What if Japan Never Attacked Pearl Harbor?

The first 700 people to click this link will get a free 2 month trial to Skillshare skl.sh/alternatehistoryhub
On this anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, let's imagine an alternate scenario where the Japanese never attack. The United States is never involved in the war. What world arises from this?
Twitter:
/ althistoryhub
Music:
The Hipcat Swagger by Martin Landh
Cyanide 3 by Rannar Sillard
Cranked 3 by Rannar Sillard
Emperors of Tomorrow 1- Rannar Sillard
Thrilling Moments 5- Peter Sandberg
Crime City 4- Peter Sandberg
Heavy Drama 5 - Jonah Hynynen

[@emeneldrayrolando4923]

Germany: We can still win the war. Japan: We just bombed the Pearl Harbor. Germany: *YOU WHAT!?*

[@duckquack8562]

Usa: WHAT THE HELL Germany: ah shit

[@mdyoung1971]

@@gandar5097 That's the key, he wanted to involve the United States...just not in 1941, and definitely not on the Pacific Ocean. He wanted to invade the US from the Atlantic after defeating the British, while Japan invaded from the Pacific.

[@shindari]

@@mdyoung1971 As Dirty Harry said in the movie "Bruce Almighty": Be careful what you wish for... punk! HItler learned the hard way. Wanting to fight the world is one of the stupidest ideas a man could ever have.

[@mdyoung1971]

@@shindari Well, his first mistake was not going ahead and crossing the channel and taking out the Brits in 1939-40. We were in no mood to get into Europe's war, and Hitler knew this. It was Japan's mistake to attack Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941. We were starving them of oil that they depended on. So, in reality, Japan forced our hand and Hitler's hand. Furthermore, Hitler declaring war on the United States was a knee jerk response to us formally declaring war on his ally in Japan. However, he forgot one thing, he was already fighting a two front war with tiny Britain on the west and Giant Soviet Union on the east. He thought, erroneously, that would take a long time for us to get mobilized. That would give him enough time to finish off Russia, or so he thought. In fact, it only took 6 months for the first American to land in Europe...nowhere near enough time to finish off Russia.

[@shindari]

@@mdyoung1971 Hitler didn't cross the channel, because he arrogantly thought that simply keeping them pinned to their island, with no allies, was enough to beat them. And it was. Britain didn't start making any noise in the war until the United States jumped in. Without America, the English and Russians would have remained pried apart on the map, fighting the same enemy, but unable to help one another. And neither country, by themselves, had the power to break into the fortress that the Nazis turned central Europe into. In this manner, Germany would have had all the time that they needed to force submission out of both powers. Even if that effort took the entirety of the decade (which it very well might have). However, the USA, and its' economic/ military chutzpah, turned the tide against the Axis. By simply getting involved as the "third wheel", America stabilized the Allied Powers, and enabled them to fight together, in unison. It was a mistake for Japan to get us involved. They'd have been far better off coordinating a two-front war with Russia, with Germany doing most of the damage in the western front. Japan's mistake might well have been the most important mistake in world history.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

Whoa whoa whoa, Japan had a massive fleet, with the largest Battleships and Carriers along with a strong air force. There was no way the Russian navy could compete against the Japanese one, so I can't see how Russia can engage in a full scale invasion of Japan. They could sweep across Korea and China, installing Communist governments, but the Japanese islands would be extremely secure. And Paratroops need to be regularly supplied in order to be effective.

[@IgnarHusky]

ltflak Airborne divisions?

[@2ethefirst318]

Russia bias?

[@Edax_Royeaux]

I don't think the logistics on are the Soviet Union's side. Operation Downfall would have involved 6 million soldiers, and predicted up to 1.7-4 million American casualties, and that was with Aerial Superiority, Naval Support and Armored support. A paratroop force numbering in the millions was just unheard of in WW2, requiring an enormous amount of vulnerable transport planes. Even if they built up such a force, those paratroops can't be supplied by sea with all IJN Battleships and Carrier patrolling it, so it'd have to be done by plane. This would require a Soviet air force of unimaginable size, and a infrastructure to send all the spare parts, fuel and munitions to maintain that air force that is so far away from the industrial factories of Russia.

[@highkingthorgrimgrudgebear7468]

That would have no supply routes. If you saw band of brothers remember that excluding bastogne they clear supply lines. Not to mention the Russian airborn troops were mostly used as plain old infantry.

[@Yoshi14832]

You forget that likely the British Navy would help out in the pacific. Along with Commonwealth. (Such as Australia and ect) Plus, I disagree with this scenario because America stopped supplying oil to Japan before Pearl Harbor and this scenario acts like that happened AFTER the bombing which is backwards.

[@JonatasAdoM]

Inside Hitler's bunker: "What about the Japanese attack on the Yankees?"

[@gavinosowski5945]

It's a front we cannot afford to lose

[@kyleking3839]

Go I will, good relations with the Yankees I have

[@spaceman081447]

@JonatasAdoM RE: "Inside Hitler's bunker: 'What about the Japanese attack on the Yankees?'" Hitler and the German high command had no advance knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack. They were just as surprised as were the Americans.

[@mattfromwiisports2468]

@@spaceman081447 they had no idea but they were rather pleased when it happened.

[@biggemboaty6969]

@@mattfromwiisports2468 rather pleased as in pissed, right?

[@thewarhawk8203]

Germany: so we're fine, as long as no one attacks America Japan: *QUESTION*

[@thegamerator10]

Germany: "What's your question, soldier?" Japan: "I attacked America." Germany: "You what?"

[@thewarhawk8203]

@@thegamerator10 germany: for how long Japan: I have done nothing but attack America for three days

[@Pikkabuu]

@@thewarhawk8203 Actually Japan would point out that Germany has been shooting at the Americans at the Atlantic for months before Japan attacked Pearl Harbour.

[@Nonamelol.]

I don’t want to be that guy but us declared war on Japan not Germany. Germany was the one who declared war on the us.

[@kurousagi8155]

@DSW22 the USA did not attack German merchant shipping. The Royal Navy did not need America’s help to cut off Germany’s sea trade. But they did fire upon German U-Boats that attacked them on their way to supply their allies. Also, the Americans were forward positioning their fleet to help deter Japan from the US mainland. Seeing as how the USA lost many of their forward navy bases in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, the conspiracy theory of “Roosevelt actively seeking a war” does not make any sense.

[@IJNavyAkagi]

"What if Japan Never Attacked Pearl Harbor, while Stalin typed console commands to *Erase All Fleets & Coal Resources Japan Has* , and to *CREATE 100 SUBMARINES FOR USSR* "

[@alejandrocarlosdevasquez1589]

Lolz

[@thejp361]

/detonate japanese_fleet /spawn submarine_100

[@nicestnice3687]

IJNavyAkagi focus.autocomplete Manpower 100000000 Research all Nuke 9999

[@michelangelobuonarroti4958]

The Soviets actually had a massive sub fleet, it was however mostly in Europe and thus ineffective...

[@josephasner171]

What if the Jews in Europe were never murdered in concentration camps?

[@DaveMiller6042]

2:55 the embargo happened because Japan was waging war in east asia. I really doubt the embargo ends because the Japanese were nice and didn't attack the US.

[@mattfromwiisports2468]

The embargo is why japan attacks the us. No embargo, no attack. Unlikely, but its needed so the situation happens

[@Rrgr5]

They attacked because they were afraid of the Chinese reorganization, they were quite victorious in the beginning of the war but they knew that it won't last long, China still a large country plentiful of resources and their defences were becoming organized day after day, the embargo was a huge factor against the war on China and they somehow felt that if they attack pearl harbor the US would lift the embargo because of the isolationist majority and their naval/air superiority in the beginning of the war, was a wrong move, but not everyone agreed with that, they could still go on without the attack and they would ultimately lose anyway, more so with the embargo than without, that's why they did it the error here is the invasion of the USSR hypothesis, they not even bother to even consider such a thing, they were cautious about the Soviets, more than anyone else by the time and they had good reasons and Stalin also didn't even think about invading Japan, maybe Korea and Manchuria, but Japan? The Japanese would probably surrender to the Soviets in the end, but not unconditionally and would still fight a war against the British empire too, and in Europe the Soviets wouldn't invade all east Europe or anything like that, Finland stood out, Austria too, Italy and Greece wanted to join them but the western allies didn't let them, so, probably in this alternate timeline they would.

[@Menckenperson]

Something else apparent in this timeline but not mentioned is that according to this timeline Japan never attacks the other Western powers in the area. No fighting in Burma or Singapore or a push on Calcutta and all those troops get directed elsewhere.

[@Rrgr5]

@@Menckenperson considering mainland China, but would still be quite impossible, considering that the Japanese would need the southeast Asia colonies oil to advance or defend their invaded territory against China because of the embargo, which was why the Japanese empire took the fight to the europeans invading their colonies before attacking pearl harbor in the first place.

[@shadithakis]

I 99% sure cody didnt have the embargo in is because why would japan need to attack the USA if the embargo never existed

[@djordan4648]

I love your videos but this one has one major flaw. The Soviets did not have any kind of sea lift capacity nor the ability to protect it from Japanese air and naval if they did have it. They could clean the Japanese out of China easily enough if Germany was defeated first but it would take decades to actually invade the home islands.

[@Pikkabuu]

Soviets don't need to invade Japan as without taking the resources from the South Japan wouldn't have the resources to wage war!

[@DexWeapons]

@@Pikkabuu But they would still have enough naval capabilities to have trade and air forces to protect it and their seas.

[@Pikkabuu]

@@DexWeapons The Japanese aren't going to get oil from anywhere as none will trade it with them!

[@DexWeapons]

@@Pikkabuu not necessarily japan may not get much trade but there will still be some willing to like Siam and a few others. And the US really only stopped trade of oil gasoline and machine tools. Not only that but Seeing as japan would be out of China maybe seeing as this is alternate history the US may never had embargoed then or maybe even stopped the embargo as China would no longer be under threat

[@Pikkabuu]

@@DexWeapons Siam didn't have oil to trade. And US was the main oil supplier of Japan! So losing all that oil will starve the Japanese out. And why would Japan leave China?!

[@wouterkessel5030]

I would like to point out that a Soviet invasion of Japan would be almost impossible to happen in less than a decade after the war with Japan starts, for the fairly simple fact that the Soviet Union both A doesn't have a powerfull enough fleet to beat the Japanese in open naval combat, meaning any naval invasion attempts or logistical supply convoys would be little more than target practice for the Japanese fleet, in addition to the fact that with both Japan as an enemy and Germany having to worry far less about a western front, a victory over the Axis would take many years longer. Possibly there wouldn't even be a total victory for either side, and something closer to a normal peace would eventually be negotiated after many millions more die. This all also doesn't take into effect that the British don't have to defend against the Japanese, and instead could keep far more attention on Europe and Africa, giving them more of a chance to actually still follow Churchills 'weak underbelly' strategy.

[@Pikkabuu]

And Japans economy would have crashed way before those 10 years are up, so there is no need to invade Japan in the first place. And the IJN would be sitting in ports due to the lack of oil and couldn't do anything to prevent Soviet invasion. And Germany would need to worry MORE about the West as US would still join the war due to the Battle of the Atlantic and without Japan to worry the US can fully concentrate on Germany.

[@highmolecularweightRDX]

@@Pikkabuu Cody stipulated no oil embargo, which probably would have lead to a war on it's own somehow. But as long as the IJN could sail, no one could invade Japan; USSR didn't even have a seat at the Washington Naval Treaty. Still, it's hard to image the US not joining, even over something like Icelandic neutrality considering Roosevelt's proclivities. Err, wait... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland_in_World_War_II

[@Pikkabuu]

@@highmolecularweightRDX There would be an oil embargo. Not having it would demand magic.

[@devayers7942]

@@highmolecularweightRDX there absolutely would be sanctions on Japan. Japan invaded china and the pacific looking for resources. It’s the best way to strangle the Japanese economy

[@ajknaup3530]

Roger that. Another factor making it difficult or impossible for the Soviets to invade Japan: virtually zero equipment & experience in amphibious landings. Fighting the Germans they were quite close to their population & manufacturing base. Look at the thousands of miles the Soviets would have to cross to invade Japan! &, Stalin is now facing the German nightmare of a 2-front war. Not happening.

[@awesomemangoes8072]

What if Constantinople never fell?

[@adidoki]

it actually have changed nothing since the byzantine empire´s territory outside of constantinople was already conquered by the turks not conquering constantiople would just let the empire live a longer as a vassal of the ottomans who´d blockade the dardanels

[@ragingshibe]

STORM LORD not really. The Byzantine Empire was pretty much just their capital Constantinople, with the ottomans surrounding them on both fronts. So Europe would still be invaded and isolated from the rest of the continent. The only way the Ottoman invasion of the Balkans could’ve been thwarted is if the Byzantines held their ground against the Seljuk Turks 400 years back.

[@keremcantekin]

You mean to Catholics or to Muslims?

[@theepicone100]

I beg to differ. The right man at the right place can cause a domino effect that can change the fate of a nation.

[@WyrmrestAccord]

The correct question would be "What if the Byzantines won the battle of Manzikert in 1071?"

[@marcooosbibendorsht1334]

"Stalin was quite vengeful" Holy shit that is the most understated thing I've ever heard

[@GAndreC]

He lacked the means to invade Japan less means than Nazis had to take England

[@RetroAP]

Stalin was fucking PISSED off dude

[@dixiefish0173]

GAndreC well if the usa continued to help by sending supplies etc, then Russia would of became the super power instead of usa. Because it mentioned in the scenario the population of the usa wanted to stay out of the actual fighting.

[@incompetence10881]

I believe once the Germans fell it would have been like Dart in stranger things 2. HOLY SHIT I MADE A MONSTER

[@GAndreC]

The problem was not manpower but a navy to overcome the sea there

[@noticemesenpai69]

>An actual invasion for the first time in history Mongols: Are we a joke to you?

[@boldCactuslad]

*dies in a tornado*

[@noticemesenpai69]

@@macdaraoraghallaigh7343 you don’t think we know that?

[@noticemesenpai69]

Some people just want to try to sound smart on the internet. He’s probably very lonely, let him be

[@konugardian2374]

ehh... maybe if the mongols actually had access to their horses would it be an actual invasion

[@richi7494]

They sucessfully invaded tsushima and Iki

[@kardy12]

Without US material help, it’s questionable that the USSR would have been able to hold back both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Remember that part of what enabled the USSR to begin the counteroffensive after Germany reached Moscow was fresh troops that were in the East guarding against a possible Japanese invasion that was no longer going to happen after Pearl Harbor. If instead the Japanese had invaded the USSR, the Soviets would have faced a war on two fronts and without considerable US materiel assistance.

[@Pikkabuu]

Lend-Lease started BEFORE US joined the war. Also Japanese attack on Siberia would be utterly pointless and wouldn't stop the Soviets from transferring troops West. Just look at how meaningless Operation Arctic Fox was and remember that the Japanese had WORSE situation...

[@2absolutelynots]

@@Pikkabuu without the US going to a war economy it wouldn't have had enough time to produce anything significant. The US was isolationist before Japan attack Pearl harbor.

[@crock3251]

@@Pikkabuuthe lend lease and help with industry came in ‘43 at it’s full might, and now, that the US isn’t even involved, it will be lower, and even lower cus they hadn’t gone into war economy.

[@negative6442]

Yeah this definitely isn't Cody's best video lol

[@hitechinc.7875]

So Soviet would fall?

[@et3747]

Now do “What If Australia Won The Great Emu War?”

[@Cringinator4000]

Unrealistic

[@britishmapping9514]

@@Cringinator4000 bro anything is possible so yeah

[@anghuyphamnguyen3096]

@@britishmapping9514 Australia will win the war if all of the continent is habitable by human, right now the Emus are taking 90% of the continent simply because Australian government can't effectively occupy captured territory The only way Australia can win is either making the whole continent more green or involving chemical and especially biological warfare

[@britishmapping9514]

@@anghuyphamnguyen3096 thank you man

[@britishmapping9514]

@@EvenFlowIntro hello American but Austria is in Europe and Australia is the real one

[@davidbalogun1928]

No way a Soviet Invasion would be possible when the Imperial Japanese navy is a thing

[@lars1701again]

I know really and even if there were no Japanese navel forces they didn't have the sea lift capacity to get a army over there.

[@patrickjin6610]

Without Manchuria and Manchuko, the Japanese would have no resources, and no oil. Their navy would not be able to run, and their war economy would die in a few months without supplies

[@deutan4390]

@@patrickjin6610 They...can import things ya know?

[@patrickjin6610]

FeierLK where would they import things from? Their colonies are invaded and destroyed

[@deutan4390]

@@patrickjin6610 The Allies, if the Soviets invaded all of Korea and mainland Japan - the Allies would try to stop the communists; they always hated the Soviets

[@hartmann3288]

I think Russia was a bit over powered in this, as it would be fighting a two front war stretching its resources much farther than the real event, and the probability of the lend lease between the USSR and the UK actually happening would have been far more unlikely, and if it was put into effect it would have been far less effective than it actually was. Not to mention how the North African campaign would have ended badly for the allies without American intervention, which would have allowed for Germany to focus more of its resources in east

[@Pikkabuu]

A two front war would only be a problem if all the fronts were dangerous. And there is no way that the Japanese could do anything meaningful against the Soviet forces in Siberia so the whole operation would be nothing like Operation Arctic Fox was. And what would happen to Lend Lease?! It started way before US joined the war in the first place! So what would happen in Africa then?

[@vuktodic1356]

So if afganistan attacked ussr in ww2 it would be a two front war and ussr would collapse? It does not matter it can be three front war but if japan has no power to defeat.ussr on land then what should happen? Japan somehow walks from vladivostok to urals?

[@lordpeanut3245]

@@vuktodic1356 ??? Japan isn't someone weak power in the east, and eastern russia isn't just all siberia, russia still needs to defend a lot it's city neighboring mongolia and china

[@johnnymiller1210]

Exactly.. 2 pronged war for Russia, they will fall. They were able to push back the Germans due to concentration in the West and because the German industry was almost devastated. With Japan in the East and German in the West?. Goodluck to Russia, especially if the Central Asian colonies might rebel..

[@saidblanco7696]

​@@lordpeanut3245 Countries that Japan had problems conquering. Do you even know why the Japanese went to war against USA? Because the embargo cut the resources to sustain the war against China. Mongolia would have worked with the Chinese to stop the Japanese.

[@ThrillzTheGreatest]

6:33 And after all of that, Switzerland is still neutral.

[@cookieboylover1360]

Yes

[@sce2aux464]

The Sovies like their chocolates too.

[@thehinzee]

You're telling me the USSR, with virtually no navy in the Pacific, is going to beat the JAPANESE NAVY and INVADE JAPAN? Sure! Not to mention that Japan would've seized Pacific Russian ports & bombed the Red Fleet in much the same way they did at Pearl Harbor in our timeline.

[@filipv.1198]

Paratroopers and bombings maybe?

[@thehinzee]

@@filipv.1198 Hahaha yeah okay. The only thing paratroopers did in real life is weaken the enemy before an attack. They weren't used alone for invasions. Also the Russian airforce isn't exactly the best.

[@filipv.1198]

Yeah but in time Russians would outproduce the Japanese, and then easely crush them

[@thehinzee]

@@filipv.1198 Wrong, the Japanese navy would turn their sights to Singapore and Indonesia (just like they did in our timeline) and without American Navy to cut off their shipping, Japan keeps a constant supply of resources coming to the home islands. Japan would be able to hold off pretty much indefinitely. Especially with the chemical warfare they were researching at the end of the war. 1946 would be chemical hell for the Russians.

[@lorddeath6300]

Hinzee I agree with this statement, and on land the Japanese would still have an overwhelming airforce to demoralize the Russians hundreds of miles before the the battle even takes place and if it did the Russians would have a hell of a time with air superiority that the Japanese holds,

[@shreckogre9481]

Japan: lets attack Pearl Harbor and lower their ship numbers USA: builds over 6,000 different types of ships

[@_Saint_Michael_]

Lol

[@Christian-ni5fl]

Lol

[@TheEnchatedIronaxienAxeth]

Lol

[@CubSATPH]

But USA needs 2 Atomic Bomb to defeat Japan

[@TheEnchatedIronaxienAxeth]

@@CubSATPH *NoOoOo! YoU cAn'T jUsT rUiN tHe ChAiN lIkE tHaT!!1!!1* (*haha broken chain go brr*)

[@mikeadams7841]

Wait, the USSR was losing equipment. The US gave them equipment to help them out. If the US didn't give them equipment, then the USSR would fall and Germany and Japan will still win.

[@Pikkabuu]

US already started sending Lend Lease material to the USSR the moment Germans attacked! Also you act as if the Soviets didn't have any industrial capability...

[@nazigorfurher4403]

The america lend lease only start effect by the siege of leningard and if u think it wont do much you absolutely wrong. The lend leas actually really helpfull to feed their soilder and people since actually soviet have food problem and the lend lease solve it for them without it the troops will be severly hungry and have worse equipment and outdated planes. At the worst case a revolt may happen because of famine.

[@ajknaup3530]

Another important & often overlooked aspect of Lend-Lease was American steel going to the Soviets. Those 10's of thousands of Soviet tanks that pushed back the Wehrmacht? Many began their journey in Pittsburg.

[@RexidusUR]

The lend lease was vastly overrated, the vast majority of it didn't arrive until 1943. It would've taken slightly longer but the USSR still would've absolutely won without the lend lease

[@RexidusUR]

@@ajknaup3530 Nope, they still would've won without the lend lease sadly

[@altinmisini8409]

So your telling me japan didnt have a navy and ussr just spawned one in the pacific not to mention that a hapanese and a german force would beat the russians considering the fact that a d day didnt happend getmany would have more troops!

[@charlieputzel7735]

All the Soviets wpuld have to do is keep the straits they use to invade open. Once they had air supremacy, that would be relatively easy, and that's assuming the British aren't fighting the Japanese to get the colonies back that Japan would have almost certainly gone after.

[@nigblack552]

@@charlieputzel7735 and the bri ish navy was also not even scratched with the wars with the pizza people

[@WestCoastOnePride]

@@nigblack552 lol what? I'm a history major, u r completely wrong. British lost over 135 capital ships during the battle of the Mediterranean, u wanna learn about history, I will give u my email, u clearly need better education.

[@MrPro897]

@@charlieputzel7735 Easy, ask the planners of Operation Downfall how relatively easy was to invade Japan. There's no way USSR is able to invade Japan.

[@charlieputzel7735]

@@MrPro897 The difficult part was co-ordinating it in order to minimize losses. The Soviets didn't give a fuck about casualties. I'm not saying it would be easy, I am saying it would be do able.

[@ghr1990]

I don't see the Soviet Union having the naval strength to invade Japan directly.

[@bedouinknight9437]

Ryan Davidson I don't think he did much research about it, this is a lazy done video

[@RexWort]

Ryan Davidson They can always rocket the shit out of them

[@Feffdc]

He said about paratroopers

[@The_Custos]

The Great Arabian Knight yeah, I think his knowledge of the Japanese empire and greater east Asia coprosperity sphere is lacking.

[@The_Custos]

Olga Voronkova the Russian islands surrounded by the Japanese navy and near the better defended Japanese islands?

[@JustinY.]

Hentai would have never risen out of the ashes of nuclear radiation. Without hentai, the world would be a sullen, void wasteland devoid of pleasure.

[@pauljones3017]

What about conventional porn?

[@JustinY.]

too mainstream

[@georgewbush.9386]

this is fucking true

[@thiagoecb]

Not true. Hentai was created in the 1450's, during the Shogunate, and manga hentai, as we know it, was created in the early imperial days, but It wouldnt be so famous, It would exist anyways, and anime would be only propaganda, like all animes would be commie propaganda.

[@yozen1995]

Salvador Mapper This is true. 1600's had a rise of Wakashuu erotica, better known today as traps. Was very popular up until 1800s.

[@Sakurball]

My favorite part of going back to these older videos is remembering Cody went through a phase where he spoke with a lower voice and took everything in the scenario very seriously.

[@marksauck8481]

I always enjoy contemplating what if’s in history. Especially WWII. This is a good one to contemplate. Now if the United States stayed completely out including no military lend lease I’m not so sure the Soviet Union could fight a two front war against Japan and Germany. It didn’t have the navy Japan had. Maybe China and Russia could have done it alone. They both could lose millions of people and still have enough to overcome as long as they had the weapons. You really need to be an expert military tactician to figure this out.

[@Pikkabuu]

A two front war is only a problem if both fronts are dangerous. There is no way that the Japanese could do anything meaningful in Siberia. And why wouldn't US want money?!

[@WestCoastOnePride]

@@Pikkabuu well, it was a land grab. They could, and the soviets don't survive a two front war, not in '41. At their weakest point, and still establishing industrial basins in Siberia and the Urals, this would shake logistics and production up beyond Soviet perseverance. Best case scenario would be the soviets coming to peace terms with the Axis.

[@Pikkabuu]

@@WestCoastOnePride Please explain how the Japanese could meaningfully invade Siberia when they already failed in it in 1939. And why wouldn't the Soviets survive?

[@WestCoastOnePride]

@@Pikkabuu I am fully aware of their failed attempt at Soviet-Japanese war, that was easily beaten off, and embarrassing defeat for Japan. U have to remember, in winter '41, Soviet manpower and production were at an ALL TIME LOW, the 250k men used for the counter offensive of Moscow does NOT MATERIALIZE with a Japan second front, with critical ports as obvious targets, this would have been another choke point for lend lease, remember, Iran was Not occupied at this point, it's sheer attrition, remember, in summer 1942, with as little IF NOT less then Japan, axis armies, IN COORDINATION with Germany, made their own gains against the soviets, it is simple attrition. Even half the Manchuoko puppet army, with a few solid Japanese divisions, would offset ANY REINFORCEMENTS shifting, as well as throw off newly established oncoming industrial centres replacing the occupied ones that were torn down and reshipped. I do NOT THINK the Germans take Moscow in 1941, but surviving past summer for the Soviets would be a miracle. With Moscow taken, it is up for debate rather Stalin would sue for peace, continue the struggle from the Urals, or even be a victim of a coup, which sounds far fetched, but remember, after Barbarossa took place a few weeks into it, when the politburo and red army command went to his retreat, he thought he might actually be arrested. Stalin was paranoid and CONTENT on holding power, I think a peace agreement would have been established, leaving only the soviets the Urals and Eastern Siberia, after Japan carved out here area. Now if u want to question what purpose Japan had for invading the USSR after being so soundly defeated, u must remember the Imperial high command although respected the soviets, especially after that humbling trouncing, also KNEW they were an enemy, by basic opposing ideologies. Gaining those ports and some other relative land, albeit essentially barren of resources, as rich as Siberia is today in natural resources thanks to the technological and inventive innovations of today, we now know Siberia is RICH. But their lies the problem: the lack of coordination and long term thinking of the Axis. I will tell u this, with a second rate Soviet union, america would have had to found reason to join the war very soon.

[@GhostOfKotori]

@@Pikkabuu Because We have Brains. I Stand with What he said as an American. If Japan hadn't attack Our Harbor, No way in HELL would I sent our men and women to go die out continents away from home

[@zdecfzdcvz]

So the soviets invent anime?

[@rydemk4168]

I don’t think so

[@nataliagonzalez1698]

Edward Hahm Anime is already cancer lel

[@Toriichii]

"Find out next time, on Dragon Ball Stalin!"

[@GAndreC]

No Anime since Imperial Army not chained by US

[@arrontolan2084]

Soviet Hentai be grim as fuck. "Redistribute the tentacles comrade, Senpai still has one un-stuffed hole!"

[@lowcalibremine3004]

Actually, the German assault only stalled because the Soviets sent in reinforcements from Far East Russia- the same Far East Russia that is invaded in the scenario. So... yeah.

[@themightymcb7310]

Blue Cat You've gotta be a tad bit delusional to believe that the USSR would fall with Moscow. The sheer amount of territory and the volumes of fighting men would ensure that the war could continue after losing Moscow. The Russians still would have had Murmansk, St. Petersburg, Gdansk, Kiev, etc. Good amount of fairly large cities to draw fighting men from, and the Germans would have had to hold on to Moscow and Stalingrad through the winter, which they likely wouldn't due to supply problems.

[@watchingfrom92]

Moscow was the center of Russian command, communication and infrastructure. Without Moscow, and the leadership there, what soviet leadership remained after the purges of the 30s would've been incapable of putting any kind of real fight. As for the other cities, St Petersburg, then Leningrad, was already under siege, Gdansk, then Danzig, had already fallen, as had Kiev. Moscow was the last stand for the Soviets, and without Zhukovs Siberians, who would have been fighting the Japanese in this scenario, it would have fallen, resulting in a blow they could have never recovered from.

[@slightlymadotter8709]

Moscow was the most important transportatio hub of the war. Most supplies from the Urals and the northern ports went through Moscow. Without these supplies most sviet armies would be unable to sustain any defense or counterattack.

[@themightymcb7310]

Deutschland einig Vaterland Oh shit I got Gdansk confused as a Russian city due to the pronunciation. Apologies for the poor geography haha. Regardless, Russia had a pretty good amount of large free cities west of the urals to mobilize men to beat back the Germans in the winter.

[@HaydenLau.]

Blue Cat Moscow is just another city. Stalin would go on until every citizen of the Soviet Union was dead before he would surrender. Maybe if the Germans took Moscow Moscow would be the new Stalingrad.

[@braize6279]

Ah I gotta disagree with this timeline. One major factor being as that Japan had no intentions of going to battle with the Soviets. In fact, they made sure not to attack any convoys headed to the USSR, to prevent any accidents. Japan wanted to go south, not north. The very reason why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, was because the US had allies in the south pacific. A better timeline, would be Japan bypassing the Philippines. Remember, Japan attacked the Philippines on December 8th. Right after Pearl Harbor. Japan's goals was South Pacific oil, not the icy tundra of the north. So this timeline completely falls flat, because it totally ignores Japan's very war goal of the Pacific in the first place

[@Pikkabuu]

The IJA wanted to move North. IJN wanted to move South. Also the Japanese knew that they couldn't leave the Philippines behind their lines as US would eventually join the war against them.

[@bordergore7623]

Alternate title: what if Japan never had a navy?

[@Correction_Guy]

don't forget about the air service and unit 731

[@bordergore7623]

@Humanity Galatica you do realize 99% of that industry was on the complete opposite side of the USSR?

[@Correction_Guy]

@Humanity Galatica Japan + Germany + The other axis nations... do you expect me to think that the USSR will, like in the video, get cheat codes and make its workers work faster? I know it's rich on raw materials, but it doesn't have limitless manpower

[@bordergore7623]

@Humanity Galatica if only it wasn’t 5,000 miles away.

[@Correction_Guy]

@Humanity Galatica you do realise they can't just do that, right? With nothing pressuring the germans from the back, they'll focuse more on the invasion on the USSR. The USSR is done because all they can do is throw people in the fire in hope of preventing it to spread

[@luke2r2r]

With Japan holding the Soviets resserves in Siberia, there's a good chance that the Moscow offensive would not happen, and with the extra manpower the Soviets had in the east was locked there they would struggle more to go on the offensive at all. Also without the US helping Britain bomb German factories German production would produce more than what it did, also German production increased by 3 times in 1944 than what it had in 1943, despite being bombed day in and day out by Britain and the US, imagine how much Germany would have produced in 1944 without the US helping Britain bomb Germany. And the lend lease part i am not too sure about, but if the US didn't give the Soviets lend lease, they would simply never be able to move troops as fast as they needed.

[@luke2r2r]

The Soviets did not have air superiority untill 1943-1944, and this was only due to German fuel shortages and more planes was needed to stop the British and US bombing runs on Germany (Which would not be relevant if US didnt join in on the bombing) Soviet bombers had minimal effects during world war 2, the only good thing they did was to bomb the Romanian oil fields. THe Soviets didn't have that much more manpower than the Germans, but as you said, many were stationed in Norway (Some 200000) Many in North Africa, which also leads to another thing, The British would never be able to win in North Africa without the US helping them, the same goes for D-Day, that would never happen. The Germans actually had more production capabilities than the Soviets, but they needed to use its production on 3 large fronts, the Soviets had one large front. If the Germans didnt attack during the battle of Kursk and instead went on the defense, the Soviets would be able to push the Germans back to Poland, but no further, then imagine if the US didn't help the British win in North Africa and joined for the invation of southern Italy (Which made Hitler send valuable forces to southern Italy which was ment for the battle of Kursk) Then the Soviets would probably fail in the Kursk counter offensive. In 1945 during the battle of Berlin, the Soviets had started scraping the barrel of their wast population, and was using woman to fill their gaps, women which was actually needed in the factories in the Soviet Union. Then you can imagine how weak The Soviets would be if they had to face every single unit used on the western front, that would no longer be needed there, because the D-Day landings never happened. The Soviets would be forced to halt their offensives because of the lack of manpower, and so would the Germans, and i would imagine that line to be somewhere around Kursk. And to the Japaneese troops, they would not do much to the Soviets troops in Siberia, but they would make troops have to be stationed there. Also tje Japaneese had a better navu and air force than the Soviets had, so that would probably used to their maximum effectivenes.

[@luke2r2r]

Where do you get your facts from? Germany had 1 million men on the Atlantic Wall, that stretched from Spain to northern Norway, 200000 men were strationed in Norway to prevent any British invasion of Narvik (Which Hitler feared but would never be possible). The German army sent 4 million during Babarossa, not 7 million. And no, the Germans can't transport 1 million men from Norway to Germany, because they only had 200000 troops there, and they could transport them back if they wanted to, but Hitler didn't want that. And yes, the British had naval superiority, i was only talking about the Japaneese having naval superiority over the Soviets. But The German Uboats still wrecked a lot of the British ships. And no, there was no 10 million in the Soviet army in 1946, there was 12 million in the Soviet army in 1945, and that was the abolute maximum as i stated earlier, because they also used a lot of women to fill the gaps of the army, something the Germans didnt do. In 1946 they had to send half their army back to the Soviet Union to fill gaps in poduction again, because their population was badly hurt by both Stalins famines, and the German invasion. The Germans had 5 million men in 1945, many others were dead or captured by the British and the US after the D-Day landings, the Germans would have had more if the US didn't join the battle, because there would never be a second front. And no, the Germans had plenty of airplanes in 1944 and 1945, but 1/3 was on the ground because of no fuel, and no spare parts (Something that also would be different of the US air force didn't help the British). And for one German soldier who died 5 Soviets did, which made the Soviet manpower irrelevant. The biggest problems was the mass produced T-34 tanks, but even their number wouldn't do much good if the total tank power of Germany would be focused on the eastern front as a defensive wall. The US didn't join the war all this would happen. The British would loose in north Africa, The Soviets would grind to a halt, and so would the Germans deep inside Russia. The British would keep bombing the Germans, but with a lot less effectivenes without the US. The Newest German Uboats would be fighting the British navy with great success, and would make i harder for the British to get supplies. The German Jet planes would do great things against the British because the US air force wasnt there to give the British more numbers in planes. The Japanese army would do bad against the Soviets, but their planes would hammer th Siberian troops hard. Stalin might be forced to pull some troops back giving the Japaneese some territory for saving the more important Moscow. But bare in mind, if the US didnt give the Soviets lend lease, the Soviets could never have produced that many T-34 tanks, they could never fastly move troops here and there as they did, and yes, Moscow would have colapsed hard.

[@charlieputzel7735]

Soviets were already receiving lend lease aid before pearl harbor.

[@luke2r2r]

@@charlieputzel7735 Lend Lease did not make a difference untill middle of 1942

[@charlieputzel7735]

@@luke2r2r true, but that had more to do with it taking a while for supplies to reach the Soviets. Supplies were coming in through Iran, which basically had to be invaded to secure the route. It had little to do with the U.S. entering the war.

[@matheuroux5134]

Germany: Hey ally, I'm invading the world's second most powerful country, want to help? Japan: No, I'd rather just attack the world's numer one country. Because that makes sense.

[@deprogramm]

Number one in terms of industry at the time.

[@EmbeMamaChannel]

Germany: Hey ally I'm invading the world's most powerful country, want to help? Japan: I can't, the Americans blockaded my oil, so now due to socio economic reasons, and the fact that we don't have much oil on the home islands, I need to attack the U.S pacific fleet in Hawaii to continue the path to making Japan as self sufficient as possible.

[@stormbringer2189]

Greenlandia is right, Japan's true threat was America not Russia. They took the islands to serve as a buffer zone between them and America. Most of the islands they took had no economic or social value but it did have a strategic one.

[@EmbeMamaChannel]

well actually a lot of the Islands, and places they took were useful, like Indonesia had tons of Oil, so that's why they took it, and they knew it would risk war with America. Japan had like no oil, because only 5% of the land is usable for Farming, and less for oil, so they needed to invade lands like Korea to get oil from there.

[@sagnik2693]

Germany(talking of soviet) : ok japan Ich attacked the stronkest country on earth. Vi can win if Ich attack from west and du attack from east Japan(thinking that germany attacked U.S.A) : k German-san. is of gud prann. ı wirr attack from east

[@SoZexal]

So what you’re saying is that we wouldn’t have anime? Truly a dark timeline

[@UwU-ok2jr]

*Y E S*

[@rishabhadarsh5227]

Anime started in 1907 so war or no war we would always have anime❤

[@matid9687]

I have to say that this time Cody had made a mistake with this video

[@cujo8425]

Yes you are right

[@domnicdial9405]

I'd put money that Germany and Japan could have taken the USSR and the other Allies without the US throwing in.

[@matid9687]

@@domnicdial9405 Kinda inaccurate but maybe plausible

[@domnicdial9405]

@@matid9687 Think about it. The biggest nail in the coffin for the Axis was fighting on multiple fronts with the Allies. Without US intervention there probably won't be a D-Day, and the African front would never have received US reinforcements that pushed the Allies up from Africa into Italy. It will be the Soviets fighting on two fronts, not the Germans. And the British would be too focused on fending off the Germans in the English Channel and Japanese in Asia to provide that much assistance.

[@matid9687]

@@domnicdial9405 However there're more things to have in mind too, the US intervention actually wasn't the fact of the loss of the Afrikan Korps, yes, it made it faster, but Rommel had already spent all his resources in a pointless campaign to Egypt which didn't ended well and the UK was already defeating them back to Libya. Also remember that the japanese forces haven't much tanks and even they were underdeveloped against light tanks of the USSR like the BT-5, of course we cannot deny that Japan without Oil will struggle to beat the Chineses and fighting the soviets will just make the wound even worse. There were 200.000 troops on the Far East and after the Khalkhin Gol incident where the japanese intelligence show it's awful work it might be the USSR who would won on Manchuria, yes maybe the russians could be defeated at Moscow but after that really nobody knows if the USSR would surrender or just kept fighting until the last stand (by the time the Battle of Moscow began most of the industry went to the Urals.)

[@aandersson650]

"KZbin rewind 2017" *I sleep* "Alternatehistoryhub uploads about ww2" *R E A L S H I T*

[@Robbie-pc1dl]

first

[@rileymiller1294]

I disagree with Russia defeating both Japan and Germany and to say the Japanese homeland would be invaded by the soviets is just absurd

[@thetrashmaster1352]

Well in our timeline two weeks after Germany was defeated Russians began travelling to the east coast for an invasion of Japan. Plus, Russia would be getting help from China and Korea and the British Empire (India, Australia and Canada) Judging that Australia was already beating Japan before the USA even showed up, it is entirely possible that with help from Russia and help from the Empire Japan would surrender. Plus, remember, the US was still supporting and would probably give supplies (combine that with Indian and Chinese manpower and we'd be unstoppable.)

[@ntm4]

Zombtroll69 really? I admit to not knowing a lot about Australia in WW2 but a quick look at Wikipedia shows that Australia didn't even declare war on Japan until 8Dec1941 (the day AFTER Pearl Harbor), less than 1 million Australians served in the military over the whole course of the war, and Japan was winning victory after victory until the Papua New Guinea invasion which was beaten by Australian AND US forces.

[@olixor]

Zombtroll69 In this timeline Germany wouldn't have been defeated because without the US they wouldn't need to defend the west coast as much anymore and thus could provide more manpower, supplies, tanks, everything to the east front and put even more stress on the Russians. Australia's fleetpower during WW2 isn't really much of a threat against the Japanese fleet. Japan was a naval superpower during that time.

[@Vert1cus]

germany would never lost africa if america didn't help britain and thus italy stays axis allowing germany to not have to send troops and supplies south

[@mykolokolo]

Also america’s total war economy of flipping all factories into military production was incredibly key on the German front, it seems to say that in this time line Russia won with its man power alone which i do not see as truly conceivable the amount of man power to take on Germany and a mainland invasion of Japan ALONE would be a ridiculous task of the U.S.S.R

[@mattnoce7558]

I think you greatly underestimate the impact Germany fighting a two front war had. It is highly questionable that the USSR wouldve been able to hold off both a full nazi germany military and japan keep in mind that all germany had to do as take stalingrad and it was likely that Moscow would fall. Germany was damn near close on doing that even with fighting a two front war

[@_Muzolf]

Ask Napoleon about what taking Moscow did for him. A german full victory was highly unlikely and would have needed more support of the baltic people and Ukrainans, whom the germans antagonized in their occupation. A Soviet victory without US support would also be unlikely, so probably it would come down to who collapses first, like in WW1.

[@fahiraalmeira8730]

@@_Muzolf Stalin is a fool, he was begging for Hitler to sign a peace treaty, before the attack on Moscow, he promised to return treaty of Brets Litovsk. Imagine if Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad fell along with siberia, the morale would collapse so low.

[@largebubbahubba]

@@fahiraalmeira8730 can I have a source for the returned brets-litovsk?

[@MoldycheeseJr]

@@_Muzolf Hitler taking Moscow would’ve meant that Stalin would’ve been captured

[@_Muzolf]

@@MoldycheeseJr So? If anything, Stalin being out of the picture would have meant that someone more sensible and competent could have gotten into power. Also, its rater dubious that he would have stayed in Moscow, he was a huge coward who was actually hiding from his own people when the german invasion started, thinking that would be the time he would get deposed.

[@Imanmacaroni]

Yes, Thank You I Have Been Searching For This

[@Correction_Guy]

you're sus...

[@ReaverLordTonus]

So given this is December 7th, the 76th anniversary of the attack on pearl harbor, I remembered this unique sci-fi film called Final Countdown about a modern Aircraft Carrier in the Pacific traveling back in time and finding itself on Dec 6 1941, in the end history doesn't change and the ship returns to the present. I always wondered what would have happened if the crew decided to intervene and alter history? They had enough advanced knowledge, tech, and firepower to wipe out the entire Japanese Navy, ending WWII in the pacific the very day it was to begin and the war itself in less than a week. What if America suddenly had access to technology almost 40 years ahead of them? How would the war have ended, would there have been a cold war, Korean war, Vietnam? Would America have become an economic powerhouse ushering in a new golden age for the world? Or would it have become a global Empire with no equal? How about it Cody, think this would make a good episode? Also please do a lore/history video for the starship troopers universe? Thanks.

[@aleksaradojicic8114]

TonesTheGeek Never heard for that movie,can you remember name of that movie?

[@1IbramGaunt]

Aleksa Radojicic The Final Countdown, got it on DVD :)

[@aleksaradojicic8114]

1IbramGaunt Nice ☺

[@kingjonstarkgeryan8573]

TonesTheGeek I saw that on Netflix years ago. Thanks for reminding me. Yeah that sounds awesome.

[@1IbramGaunt]

Aleksa Radojicic kzbin.info/www/bejne/jJuakJmuj7x3qcU

[@RJLbwb]

So how do the Soviets get around invading Japan with an intact Imperial Japanese Navy? Sure the Japanese army was not match for the Red Army, but the Soviets had nothing to compare to the Japanese fleet.

[@The_Custos]

RJLbwb Japan air is also better supplied, backed by the sea and navy, and can draw new pilots from assimilated parts of the Empire.

[@Vert1cus]

russian production would grind to a halt as german production goes mostly unhindered because no american bombers attacking industrial centers and thus allowing a greatly improved armor and air force production. germany with its intact luftwaffe and joint operations with japanese long range bombers will destroy russia's ability to rapidly produce tanks much like what america did to germany.

[@t.on.y]

EmperorHirohito. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

[@toolcruise]

Alright I see. I was looking at annual aircraft production my bad, but the Soviet airforce would still be outnumbered as long as the brits were defeated.

[@0311Mushroom]

I like most of these, but this one is a bust. To many problems. Like the need to take the Dutch East Indies for oil and rubber. Which was the real reason they attacked the US. Not out of anger, they were not going to leave the massive bases at the Philippines across their supply lines. And if they had attacked the Soviets, better believe we would have flooded more supplies to Siberia. Does anybody think Japan would have ignored that? And the increase of "American Volunteers like the Flying Tigers? And the massive build up of US forces in the Philippines? Even without Pearl Harbor, we would have been dragged in because we were holding a large part of the Co-Prosperity Sphere.

[@06diogoleitao41]

Nah the US wouldnt be dragged in if it was not attacked US population didnt wanted a war, especially agaisnt the Axis that were fighting a war agaisnt the Soviet Union

[@0311Mushroom]

@@06diogoleitao41 Japan could not attack with a fortified Philippines on the route. And at that time, the Philippines WAS US territory.

[@06diogoleitao41]

@@0311Mushroom ? Japan would be in a war agaisnt the Soviets no the US

[@0311Mushroom]

@@06diogoleitao41 why? There was no oil or rubberl in the Eastern USSR. However, there was oil and rubber in the Dutch East Indies. And more than anything they needed oil and rubber.

[@06diogoleitao41]

@@0311Mushroom But thats the point of an alternative timeline duh? Like I can give a reson of why invading the soviets first, if you can get rid of them first then you attack the duth or the British colonies but thats the point of why the Axis lost there was no cordination

[@Xtariz]

Japan was like that guy in gaming who thought it would be fine to teabag their rank 1 player...

[@pessimisticcommenter5719]

Nah... the Soviets would just die in a tornado.

[@deadlykiwi9289]

I love the history of Japan

[@thebravegallade731]

kamikaze lol

[@mr.dystopian5554]

No the Soviets would get sent to the gulag.

[@hulkhogan4203]

A Sharknado actually.

[@davilimalol4612]

*HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF*

[@jfts09]

Yamamoto was extremely against fighting the US.

[@bingobongo1615]

Everyone was - until the embargo

[@rylan8046]

Yet he orchestrated the attack on PH because he knew if he didnt knock us out in one swift strike, it would mean the end to his war effort

[@jocelynndotson7273]

Fact, he also commanded the attack on pearl harbor

[@belgiumball2308]

And he after the ph attack, he said: "I think all we done was awaken an sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve"

[@christiannguyen6846]

communism are much more fearful than atomic bombs

[@jesperson_2003]

Absolutely fantastic beginning to this video.

[@ErikVince]

And that is a sort of a scary time line to think about

[@philip8673]

Personally I think that the Soviet union couldn't hold the Germans the west and the Japanese to the east I feel like they would have cracked.

[@richardbug3094]

most definitely soveit russia would have lost too much manpower, had virtually no navy, and fight a two front war i.e Russia would have capitulated to the Axis powers possibly in 1943 or 1944.

[@pitmeme5725]

@Olga Voronkova you guys seem to know less, in fact w/o the lend-lease of the americans, the soviets would lose in the western front even w/o japan. The only thing that kept the germans from moving to moscow was the russian winter and the american equipments. If japan was able to attack from the east then it would certainly fall faster. Chinese soldiers were struggling against the japanese and it's own political ideologies, they can't even push the japanese even if japan attacks the soviet union.

[@Feffdc]

@Nis, Nope.Ussr would have beat Germany alone.Without Ussr germany would have won

[@Feffdc]

@Nis, You mean the backwater 1 million personnel in the west meanwhile Soviets were fighting the best and more numerous in the East?Also sending more men east would have stretched even more the supply lines and they were already breaking

[@Feffdc]

@Nis, Axis powers outnumbered the Soviets.Axis had initial army size 3.8 million men vs 2.9 million Soviets.Initially Germans had quality advantage but later in the war it was the soviets that had more quality both in equipment and personnel.And hitler was already in war with the allies before he attacked the Soviets.It was the Soviets and Germany that they had agreement in non aggression and cooperation so it was nore likely Soviet Union+Germany vs Allies

[@peytonhawk]

To act like the Soviets could easily push Germany back is just dumb. One of the biggest reasons Germany struggled to fight after the USA joined was that the USA helped open not only the western front but the southern push from Africa. Without the southern front Germany has more men to at least hold the line in the USSR instead of pushing into Siberia. This might even give Germany enough time to finish their own Nuclear research and be able to end the Soviets. That's without even considering that Japan would help out by holding a second front the Soviets would have to fight.

[@TheRezro]

And you act like someone who lack comprehension issues. In the video they say clearly that not, but in end Russia did have resource to push back both. That is clear if you make a professional data analiz.

[@Fulllife3.2]

Hold on if "Germans cannot in theory mobilize the 1/3 rest of there army from Norway France and Germany in time to plan a successful counter offensive" How THE HELL CAN THE SOVIETS MOBILIZE FROM SIBERIA TO WESTERN EUROPE? That's ludicrous.

[@Glicksman1]

Does this include no attack on the Philippines either? It makes no sense that Japan would have left a strong U. DS. military force in the Philippines. They would have had to attack it and thus the U.S. would have declared war on Japan - then the same timeline. Like most alternate timeline theories, the mistakes made in creating them include not realistically considering geography, economy, and national will. It's too easy to have a conclusion in mind and then just create any scenario that gets to it. This is called "casuistry" which is a specious method of reasoning and not the ability to play a kazzoo.

[@crowfeedreactions]

The Japanese did not HAVE to attack the Philippines. They chose to. Now, yes, it makes some strategic sense because the Philippines CAN BE used as an interdiction point between Japan and the oil from the Dutch East Indies. But would the US have taken the provocative step to try to stop Japanese oil shipments militarily? I highly doubt it. The US hadn't attacked Germany even though Germany had overrun France and was attacking Britain. I see no reason why that calculation would change with the Japanese attacking the Dutch and British colonies in the Far East. Verdict: Japan could have avoided US involvement in the war, at least for a period of time, if they had avoided attacking any US possession and that would absolutely have altered the timeline of WW2 significantly, though not necessarily the eventual outcome.

[@Glicksman1]

@@crowfeedreactions Speculation is fun but is ultimately unsatisfying. What actually happened is inconveniently always there and ruins all of our brilliant alternate plans and scenarios. I think that the Japanese had to do exactly what they did for numerous reasons, many of them sociological and psychological, just as the Nazis had to do what they did.

[@crowfeedreactions]

@@Glicksman1 I think that's a very rigid way of looking at history. Yes, there were reasons for what they did, but we believe their choices were inevitable because we know what choice was made. They still COULD HAVE gone a different direction and then we'd have the same opinion about THAT choice. Yes, alt-history is fun to speculate about. That's the whole point of all this.

[@Glicksman1]

@@crowfeedreactions No, it's not rigid to study and come to an understand something about a particular nation and culture in a particular time and what they did as a result of it. That is called studying history. Of course, what is history COULD have gone a different way and it's interesting to speculate what MIGHT have happened. I think that's obvious.

[@crowfeedreactions]

@@Glicksman1 Thank you for restating what I said.

[@caesarleak4705]

Kido Butai: watches video... "are we a joke to this timeline?"

[@ADCD-dj8gz]

If Japan never Attacked Pearl Harbor and the plans still existed, then Alternate History Hub would be making a video "What if Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan"

[@nikoladedic6623]

ADCD 0405 And how would he know if this was a possibility?

[@SGRev1]

More likely it would've been, "What if Japan Attacked the United States?"

[@seanmcmanus4701]

Or "What if the United States hadn't attacked perl harbour" aye

[@emperordank9299]

"Only a smaller force of British and Canadians" My Canadian just went full 100% is yelled "ehhhhhhh"

[@PadLock94]

I went full Australian and yelled "cunt we were there too"

[@personmcpersonface8415]

Skyboy stfu self-entitled piece of shit

[@solemnsimulacrum]

Skyboy a centralist that can't make up their own opinions so they copy others

[@personmcpersonface8415]

Skyboy A small child obviously...

[@thetrashmaster1352]

Lets just all agree that the Commonwealth is the best and we were all there, even if the video COMPLETELY IGNORED AUSTRALIA FIGHTING THE JAPANESE FOR 3 YEARS BEFORE THE US SHOWED UP!

[@big_crungus4667]

There was a battle before WWII that was between the Red Army and the Japanese Imperial Army. That battle was extreme influential not only because it helped Zhukov become a key figure in WWII it also scared the Japanese into having no land combat against the Russians. Assuming in this scenario the battle would still occur with the Soviets absolutely dominating (which it most likely will) I highly doubt the Japanese would fight against the Russians to help Germany. They didn't even do that in our timeline and that was with Germany declaring war on the US to help push Japan to declare war on the Soviet Union.

[@SK-le1gm]

Well done 👍🏾

[@Louthanjen]

what if nukes were never invented

[@johngreene8988]

Mic Clank he did that

[@thekittycats8061]

then the war would have been much more dragged out because the US had plans to invade Japan if the Manhattan project didn't work causing the war to continue on for another 6 months at least

[@AngusGotSad]

But what about the cold war? With no threat of nuclear annihilation then what could possibly happen?

[@leafshinearts]

then north korea will have the most nukes in the world

[@karolissavickis10]

NovaThief most people would say that cold war would most likely turned into ww3. But problem with that is USSR had no chance against to actualy defiet USA in conventional war (because of weaker navy) so yeah USSR might have been less agresiv and more defensiv in that timeline.

[@rj1056]

America: I really want a reason to get involved... * *holds gun intensively* * Japan: I got you fam.

[@GhostOfKotori]

Hell No.

[@moedictatornoriega8475]

Hell yeah

[@daught967]

Congrats to the ones that wrote the subs!

[@zombiedog1088]

It always seems like you kinda end so abruptly. Like so much more could be told. I love the content just want more I guess.. lol thanks

[@spruceclient8307]

|World War Two In a Nutshell| Germany: Hey Russia, want to make sure that we don't kill each other? Russia (USSR): Um, sure? Germany: Austria, JOIN ME, LET US UNITE THE GERMANIC COUNTRIES!!!! Austria: S-S-Sure, chill. (Germany Annexes Austria) Germany: Czechoslovakia, Gib Clay. Czechoslovakia: Um, No, please, l-l-leave me alone... Germany: Then we have to do this the hard way... Britain and France: Stop, you can't invade Czechoslovakia! Germany: I'll be peaceful after. Britain and France: Alright then. Czechoslovakia: I thought you were my friends, Noooo! (Germany Takes over and annexes Czechoslovakia) Germany: I feel the POWER! (Meanwhile in Asia) Japan: I just killed China. Yay! Russia: O-O-Ok... (Back in Europe) Germany: Hey Russia, I'll take Poland, got my back? Russia: Sure. Poland: Um, what? Germany and Russia: Goodbye Poland Poland: NOOOOOO! (Poland is Invaded and annexed) Britain and France: What?! Britain and France: We declare war on you! (Britain and France declare war on Germany) Viewer: Why not Russia? Russia: No one can invade Russia without paying the price.... Viewer: Okay.... (Back to the Story) (At First it's known as the "Phony War" as no one invades each other, that was about to change) Germany: I'll invade you, France! France: Oh no... (Germany Invades France) France: Could use some help. Britain: I got your back. (Months of fighting occur) France: THEY NEARLY GOT PARIS! (Paris is captured) France: NOOOOOO! Britain: It'll be fine, buddy. (British and French forces are pushed back to Dunkirk) Britain: We need to evacuate. France: I'll come back for you... (Southern France becomes a Puppet) Free French: Mhmm, Vichy isn't the true French. Vichy France: What, No, I am true France. Free French: You're only a puppet! (Battle of Britain Occurs) (German Loss) Germany: Grr, I'll bomb you! (Germany bombs Britain heavily) (Britain would be hanging on a threat of rope) Japan: Time to get the US... Italy and Germany: JAPAN DON'T! (Japan Bombs Pearl Harbor) Italy and Germany: Good job, you've doomed us... USA: JAPAN, YOU ARE DEAD! Japan: Oops... Germany: Time to destroy Russia! Napoleon's Spirit: You should've learned from my mistakes, you are doomed now. (Germany Invades Russia) Russia: Germany, prepare to DIE! (Leningrad is captured) Russia: NOOO! (Russia is pushed back, but resisted at Moscow) Germany: I'll get Stalingrad to get the Oil there. USA: OIL???? (Sorry, bad joke) (Germany pushes to Stalingrad) (Germany is pushed back) Germany: Nooo! Japan: I'm loosing! Italy: They've landed on me! (Germany get's pushed back to Poland) (Normandy Landings Occur) (Germany is being pushed back on all Three Fronts) Germany: Japan, Remember me.... Japan: GERMANY NO! Germany: I had a good run... (Germany collapses) Japan: It's just me then... (Hiroshima is bombed by the Atomic Bomb) Japan: No....My People....Genocide.....YOU MONSTER! USA: It's the only way to prevent more loss of life, sorry. Do you surrender? Japan: No. USA: I'm, sorry... (Nagasaki is bombed by the Edit: Plutonium Bomb) Japan: Fine, I surrender.... (World War Two Ends) I hope you enjoyed this simplification of WWII, I left a lot out, I know. Such as the North African Campaign. I'm sorry if I left things out. Anyway, have a good day! Edit: Holy, Thank you for the likes!

[@ultradogmato-revisionist7920]

Nagasaki wasn't hint by a hydrogen bomb it was a plutonium bomb

[@ultradogmato-revisionist7920]

*hit

[@iamnotdeadpool6479]

This seems copied from a Polandball comic.

[@kahnfamily9467]

The real reason Japan surrendered was because the Soviet Union invaded their territory in Manchuria and they were scared that the Russians would invade the Japanese home islands thereby turning them communist and doing the things that Soviet soldiers in occupied territory did. (No need to elaborate).

[@kooljakeiii]

SpruceClient8 nice explanation

[@DuranmanX]

There would be no Godzilla, no Ultraman, no Super Sentai, no Power Rangers, no Gatchaman and no anime

[@dams6829]

Adrian Duran Gewd!

[@chillhydro1300]

So only negative would be no power rangers?

[@Mecha82]

Kev3004 Just so that you know Power Rangers needs Super Sentai to exist and if it wasn't for Super Sentai Saban would had never wanted to adapt it at first place to make Power Rangers. These days those two franchises need each other so there is no reason to act all smug and arrogant towards forms of Japanese entertainment. Oh and you might have forgotten that original Godzilla movie from 1954 is classic and among anime there are beloved classics like Cowboy Bebop and Trigun that I am sure you have watched from Cartoon Network's Toonami block. Don't be ignorant asshole, be open minded.

[@agamemnonofmycenae5258]

but there would be ttack on titan(concept of invading another land with supreme manpower and firepower)

[@redblaze8700]

No Pokémon or Digimon :O

[@thugshaker4]

My great grandfather was trapped under a concrete wall when Pearl Harbor happened. Thank goodness he lived.

[@SomeGuy-ty7kr]

I think you're giving the soviets too much credit.

[@jonasloe4926]

Can you do “what if Sweden won the great northern war”?

[@colinlegrand9260]

Yes i agree

[@billysbilbolag2050]

This is a good ide, do this

[@icaricc]

👍

[@colinlegrand9260]

I am swedish and i think that the great northern war was very interesting.

[@milanhefka2154]

+Txtspeak Poltava!

[@kahnfamily9467]

Can you please do a video on would if the Republicans won the Spanish Civil War? I think this would have large repercussions for the world because the conflict was a proving ground for the armies of Russia,Germany, and Italy.

[@GAndreC]

He has done pne buddy it is in this channel or one of his other ones can not recall atm

[@Feffdc]

Kahn Family Stalin would have a powerfull ally in europe

[@porcelainninja6821]

greekmarine troller depends if his facton won

[@duncanmcdowall3733]

Sure but even those who were not Stalinists would appreciate the aid Stalin sent and would be more friendly to him

[@armedwombat6816]

Powerful ally? Fascist Spain was an ally to Germany. All they amounted to was sending about 45,000 men to fight on the Eastern Front. If the civil war had gone the other way Republican Spain wouldn't be in a much better position.

[@Draconianoverlord55]

You know Japan still makes some pretty good spark plugs

[@builuuquanghuy4144]

What is the music used in the video? I can't find them by searching their name in the description

[@kenben9661]

I doubt the soviets would have been able to beat back both axis powers on their own, much less be able to take on the Japanese navy.

[@hollowofme4381]

kenneth Vargas agreed

[@galaxyeyesphotondragon8191]

Yeah but Japan had air superiority. Russia's air force was awful.

[@delacrewsolaire3100]

kenneth Vargas the Soviets strength was in ground troops and creating explosives so they could beat the Nazis but would be unable to beat Japan unless they used their oil supply in Alaska (which I think they still owned) to make more weapons and bombs, like nukes.

[@delacrewsolaire3100]

Olga Voronkova yeah that's a huge boost for the Soviets right there.

[@kenben9661]

Malachi Brown no the americans had bought alaska i think in 1862 from the russians so no alaska pipeline there, but the real issues for the soviets (which everyone keeps ignoring) is the naval battles. Yes the soviets had massive amounts of tanks men and planes, but the soviet navy was pitiful at best. To invade japan a navy is needed.

[@robertkuuba]

Considering that without USA entering the war, there would have been little-to-no aid to the Soviets from the US, such as lend-lease and immense loads of supplies and machinery, I don't think that the Soviets would have won so easily. American lend-lease program and support to the Soviet Union was a very big deal, without it I rather think that Moscow would have fallen and for Soviets fighting on two fronts would have been simply too much, but that is just my opinion. Any thoughts on that?

[@Patop2002]

Robert Kuuba In the video he never mention it was "easily". He said it would have been a hard won victory. The american aid just accelerated the process of wining. Didnt made the victory. The ussr could sustain themselves enough to contain and push the germans

[@maxashby8160]

The Lend Lease definitely helped the offensive but as soon as the factories we're moved behind the Ural Mountains the Germans we're finished as the Royal Navy and RAF would still beat Germany

[@bryanfong1023]

Lend lease happened months before pearl harbor. And no, soviets wouldnt be fighting a two front war bc there invading the East coast of Russia is just stupid. The harsh environment and the lack of roads would have taken care of the Japanese army. Not to mention that they were still busy in China.

[@dominicpetrone1393]

You guys seem to forget half of the German army was defending France. Without the US Italy would guard France and the whole German army will attack the Soviets. They came close to losing so many times. With amount double the amount of men attacking them they would surely lose.

[@tanostrelok2323]

The Soviets would still have won without American help, but it would have taken longer, fighting with Japan at the same time may be a different story, but then again, Siberia is a harsh place and I don't think the Japanese forces would have been able to push through when they lacked the mechanized divisions and tanks for that matter. I'd call this video doubtful, but plausible.

[@Twomatoes2]

Nice vid

[@YawningYeti512]

Great intro!

[@leileijoker8465]

Your prediction is way off. The Soviets had almost ZERO Navy during WWII. Yet Japanese Navy was even stronger than the British Navy. Any Russian forces that's trying to land in Japan would have been send to the bottom of the ocean. They wouldn't have the capability to invade Japanese homeland or other islands territories. Without American involvement in the WWII, Soviets might be able to stop the enemies from advancing in both front. But I don't think they'll ever be able to conquer as much Europe as they did in our timeline. They might end up still lost some territories to the Germans and Japanese.

[@yarpen26]

On a side note, it's interesting to point out that prior to WWII, the one war scenario American military plannists feared the most was an anti-American coalition of Japan and... the UK. Yes, due to their combined naval might which would have owned whatever the US could put against them to defend the likes of Guam or Hawaii.

[@dariogutierrez6716]

The British navy was better, but still, you are correct, a Soviet victory was impossible

[@FantasyUnited04]

Japan itself was stretched thin in China and couldn't sustain the attacks against the British in Burma. Japan never had a great chance of invading the east of Russia.

[@rodrigomoreira1596]

lets be honest japan was a disaster in ww2...

[@mightyambassador4189]

US and Japan had the best Navies for both sides due to how they used aircraft carriers. The British and Russians would've gotten creamed by the Japanese if they actually had to take on their aircraft carrier fleets without the help of US naval support.

[@thatguy5165]

What if AltenativeHistoryHub never existed?

[@Hakimgrr_]

heresy

[@RetroAP]

blasphemy

[@GuardianTactician]

So meta. Everyone here would find some other thing to watch every week.

[@samplename1098]

World wouldn't change much

[@vixen878]

no one: alternatehistoryhup: "emperor highrohido"

[@benjaminlieberman3932]

This one is due for an update. You need to make the multiple scenarios depending on different actions taken because I think the timeline you gave is highly improbable. Context: Adm. Yamamoto pleaded to the IJN General Staff and Emperor for the Attacks and planning began in early Spring 1941, threatening resignation if the attacks are not authorized. This was concurrent with the military deciding against the Hokushin-ron (Northern Invasion strategy, aka war with Russia) and instead deciding on the Hanshin-ron (Southern strategy, aka Pacific War). The Soviet neutrality pact solidified the Empire's plans and made conflict inevitable. This was all in the context of an ongoing years' long war with China where the bulk of the Army was currently engaged in. Scenario 1: Yamamoto's plan for the pacific war is defeated despite his objection. The neutrality pact is never signed with the Soviets. the Hokushin-ron is undertaken, simultaneous with Operation Barbarossa in the East, likely giving Japan the whole of the land area of Northeast Asia and oil reserves. The Soviet Union may in fact get conquered in the worst case scenario and all bets are off but also possible the weight of the British and Dutch forces in the Far East could work together with the Chinese in a massive land war in Asia rather than a war at sea. Scenario 2: The Soviet pact remains intact and the Japanese still decide on the Hanshin-ron and war in the pacific just without Pearl Harbor to not "wake up the sleeping giant". This is the classic scenario. The Philippines and Guam are invaded but the U.S. mostly performs retreating actions and focuses far more on Allied shipping in Europe and maybe eventually declares war on Nazi Germany before Japan but would not spend so much muscle in the Pacific over a few islands on the other side of the world. The U.S. might want to end the war in Europe before focusing on the war in the Pacific, although they would likely still declare war once Japanese troops land on Luzon. I DO think the U.S. would eventually go to war by 1943 seeing the world falling apart. Scenario 3: Limited Japanese invasion for resources and focusing all efforts on war in China. The Japanese go so far to appease the US by not evening invading Guam or the Philippines. They may take Hong Kong, Malaya, Singapore, and the Dutch East Indies, invading only colonial European powers and leaving the Americans at peace, maybe even signing a non-aggression pact with the U.S. and working to only take territories with high resources like Dutch Borneo with oil deposits to continue their war with China. The war would go Japan's way as China is facing a superior opponent with no Pacific war to distract the Japanese. I don't think Tibet would become Japanese but most of China could fall to the Empire, especially if the supply lines to Burma are cut early on. Japan may take leases on Shanghai similar to Hong Kong. Japan may be hesitant to decolonize after the war but decolonization would be inevitable at some point in history if not regime change, with the Japanese people perhaps overthrowing their Emperor by the 50s or 60s due to political repression and no freedoms and a dogmatic state that is from a bygone era. Japanese settlers in China may lead Japan to lay claims to China, Taiwan, Korea, and Vietnam even after decolonization to this day and a hostile Japan that is allies with Russia and Iran to this day.

[@Legion617]

Highly unlikely Japan would fall to the Soviets without American intervention. The USSR had a pathetically woeful navy in the Pacific, and the Imperial Japanese Navy was one of the most the powerful at the time. Japanese mainland colonies in China and Korea may fall but the Soviet could NEVER touch the home islands. It's basically the Far Eastern version of Germany attempting to get to Britain, it would be a nightmare to cross the sea and get into the Japanese home islands. Probably even a potential Battle of Japan.

[@ShadesMP5]

The Soviets not only had a woeful navy. But the Soviets would have lost Air Superiority to the Japanese because they lost it to the Germans. Without US Aircraft and other Material support the USSR would have fallen. Without having to waste men and resources in the Pacific. The Japanese would have taken whatever they wanted from Russia. The Japanese victory in Asia would have been inevitable without the US's entry in WW2.

[@iglidor]

Also there is that problem where Soviets would not be able to stop Germans at Moscow in this scenario. What saved their butts were reinforcements from behind of Ural. Ie from eastern side of USSR... which in this scenario would be pushed by Japanese and would not be able to send anything to west. It seems that in this scenario author magicaly doubled russian forces, allowing east to reinforce against German invasion and at the same time west reinforcing against Japan invasion

[@louiemoore6086]

that Japanese flag is just the old windows logo with different colors

[@shinchannohara2924]

Now all they have is a giant red ball in the middle of white.

[@osaka4615]

That’s the actual logo of the Japanese Communist Party, too

[@amalendubarik5728]

@@osaka4615 no the circle means rising Sun

[@osaka4615]

I assume the guy was talking abt what was shown at 6:18, which is the Communist Party’s logo

[@amalendubarik5728]

@@osaka4615 ok

[@jerylin1491]

This is interesting

[@Limubi1]

I think even the Soviets would have struggled to fight on two fronts against industrialised and militant fascist armies. They would have been pushed to Siberia and the Urals and I don't know if they would have been able to spring back from there.

[@Pikkabuu]

Why? A two front war is a problem if both fronts are a problem but a Japanese attack on Siberia wouldn't cause any problems for the Soviets as it would be nothing more than a suicide by cop. Just look at how meaningless Operation Arcitc Fox was and remember that Siberia would be even worse!

[@Gardstyle35]

@@Pikkabuu The russians did stop the offensive in 1942 with help auf 17 siberian divisions that were moved from the eas,t 2 independend rifle brigades and a number of elite ski regiments. Those forces were not "fresh" troops, those were veterans that have seen battles before f.e. against the japanese. Since the battle was extreamly close moscow could have fallen here and with it the distribution center for the industrial products from the ural. Furthermore lets not forget that 30% of the wehrmacht forces were in the west. Without the threat of an invasion with US troops its likely that those troops would have been further decreased making germany in the east stronger whyle the russians had fewer forces. Russia beeing squeesed from 2 sites with japan and germany not occupied with US-Threat/Troops and things would have gone different. Every historian that claims that the soviets would have won anyway did not study how close those battles were. The move of troops started even earlier, 1941 were 12 rifle, 5 tank and 1 motorised divisions were moved from the east to the west, again not fresh units but combat ready army with over 90% suffiecient equipment (much better than most soviet troops at the time) Those units did defend and lead the counter attack in the winter offensive. All in all until 1943 over 1000 tanks and 1 million soldiers were moved from the east to the western theater. Those numbers matter. furthermore the video says the japanese have no embargo so the japanese war machine and economy would be way stronger, they would completly dominate the pacific war. The north african campagin from rommel might have been succesfull and the damage from bombing raids would have been far less without US help in europe. Rommel would have wiped through north africa without US american help - with an success in africa u dont know if turkey and spain who both thought at times about joining the axis would actualy have done that but lets assume they stay neutral. North africa supplies for AXIS without the US and the japanese navy focussing on british ships and navy in the pacific without US intervention would have caused real trouble. The GB supplies would have been worse, the AXIS supplies greater and no american generals, tanks soldiers in north africa. This might have been a win for the axis. With north africa save, suez in the axis hands that would have worsend the supply for GB again. 30% of the wehrmacht was in the west, without the threat of an invasion those 30% might been reduced to just 10% f.e. - at least south france and italy wouldnt ahve to be heavily guarded. that together with the missing reinforcements from the east and the additional troops from the western theater would have breaked the soviets. The german war machine was increasing its capacity till 1944 despite the allied bombing campaigns, with those weaker, more troops free, italy save, north africa save, maybe even other nations joining because of this - i doubt heavily the soviets would have won anyway. there up to 4 million japanese with better combat experience and equipment invading the 1.25 million russians that were stationed there - it gets overrun or it needs reinforcement. In our timeline those 1.25 million were reduced and well equiped battle ready expereicned troops helped vs germany. Instead russia has to keep them against japan or they may have to reinforce it. japan has no oil embargo, those ships run 24/7 raiding british convoy lines from asia to britain, britain is weaker, no us pilots and soldiers in north africa, the soviets weaker in the west, the germans stronger because less troops are necessary in the west. Everyone whos just like "yea the soviets will win anyway" is ignorant.

[@Pikkabuu]

@@Gardstyle35 You should learn that repeating the same BS doesn't make it true. - Offensive towards Moscow was stopped in 5.12.1941 - The German forces in West were units of low quality made of older less trained men - The Japanese are going to be in an embargo - Bombing campaign didn't start creating proper results until late 1944 so it doesn't matter that the bombing is less intense - US came to Africa AFTER Rommel had been stopped so Rommel wouldn't do anything! Especially as Rommel's whole advance in 1942 was done with Rommel ignoring the logistical issues and relying on his troops scavenging supplies - Japanese attacking the British would bring US into war But the biggest joke that you made is that the JAPANESE have BETTER equipment than the Soviets! Japanese who build LESS SMG's than Finland did during the war! Japanese whose anti-tank tactic was "Daisuke. Take this mine and charge that tank. BANZAI!" would crumble in the face of the Soviet tanks! No. You are utterly clueless about the war and are invoking magic to make the Axis win....

[@scarzandy436]

@@Pikkabuuhow would Russia invade Japan with lack of naval and air superiority LOL

[@Pikkabuu]

@@scarzandy436 USSR would have both as Japan wouldn't have the oil to run either.

[@AlaskafishStudios]

I think there's three big problems with this. Firstly, why would Germany have just lost? Germany could have focused fully on the Soviet Union and wouldn't have to really worry about backing the Italians up in North Africa. After all, the US sent troops to Africa and later Italy in 1943. Had the US not been involved and not been selling tons of weapons to the allies, then they would have had beat the Italians out of North Africa, which means that Germany would have had a lot more supplies for the Eastern Front. Secondly, on the topic of supplies, the US wouldn't be so involved with lend-lease. One thing people forget is that the Soviet Union depended heavily on American imports. Not only weapons, but clothing. About 38% of Soviet winterwear was produced in the United States (or with American raw materials like wool). Whereas the Germans didn't have such supplies and would be at a loss because of the harsh Russian winters. Last, Japan had one of the most powerful navies of the time. Probably the most powerful in the Pacific (as most of the British fleet was in Europe, and the US had their fleet separated between oceans). Russia, notoriously known for a incredibly weak navy during WWII, would have never been able to launch a full scale invasion of the Japanese mainland, let alone, Japan islands. Japan also had a very good air force, much more than the Russians. And remember, the Russians depended heavily on US imports, so with the US not really engaging lend-lease with the Soviets, then you would see Japan defending their islands very well. Sure, Japan would probably lose China, and Korea if Soviets had some how beat the Germans. But here's the thing. Had the US still supplied Japan with oil, then wouldn't Japan have seen more success in China than before? Without having to focus on the Americans, they could have expanded deep into China, or even to a point of full Kuomintang capitulation. And another thought is that the US would be more likely to actually support Japan than support Russia, especially if Russia had beat the Germans and taken over a lot more of Europe under their sphere of influence. If I had to say what would have happened if Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor, at least in my opinion, I would have seen a partial axis-victory, especially if Japan and Germany were double teaming them. The Soviets would not have the lend-lease from the Americans, and as a result the Soviets would have been terribly prepared. It would be a hard war, both sides would lose lots of people, but at the end, the axis would most likely have been able to inflict enough damage that the Russian people would have no longer supported such a devastating war. Especially if you consider that most of ethnic Russians lived in a very concentrated area. Remember, when Germany invaded the region of Ukraine, the ethnic Ukrainians saw them as liberators. Non-Russian ethnic groups in Eastern Russia would have most likely supported a Japanese invasion too. Siberia, Central Asia, GU, and so forth, with the exception of Russian ports like Vladivostok (which Japan would most likely easily capture and hold). Once the Soviet Union were to fall, I could see a peace between the axis and Great Britain. The people of Great Britain already were not in favor of the war (looking at you Chamberlain), and seeing first France (considered a military power house), then the Soviet Union (considered a backwards military power house), fall, I could see a peace deal resulting in most of Western Anglo countries seeing very little change, and most of Eastern Europe different.

[@Solaxe]

Japanese would quickly get stuck in Eastern Siberia, all they would achieve would be maybe capturing Vladivostok and the eastern seaboard. Eastern Siberia would be a nightmare to invade, especially for the Japanese who lacked the equipment the Germans had

[@abdurrahmanyamani7129]

Alaskafish he never said that the UK was out of the picture nor were any other countries

[@RandominityFTW]

Solaxe, capturing Vladivostok circa 1941 would pretty much gut the Soviets. That was half their lend-lease pipeline. Not to mention, the Soviets only held by bringing their troops from Siberia in the first place. If Japan managed to tie down those troops and take Vladivostok, Germany would have a good chance of actually knocking Russia out of the war.

[@abdurrahmanyamani7129]

Forgot to say that Germany wasn’t too far behind America in their nuclear program

[@angusyang5917]

ok, the blunder of Germany's nuclear program had nothing to do with the US. The reason Germany could not bring a nuclear bomb to the scene, was because in 1943, the Norwegian resistance, backed by the British, sabotaged the Vemork Hydroelectric Plant in Operation Gunnerside. Why is this important? Vemork was producing heavy water, a material that was needed to get a nuclear reaction going. With the loss of heavy water, the Germans were unable to make a nuke in time.

[@whoisthat1671]

This one was not even close to accurate. Skipped over way too many scenarios.

[@tkkmss5713]

Sum it up Britain: Help... U.S.A: Nope Britian: :( *Germany has killed Britian* Russia: come on man U.S.A: No... Russia: ok... *Germany has killed Russia for reasons IDK* Australia, China Norway Etc.: Please? America: No... Canada: Plez America: No Japan: Heh... America: -.- *Japan attacks Pearl harbor* America: Oh that does it *america has liberated the pacific islands over a few years* America: Here we go! *america has difficulty to liberate China with the help of Australia & Canada* Germany: wait a minute *china, America, & Australia liberate russia* Axis countries: oh no!

[@Metal9040]

TK Kmss ?

[@Someone-ej7kd]

Simply the least likely scenario if the Soviets were extremely lucky.

[@abrums2284]

But the beginning was powerful huh legit the ending made my cry and I don't even have emotions

[@danielsmithiv1279]

@Abu Troll al cockroachistan Exactly. He didn't even cover all of the main scenarios.

[@jhittery6194]

Yamato in the another universe: i became a museum

[@SapphireZeev36]

In the event that this occurred. Would Spain and France or Turkey may have entered the war on the side of the allies as the war had been raging on for longer?

[@sarahwisniewski1699]

And this came out on the anniversary of Pearl Harbor

[@yes-tw8df]

Sarah Wiz13 thats the point.

[@colorsandsymbols8994]

Actually, I think if Japan didn't attack the US, Germany and Japan may have won the war. Russia only survived because it moved its industry eastwards, but if Japan invades Russia they can't do that. Russia saved Stalingrad because Stalin moved his eastern forces to reinforce it, these forces were meant to defend Russia in case Japan invaded in the east. So in other words, I believe Germany and Japan would had defeated Russia together. And it would be a much worst fate since they utilized occupied nations as slave labor.

[@stephen1991]

The problem I see with that assessment is that the Japanese army struggled mightily against the Soviets early in the war and if they had decided to forego the naval expansion south, they would have run out of oil. Stalin was okay with the ceasefire and the Japanese needed to focus on securing Dutch and British oil fields to sustain their military since America had cut them off. Their only chance was to strike the U.S. fleet hard and hope America wasn't willing to risk their young men to fighting the Empire when the chance of FDR sending troops to defend the UK was just waiting for an excuse.

[@bobthebuilder7620]

Don't forget that Russia was also saved by the weather. Hitler timed his invasion in Russia wrong and most of his troop were killed from the cold winter. If he nailed it right, they might of had Russia.

[@makoy2689]

+Steve Klug The japanese army did not "struggle mightily" against the soviets early in the war. I presume you are talking about khalkin gol, and this is always used as an example of what would happen if the japanese army and soviet army were to properly clash. (invasion of manchuria is disregarded given the state of kwangtung army at the time) When you look at the sheer numbers of troops and equipment involved at khalkin gol, it is no wonder why the japanese advance was halted. The soviets had the japanese beat on nearly every statistic of quantity usually 2:1 ratio. Even then, the japanese still inflicted more casualties on the soviets than the other way around. The actual significance of the battle of khalkin gol appears to have been lost in the west, with people seeming to think that it serves as a great example of a heroic soviet victory. In reality, the actual significance of the battle is that it was the first event that properly stunned and halted the japanese army. Before this, it was a string of victories for the IJA, usually quite heroic ones at that. However kalkin gol proved that the army was in fact not unstoppable and that yet again, the army had gone behind the back of the government and performed such a reckless action. Essentially, the entire situation had completely blown back into the IJA's face, as they not only lost the skirmish, but also the approval of tokyo for their plans. That is why khalkin gol is so significant.

[@tuckercarlson3127]

uk france canda austrilla

[@stevenlaurencegho194]

I agree with you. If Japanese did not attack US. US would not join the world war. Hence germany would have won the western front. It was a matter of time until eastern front was conquered.

[@Java-nese]

Japan : "lets join my party bro"

[@alexanderwu]

This video should be titled "What if the US never started the oil embargo?" Pearl Harbor was inevitable after the oil embargo

[@alexanderwu]

@CHB Ryan I guess then this video should be title "What if Japan never committed war crimes?"

[@genremags8317]

@@alexanderwu Name a country who fought wars who never committed war crimes. And don't cite the history as told by the victors.

[@alexanderwu]

@@genremags8317 I was replying to someone who said something about Japanese war crimes. I did not say anything about Japanese being the only country that committed war crimes.

[@philpatterson7085]

@@alexanderwu You may want to ask the Chinese and the Koreans about that.

[@alexanderwu]

@@philpatterson7085 So... myself?

[@RandominityFTW]

I'm not entirely sure Russia could have turned back Germany if they were fighting a war on the other front with Japan. That would effectively shut down the Pacific Route, which accounted for about half that lend-lease to the Soviets. Just as importantly, no US entrance might mean no expansion of the US Lend-Lease to the absolutely ridiculous levels it hit. With the historical Lend-Lease, the Soviets punching out the Germans, 1v1, no doubt. Without it, things get a lot dicier. Throw in Japan on the backside and an effective interdiction of the largest lend-lease route, and the Soviets would have been in a terrible position. Honestly, I'd give the war to the Axis if the US stays neutral and Japan decides to go to war with Russia.

[@podemosurss8316]

Well, the lend-lease was about 7% of the Soviet production, also keep in mind that the URSS kept important forces in their border with Japan by the time of Operation Barbarossa, more than enough to deal with the Japanese (33 divisions, 15 brigades and 13 fortified lines covered each by a brigade for the USSR against 13 Japanese divisions in Manchuria and 21 divisions in China, not taking into account the difference in armored units or heavy artillery). The only way the Japanese could have posed an effective threat was attacking with all units on the Vladivostok direction (which was fortified), and that would have meant withdrawing from China with the Chinese united front being able to retake a lot of territories and successfully contact with USSR with a land border, which means that USSR would then send a lot of equipment and military help to the Chinese and then counterattack from the Khalkhin river, while the Soviet fortresses on the Amur river keep the Japanese fixed (take into account that Japanese divisions lacked heavy artillery above 76mm, when USSR divisions included 105mm and 122mm, and had heavier pieces attached to corps command). Also, the USSR could still receive Lend-Lease by Persia (a route which was actually used) since they conquered Persia within two days after Persia joined Barbarossa.

[@donnie7013]

Podemos URSS Around that time, Soviets had terrible leadership, poor equipment, and No Navy to hinder Japanese Operations in the Pacific without it being curb stomped by Yamamato.

[@Warsie]

th lend lease can go through Iran and Murmansk instead

[@modularcobra0691]

Actually, the best soviet general was in siberian fast east when barbarosa begin, so japan would deal with the general that made the "soviet blitzkreig"

[@Abnarly]

CAN I JUST SAY I'M LOVING THIS STYLE OF VIDEO? THANKS!

[@InvisiblerApple]

I too, LOVE this style, and this channel really pulls it off! (although there were maybe 2 audio spikes that bugged me since I was listening loud with earphones to soak up all the awesome)

[@parkerkincaid1031]

It is fine, but I also like the cartoon art style.

[@Zekushiiido]

I KNOW RIGHT?! It makes it feel more immersive than just some guy talking about history(not thats its bad) and it makes it more inetersing

[@Abnarly]

Zekushiiido I agree, also holy crap 400 likes haha that's an achievement for me I've never gotten that many.

[@olstar18]

I'm not entirely sure about the german advance stalling like that as part of why they stalled was because of reinforcements from the east that weren't needed since japan didn't attack.

[@Pikkabuu]

Japan could never attack in a way that would force the Soviets to keep their troops in Siberia.

[@robertdumas3034]

Can you make a remake of this Cody?

[@seanhickey4788]

Germany: the Soviets are putting up a great fight but we can hold them back. They are our only threat Japan: about that

[@mjp29]

The Soviets were putting up more than a great fight - they had the Germans on the retreat big time.

[@tommark3015]

With u.s supplies and resources without of witch the USSR never would have won

[@LolLol-sy2hj]

@@tommark3015 But they would also not have completly lost. The Front is simply to massive. Germany would have probably taken most if not all of the western soviet union and the japanese (if they join) the sibirian coast. But I think the japanese would have never been able to join because the oil embargo was devastating. The japanese high command calculated, that they would only have about two years worth of oil with the american embargo. So the would probably use their oil reserves to finish of china or attack the western colonies to get the ressources.

[@thatguyinelnorte]

@@LolLol-sy2hj In the video there is no oil embargo

[@LolLol-sy2hj]

@@thatguyinelnorte yes there was no oil embargo in the video, but its just not realistic that the USA would let the japanese do whatever they want. So realistically i still think there would have been one. But thank you for the correction.

[@mishkata348]

I dont think the soviets could've invaded Japan I mean, the Japanese had one of the largest navies in the world. And what did the soviets have? Millions of troops, a very small navy and no experience in invading islands. There is a reason Japan has never been invaded. Also all of Japan's navy should've been intact. Imagine what Yamato, Musashi and Shinano (as there is no Midway battle, she would be completed as a battleship) would do to the landing crafts, the Russian ships and their forces on the shore. Not to mention all the other ships and the 6 fleet carriers. And, for the US, helping Japan would probably be the best choice if they don't want more communism. So yeah, I don't think Japan would' ve fallen...

[@CromlixQuartz]

they would have done a mass paratroop drop into Japan immediately, ignoring the islands and try to get supplies through on boats and airdrops while living off the land. Millions would have still died though and this would probably have failed, but by then a pacific fleet to match the Japanese would have been constructed

[@fuzzydunlop7928]

That would have been a disastrous airborne operation. They wouldn't have enough for airdrops alone to sustain the paratroopers and any boats would be running one heck of a gambit.

[@Piratejoe44]

Cammie, if they where actually able to make a fleet, it probably wouldn't be in the pacific as that kind of operation would be bombed to hell and back by the Japanese, if not just bombarded by their navy. And, the navy they would need to make to match japan would take years to make, along with of course the long under supplied trip half way across the world to reach japan where the fleet would most likely be sunk like a repeat of 1905. And as Fuzzy stated, an airborn paratroop would be disastrous, as they would run out of bullets and food if their transports wheren't shot down before the soldiers could jump out.

[@MrChickennugget360]

Mass Paratroop will not defeat Japan. it would just be blood bath for the Soviets. Its not like the Soviets had that many transport planes

[@UsernameAss]

Cammie Ward that would have been a devastating defeat for the soviets,japan had more than 45 million soilders in their island and their emperor had no thoughts of surrender,most soldiers and even civilians would fight to the death,and if they occupy any land,they would easily be overwhelmed by the decades of gruella attacks.

[@tylerdaerden]

You totally forgot the Chinese in this scenario ... How could possibly IJapan Launch a massive attack on USSR While up to 80% of their armed forces are still figthing in China

[@bordergore7623]

I’ll answer this question by asking another question. How could Japan possibly fight against the United States with 80% of their armed forces in China?

[@tylerdaerden]

@@bordergore7623 simple : they deployed only a few division in the pacific and the war was essentially amphibious operations , the IJN took most of the job, in the pacific war you fight an aeronaval/amphibious war where naval/aerial fights are more important parts In the case of a fight with the USRR the Japanese would have to fight a continental massive war ,as big as the chinese front So japan was able to fight (essentially during the first half of 1942 on the offensive with a few division and then on the defense) on the pacific , because it required not as much troops than in China

[@unnamedchannel1237]

Should turn the music up, I almost heard what was being said

[@rick_septicon7432]

What if Germans won the battle of Stalingrad?

[@Ghost23712]

Schatten der Pickelhaube well don't ask him this as this guy seriousely belive the SU could naval invade the Japanese and defeat the germans without any aid and so on. But i will tell you this. The germans did take the city and it had no effect. After months of fighting and thin supply lines it wasn't worth fighting for it in the first place

[@yo_tengo_una_boca6764]

broken potato There would be a Russian Al-Qaeda.

[@mustangenthusiast2997]

There would be World war three

[@dylanwight5764]

The Germans could never have one the offensive into Russia, not alone. They required the support of Japan's army to open a second Russian front from Vladivostok in the east.

[@fristnamelastname5549]

Schatten der Pickelhaube If they did the oil fields in the southern part of Russia would have been taken. Russia would have to rely on Western oil. If Germany could continue to attack Russia the winter would halt the German Forces of a time. Without oil Russian Tanks can't run and Infantry would be sent into meat grinders. But ultimately Germany would be crushed by the US and Western Allies, as Germany is pushing deeper into Russia and it counties into Moscow. Simply put: Germany was destined to fail in Russia, The Battle of Stalingrad would allow German forces to the south to get the Russian oil Fields, this would hurt Russia but not for long. In our Timeline Germany simply didn't have enough troops to stop the the Western Allies from doing D-Day, or to stop them in Italy. In this Timeline the same thing happens, Germany is invaded in 1944 with no Renforcems to speak of, The Allies take Berlin and Force Germany to Surrender. WW2 is done, Democracy Wins Communism is smaller and not any threat in this timeline. To Somme up: Germany loses either way, but the Western Allies control the Peace and post War Germany and maybe Poland too. Communism is weaker, and Japan is still Nuked, Korea is Whole, and Democracy Wins in the end. China is up to u.

[@dylandrake5352]

This may be a possibility, but the whole reason the Soviets held off the Germans from taking Moscow was them sending all of the fresh troops from the East, over to Moscow. Stalin didn't detect a Japanese invasion, so he put all of his resources on the Western front. With Russia fighting a two front war and the Germans not having to fight the US, I entirely disagree with your timeline. Without America, Germany still controls North Africa and Italy easily. Japan focuses predominately on Russia. Stalin fights a two front war and D-Day never happens and France is never liberated. I think you got this wrong.

[@GoobNoob]

Germany wouldn't take control of Italy because there would be no invasion of Italy, and Mussolini would still be in power.

[@dylandrake5352]

You're right. So even less fronts the Germans have to fight. I think they could've beat the Soviets eventually, if they focused on one enemy.

[@AbelMcTalisker]

Except in late 1941 Germany dosn`t control North Africa. Axis forces (mainly Italian) in this theatre have at this point been pushed back to the Tunisian/Libyan border, outnumbered and on the defensive. Not defeated though and commanded by an excellent general in Rommel.

[@aroundhere1200]

They dont need to win with the Japanese the far eastern front will end in a stalemate you forgot japan was in war with China to a nation ho have even more mapawor then the Soviets japan will end being over run or by the Chinese Soviet troops or to consume all of there resources protecting there front. Soviet will still pull the troops from Japan border to defend Moscow this will be the best moment Japan to attack and even if they have all that oil is pointless if they dont have where to put in, you make the navy go on land?. Soviets and Chinese governments are been friendly if Japan is in war with booth of them they would be forced to cooperate. Chinese troops would be trained by Russian general's to fight in Siberia and they would be shipt to Siberian Russian front with Soviet equipment they would hold the front until more prepared Russian troops will reinforce the front. The Chinese manpawor and the Soviet production will over run the Japanese troops. Evryoane keep forgetting about how Japan was in war with China already a nation with even more mapawor then the Soviets they lack competent leadership and equipment with this 2 disadvantages being solved by the Russian officers and Russian equipment China woul become the Second Soviet Union for Japan and being in war with the actually Soviet Union this would mean to much for Japan . The eastern front will end the same with Stalingrad lost and battle of kursk still being lost by the Germans beacuse Britain would start the invasion in Sicily. Rommel will still lost in Africa even if America dont invade northern Africa Rommel will steel retreat American invasion just speedet the process. This is the cruel truth people usually forget about the people ho lead this countrys Stalin will just throw more people, Hitler will make the same mistakes , Chan cai check ( i dont now if i write his name good) will be forced to cooperate with Soviet Union so he can survive (he will become a tiny Stalin throwing people into Japanese)

[@williamash8246]

Robert Sneddon In 1941 Vichy France the German puppet still controlled the rest of north Africa it was the Americans who made the landings in 1942-1943 that squeezed the axis out of africa

[@gibbonbasher8171]

Japan wouldn't know a thing or two as a result of having seen a thing or two.

[@marksauck8481]

Another what if. What if the Us Navy had one of our modern atomic powered aircraft Carriers included in its Arsenal back in 1941? The movie The Final Countdown had a great start to that Pearl Harbor scenario but spoiled the ending with darn time tunnel storm coming back after them.

[@darkxtw]

The soviets wouldn’t have been able to beat Germany because the reason the Germans didn’t conquer Moscow was because soviet divisions from Siberia went to fight germany, in this timeline those divisions would be fighting japan so Germany would eventually win after taking most of ussr factories in the west

[@idontgetit2195]

Japan invade USSR from siberia is this men live in a fantazy.

[@Omega4Productions]

The reason the Germans didn't conquer Moscow was because Hitler redirected Army Group South to take the oil fields to the south first, and then swing back around to take Moscow. This allowed the Siberian armies to arrive in time to reinforce Moscow. Had Hitler allowed Guderian to simply push onto Moscow, they would have taken it.

[@drcable9322]

Incorrect, Ussr had already declared war on japan with the general Zhukov and was in a victory course, no division from siberia was needed to defeat japan

[@DonMadruga72]

the USSR only declared War on Japan in 45 imbecile. This video is wrong, Cody forgot that the Soviet Union was not invincible.

[@zamuziku4991]

LOOMINARTY CONFIRMED??? What exactly would taking Moscow bring the Germans? Not much, imo. Napoleon took Moscow which didn't change the course of the war a little. All that taking Moscow could've given Hitler would be an even colder winter and the Soviet troops would probably fight on.

[@KillingDemons]

I hate to say it but....You are clearly off your rocker thinking the Soviets could stop a push on two fronts.

[@AholeAtheist]

Look at what capitalist propaganda has done to the world.. So many people here seem ignorant of the power of the U.S.S.R. in WWII.

[@planets9102]

they woul jusy ignore japan until the nazis where dead

[@lurac5710]

I hate to say it but... You are clearly off your rocker thinking that the Soviets couldn't stop a push on two fronts. *Considering they did a push on 3*

[@CedarHunt]

Russia came to the brink of collapse and would have lost without US aid even just fighting the Germans. Fighting in both the East and West would have been untenable and they would have essentially collapsed after Moscow fell to the German blitz.

[@dingdong3337]

For example in Stalingrad the soviets brought in divisions from Siberia to defend, and those divisions were crucial for the victory. So if Japan attacked, they wouldnt have been able to move those divisions, further weakening the red army in the eastern front. Also the US lend-lease act was crucial for soviets, and without that and without any invasion from western europe and having to also fight the japanese, the USSR would have lost the war

[@superforresttie1032]

There actually would have been a new U.S state called Jefferson (in Northern Washington southern orogen)which was only rejected because it was supposed to become a state on dec 8th 1941 which was one day after pearl harbor.

[@notasadperson2357]

That alternative timeline must suck since there would be no anime