just that one point clearly shows the impossibility of a Soviets only victory. There’s a disturbing trend in forgetting that there’s no good guy in Communists vs. Nazis.

[@dustindubbo2892]

One thing I would like to say is that the main turning point not when The soviets pushes back but at least weren’t being folded like paper was the 41 winter offensive which was due to the arrival of the hardened Siberian soldiers and their experience in cold weather. If Japan were to assault Through the other end of Russia ala Siberia then there is no way the winter offensive would have been possible or at least nearly as successful.

[@sulevturnpuu5491]

They seem to ignore a little thing about Siberian divisions basicly saving Moscow. In this alternate timeline these divisions would have to stay in far east fighting Japan and Moscow would fall to German troops. This would be major blow to morale and authority of Soviet leadership. Futuremore, it would probably mean less erratic leadership on German side next year.

[@livethefuture2492]

also might i suggest you watch some of Cody's more recent work, his newer videos are far more detailed and substantiated than the older ones.

[@cactitiger]

I think that this is a very realistic scenario

[@thekiller7994]

Here’s one problem with the scenario: the Soviet Union can’t invade Japan due to the Japanese navy not being weakened and the Soviet’s invasion force would of been wiped out by the Japanese navy.

[@beerme2096]

Is that a Legends of the Hidden Temple shirt? If it is, that's awesome

[@19Paul91]

Please could you react to The Greatest Deception of WW2: Operation Fortitude! Would love to hear your thoughts about this topic.

[@tenofprime]

I can see one difference in the cold war here. In this scenario nukes were never used in WW2 so the major players may be more willing to use them directly on each other. A major lesson learned after using the nukes was how much long term damage they do, at the time long term radiation effects were not understand at all.

[@Ivanical]

Also, interesting question on this. Would Russia be able to invade Japan after it counters the invasion from the Japanese army? Reason I asked is Russia had to stop production of a navy, because they needed the steel to produce tanks to fend off the Germans. Russian technology couldn't really produce cemented armor thicker than 9" at the time. Sure they had the technology to produce the artillery on said ships but would the armor be any good and could they build the navy to counter the existing Japanese navy. Don't forget that earlier in the war, Japan's navy was on a roll before the battle of Midway. Would Yamamoto Isoroku still be a card to be played here, as a naval commander the guy was pretty good. Japan's aircraft carrier force also wasn't exactly a push over force.

[@temerityxd8602]

Regarding the negotiations, I've read that the Japanese decided to go to war with America first and sent the negotiators to make it seem like they were willing to talk but were actually just stalling while Japan got ready to attack.

[@shep7544]

Would Finland really have fallen to the USSR though? They got barely any outside help in the Winter War.

[@RasakBlood]

People forget how that war ended. Finland lost and had to give land to the USSR. A great KD is fun to talk about but not really meaningful when there still is millions of Russian troops pushing into your nation.

[@0Quiwi0]

I'm not sure about the Japan thing, but the biggest problem I had was Finland being marked as Soviet on all the maps. How did that happen? They never explain it. It's just there

[@artembentsionov]

This reminds me a bit of Harry Harrison’s alternate history trilogy Stars and Stripes, or as TVTropes calls it an “alternate history wank” (when you basically turn a country in to a Mary Suetopia). In the trilogy, the Trent Affair (a seizure of a British mail ship with Confederate diplomats aboard) is not resolved peacefully by Prince Albert. Instead, tensions rise and the Brits declare war on the Union. But then the Royal Navy makes a stupid navigation blunder (yeah, right) and attacks a Southern town instead of a Northern fort (assuming stars-and-bars to be a Northern flag). The soldiers then start raping and pillaging to make even the Vikings blush. So North and South decide to make peace against a common enemy and forget all about the whole slavery and secession thing (because it’s not like there was a whole war fought over it, right?). The reunited US then becomes an industrial powerhouse and starts building dreadnought battleships and tanks (still in Civil War era, mind you). The Brits get soundly beaten on pretty much all fronts. The “poor” Canadians willingly accept annexation into the US, followed by Mexicans. Then the US helps both Irelands reunite and forget about the whole Catholic/Protestant split like it’s nothing. And finally there’s an invasion of England, the removal of the Queen and aristocracy and installation of an American-style democracy (ignoring the claims that the British already have a representative system). While I do like Harrison’s books, these are by far the worst.

[@charlieputzel7735]

Two things: 1) The terrain of Siberia would basically prevent the Japanese from going any further east than the coasts, so once the Japanese capture the Pacific ports, the Soviets wouldn't be really effected. 2) While I agree that an invasion of Japan by the Soviets would have been bloody, this is Stalin we're talking about. He would refuse to stop until he had obliterated Japan for breaking the non-aggression pact they had. The main issue is the navy, but the Soviet air force would take care of that with bombing runs eventually. I do think most of Japan's pacific colonies would have gone to the Americans just by their commanders asking for American protection. Would be interesting to see a Japanese government in exile in Taiwan or somewhere ese in the pacific

[@alvis6970]

Considering what equipment the japanese were using against the chinese which was mostly airplanes and infantry since their armor was lacking the Soviets wouldnt need that much in the form of tanks on their front with Japan since tanks like the Ha-Go could be knocked out with a simple AT-rifle like PTRS or the PTRD both of these were in heavy produciton and use in the Red Army

[@DreckbobBratpfanne]

I don't think the Soviets could've beaten both at the same time and if then only with insane man slaughter and the death of tens of millions of people. And then to not only invade Europe but then Japan (4 Islands!) as well is simply impossible right after even with nearly unlimited resources, and i mean the Japanese would never give up to the Soviets because they know what's going to happen to them if they lose. And also if we assume that all of this happens, i doubt the Soviets would stop at Scandinavia, if you can beat two of the strongest millitaries at the same time, Scandinavia is just a pushover. Another thing is that the Soviets would get all the german scientists, so it's likely they would dominate the space race as well. Of course they would lose a lot of money in the war, but i mean they gain so much territory and so much wealth, the rhineland alone is so extremely valuable that it could be enough...

[@healydevlin1930]

My personal take is that trouble would be had on both the European Front and the Pacific Front. I think that the Invasion of the Soviet Union would continue much like the opening. A massive amount of vastly inferior equipment being desperately thrown into combat to stop German Advances. In Europe, Lend-Lease may slow down to be a trickle at best. Daylight bombing kills thousands of pilots on the Allied Side with little to no damage gains. No effective daylight bombers exist on the Allied Side. Even without changing much of the actual real world facts, D-Day is ineffective due to a lack of men and equipment to throw into a major beach assault. WW2 becomes a massive moving stalemate. The US may get involved later against a powerful Japanese Threat after Japan moves to finally decide it wants Hawaii as an operations base against the US.

[@potatogamer3830]

I kinda wanna see a Soviet Ura Charge go head to head against the Japanese Banzai Charge. Its gonna be the biggest fight ever.

[@thekiller7994]

Basically one side who suicide charges win

[@joeuncoolio]

I pretty much agree with what he predicted with Europe. I think a Soviet war with Japan would have been long and drawn out. The Soviets would have eventually pushed them out of east Asia but without America doing what they did to Japan's navy, there is just no way the Soviets could have gotten across the Sea of Japan. At worst for Japan I see an attack of Hokkaido and maybe even Japan giving that island up in surrender. The real interesting thing is that Korea would not be divided so they would not be part of the Cold War. Reading the history of Viet Nam in this period I think things go the same there but what does a the loss do to the Americans seeing this much red across Europe and Asia. It is also interesting to think about what the world would be like without post war industrial might of the Germans. In the simplest form, no Mercedes, no BMW, etc. At least not in the engineering quality they are. It is also doubtful that America would have bolstered up Japan in this after war scenario. Would we have Sony, Toyota, Nintendo, etc. in the form they are now. We would also not have South Korea. All that post war innovation would be no where to be seen. Technologically we would probably be several years behind (maybe a decade or more) where we are now.

[@MrTerry]

Great points!

[@jamie5140]

I can’t see the soviets being able to fight on two fronts, even with their vast manpower. Japan, while not massive militarily, would be a serious problem for them. They pulled troops from the east to fight Germany, a big part of them turning the tide in the west I always thought, that would not be possible with japan invading. Plus the soviets moved all there industry to the east when Germany invaded allowing them to keep producing throughout the war, Japan could disrupt that causing their war machine to falter/collapse. But who knows, just my two cents on the matter👍🏼

[@redzeppelin6]

I'm not buying the USSR taking Japan. I agree with you on that. And too add without the US, Japan not only has the large Navy, but their flagship Yamato.

[@Merennulli]

I think the Soviet Union would stall in (no pun intended) the east until the more pressing German threat is obliterated, but just as Stalin did in our timeline, I think a mobilization to the east is inevitable, especially with the added Japanese attack on Manchuria. I think, given the Soviet navy, though, I don't think they invade successfully. It takes time to deploy, and it's obvious the deployment is coming, so Japan is in a position to prepare a superior response. Russia doesn't have the air experience or hardware at that time to support its fleet, with much of the aircraft it did have expended against Germany. I think we see Soviet control spread from retaking Manchuria on down to Korea and China, but very slowly with high human cost. And now we have a United States that thinks the Holocaust in Europe and the Nanjing massacre are Soviet propaganda while being afraid of Stalin and already supplying Japan with oil. I could see the US getting pulled in on the side of Japan in the early 1950s.

[@thenorthkoreanwifier2075]

I can't help but think about how the depression would have gone

[@grahamreece519]

...what?

[@keltdavies8792]

The depression was over in 1939 when the US started to build the war economy to supply the British for lendlease. Not being in the war just means there would never have been a baby boom, as there would be no returning soldiers with a high drive for life-affirming acts.

[@willjadams]

So in this scenario what happens to Soviet manufacturing and the T-34 spam? In response to Operation Barbarossa the Soviets where forced to relocate their manufacturing centers to the east but is this still viable while fighting a Japanese invasion?

[@MorokLeviathan]

It would still have been viable. The Urals were far away from the Far East and the Japanese land forces would not have the supplies or supply lines to advance even through Mongolia. Not even mentioning the Soviet Far Eastern forces and the Chinese still fighting the Japanese and the Japanese navy being useless against continental powers.

[@christopherrector5886]

Yeah, I don't see a way for the Soviets to overcome the Japanese navy. The Soviets/Russian navy are famously anemic. They could try unsupported paratrooper drops, but that would probably fail spectacularly

[@KommandoCraftLP]

I don't think the soviets would've been able to defeat the Germans and Japanese without the Americans fully in the war, certainly not in 1945. Not only would the Germans have had MUCH LESS pressure in Africa, France and Italy (with them remaining in the war as well) leaving more troops for the eastern front. What people are usually forgetting is that at the Soviet Union, despite its numbers and equipment was even more on the knees than Germany. IIRC in 1944 their advantage in numbers was even smaller than at the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, but now the Germans had two more fronts to fight on (Italy and France), that shifted the power towards the Allies. The Soviet Union was the major nation that lost the largest percentage of their ready to fight population, not just in absolute numbers. They still had the ability to supply their troops with guns, tanks and other equipment but every shot russian would've been one they couldn't adequately replace anymore. I think even with both America and Japan out of the war the eastern front would've stalled somewhere in Poland and it would've stalled for a long time because both sides were depleted of any combat ability. With the Japanese in the war forcing the Soviets to dedicate more units far away from Moscow the outcome of the war would depend on their entry into the war. If the Japanese were able to deprive the Soviets of supplies from the east in 1941 and forced them to dedicate more units there it might have even been a German victory/occupation of Moscow as the counter attack might not have taken place, leaving their capital vulnerable throughout the winter. Had the Japanese taken longer than 1941 to declare war for Siberia I think the stalling of the war would've happened earlier on more eastern soil but still happened. What would've happened if Moscow were never relieved from german pressure? Would the soviet elite have changed? Would Russia break and fall to local warlords? I don't know, neither am I sure what would've happened when ww2 would've stalled somewhere in eastern Europe. Let me know your opinions on it.

[@Owen_loves_Butters]

A soviet victory in Asia and Europe is likely, but I don’t think Russia could beat the Japanese navy.

[@YAH2121]

Soviets defeating Japan? Sure. Soviets INVADING Japan? Yeah, no. With what Navy? I also dont think Pearl Harbor never being attacked would necessarily mean that Hitler wouldnt inevitably declare war on the US, meaning D-Day was still likely to occur.

[@Ivanical]

is that a silver snakes t-shirt? like legends of the hidden temple?

[@natbornkilla]

Its unlikely that barborosa would be succesfull due to issues that arnt affected by the lack of the us involvement. The question worth thinking about is how supply sharing on both fronts may have been challenging for the ussr so germany may have actualy gotten to the Azerbaijan oil fields . But no chances are what happens in the video happens

[@TheCsel]

There are a few things that almost happened in real life that could have made Japan think twice about a naval war against the US. One of those things was the presence of the British fleet in the Pacific. There were several plans that kept being delayed to bring a larger British fleet to the Pacific to counter Japanese expansion. It is difficult to say if Japan would be willing to commit to a war against a large British fleet and a large American fleet, And perhaps they would have launched a "Pearl Harbor" attack on Britain instead of the USA.

[@matrixphotodesign]

8:23 Plus Germans subs were targeting US Ships ( America was in the war just not officially )

[@HamHamJ1]

I agree with people saying that the USSR didn't have a Pacific navy sufficient to threaten the Japanese mainland. I could see them being able to drive Japan out of mainland Asia though. But if Japan broke neutrality and invaded Russia while they where still at war with Germany... like, I'm pretty sure historically Russia pulled most of the troops it had back to Europe. If the Eastern front was even more of a meat grinder and many of the German troops tied up defending France were instead thrown at Russia, Japan may just be able to grab all the worthwhile territory with little opposition and then the USSR has to stage a counter offensive across Siberia so who knows. Personally I could see Japan not attacking Russia and focusing on the Allied colonies and China, and thus Russia also not wanting to start anything without the help of someone that could challenge the Japanese fleet, like the US, resulting in them just remaining in an uneasy peace all the way through and past the fall of Germany.

[@b.w.6535]

It wouldn't have kept the United States out of the war. Churchill and Roosevelt met months before that incident to discuss how to introduce America to the fighting, and to lay out a framework for rebuilding afterward. They met in secret on the HMS Prince of Wales in the harbour of a town near where I grew up in Newfoundland (when we were still our own country) Roosevelt didn't have the support at home, and needed "something" to drum up that support. He started needling the Japanese in order to get a reaction. I don't think he realized just how big the response would be. If it hadn't been Pearl Harbour, it would have been something else. It was also the precursor to the formation of the United Nations.

[@TheMyrmo]

You might have some fun with Drachnifel's description of the Voyage of the Second Russian Pacific Fleet, a true voyage the damned, to fight the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese War.

[@augustozoratto267]

in my opinion i would say that the war would´ve lasted until 48-49 due to Russia splitting its army in 2 to defend both sides or even longer time, yeah the Japanesse army isnt really prepared for Siberia but still they could grab and protect part of the land while the germans continue pushing trough.. also if at any moment the ussr moved some troops from the eastern front to the western it would give Japan an advantage to move in and take land.. so it would be inconclusive, we can only speculate what would happen, it could be an axis victory over most of europe and Asia (defeating ussr would create a bridge for Germany to help japan against china and so and so)

[@TheCsel]

While people say that Japan can't invade Russia/Siberia, especially in the winter, the opposite is also true. Russia's supply lines and infrastructure in the east was almost nonexistent. It would be equally hard to for Russia to send a substantial force against Japan if Japan was ready for it. But it is hard to say, by midwar the Soviets technology in land and air had increased to counter the Germans, it is hard to compare to our timeline where Japan neglected tank technology in favor of naval technology. Perhaps Japan's tanks and planes would have improved to better fight the Russians, or perhaps they would be overwhelmed by a Soviet army that has been hardened by European experience. Likewise, the Soviets would have limited naval capability. It would take a monumental effort for them to build up a large enough fleet and airforce to physically invade Japan.

[@BlueGroove7]

Russia taking on Japan and Germany at the same time but with out the U.S supplies, and oil that be very difficult.

[@dvidsuba]

I don't see the Soviets invading Japan. Defeating Germany with less allies at their side would've costed them even more, against the almost untouched Japanese navy and probably still effective air force an invasion would've been extremely difficult. The Soviet Union takes the mainland and leaves Japan alone.

[@ashleytribe1014]

Please can you do a video of the germany occupation of British soil that isnt widely known about germany invasion of Guernsey and Jersey during the ww2

[@1013258409]

Silver Snakes shirt! Always rooted for them but they let me down every single time. 😂

[@LordyT34]

I think the Russians get really overestimated in WW2 Don't get me wrong that they fought hard and well and were instrumental in winning, but the Red Army relied heavily on the US and Britain, those two rebuilt and modernized the Red Army

[@Adiscretefirm]

The US and Japan would have gone to war eventually. If Japan had attacked Siberia the oil embargo would still have been the first US response, also having declared war on the USSR Japan would not have had any incentive to allow lend/lease shipping across the Pacific. So either a later embargo would have had the same result or attacks on US shipping would have eventually dragged the US into the war. Similarly the Kriegsmarine would eventually have to go after the US merchant ships supplying Britain and much like the first World War would have turned public opinion against isolationism.

[@gonzoengineering4894]

In the West, I don't think the Japanese army was strong enough to hinder the Soviet advance very much. What bothers me most about this video is how Italy is brushed under the rug, and I think the most interesting thread to follow would be how the British/Soviet alliance would shape the future of Britain and France without The Marshall Plan tipping the scale. I think a stalemate with Japan is the most likely outcome in the East, but don't think a Soviet victory is outside the realm of possibility. I say that with 2 caveats. 1) I don't think a full scale land invasion of Japan is plausible. Political intrigue and support for Japanese partisans (largely forgotten in the west, but Japan didn't get the largest communist party outside of the Eastern Bloc from nowhere) would be the main arrows in that quiver. Japan would have to be on the verge of civil war before Soviet boots had a chance to reach the ground. 2) the war would almost certainly drag on into the 50s and I wonder if even Stalin would have the motivation to see it through.

[@twrampage]

I suspect the Benelux and possibly Denmark would end up Western. The Soviets were overextending a bit irl, with a bloodier war against the Japanese even Stalin probably wouldn't try going further than Germany.

[@jacekwilczopolski6024]

I agree with the Japan-Amerrica relations part. Like in the video Japan would attack Russia, they would face quite a lot of resistance, and for now they wouldn't commit into it very much (pt.4 below) and at the end they'd be succesfull, byt the ammount of gained territories'd be much less than they anticpated. In the Europe, the fight berween Britain - Germany - Russia will proceed quite simillarly like originaly (the course of actions), but it'll be stretched by at least 1 year (up to 1,5), and in final stretch Russia would be replaced by countries mentioned in pt.4 below. As for outcome of the war, comparing to original outcome, there would be 5 differences: 1. Countries economy would be overstrained and soon after the war, Europe would be facing occurence simillar to Great Depressiom. 2. After the was has ended, all the international matters (convention, trials, etc.) would be handled with before everything else. 3. Germany would keep integrity and freedom, but would be strictly overseed. 4. East european countries (or at least most of them) that were under Russia, would attain freedom. 5. Closely to the end of WWII Russia couldn't withstand economically and'll have to back off. Japan would took up that opportunity to again invade Russia's territories, but this time seriously, and would reap great benefits of that. Not to such degree, but still Russia'll have to, alongside with Germany, face pt.2.

[@cdw2468]

i think that taking out 2 fronts (which i believe would have been possible for the soviets) would have evened out with their dominance in western europe. the resources taken from pacifying the east (think hungarian revolution or prague spring but with a potential great power instead of european minors) would have been taken away from dealing with the west. plus the fight being much more devastating because of the 2 fronts of the soviets means that they are much weaker as a nation. perhaps the soviets even fall sooner than in our timeline because of the overstretched and depleted nature of their nation

[@USSSfr33d0m]

Don't think so, USSR didn't even have enough gun for western front.

[@thechannelitrollwith1645]

Lol then my aunty's house wouldn't have had a plane wing fly through its wall. I live in Hawaii and had family in the 442. In fact, that Pulitzer-nominated photo of the father hugging his son, a sergeant in the 442nd, is my family. Thinking about them not having a blatant reason to pick up arms and prove themselves for their country is very interesting but it's such a turning point in history I feel like something would've brought us into the world at some point. I'm not nearly informed enough on it so I'll finish the video lol.

[@supervegito2277]

12:23 Germany isnt... but apparently Denmark is...

[@notsae66]

Germany verses Russia alone would be a German win, having Japan also attacking would make the conquest of Europe fully possible.

[@phdgamingftwontwitch3485]

I think I could see how the Russians could invade Japan start at that northern island that they shared at one point, invade the top island of the Japanese mainland, invade the middle island than the southern, it would be bloody bit I don’t really think Stalin would care

[@dezhernan]

Soviets had too much strength in this alternate history. 1. They’d have enough men but not supplies and manufacturing to fight a 2 front war. 2. Japan would head to the nearest and easiest oil source, not necessarily USSR, as they had limited strategic reserves. 3. Imperial Japanese Navy has plenty of ships to fend off a Russian naval attack, especially with the Russian fleet needing to go around Europe, Africa, and Asia to get to the Pacific theater Also the Cold War plays out much differently if this alternate history comes to pass. 1. US still develops a nuclear bomb with the scientists seeking refuge in the 30s. 2. USSR takes all the rocket scientists and gets a large jump in the space race. 3. US doesn’t become the superpower it would have, so its role is diminished in foreign affairs as it isn’t the leader of the free world. 4. USSR would’ve lasted longer with not spending so much on defense after securing Germany.

[@1lostmuffin]

I could definitely see the Soviets pushing the Japanese out of mainland Asia if the war in the west ended. And maybe Stalin is crazy enough to try to invade the Home Islands. But I don't see the invasions getting past the IJN, ultimately peacing out and taking the japanese islands in the South Pacific.

[@livethefuture2492]

i think war with the US was inevitable, remember pearl harbor was just one of the invasion plans. they also invaded the Phillippines and guam and other American possessions in the pacific at the same time, and ultimately that was their goal. so regardless they would have eventually found themselves in conflict with the US. also i think Germany would still have declared war because the US was supplying both the British and the soviets through lend-lease anyway.

[@johnwalsh4857]

actually a correction, the embargo was done due to the Japanese war in CHina, basically after the Japanese move into Indochina in 1940, angered the USA and the US demanded the Japanese withdraw from French Indochina and CHina or get embargoed.,

[@charge8039]

Honestly, a land invasion of Japan is unlikely. An invasion of a mountainous island nation like Japan would cost enormous resources and manpower that the Soviets may need to enforce their holdings in Europe. Although, I can see fire bombing of Japanese cities as a very real possiblility. Similar to the air raids the Nazis carried out on the UK

[@animegaming4057]

I would say no to be honest. Cause then Germany doesn’t split their resource between Russia and the US and allies. That out of nowhere blitz at the battle of the bulge would head straight to Russia. I don’t think they would have enough to face all of the tiger tanks. Even though they had less than a 1400, but we know through history, that the tiger tanks didn’t really get destroyed. They just ran out of ammo and fuel and had to be abandoned. Having a focus on 2 enemies, that would change the whole coarse of the war

[@puckyMaXxx]

10:57 from here THOSE alternate line of history IS ABSURD for me, cause : 1. that's actually perfect scenario of "Back Stabbing" which can drain "the Blood" of Soviets a lot. 2. [WHAT I KNOW] its still no way for US to "not to involve" in "Pacific Theater" because Japan had already invade northern of Australia(..and also US territory in Philippine(?)) WHICH between Australia and US is already an ally (..aren't they??)

[@debsnjim]

The invasion of the Philippines happened at the same time/right after the attack on Pearl Harbour. There was never any attempted invasion of Australia, only a few air raids and a mini-sub raid in the Sydney harbour. The Japanese never pushed past the Spice Islands thanks to Australian forces in Papa New Guinea. The Australian-US alliance only became a thing after the war, since it was WW2 that showed the US as the world naval power instead of the British (Australia basically has to be allied to the biggest maritime power to survive since it's entire economy is based on sea-based trade)

[@V-V1875-h]

@@debsnjim they wouldn't have attacked the islands, since they didn't have resource shortages because of thr Embargo

[@xtcarnagerocks8915]

I think the main question would be exactly when Japan gets involved with Russia, if they go at the same time as Germany then Russia would most likely fall given how it got to the brink against just the German army in the beginning, but if they attack after the Germans start to fall back and take heavy losses then the Russians would be more likely victorious because they would have the war industry up and running and would have the time to finish the germans before moving to the Japanese because of how hard Siberia is to move large troops though.

[@BobHerzog1962]

Invasion of Japan with what Navy? The USSR Navy was smaller and less advanced than the Japan one. And not stationed and geared towards the Pacific ... I guess they could outbuild Japan eventually but that still would take time. Large ships take a lot of time.

[@Jimbo-rt1yf]

When he puts on the helmet he means business

[@whitekaiser9971]

It's Hideki Tojo The Prime Minister Of The Japanese Empire Who Holds The Power Not Emperor Hirohito

[@nutcrackit7396]

the soviets couldn't invade japan in an alternate timeline. The japanese navy would be virtually intact. The soviet navy would stand no chance.