*“Canada invades Seattle”* After 24 hours Canada attempts to give Seattle back to the US. The US refuses and demands Canada take Seattle. Canada rejects the demand and flees. US Forces give chase and demand Canada take Seattle. This would spark the battle known as the No Refunds War.
Seattle is home of Boeing, Amazon, Microsoft, Expedia, Nintendo, tmobile, Starbucks, and lots more. it is home to the Cascade mountain ranges, numerous lakes, the most educated people in the country, seven military bases, one of the nation's top universities in the U.W., one of the west coast's biggest maritime ports and airports and the highest minimum wage in the country -- but yeah, the U.S. can't wait to get rid of it.
Germany would just be using America. Just like they were using Russia. Just like they used Italy. Just like they used Austria. At the end of the day only one would world power would be left standing. And it would be the one willing to use nuclear weapons.
I think USA and Nazis became allies during the Cold War when CIA recruited ex SS/Gestapo officers to counter USSRs KGB. NASA also recruited Nazi rocket scientists.
Imagine the US propaganda against Britain. "We fought them once, we'll fight them again!" Edit: I get that the US fought Britain multiple times. I'm just too lazy to fix it.
It really is absolutely wild how the enormity of this conflict single handedly forged the US’ military and economic leadership position in the world for decades to come
But our blue collar industry is nearly gone in today’s world, could we do it again once everyone uses up all the technological gizmos to fight our video game war?
Sweden, being neutral and thus not bombed, did benefit from the same effect. We had a working industry, and we could continue to supply Europe with steel, now to build up society rather than create weapons, but for us, the effect was a large influx of money that funded the wellfare state. The US not only managed to avoid being bombed, but they also had to built up their industry to support the war effort, and the manpower losses were, compared to all other nations involved in the war (perhaps with the exception of Australia and Canada that never had war on their mainlands), miniscule.
I really like how this is a collection of "separate" wars, and where "alliances" are a matter of convenience and pragmatic rather than ideological. It is very messy yet totally realistic :)
Alliances were never ideological in WW2, unless you call a democratic - communist alliance an ideological one, or a fascist - nazi and plain authoritarian alliance an ideological one.
@@elsauce4873 Good point -- the US and UK have absolutely noting in common, and in fact are pretty much ideologically opposites on everything. It is a miracle that their soldiers didn't turn on each other on the field the moment that they had the chance. I guess the only thing that trumped their hatred of each other was their common desire to prevent a German super-state on the continent. lol
@@ravenlord4Throughout WW2 there were no alliances that were formed because of ideological goals or similarities between nations. Alliances, like the axis for example, only existed because nations shared the same enemies.
The war would have never started then. It was a pure financial war, no matter what they tell you. The fact that Germany privatized their banks was a big blow to the powers
@@zvallid not really, the dollar first got rid of the gold standard in 1971, the same year where the research against Covid started (look at Archive if you don’t believe me). If they had feared gold standard so much, they‘d get rid of it sooner.
Fun Fact; In a war, if a country has cracked their enemies' battlenet (i prefer to use this term because it's similar to the codes used in ww2, only more modern and secured) or has a spy in their ranks and uses the intel gained to counter EVERY enemy offense/defense tactics, they'll quickly catch on. Doing that sorta thing is more short term advantage, so being careful to only use the advantages when needed is vital for long term.
Unless the battle net is so ingrained into their tactics that it is hard to replace the battlenet or fix the leak. (ww2 examble being the enigma code being broken)
The Brits knew about the Zimmerman Telegraph months before they released the information and they had all information the Germany sent over to their embassy in the USA.
I love that you were able to concoct a reasonable and believable scenario where warplan red is able to be enacted exactly as its designers feared. America attempting to trade with a nation that Britain is at war with and Britain attacking to ensure that their blockade is upheld.
"The U.S navy's battleships were never tested in war, apart from their diving ability in pearl harbor"- had me do a double take when I first heard that
So damn based. If we went with Patton's plan and he wasn't assassinated, communism would have been erased from history. We would have cities on Mars at this point.
The thing I love about this video, is as someone who knows a lot about WW2, I love being able to understand each battle in order, some dates are off, but with a twist of, the sides have changed. And the way you blend the events of fiction and fact, is absolutely amazing.
@@Sun-Tzu- I never said anything about being possible, I said I could understand the events in the order they're in, and it was a great mix of fact and fiction.
I've doubts about that combination. Not in the possibility but in the video depiction. The Sherman turret as manufactured would have been too small and would require a redesign. As well as would the Sherman's suspension and drive train. Such a vehicle wouldn't have just looked like a Sherman with the larger gun. We're speculating a heavy tank gun into a medium tank turret and chassis. If just throwing that gun into a medium tank and it magically just work had been feasible, the Germans would have loaded it into the panzer four as standard. It would be interesting to see a mock up of the Sherman with the necessary modifications to make it possible to carry and use the 88 tho.
Actually the US Navy battleships in Pearl Harbor were a bunch of obsolete tubs from the WW1 era. Roosevelt had them planted in Pearl Harbor ro provoke Japan. All the valuable US warships, such as the aircraft carriers, were sent to sea a few days before the attack.
@@whitewolf1298 Japans fault they didn’t attack the other resources stations near Pearl that would have caused the ships at Pearl to take years to be repaired if it was destroyed
@@jayjyuri8796 The question we should be asking is: Why did Japan attack in the first place? There were so many indications the US knew the attack was coming that the strike force should have turned back two days after it sailed. Pearl Harbor was crawling with Japanese spies and minisubs. They knew all the modern US warships had sailed. All that was sitting in the harbor were a bunch of obsolete battleships, a few old destroyers, some oil tankers, some repair ships, and supply craft. Japan would have been much better of attacking Russia, which in Dec 1941 was reeling from the onslaught of the German army. They could have seized the trans-Siberian railroad, exactly as they had done in 1905, and gotten all the oil they needed from the German-controlled Caucasus region of Russia. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, from both a strategic and tactical perspective, was absolutely, galactically stupid.
England sink an american ship: "Sorry, mate, it was an accident." England sink a second american ship: "Bloody hell, I swear I didn't see it was you." *sips tea*
Nowadays it's more like, US Navy crashes into a supertanker in one of the busiest shipping lanes of the Pacific. Tactical Info Officer: "I thought you were watching the traffic." Officer of the Deck: "I thought *you* were watching it." USN amphib ship catches fire in drydock. Chief: "Who was standing fire watch?" Sailor: "the shipyard guy said the contractor does their own watch." Contractor: "That's not my job."
The US fleet was obsolete already on December 7th. In a brutal sense, the Japanese did the US a favor by putting them in a position where they had to update to the latest and greatest instead of having to try get the isolationist Congress to approve funding. The battleships were already historical relics.
The USA puts so much money into evolving their military they're a game changer for whoever's side they're on. Edit: I meant nowadays. Also I have not checked this comment in a while, I appreciate your appreciation :)
Bettewn the industry and the absurd amout of money they spend in their military i will say that having the U.S.A as an allie is almost the same as cheating a bit to much
Its a shame and a act against humanity that the world will not adopt the military stamina heart and soul of the fighting men of the usa Britain Australia Norway Sweden Holland Canada and so many other free nations of the world in uniting as one and getting the rest to join with us in a world of peace where all people are equal, yes we are far from perfect, but I truly believe this is the only way we will ever end war and senceless killing of free working and proud people of the world, there is enough problems with violent criminals destroying the world lets finally agree 👍 that sencelessly killing people in governments wars is a waste of everyone's time it never lasts long evil is always eventually defeated unfortunately evil rises again somewhere again,haven't we learned anything after 50.000 years that forcing people to follow evil direction never lasts,evil is eventually stamped out ,but at the cost of millions of lifes most all of the time why do idiots like hitler even try 🤔 😳 like his 1000 year Riech that lasted less than 10 to many human lives are lost in war genocide and evil thinking they can exterminate a race because of false beliefs and propaganda, I hope this isent our eventual demise of the human race because someone believes there gang is more important than another, like the first cavemen killing each other over a woman or a chunk of meat over a campfire, are we really that feeble minded 😉 I hope this isent our inherented fault from our ancestors that we can never get away from,haven't we evolved yet,will we ever learn from our past mistakes that the only thing important is family and water and food,nothing else really matters,but unfortunately it might be our greed to control and have it all in our control that could be our end,its in our control, to try for our grandchildren future to live a decent life on this beautiful planet as we have,will greed eventually be our biggest flaw and our environmental disaster that ends us all,I think we deserve to leave a better story for our history than that,lets hope
Hitler: I’m good at drawing and like dogs I can offer drawings of doggos as reparations, my scientists are greatest at holding beers and said beers remain cold
I think u meant Judan intensifies..... Google Judea Declares War on Germany and check the dates on those newspapers.... We were so lied to it hurts when u wake up
@poopshoes7579: Yeah but Germany had the smartest scientists at the time (till they all came here and helped us win the moon race). They were a decade more advanced than ours.
I like how its mentioned that the holocaust would just be covered up the same way the communist genocides were in our timeline. i was wondering how that would get squared with the theoretical western allies
Covered up? Where? How? All you need to learn about communist atrocities is move yourself to a library and find a book about it. Nobody covered communist atrocities in the West, and in the commie block they admitted they've done it already in late 1950s.
@@SparrowNoblePoland Covered up in the west isn't entirely accurate. Communist genocides are more accurately simply not discussed like Nazi Germany, at least in American education and popular culture. This is because a great many educators and Hollywood types are decidedly hard left leaning. Even when they know and accept the horrible atrocities committed in the name of world communism/socialism they prefer NOT to mention it because it is counterproductive to achieving the goals of communism/socialism in western society. The average high school student in American learns all about the Holocaust and the Nazis. They are also told repeatedly how evil their own nation was during western expansion. They are not told how those western tribes also exterminated each other for millennia before Europeans arrived, The Holomodor in the Soviet Union which slaughtered 3.5 million, Stalin's purges, Pol Pot's mass murders, Mao Zedong's mass murders, or any other atrocities which don't match the narrative being pushed. Yes, you can FIND information on all of these IF YOU LOOK. Unless you look though they are conveniently left out of most general education.
I've lived in Finland and went to school there learned alot about WWII moved to America went to the schools here and was told something else and that what I was taught was wrong sooo yeah I believe country's teach differently and we'll i guess brainwash your ass.
@@kennethfharkin imperialism/colonialism is also not talked about. Why's that, are many Hollywood writers imperialist? Also Oooh they killed each other so it's perfectly fine we did it too! You're not Repeatedly told anything. You just like to avoid the slightest mention.
Here's a question though, if you went back in time or forward in time, theory would suggest that your position in the universe wouldn't change so if that is the case, wouldn't you just time travel and be in space? 😂
@@enochchow4099 it's more complex than that. You could never time travel backwards unless your in a space ship cause not even making cosmic calculations would work. How would you move yourself both spatially and time wise cause that would mean you either have to move before you time travel, during your time travel which would be even more difficult cause you would have to actually move yourself cause you cant just Teleport somewhere else randomly, or do it after.
UK: "Why did you join the Axis Powers?" US: "Why?" *"It's because we have cool birds on our emblems."* Edit: Damn people actually agree with me. Thanks.
"Look at you with a stupid unicorn on yours, UK. That's not even a real animal. I bet you little girls like tea parties and teddy bears, too - OH WAIT you DO!"
@@PatrickKniesler Thats true. In America its the complete opposite. It seems now the guys with unicorns and teddy bears and the girls SAYING they can do this and that and acting butch yet objecting to having to do the same levels
I would say this alternate history would make a great movie, except there's way too many dumb people who would accept it as fact. Great story on how political allegiances are always on a knife edge.
Just the explanation of this alt history is an hour long, it would work better as a series rather than a film, maybe following the story of a British and Japanese soldier simultaneously until the meet up in the pacific or smt like that.
Yeah hahah I was like wait a minute this stuff didn't happen... Lol but then I cought after a few minutes and realized its just a story from someones mind... But, it's a Damn good story. The whole like actual war footage is what threw my ass dafak off lols
I just had to pause this video, very well made BTW to say the idea of Patton working along side with Rommel just makes smile. Two of the greatest tank commanders working together, Oh shit you're screwed.
Wow, you guys did a heck of a job figuring out this alternate history. You all seemed to have researched a great deal of information and come up with a alternate viable scenario for WWII. Please continue with these alternate histories, these are the best ones I've seen on the UA-cam.
@@danieljones9937 If capitalists and communists could work together against the Nazis, so it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that it could've worked the other way, too. Remember that the full extent of Nazi crimes only came to light AFTER the war and were not part of the everyday propaganda. Of course, 'viable' is a strong word - but I'm fully going for 'plausible'.
@@danieljones9937 If "Hilter" Would have just accept Austria, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia then Continue with the technical improvement and wait for Stalin to attack Poland... Stalin would have been the same common enemy as "Hilter" was in our timeline.
@@DGARedRaven It's true that the general public weren't informed of Nazi atrocities like Auschwitz but the Allied authorities sure as hell were. I just don't find it plausible that the US would stick with such monsters.
@@Stux6-3 I think Stalin was opportunist rather than flat-out expansionist. I could be wrong there though. I know Hitler /was/ expansionist, though. He rebuilt the German economy through transforming it into a war machine. Again, it's pretty implausible that he'd just stop, particularly with his attitude towards Poles.
Some corrections are in order about Canada: if the USA would have joined the Axis, Canada would have severed its bond with the UK and join the USA as many leaders in Canada were in favor of what Germany was doing in Europe and thus would have joined the Axis too. So there would never have been an invasion of Canada as it would have willfully followed their much better neighbors than their "foreign UK masters" who never really cared about Canada and saw them as fodder over anything else.
Canada was still a Dominion of the British empire and had been fighting the axis since 1939. They would probably have tried to negotiate into becoming a neutral power with some concessions to the US, but the situation is this video is plausible as well.
-Comrade, the americans bombed Leningrad with a new weapon + A new weapon? How many? - Just one explosion. 100.000 people, most of the railway infraestructure, and the icy roads are lost + Oh no... anyway _calls Zhukov for the daily report_
@@chrisca *Zhukov:* Oh hey, Comrade Stalin. I'm betraying you so we can end the war peacefully. *Stalin:* What? *Zhukov:* What? _Suitcase explodes and kills Stalin_
@@LouisbertrandIvander-iw9mb I understood now, he mention about a pararrel world not real world where Russian is not formed yet and Soviet where never part of Axis
This video is underrated, considering how much time was spent on this and how realistic they were able to make it, I think it deserves at least 20 million views
@@dobknocks did I say it does? Did I say every single video that has had a lot of effort put into it deserves views? No. I said there are a lot that do deserve views, sonny.
You maybe not. But it makes sense, since Soviets committed atrocities mainly towards their own people, or on Germans as a revenge for the war. From the West's perspective it doesn't matter. In Poland we were attacked both by Germany and Soviets, and both committed atrocities on us, yet math shows that Germans killed us 4 to 6 millions just between 1939 and 1945, while soviets only 300-350 thousand from 1939 to 1953. For anyone outside Soviet Union, Soviet Union was effectively a lesser evil.
What do you mean we never mention the atrocities committed by the Soviets? Everyone knows about them. Are you one of the people still being told to worry about a Commie takeover?
@@ostrich67 By everyone you surely mean everyone who knows about the holocaust right? It's not a 1:1 ratio on it, and no I'm not worried, that has nothing to do with what I said
@@SparrowNoblePoland have you seen Man in the High Castle(Amazon Prime series)?it's a Japan&Germany win situation, and Germany was teaching students The murder of the natives in the Americas in schools
Putting a '88 on a Sherman would have been awesome. It would be the equivalent of putting a big block V8 in a old Ford Ranger, but still love the idea. Closest we got was the Firefly
I'm saying this based of Videogame knowledge but when i played world of tanks the firefly was the only enjoyable m4 variant I played its no 88 but putting the large 17 pounder on a sherman still seems like an epic idea
In the 50s France was given a bunch of M4s which they allowed different design companies to mess around with. On one of the prototypes they installed a 105mm gun, unfortunately, they never built any beyond the prototype stage. I think they put a version of it in World of Tanks or War Thunder.
It likely would've been a Kwk 42 75mm gun, not an 88, the Kwk 42 was the rough equilivent of the 17 pounder for germany and it would've had a similar result.
plus Stalin knew about the nukes before they were used he had a spy in the Manhattan project there were some scientist who fluted with communism and didnt want the US to be the only ones with nukes as they might us them to eliminate communism
@@sqike001ton the scenario might not have been exactly the same tho, with Nazi scientists, and the USSR being an enemy, we don't know if those agents would've gotten that close to the Manhattan project.
Since after getting german colonies (wich were very little ) they didn't do much maybe the could of invaded India and Australia wich is better than some small islands
@Luca Denegri 1)this scenario can be only if Russia and Germany-Ally. 2)too. 3)Khrushev will be win. 60-s for USSR was very good time: no post-war devastion and no crisis 70s-80s. China-enemy,but if it join in war,India help for Soviet. In Africa Soviet have more anti-colonoies ally,N. Korea fot now stronger S. Korea. Soviet have slow rise economic,but in 60-s economic mo biger, than western. 4)China will be fall. He is frech rebellious "colonies" USSR. USA will be halp,but no more- it's no cheap.
Also could you tell imagine a German Wehrmacht whose supply chain was fully motorized by US supplied trucks and support vehicles instead of the horses, carts and mules they used?
US aid going to the Axis rather than the allies is a terrifying thing to think about. Barbarossa in this timeline would be a lot more one-sided, cant imagine Soviet defense without so much lend-lease aid
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j I'm not denying that they did. I'm just saying their supply chain was never fully motorized like the allies. There are many recorded instances of Wehrmacht supplies being delivered by non motorized methods. This undoubtedly impacted operations.
Imagine being a Soviet soldier in Leningrad and suddenly the ground rumbles..it isn't a tank assault...it is from above as dozens of B-17s, with massive payloads of bombs compared to German bombers rumbling over the city for the first time. God I cannot imagine how scary a scenario that would be for someone on the ground.
You’d be in Leningrad with all your machines stuck and broken down, sitting with your gun that only had 12 bullets, because the US never got to the point to triple your country’s supply capabilities with their freight cars and trucks.
I did some research of both countries largest bomber planes and their both basically the same b17s span is 104 while Germany heinkel is 103 plus their both 74 and 72 inch by length
@Alenas Kvasninas this was a different time. During ww1 and 2 when Americans entered there had a Vendetta. The only reason we left Vietnam and now the Afghanistan war is because of the leftists and idiotic Viewon the world.
@@tnt_ak8625 No, it’s because staying would have been a costly affair and lead to nothing. In Vietnam we couldn’t push north for fear of Chinese nuclear payback, and in Afghanistan our troops were slowly being picked off. The Taliban is not a conventional military, but an idea, and an idea cannot be stopped no matter how much of any military force you throw at it. Things would have been different if the CIA was involved to assassinate and demoralize key parts of the Taliban, but we’ve stayed there 20 years and only empowered them more and more as time went on. Even Biden leaving idiotic amounts of weaponry behind made little impact compared to the mere US presence in the country.
I’m a little late to the discussion but if I recall correctly Germany was also working on strategic bombers too IRL that had to be cancelled because of the higher need for fighters and interceptors due to being bombed by the US, UK, and Russia. I’m guessing they would’ve continued the strategic bomber development if they didn’t have to deal with that.
Noone can say for sure what would have happened IF and WHEN, but in the end you are correct. There were plans for a so called "Amerikabomber" (able to reach America) early on, but a change in strategic planning happened and long range strategic bombing was considered much less cost efficient than to destroy the enemies army with smaller (cheaper) tactical bombers who could in theory act as budget strategic bombers (although with less range and payload) when needed, only when the enemy brought up their air power the Germans only could react and had to put everything into fighter production and couldn't regain initiative, being damned to fight an enemy in a material battle they only could lose (against the USA at least). 1935/36: Heinkel He 116 in an optimized version could have done the distance from Europe to USA but with little payload and being awfully slow; 1942: Messerschmitt Me 264 would have been the german answer to B-17's. Lack of ressources halted production, only three were made but considered worthy; 1944: Focke-Wulf Ta 400 (prototype was tested extensively and considered for production when ressources would be available. That was in 1944, lol) 1945: Horten H XVIII, THE UFO'S ARE INCOMING!!!
No need to even on this timeline, USA was already providing bombers in the european theather. They prolly divert their efforts on the more massive tank projects instead with the crazy amount of resources coming from the west.
Looking back at this again, it's hard to imagine any real tension in the axis powers following the war. With the allies it was easy because of the huge distance between the Soviets and the west, it was more of an alliance of mutual convenience. But in this, America and Germany straight up shared blood together for multiple years in multiple theaters, the high commands and governments spent years in rooms together planning campaigns, battles, trade deals, they were building each other's stuff, etc. It would be like the British and Americans not liking each other after the war in real life. Just doesn't compute for me
Except that both the Germans and Americans would be superpowers on their own and thus conflict would be inevitable. Even the British and Americans in our own timeline clashed over the Suez despite the British being a declining power as well as being a "similar country" to the US, not to mention how rebellious France was despite fighting alongside the Americans and British as well, albeit on a much smaller scale. A militaristic, totalitarian Germany ruling most of Europe as well as parts of Africa and Asia would definitely have conflicting interests with the US and would definitely fight the US to preserve/have those interests, this is WWII Germany after all.
@@MorokLeviathan its different in this alt timeline though. soviets could betray the west because they have the manpower, nukes and influence. germany pretty much got carried by their north american ally USA and hitler betraying them would be tantamount to suicide
the most reasonable way that it could've happened is if the public really heard a lot about the holocaust. that would've turned public opinion enough that, in a democracy like the US, there would've been no choice but to go to (cold) war.
Her Majesty's Royal Navy is formidable but they would not have fared well against the US for one reason alone. Sheer production ability. The US had an absurd amount of aircraft carriers by the end of WW2. Plus the US is on another continent which makes hitting their shipyards and factories way more difficult. The Royal Navy only mopped up the Kriegsmarine because they outnumbered them severely. That would not have been the case against the US. It would probably be somewhat even for the first few years, but the US would easily win the long war of attrition.
@@CrimsonUltrafox not to mention with all their superiority on almost everything, from intelligence to numbers, the u boats still managed to be a major pain in the ass until 43-44 when they simply couldnt/wouldnt produce more. the us navy is the equivalent to the red army, simply being able to trade casualties at a rate so overwhelming for the enemy that you just cannot defeat them singlehandedly
You can see that the USA is a real powerhouse, able to rebuild an entire part of their army, so switching sides is the real turning point, this was an interesting and amazing video
@@julesemma7249 Well if you've seen the video about what if the soviet union joined the axis, you'll see that it has become a stalemate because of the axis their lack of naval power and the allies their lack of land forces
@@Shadow_KnightDPM It would also be a dead end if Joseph Stalin was not killed. And in the clip where Soviets join the Axis, it shows that the Core is more powerful and weaponized than the Allies. even if they didn't win and if you take the US Fight the Nazis alone. The United States will lose. It's not really about the United States.
This is an intriguing scenario, bravo! Its like a HOI4 game taken off the historical setting. So the first big point of divergence here - Japan declaring war on the axis in 1940, is plausible enough. They were Britain's ally in WW1 after all. Its hard to see exactly what the Japanese would gain here (the Italian concession at Tianjin is hardly a prize). The British might permit them to occupy Vichy French Indochina and guarantee access to the oil supplies in the Dutch East Indies in return for their help against the Axis in the Atlantic and North Africa, though I doubt they'd have been happy about it. The next part - where the Japanese still carry out Pearl Harbor, is where I feel this scenario runs off the deep end a bit. In reality the British would be horrified by such an act. Faced with a choice between Japan and the USA as an ally, Churchill would never have chosen the former, even at the risk of Britain immediately losing its far east colonies. He would at least have renounce their alliance, quickly order the Japanese fleet and army units to depart, or outright have attacked them to help the USA. Events might have been a bit more plausible if there was a more gradual escalation to war, or outright American aggression. For instance, maybe Macarthur or some other trigger-happy American commander decides to provoke an incident around the Philippines, 'accidentally' bombing a Japanese ship like the Panay incident of 1937 but in reverse. The Japanese respond by mining Manilla Harbor and things escalate from there. A war between Britain and America in 1941 still seems very unlikely, but I like how you've explored the idea.
Yeah I agree with@homeworld22. In the video, while both Britain and America were at peace although on opposite sides with Japan, why would the US sink the British Ships? Even if they were carrying supplies for Japanese use. They would have just instructed them to turnaround as the British did to the American convoy near Sweden (in the video). A little bit of a stretch to go from lend-lease (the British were lobbying the Americans very hard to be more involved in both timelines) to War with one another. Although overall I did enjoy the video and realise you had to come up with something why the Americans would join the Axis side. The likely truth is America would have stayed neutral rather than enter a conflict with Germany against Britain. That in itself may have been enough to alter the outcome of the war.
I agree, but he still did a good scenario on the japanese not only threatening to take all of the colonies but also cripple india and it's surroundings making them lose a lot, not just the small colonies in the far east (edit) and without it's allies, defending Africa would've been a nigh impossible challenge since at that point the USA were neutral and a lot of Americans were actually pro-nazi so it's not super far fetched
I agree. Let's say the Americans would have sunk those ships, it would most likely have been due to misidentification or stray shot, not intentional aggression. Even then, Churchill would not have wanted to declare war on the United States. That sort of move would not only remove any meaningful manufacture of weapons, ammo and equipment, it also would have opened a second front. I'm not sure what a more reasonable explanation would have been for this, but it is interesting to think about. Also, while the supply of oil from Britain would not have been able to replace the American means, it would have, at least, allowed some time for the Japanese to determine a more reliable source of oil, maybe even attacking the Soviet oil fields Germany had later on in the war. (I am only at 13:00 when writing this comment)
@@sandroblechinger4737 What? I am pretty sure everybody agrees that using the nuclear weapons was a bad idea and unnecessary to close out the pacific theater. If anything we should have withheld the nuclear weapon and used it on a different war as to not lose the element of surprise. SO what if it would cost 1 million more American lives we could have unified north and south Korea or forced the USSR and CCP to submit to us later on had we not nuked Japan during WWII. This is stupid to claim that the US was having troubles closing out Japan. It was only a matter of time that Japan would surrender nukes or no. EDIT: Japan lost all hope when they failed at midway and lost at coral sea. It was over they would only make last stand attempts to the bitter end. Even then Imperial Army and Navy realized it was over. You're telling me Japan was a threat when they couldn't even field a sizable air and naval presence by 1945? You're insane. How do you think Imperial Japan would win against an all in America without a navy or air force?
@@rhylin26 I hate how everybody blames Germany for the holocaust but nobody talks about the other atrocities made by the allies like the famine of India by the UK, all the sh*t than the URSS made in Europe, how USA drop two of the most letal weapons in the history and other things
@Mason Murchison When did the US give Germany weapons, protection, vehicles and other stuff during WW2? Or are you talking about West Germany after the war?
It's rare when UA-cam recommends something good and interesting. Great alternative history really well made and great realistic outcomes following events.
US veteran here, and that line: "The US Navy Battleships had never been tested in combat except for their diving ability at Pearl Harbor," had me dying! 🤣🤣
I love this absolutely, but my only real critique besides the lend lease importance to Soviet Supply is the Sino-Japanese Front. ROC China was heavily factionistic and Chiang Chi-shek wouldn’t have attempted to surrender his national army, without an internalized threat. The Communists and Nationalists at this period would’ve most likely became more aggressive, due to the threats all around them. The Potential Guerrilla Warfare, even if a surrender is given to Britain(which I will say is the most realistic), would be almost impossible for the IJA, as in the war as a total, 2/3’s of the IJA were bogged down in stalemate with China. I’m highly skeptical that the Kuomintang, Warlords, and Communists would just have lessened capability to fight the Japanese, as mostly the Chinese United Front was practically already a Guerrilla War. The Soviet invasion of Xinjiang/Sinkiang is really the deciding factor here, as Communist Chinese feeling betrayed could be a more loyal and aligned to their Chinese brothers in arms, which could end up paving a more dangerous ROC. I just feel there are huge amounts of variables to assume China just throws down arms and to negate their actions effects on Japanese War Effort.
@@bonkbonk420 Try asking the real world powers. The *_World Bankers_* and their soldiers, the *_Freemasons._* Purse strings control the world governments.
with britain being on the opposing side,I'm not sure that china could've held out as long as it did being surrounded on all sides,american help would've been all but impossible to send, especially with the loss of the philippines.
I would believe Detroit would have been one of the first US cities attacked due to the industrial presence, including auto factories changed over to bomber and tank production. Plus you add in Henry Ford’s alleged sympathy towards Nazi Germany. Conversely, the US would have likely taken Windsor which is separated by Detroit by the mile wide river, and Windsor is the gateway to Toronto, which would also have been pinched by an assault from Buffalo. That would have knocked out a huge portion of Canada’s power production.
I like your story, although some bits are a bit of a stretch, such as America going to war with Britain, but is not really that big of a deal. However the one big problem I have with it is the end result. Despite essentially being the masters of the world, alongside the United States, Italy and Germany take relatively little in the way of territory. It makes sense in our timeline, with the democratic countries condemning war for conquest in Europe, but for fascist Italy and Germany that would be no problem, Mussolini even proclaimed that he wanted to reestablish the Roman empire. Additionally Hitler despised the Soviets, yet in this he basically ends war with them with only relatively minor concessions.
Well, in both timelines, the Soviets were pushing the Germans back slowly but surely. Plus, the only reason the USA joined the Axis in this video was bascause of Japan's alliance with Britain and the Soviets. Japan and America were going to war with each other anyway, and that would have inevitably led to war with Japan's allies, whether it be Germany/Italy or Britain/USSR
The thing is, the origins of "War Plan Orange" was part of a larger plan known as "Red-Orange", which was the US against a UK-Japan alliance in the Pacific. The two nations were closely allied, until the 1920s when Japanese expansion and tensions with the US caused the UK to pull out.
Maybe in this timeline the tiger and panther tanks would actually get good transmissions from the US EDIT: wow guys thanks for the likes! Also, i dont know much about the Sherman, but they seemed to fit the role of medium tank well enough to be a good tank. I’m more of a german tank enthusiast myself, and when you match the Sherman up against tigers, panthers, and king tigers yeah they fall a bit short in the armor/armament catagories, but thats because all of those were basically heavy tanks by the allies standards.
@@attackmaster519 Sherman with 88. Angled Tiger 1 Front armor and a actual practical use of a Tiger 2 and several other tanks. This truly has my mind on overdrive.
@@attackmaster519 You need to study up on your history of armored vehicles...marginal gun until the Canadians put the 17 pounder on it, mediocre armor, high profile, nicknamed the Ronson...
In our timeline, the soviets lost millions. 300k is a drop in the bucket. They lost over 600k soldiers in a single encirclement. But I still have trouble believing that the soviets would lose. They outnumbered the Germans 12 mil to 8 mil. And German tanks tended to be overcomplicated. So the scenario presented with the US help allowing a stalemate until Stalin gets assassinated is plausible. But even then, I doubt Hitler would allow anything less than the creation of a full Lebensraum, which the US would utterly despise. Especially after the US sees the concentration camps.
@@ColinTherac117 Hitler going on east the main reason was not lebensraum but destroying bolshevism. The idea that germany should get more lebensraum existed even before hitler due to british naval blockade in ww1 which hurt the german people and created a food crisis. I doubt Usa is any morally superior to the third reich, when it provoked the axis powers always the war, they even had camps themselves for germans, italians and japanese. Throwing nuclear bombs, War agitating, eisenhowers deathcamps. Ofc I Soviets and The germans also had crimes. But I dont think Usa is in any moral position to judge.
The 29 was a disaster... there are parts of the globe that have multiple wind shifts at increments of altitude and the 29 was reduced to low level fire bombing most of the time because the bombing site was useless at anything but lower altitude... and took a lot of casualties...
@@charlesbukowski9836 "The 29 was a disaster.." Except it wasn't. Fire bombing is generally conducted at lower altitude. Fire bombing was used as it created more damage than concussive bombs. The sites weren't so much "useless" as there was little experience bombing from the jet stream. 300 planes lost compared B17 losses was trivial.
Except if Japan was allied with Great Britain then the Japanese would have had access to their engine technology so the B-29 would have been in for a bit of a hard time. American aircraft carriers with their wooden decks would have still sunk whereas any British ones would had the bombs bouncing off them and stayed floating and fighting as the Japanese found out. With Japan on the "other" side, Russia wouldn't have kept so many troops in Siberia which could have then been committed to their Western (Germany's Eastern) Front.
@@charlesbukowski9836 High altitude was disaster for sure. The US was unaware that the jet stream even existed. That being said, the low level fire bombing campaign was devastating. In the end it was a massive success. So successful , in fact, there were no targets left to bomb.
a very important thing I would like to add about the construction and testing of the nukes is that in ww2 the Germans had control of the largest production plant for rare heavy water. heavy water was used largely in the production of nuclear bombs back then so having them as an ally would have probably accelerated the process
They had by *far* the world's largest uranium enrichmemt plant as well. That's what Auschwitz was. It used more electricity than Berlin. Then after the surrender and the U-Boat carrying secrets and material came to the U.S., our stockpile of enriched uranium magically multiplied overnight, far beyond what we had before. We also magically went from 5 years to a completed bomb to direct production which was finished in a couple months.
I love your videos, I speak Spanish and your subtitles help me a lot to understand English and I have fun with your stories, thank you very much and keep it up
@@Philitron128 Wow. If you actually believe Germany was worse then the USSR, then the brainwashing has really been effective. Why don't you prove that Germany was worse then the Soviet Union, instead of repeating what you are told by society on a daily basis? It's so much easier to repeat things you have been told rather then do your own research on them and come to your own conclusion. Do that, and maybe then I will have at least an ounce of respect for you.
@@ronlacker326 Ok, how about starting WW2 with the express purpose of conquest and genocide. Maybe the Holocaust? Let's also look at the genocide of Slavs. Get fucked you Nazi sympathizer.
I think instead of upgrading the shermans with the 88mm, the germans would probably just use the same gun as on the panther as it is lighter and could more easily fit into the sherman without major redesigns. Plus, I'm not even sure the 88mm would even fit in the sherman.
I think only the later war Shermans, like the M1A3E2 "Jumbo" tanks, could probably fit the German 88 on the turret, as many "Jumbo" tanks were upfitted when armored resistance was expected. Most certainly the M26 Persing could have handled the German 88 as a main cannon, had the US joined the Axis.
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : V2 rockets wouldn't be used against Japan. Germany wouldn't fight Japan, only the US would. That being said, I think that at some point, what would be of more interest would be the German jet fighters, like the Me-262 and the He-163. Those would be of interest to counter the Japanese Zero threat, and if fitted to bombers, jet engines would allow much faster bomber air speeds.
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : Depends on the experimental weaponry you're talking about. I don't think the US would have seen any purpose in weapons like the rail-car artillery guns or the Mauser super-heavy tank. The only weaponry I think the US may have wanted is the same rocketry tech we got in this timeline, as well as the "Leopard" tank the Germans were looking at building after the Tiger tanks, especially the Tiger II, proved problematic. Most people don't know that had Germany won, they would have built the first 70-ton MBT. (I don't consider the Tiger II an MBT, simply because it was never used offensively. It was literally a mobile pillbox.)
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : What most people don't know or remember is that the equivalent of the German MG-42 was not the Browning M2 .50 cal. HMG, but the M1919 Browning .30 cal. LMG. Like the MG-42, the M1919 used by the US Army was a two-man operated, belt-fed LMG that was largely used when an infantry squad or platoon needed a heavy weapon. Most M2 HMGs were tank or vehicle-mounted, not carried by infantry. The M1919 Browning .30 cal. LMG was the World War II predecessor to the M60E1 used in Vietnam, the M60E4 used in Gulf War I, and the M240 SAW used in Afghanistan.
Dont worry, the ones that were diving were old, useless vessels, they took the good ones out before the attack, because they knew, what will happen. Its part of modern warfare.
@@willymueller3278 that and most of the ships were sunk in shallow water and were raised repaired and back in the fight fairly quickly. While technically a success for the Japanese navy, the major thing it accomplished was pissing off the USA
I enjoyed this very much. Really gets you thinking about things the way they were compared to what might have been. I think that if Germany and the United States were together as allies in WWII, the outcome would have been more lopsided than this video depicted. Militarily, the two countries complimented each other quite well.
This was honestly one of the best alternate history videos I have EVER seen, and I watch a LOT! It was so very realistic, and entirely plausible! Thank you so much for this video, and keep up the excellent work!
I don't think most people realize how close this came to being a reality toward the end of the war when the US in particular realized the Russians were not going to stop at Berlin
I think Roosevelt had a deep dislike and mistrust of the Nazis, he'd never go to war on their side. Fact is he used Pearl Harbour as an excuse to go to war against the Nazis.
@@thefurrybastard1964 Germany made that decision for Roosevelt as they declared war on the US, true he didn't like the Nazi's but he also never wanted to fight them and waste American lives, Roosevelt didn't like the Soviets either, he also hated Britain, Churchill especially calling him a bumbling drunk, and France more as he despised the old ruling Imperial European powers and blamed them for Europe's, and the world's, problems and believed they should fall to "Soviet barbarism and domination and hope that after a few decades of occupation they (the Soviets) become less barbarous". Yet he sided with Britain out of convenience, its more accurate to say he'd never go to war on any of their sides, Japan's attack at Pearl Harbor and Germany's declaration of war just made America a defacto ally, but more importantly the war America entered was their own war with their own goals and agenda, not necessarily in aid of the other nations, especially Britain's as Churchill's goal and original plan to get America to help (which failed) was to preserve the British Empire which Roosevelt wanted dismantled, and thanks to Japan's attack, Roosevelt got his wish because Britain needed an ally to survive but with America fighting their "own war" had to bend to America's terms. Whether you like him or not, Roosevelt had a brilliant mind and played the European powers as well as Congress, while simultaneously keeping American popular opinion which is what earned him his third term in the first place, to catapult America to the top. So as OP, and the video stated, this very well could have happened at the slightest historical change, with America potentially entering the cold war with the Nazi's and/or the Soviets at the wars end, even another war between the surviving European powers afterwards in the years or decades that followed, along with many other possibilities, the further you get from our timeline the harder it is to predict following scenarios.
@@Jeremiah71603 Nah Roosevelt prefered Britain, altough i dont think he would have declared unless pearl harbor or any other major event. He would never join Axis.
Yes and Montgomery was a Hero in our timeline definitely interesting he would never have been known as one. No Americans no d-day he would never be known for his victory in Normandy. Therefore he would be just another casualty of war.
I didn't realize how bizarre this alternative reality was until the point where American B-17s were bombing British cities... So hard to fathom. But this is such an amazing what if video.
Very interesting alternate history. I do appreciate the effort that went in to it. This is the first video I have watched on this channel. I do hope it has only improved from here. Proofreading, proofreading, proofreading. Cheers and best of luck with all of your endeavors!
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
*“Canada invades Seattle”*
After 24 hours Canada attempts to give Seattle back to the US. The US refuses and demands Canada take Seattle. Canada rejects the demand and flees. US Forces give chase and demand Canada take Seattle. This would spark the battle known as the No Refunds War.
thanks, Overly Conservative Guy.
Can they exchange it for Detroit, at leeast?
No take back war lool
Seattle is home of Boeing, Amazon, Microsoft, Expedia, Nintendo, tmobile, Starbucks, and lots more. it is home to the Cascade mountain ranges, numerous lakes, the most educated people in the country, seven military bases, one of the nation's top universities in the U.W., one of the west coast's biggest maritime ports and airports and the highest minimum wage in the country -- but yeah, the U.S. can't wait to get rid of it.
@@maybealexa5216 ...what?
I could see US and German propaganda, something like "Eagles stick together" or something Eagle related
Or make an alternate "Band of Brothers" series where Germans of US origin helping the fatherland.
Germany would just be using America. Just like they were using Russia. Just like they used Italy. Just like they used Austria. At the end of the day only one would world power would be left standing. And it would be the one willing to use nuclear weapons.
I think USA and Nazis became allies during the Cold War when CIA recruited ex SS/Gestapo officers to counter USSRs KGB. NASA also recruited Nazi rocket scientists.
@@scooterbob4432 Damn, I keep forgetting key aspects of American cultural and historical links to fascist ideologies, silly me.
Birds of the same feather stuck together? 😁
Imagine the US propaganda against Britain.
"We fought them once, we'll fight them again!"
Edit: I get that the US fought Britain multiple times. I'm just too lazy to fix it.
More like
"Our founding fathers fought them for our freedom, now it's our duty to defend our freedom."
British propaganda “let’s burn Washington again”
Instead they were like, your queen is our grandmother we will fight for her
@@timexkills65 the Queen was 16 at that time.
Actually twice
Lmao Hitler really pulled an UNO reverse card on Stalin. "Here's the suitcase bomb, enjoy."
@OurLordandSaviorSigmar bro that part fr scared me it was so sudden
“america would just rebuild the navy” that’s a damn fine explanation of the industry the US had during WW2
It really is absolutely wild how the enormity of this conflict single handedly forged the US’ military and economic leadership position in the world for decades to come
Man you broke my stuff, here's five more
But our blue collar industry is nearly gone in today’s world, could we do it again once everyone uses up all the technological gizmos to fight our video game war?
@@SVT40AK47 the technological gizmos won't first fight the war, they shall make the tools to produce the war.
Sweden, being neutral and thus not bombed, did benefit from the same effect. We had a working industry, and we could continue to supply Europe with steel, now to build up society rather than create weapons, but for us, the effect was a large influx of money that funded the wellfare state.
The US not only managed to avoid being bombed, but they also had to built up their industry to support the war effort, and the manpower losses were, compared to all other nations involved in the war (perhaps with the exception of Australia and Canada that never had war on their mainlands), miniscule.
"Australia is far away" is the best way to describe Australia in any situation
and with Japan they really assisted the USA.
@Brn stls Australia really helped the US? smh Australia would have folded under the Rising Sun quickly if not for the US
I think he forgot that when the war with Japan was going badly that the US based a lot of the pacific fleet out of Australia.
Ausralia was bombed a lot during WW by Japan.
Australia would be a Japanese providence if America didn't get involved.
I was about to watch a regular movie, but this is even better
hi marcatus
Hahaha yes it is in fact!
Yes it is
Some could make a movie or SOME out of this alternate reality LOL
What movie can you tell me pls maybe I can watch it?
"USA lost thousands of boats to torpedoes"
"The British also loses thousands of boats to torpedoes and dive bombers"
" *Germany loses 2 U-boats* "
germans are smarter
@@zvallidSeems you didn't get the "411" on the actual outcome of Germany's war of aggression
@@zvallidyou wehraboo
@@craigoliver8712 What war of aggression?
@@casual_loser6733bro he was making a joke chill
Don’t you just love how Switzerland is just neutral throughout this entire war, even though it’s been surrounded completely (360 degrees)
and how they stole all the jewish gold.
Switzerland throughout history: This is fine
they werent "neutral" they played both sides
You mean they funded both sides.
Its where the elites who both funded and profited from the war lived.
I really like how this is a collection of "separate" wars, and where "alliances" are a matter of convenience and pragmatic rather than ideological. It is very messy yet totally realistic :)
Alliances were never ideological in WW2, unless you call a democratic - communist alliance an ideological one, or a fascist - nazi and plain authoritarian alliance an ideological one.
@@elsauce4873 Good point -- the US and UK have absolutely noting in common, and in fact are pretty much ideologically opposites on everything. It is a miracle that their soldiers didn't turn on each other on the field the moment that they had the chance. I guess the only thing that trumped their hatred of each other was their common desire to prevent a German super-state on the continent. lol
@@ravenlord4 I was talking about the Soviet Union, but okay.
@@elsauce4873 No. You said "Alliances were never ideological in WW2". Note the word "never".
@@ravenlord4Throughout WW2 there were no alliances that were formed because of ideological goals or similarities between nations. Alliances, like the axis for example, only existed because nations shared the same enemies.
What if Germany adopted the gold standard and the free markets ?
The greatest fear of the bank and finance powers
@@zvallid what do you mean by that🤨🤨
The war would have never started then. It was a pure financial war, no matter what they tell you. The fact that Germany privatized their banks was a big blow to the powers
@@adobscurum5403 I meant that the greates fear of bank powers was the gold standard
@@zvallid not really, the dollar first got rid of the gold standard in 1971, the same year where the research against Covid started (look at Archive if you don’t believe me). If they had feared gold standard so much, they‘d get rid of it sooner.
Fun Fact; In a war, if a country has cracked their enemies' battlenet (i prefer to use this term because it's similar to the codes used in ww2, only more modern and secured) or has a spy in their ranks and uses the intel gained to counter EVERY enemy offense/defense tactics, they'll quickly catch on. Doing that sorta thing is more short term advantage, so being careful to only use the advantages when needed is vital for long term.
Unless the battle net is so ingrained into their tactics that it is hard to replace the battlenet or fix the leak. (ww2 examble being the enigma code being broken)
The Brits knew about the Zimmerman Telegraph months before they released the information and they had all information the Germany sent over to their embassy in the USA.
Ok
The German army backed by the massive manufacturing effort of the USA is frightening...
Yeah, that fact was thrilling.
I love that you were able to concoct a reasonable and believable scenario where warplan red is able to be enacted exactly as its designers feared. America attempting to trade with a nation that Britain is at war with and Britain attacking to ensure that their blockade is upheld.
America fuelled Germany even after joining in, and Ford and Chevy powered the war machine... (at least Chevy never sued and won at Nuremberg)
@@rahowherox1177 i mean coke was serving Fanta to SS officers but I’d hardly take that as evidence that america was Germany’s breadbasket
I was honestly disappointed at how quickly they depicted Canada's defeat. And how little of an impact they made.
@@libefiken1863 Canada just doesn't have the numbers to hold a border that size. Plus, it's a very easily traversed terrain.
@@rahowherox1177 literal brainwash
"The U.S navy's battleships were never tested in war, apart from their diving ability in pearl harbor"- had me do a double take when I first heard that
I know, right? Like wtf did he just say
Lol they were very much tested and found superior to the Japanese ships.
Savage
Battleships were obsolete by WW II.
Once the carrier was fully developed the battleship is proven to be pretty much just an artillery piece.
I like how in both timelines, Japan attacks America and it's allies go "what the hell were you thinking!?"
pearl harbour was the fatal error
pretty much remember quote we im affared we have just awk a sleeping beast... yep pretty sum itt you pissed us off and get the atom bomb spacking
@@zvallid yo Japan why are you going towards haiwaii
Japan: peace was never an option. I just want to FUCKING DIE.
@@zvallid as one japanese naval admiral stated "I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant"
American manufacturing and German engineering is a match made in heaven.
British Ingenuity rules the world.
@@newton18311 In the mid-to-late 20th and now 21st century, US Military ingenuity still reigns supreme.
@@memeityy Who designed your f35, who gave you the jet engine.
@@newton18311 Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney. Both are American.
@@memeityy No well i never, Britian Invented vertical take off, as in The harrier then had a lot of input into the F35
Rommel and Patton fighting on the same side? Jesus. That's frightening.
That is why Churchill threw in the towel. He wanted none of that.
Britain had Montgomery and the Soviets had Zhukov, as we all know Rommel's time was cut short
Plus Guderian and Von Runstedt.
@@littlst Guderian is better than Rommel
@@gwclive6530 Sure..
Switzerland throughout the war:
- If I don't move, nobody can see me.
Switzerland held everybody's money. So nobody robbed the bank.
Lol
switzerland: Ive mastered the ability of standing so incredibly still, that I've become invisible to the eye.
Thats how I got through 12 years in the Army.
But for real though the Swiss literally did go underground or into the mountains(bunkers) lol
One of the best alternate history channels
"one of" should be non existent in this comment
@@falco6414 The best
yup
Me to
better than commie alternatehistory hub
“We fought the right enemy.”
-this video’s George S. Patton
So damn based. If we went with Patton's plan and he wasn't assassinated, communism would have been erased from history. We would have cities on Mars at this point.
Correct,usa hadmore in common with the Nazis, race hatred,segregation,inter racial laws ,Kkk the Bund
My Grandpa fought in WW2 for the USA and our Ancestor’s, ironically we’re from Germany. My Grandpa crossed into the Rhine in 1945
When hearing Patten say "we found the wrong enemy" is when I had to relearn history. It's amazing what they tried to keep from us.
@@AlexanderTheGreat-q8p
propaganda hits different
In a parallel universe, Zvalid has made a video called: WW2 - What if USA joined the Allies instead of the Axis.
@@kieran8845 (that’s the joke)
@@kieran8845 in other universe
Mind blowing
@@kieran8845 Dude... C'mow mank !
WW2.3 - What if the USA Joined the Allies instead of the Axis instead of the Allies
The thing I love about this video, is as someone who knows a lot about WW2, I love being able to understand each battle in order, some dates are off, but with a twist of, the sides have changed. And the way you blend the events of fiction and fact, is absolutely amazing.
If you think this is even close to being possible, you clearly know nothing about WW2.
I just put the discrepancies down to the butterfly effect.
disagree...it was pathetic amateur hour
@@Sun-Tzu- I never said anything about being possible, I said I could understand the events in the order they're in, and it was a great mix of fact and fiction.
@@jamesw71 would you like to submit an hour-long rebuttal to this? I would enjoy watching it and giving appropriate feedback
US: *Nukes two Russian Cities*
Stalin: Ah fuck it. Use the gas!
LMAO
japan should've used the gas too because they nuked them
stalin: "hold my tsar bomba.."
@@robierahg17 *redditor corrects simpleton on soviet history
@@robierahg17 tsar Bomba gas bomb, a 50 Megaton gas bomb instead
the idea of a sherman with a tigers 88mm gun is wicked to me that tank would be a monster
I've doubts about that combination. Not in the possibility but in the video depiction. The Sherman turret as manufactured would have been too small and would require a redesign. As well as would the Sherman's suspension and drive train. Such a vehicle wouldn't have just looked like a Sherman with the larger gun. We're speculating a heavy tank gun into a medium tank turret and chassis. If just throwing that gun into a medium tank and it magically just work had been feasible, the Germans would have loaded it into the panzer four as standard. It would be interesting to see a mock up of the Sherman with the necessary modifications to make it possible to carry and use the 88 tho.
@@knackerEv with Germany famous engineering and USA resources+manufacturing will made war machine that can be mass produced in instant.
or imagine a Tiger II with the 50mm cannon 💪
if we waste all the oil, nobody can wage war against us.
@@knackerEv Yeah. Perhaps a Pershing would be a more fitting tank to give the 88mm, considering they had an 90mm cannon attachee
@@lidianane536that or see if the firefly treatment will work
GUYS THE KING IS BACK HES BAAAAACK
he been back bucko
This isn't a new video on a new scenario btw. This is just all the videos in the "USA joins Axis" series mashed together into utter epicness.
pog
I wish this history had been ours... yeah this is going to get erased. Still...
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
"The US Navy's battleships were never tested in war, except for their diving ability in Pearl Harbor" this made me laugh too hard xd
In the Philippines they were in action and did quite well
Actually the US Navy battleships in Pearl Harbor were a bunch of obsolete tubs from the WW1 era. Roosevelt had them planted in Pearl Harbor ro provoke Japan.
All the valuable US warships, such as the aircraft carriers, were sent to sea a few days before the attack.
@@whitewolf1298 Japans fault they didn’t attack the other resources stations near Pearl that would have caused the ships at Pearl to take years to be repaired if it was destroyed
@@jayjyuri8796
The question we should be asking is: Why did Japan attack in the first place? There were so many indications the US knew the attack was coming that the strike force should have turned back two days after it sailed. Pearl Harbor was crawling with Japanese spies and minisubs. They knew all the modern US warships had sailed. All that was sitting in the harbor were a bunch of obsolete battleships, a few old destroyers, some oil tankers, some repair ships, and supply craft.
Japan would have been much better of attacking Russia, which in Dec 1941 was reeling from the onslaught of the German army. They could have seized the trans-Siberian railroad, exactly as they had done in 1905, and gotten all the oil they needed from the German-controlled Caucasus region of Russia.
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, from both a strategic and tactical perspective, was absolutely, galactically stupid.
@@whitewolf1298 the khalkhin gol was a major psycological blow for japan that they didnt think to attack soviet uniom for entire time
Japan: "Oh look, why is that Bomber only droping one bomb?"
USA: "Here come's the Sun"
USA: say hello to Amaratsu
England sink an american ship: "Sorry, mate, it was an accident."
England sink a second american ship: "Bloody hell, I swear I didn't see it was you." *sips tea*
As an American, who has been in the military I can totally see that happening. Not only that but probably working. lol
Too bad the US was making ships so fast that the Navy probably wouldn't have noticed.
Sounds like a plot in a Tom Clancy book. 🤔
🤣 lmfao
Nowadays it's more like,
US Navy crashes into a supertanker in one of the busiest shipping lanes of the Pacific. Tactical Info Officer: "I thought you were watching the traffic." Officer of the Deck: "I thought *you* were watching it."
USN amphib ship catches fire in drydock. Chief: "Who was standing fire watch?" Sailor: "the shipyard guy said the contractor does their own watch." Contractor: "That's not my job."
"The US battleship were never tested during the war, except thier diving ability"
Never fails to make me laugh
The sudden and abrupt transition from a talking Stalin to an explosion is hilarious and I didnt expect such a violent change in a second
Surigao Strait and Guadalcanal would like to have a word with you
@UCyh_iA5fqq0WHsAW7xe2axg DDs has 105s, cruisers 203s and battleships the big 16 inchers yeeting those 2,000 pound rounds
After Pearl Harbor, how many U.S. battleships were lost in combat?
Zero, right?
The US fleet was obsolete already on December 7th. In a brutal sense, the Japanese did the US a favor by putting them in a position where they had to update to the latest and greatest instead of having to try get the isolationist Congress to approve funding. The battleships were already historical relics.
The USA puts so much money into evolving their military they're a game changer for whoever's side they're on.
Edit: I meant nowadays.
Also I have not checked this comment in a while, I appreciate your appreciation :)
Bettewn the industry and the absurd amout of money they spend in their military i will say that having the U.S.A as an allie is almost the same as cheating a bit to much
Its a shame and a act against humanity that the world will not adopt the military stamina heart and soul of the fighting men of the usa Britain Australia Norway Sweden Holland Canada and so many other free nations of the world in uniting as one and getting the rest to join with us in a world of peace where all people are equal, yes we are far from perfect, but I truly believe this is the only way we will ever end war and senceless killing of free working and proud people of the world, there is enough problems with violent criminals destroying the world lets finally agree 👍 that sencelessly killing people in governments wars is a waste of everyone's time it never lasts long evil is always eventually defeated unfortunately evil rises again somewhere again,haven't we learned anything after 50.000 years that forcing people to follow evil direction never lasts,evil is eventually stamped out ,but at the cost of millions of lifes most all of the time why do idiots like hitler even try 🤔 😳 like his 1000 year Riech that lasted less than 10 to many human lives are lost in war genocide and evil thinking they can exterminate a race because of false beliefs and propaganda, I hope this isent our eventual demise of the human race because someone believes there gang is more important than another, like the first cavemen killing each other over a woman or a chunk of meat over a campfire, are we really that feeble minded 😉 I hope this isent our inherented fault from our ancestors that we can never get away from,haven't we evolved yet,will we ever learn from our past mistakes that the only thing important is family and water and food,nothing else really matters,but unfortunately it might be our greed to control and have it all in our control that could be our end,its in our control, to try for our grandchildren future to live a decent life on this beautiful planet as we have,will greed eventually be our biggest flaw and our environmental disaster that ends us all,I think we deserve to leave a better story for our history than that,lets hope
@@enternamehere4124 hE HaS aIMbOt aND ThE uSa rEpoRt hIM
Yep. The US supplied Russia with 18 million tons of supplies. The US supplied it’s own army in Europe with 22 million tons of supplies.
@@alexanderh.5814 yea, the russians were making T-34's with aluminum engines due to the sheer amount being imported from the US
"Hey Britian, you know how you invaded us?"
"...yeah?"
"We are going to take a quick swim."
"wait, what?"
Hitler: “I don’t expect much from the Americans”
America: Industry intensifies
Hitler: “Okay Ike, you’re in charge”
Lol
Hitler: I’m good at drawing and like dogs I can offer drawings of doggos as reparations, my scientists are greatest at holding beers and said beers remain cold
I think u meant Judan intensifies..... Google Judea Declares War on Germany and check the dates on those newspapers.... We were so lied to it hurts when u wake up
@poopshoes7579: Yeah but Germany had the smartest scientists at the time (till they all came here and helped us win the moon race). They were a decade more advanced than ours.
Ike to FDR: As far as France is concerned, they'll still hate us no matter which side we're on.
This is actually really insightful and polite, even kind to the enemies of our timeline. I love it. Thank you very much zvallid.
I like how its mentioned that the holocaust would just be covered up the same way the communist genocides were in our timeline. i was wondering how that would get squared with the theoretical western allies
All 8 million of them living in Germany and captured land. *BS
Covered up? Where? How? All you need to learn about communist atrocities is move yourself to a library and find a book about it. Nobody covered communist atrocities in the West, and in the commie block they admitted they've done it already in late 1950s.
@@SparrowNoblePoland Covered up in the west isn't entirely accurate. Communist genocides are more accurately simply not discussed like Nazi Germany, at least in American education and popular culture. This is because a great many educators and Hollywood types are decidedly hard left leaning. Even when they know and accept the horrible atrocities committed in the name of world communism/socialism they prefer NOT to mention it because it is counterproductive to achieving the goals of communism/socialism in western society.
The average high school student in American learns all about the Holocaust and the Nazis. They are also told repeatedly how evil their own nation was during western expansion. They are not told how those western tribes also exterminated each other for millennia before Europeans arrived, The Holomodor in the Soviet Union which slaughtered 3.5 million, Stalin's purges, Pol Pot's mass murders, Mao Zedong's mass murders, or any other atrocities which don't match the narrative being pushed.
Yes, you can FIND information on all of these IF YOU LOOK. Unless you look though they are conveniently left out of most general education.
I've lived in Finland and went to school there learned alot about WWII moved to America went to the schools here and was told something else and that what I was taught was wrong sooo yeah I believe country's teach differently and we'll i guess brainwash your ass.
@@kennethfharkin imperialism/colonialism is also not talked about. Why's that, are many Hollywood writers imperialist?
Also
Oooh they killed each other so it's perfectly fine we did it too!
You're not Repeatedly told anything. You just like to avoid the slightest mention.
This is the best alternate history video I’ve ever seen.
Time traveler: drops a glass cup*
The timeline:
Lol
nah it's more Time traveler: exhales*
The timeline:
Here's a question though, if you went back in time or forward in time, theory would suggest that your position in the universe wouldn't change so if that is the case, wouldn't you just time travel and be in space? 😂
@@darkprometheus Noted... Include space positioning calculation if I ever make a time travel movie.
@@enochchow4099 it's more complex than that. You could never time travel backwards unless your in a space ship cause not even making cosmic calculations would work. How would you move yourself both spatially and time wise cause that would mean you either have to move before you time travel, during your time travel which would be even more difficult cause you would have to actually move yourself cause you cant just Teleport somewhere else randomly, or do it after.
UK: "Why did you join the Axis Powers?"
US: "Why?"
*"It's because we have cool birds on our emblems."*
Edit: Damn people actually agree with me. Thanks.
"Look at you with a stupid unicorn on yours, UK. That's not even a real animal. I bet you little girls like tea parties and teddy bears, too - OH WAIT you DO!"
@@PatrickKniesler Thats true. In America its the complete opposite. It seems now the guys with unicorns and teddy bears and the girls SAYING they can do this and that and acting butch yet objecting to having to do the same levels
@@PatrickKniesler As an American that likes tea, I'm offended
"The Birdie Boys"
You know, us Eagles should stick together like 2 birds of a feather🇩🇪🇮🇹🇺🇲 (Or in this case 3)
I would say this alternate history would make a great movie, except there's way too many dumb people who would accept it as fact.
Great story on how political allegiances are always on a knife edge.
It would be a good movie. There will always be dumb people that take movies as truth. That shouldn't stop someone from making it.
Just the explanation of this alt history is an hour long, it would work better as a series rather than a film, maybe following the story of a British and Japanese soldier simultaneously until the meet up in the pacific or smt like that.
Yeah hahah I was like wait a minute this stuff didn't happen... Lol but then I cought after a few minutes and realized its just a story from someones mind... But, it's a Damn good story. The whole like actual war footage is what threw my ass dafak off lols
If you want alternate history that already in the cinema. Watch Man in the high castle.
Yea they made men in the high castle i think if it a seeious than people would watch it
I just had to pause this video, very well made BTW to say the idea of Patton working along side with Rommel just makes smile. Two of the greatest tank commanders working together, Oh shit you're screwed.
It's not-fiction, it's alternate history. I like it.
@Fishy Tree partly fictional but yes, it’s possible that this happened.
@Fishy Tree do you really not understand what they meant to say... Dummy
alternate history is literally fiction. It's impossible to know what could've happened
Its alien space bats really.
@@georgbergsten6050 I agree with you, we can speculate but we cant know what happens
Alright, that shot of Tojo's head photoshopped onto FDR's body at the Tehran conference made me laugh.
Wow, you guys did a heck of a job figuring out this alternate history. You all seemed to have researched a great deal of information and come up with a alternate viable scenario for WWII. Please continue with these alternate histories, these are the best ones I've seen on the UA-cam.
Good story? Yes, absolutely.
Viable? Do me a favour!
@@danieljones9937 If capitalists and communists could work together against the Nazis, so it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that it could've worked the other way, too. Remember that the full extent of Nazi crimes only came to light AFTER the war and were not part of the everyday propaganda.
Of course, 'viable' is a strong word - but I'm fully going for 'plausible'.
@@danieljones9937 If "Hilter" Would have just accept Austria, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia then Continue with the technical improvement and wait for Stalin to attack Poland... Stalin would have been the same common enemy as "Hilter" was in our timeline.
@@DGARedRaven It's true that the general public weren't informed of Nazi atrocities like Auschwitz but the Allied authorities sure as hell were.
I just don't find it plausible that the US would stick with such monsters.
@@Stux6-3 I think Stalin was opportunist rather than flat-out expansionist. I could be wrong there though.
I know Hitler /was/ expansionist, though. He rebuilt the German economy through transforming it into a war machine. Again, it's pretty implausible that he'd just stop, particularly with his attitude towards Poles.
This is the timeline that flashed through George Patton’s head right before the end
Some corrections are in order about Canada: if the USA would have joined the Axis, Canada would have severed its bond with the UK and join the USA as many leaders in Canada were in favor of what Germany was doing in Europe and thus would have joined the Axis too. So there would never have been an invasion of Canada as it would have willfully followed their much better neighbors than their "foreign UK masters" who never really cared about Canada and saw them as fodder over anything else.
Yeah that one boggles me the most why on earth Canada would ever want to fight war with its neighbor.
Canada wouldn't stand a chance , so they would definitely be Allied with the U.S
Canada was still a Dominion of the British empire and had been fighting the axis since 1939. They would probably have tried to negotiate into becoming a neutral power with some concessions to the US, but the situation is this video is plausible as well.
And where did you get the idea that Canada was in favour of Germany???
And where did you get the idea that Britain never cared about Canada ?.
Axis: drops two nukes on USSR
Stalin: Anyways,...
*I WANT ALL AVAILABLE COMRADES TO CONTINUE FIGHTING THROUGH THE NUCLEAR FALLOUT!!!*
*NOT ONE STEP BACK, COMRADES!!!*
-Comrade, the americans bombed Leningrad with a new weapon
+ A new weapon? How many?
- Just one explosion. 100.000 people, most of the railway infraestructure, and the icy roads are lost
+ Oh no... anyway _calls Zhukov for the daily report_
@@chrisca
*Zhukov:* Oh hey, Comrade Stalin. I'm betraying you so we can end the war peacefully.
*Stalin:* What?
*Zhukov:* What?
_Suitcase explodes and kills Stalin_
lol A totally Russian reaction. Seriously, gotta admire the Russian resolve.
@@TR33ZY_CRTM "Want a job done? You call the Army"
Well now Rommel & Patton can have that chess game in peace, also why is everybody giving the guy with half his face shot off from Finland 2km space?
Cause if he has you in his iron sights, you're dead lol. Perkele!!
Because that ‘Fin with half his face shot off’ would shoot the left nut off an 🦅 at 2k yards!
@@jacklarue7049 He could probably shoot a hair of either nut you chose
@@bloodyspartan300 ; It's getting Deep
Simo hayha
"WW2 - What is Russia never joined the Axis powers?"
"It is the year 1939, Hitler and Stalin are having a painting competition hosted in Poland..."
Uh, excuse me but "Axis" Power?
@@HandsomeT-z4l yes it was called that
@@LouisbertrandIvander-iw9mb I understood now, he mention about a pararrel world not real world where Russian is not formed yet and Soviet where never part of Axis
This video is underrated, considering how much time was spent on this and how realistic they were able to make it, I think it deserves at least 20 million views
Ya very good content!
I agree, unfortunately there are so many videos out there that people work so hard on and they get very few views. 😢
@@rxdntpto hard work does not equal quality sonny
@@dobknocks did I say it does? Did I say every single video that has had a lot of effort put into it deserves views? No. I said there are a lot that do deserve views, sonny.
@@rxdntpto my point stands, even with your edit. now go to sleep. just stop it. get some help.
I liked how this mentioned the atrocities committed and how we never mention the ones commuted by the Soviets, it's a "Wake up to reality" moment.
You maybe not. But it makes sense, since Soviets committed atrocities mainly towards their own people, or on Germans as a revenge for the war. From the West's perspective it doesn't matter.
In Poland we were attacked both by Germany and Soviets, and both committed atrocities on us, yet math shows that Germans killed us 4 to 6 millions just between 1939 and 1945, while soviets only 300-350 thousand from 1939 to 1953. For anyone outside Soviet Union, Soviet Union was effectively a lesser evil.
What do you mean we never mention the atrocities committed by the Soviets? Everyone knows about them. Are you one of the people still being told to worry about a Commie takeover?
@@ostrich67 By everyone you surely mean everyone who knows about the holocaust right? It's not a 1:1 ratio on it, and no I'm not worried, that has nothing to do with what I said
@@dela_v8227 What are you implying then?
@@SparrowNoblePoland have you seen Man in the High Castle(Amazon Prime series)?it's a Japan&Germany win situation, and Germany was teaching students The murder of the natives in the Americas in schools
~17:18 "American battleships were never tested in war, except for their diving ability at Pearl Harbor." Why is this funny
Cold-blooded lol
The whole not tested part is BS
And then the Iowa class shows up and becomes the ultimate xenith of all battleships remaining in service until the 90s
Well because it is
I suppose in the timeline the US did not have the experience from the war in Pacific
1:25 why do i feel like Germany and The USSR are gonna start a rap battle
😂
Putting a '88 on a Sherman would have been awesome. It would be the equivalent of putting a big block V8 in a old Ford Ranger, but still love the idea. Closest we got was the Firefly
I'm saying this based of Videogame knowledge but when i played world of tanks the firefly was the only enjoyable m4 variant I played its no 88 but putting the large 17 pounder on a sherman still seems like an epic idea
Trust me, the 76mm Sherman was miles better than the Firefly
In the 50s France was given a bunch of M4s which they allowed different design companies to mess around with. On one of the prototypes they installed a 105mm gun, unfortunately, they never built any beyond the prototype stage. I think they put a version of it in World of Tanks or War Thunder.
It likely would've been a Kwk 42 75mm gun, not an 88, the Kwk 42 was the rough equilivent of the 17 pounder for germany and it would've had a similar result.
76mm sherman would be better than 88 sherman
“The nuke kills 300,000 people”
Stalin is not particularly scared of this weapon
“ *those are rookie numbers, you gotta bump up them numbers* ”
Graystillplays reference
"I killed more people in Siberia last week, is this new weapon supposed to frighten me?"
One could say it was just a statistic.
plus Stalin knew about the nukes before they were used he had a spy in the Manhattan project there were some scientist who fluted with communism and didnt want the US to be the only ones with nukes as they might us them to eliminate communism
@@sqike001ton the scenario might not have been exactly the same tho, with Nazi scientists, and the USSR being an enemy, we don't know if those agents would've gotten that close to the Manhattan project.
Plot twist: This guy is reporting his history and is not form this timeline
Plot twist: this is all real but someone remembered it wrong
@@wilsoniothegreat6162 x files...
The Man In The High Castle but reversed
Stranger things happen
What does he reported wrong that wasn't form you called timeline or youre timeline? 🤣 answer it or the plot twist change to " You're idiot!"🤣
Stalin suddenly exploding caught me way more off guard than it should of have.
It was a jumpscare lol
Wow, a full video of USA joined the Axis!
I like it! Thank you for the update! XD :) :D
Please do an extend to this one about the Cold War in this timeline
it will be the next video
@@zvallid can you do a video of what if the Japanese joined the central powers? It's possible because they could of gotten the European colonies
Since after getting german colonies (wich were very little ) they didn't do much maybe the could of invaded India and Australia wich is better than some small islands
@@bluyt3806 good idea! And,no only Japan.
What,if Italy,Japan,Romenian and Tailand war for Germany in WW1 like WW2.
@Luca Denegri 1)this scenario can be only if Russia and Germany-Ally.
2)too.
3)Khrushev will be win. 60-s for USSR was very good time: no post-war devastion and no crisis 70s-80s. China-enemy,but if it join in war,India help for Soviet.
In Africa Soviet have more anti-colonoies ally,N. Korea fot now stronger S. Korea. Soviet have slow rise economic,but in 60-s economic mo biger, than western.
4)China will be fall. He is frech rebellious "colonies" USSR. USA will be halp,but no more- it's no cheap.
Also could you tell imagine a German Wehrmacht whose supply chain was fully motorized by US supplied trucks and support vehicles instead of the horses, carts and mules they used?
The Logistics and Supply lines problem would be solved
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j Oh yeah I agree you would end up with American manufacturing companies producing German designed vehicles.
US aid going to the Axis rather than the allies is a terrifying thing to think about. Barbarossa in this timeline would be a lot more one-sided, cant imagine Soviet defense without so much lend-lease aid
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j I'm not denying that they did. I'm just saying their supply chain was never fully motorized like the allies. There are many recorded instances of Wehrmacht supplies being delivered by non motorized methods. This undoubtedly impacted operations.
@@donpietruk1517 Well written
Damn 💀💀 Japan can’t skip the canon event
☠
HERE COMES THE SUN
Imagine being a Soviet soldier in Leningrad and suddenly the ground rumbles..it isn't a tank assault...it is from above as dozens of B-17s, with massive payloads of bombs compared to German bombers rumbling over the city for the first time. God I cannot imagine how scary a scenario that would be for someone on the ground.
Nazis and Americans best friends
You’d be in Leningrad with all your machines stuck and broken down, sitting with your gun that only had 12 bullets, because the US never got to the point to triple your country’s supply capabilities with their freight cars and trucks.
@Comrade Heavy youtube is having a moment
I did some research of both countries largest bomber planes and their both basically the same b17s span is 104 while Germany heinkel is 103 plus their both 74 and 72 inch by length
🤓*
Eisenhower and Rommel working together?
I AM WEAK
OH YES
YAS
Start Rommel from the Baltic... and Patton from the Aleutians... yell GO! and see how long it takes for them to meet.
Rommel, Eisenhower, and Patton.
@Alenas Kvasninas this was a different time. During ww1 and 2 when Americans entered there had a Vendetta. The only reason we left Vietnam and now the Afghanistan war is because of the leftists and idiotic Viewon the world.
@@tnt_ak8625 No, it’s because staying would have been a costly affair and lead to nothing. In Vietnam we couldn’t push north for fear of Chinese nuclear payback, and in Afghanistan our troops were slowly being picked off. The Taliban is not a conventional military, but an idea, and an idea cannot be stopped no matter how much of any military force you throw at it. Things would have been different if the CIA was involved to assassinate and demoralize key parts of the Taliban, but we’ve stayed there 20 years and only empowered them more and more as time went on. Even Biden leaving idiotic amounts of weaponry behind made little impact compared to the mere US presence in the country.
I watched all three episodes more than once, but I just need to watch the whole ideo
same
@@crazmapping first time here
You gotta be autta your mind !
I’m a little late to the discussion but if I recall correctly Germany was also working on strategic bombers too IRL that had to be cancelled because of the higher need for fighters and interceptors due to being bombed by the US, UK, and Russia. I’m guessing they would’ve continued the strategic bomber development if they didn’t have to deal with that.
Noone can say for sure what would have happened IF and WHEN, but in the end you are correct. There were plans for a so called "Amerikabomber" (able to reach America) early on, but a change in strategic planning happened and long range strategic bombing was considered much less cost efficient than to destroy the enemies army with smaller (cheaper) tactical bombers who could in theory act as budget strategic bombers (although with less range and payload) when needed, only when the enemy brought up their air power the Germans only could react and had to put everything into fighter production and couldn't regain initiative, being damned to fight an enemy in a material battle they only could lose (against the USA at least).
1935/36: Heinkel He 116 in an optimized version could have done the distance from Europe to USA but with little payload and being awfully slow;
1942: Messerschmitt Me 264 would have been the german answer to B-17's. Lack of ressources halted production, only three were made but considered worthy;
1944: Focke-Wulf Ta 400 (prototype was tested extensively and considered for production when ressources would be available. That was in 1944, lol)
1945: Horten H XVIII, THE UFO'S ARE INCOMING!!!
Also, would the Soviets have the resources for a proper counter-attack as at that point the lend-lease would have been over for months?
No need to even on this timeline, USA was already providing bombers in the european theather. They prolly divert their efforts on the more massive tank projects instead with the crazy amount of resources coming from the west.
Looking back at this again, it's hard to imagine any real tension in the axis powers following the war. With the allies it was easy because of the huge distance between the Soviets and the west, it was more of an alliance of mutual convenience. But in this, America and Germany straight up shared blood together for multiple years in multiple theaters, the high commands and governments spent years in rooms together planning campaigns, battles, trade deals, they were building each other's stuff, etc. It would be like the British and Americans not liking each other after the war in real life. Just doesn't compute for me
could not agree more in this hypothetical
Except that both the Germans and Americans would be superpowers on their own and thus conflict would be inevitable. Even the British and Americans in our own timeline clashed over the Suez despite the British being a declining power as well as being a "similar country" to the US, not to mention how rebellious France was despite fighting alongside the Americans and British as well, albeit on a much smaller scale.
A militaristic, totalitarian Germany ruling most of Europe as well as parts of Africa and Asia would definitely have conflicting interests with the US and would definitely fight the US to preserve/have those interests, this is WWII Germany after all.
@@MorokLeviathan its different in this alt timeline though. soviets could betray the west because they have the manpower, nukes and influence.
germany pretty much got carried by their north american ally USA and hitler betraying them would be tantamount to suicide
the most reasonable way that it could've happened is if the public really heard a lot about the holocaust. that would've turned public opinion enough that, in a democracy like the US, there would've been no choice but to go to (cold) war.
u assuming nazis would view americans as equal. where they have viled blacks not aryan race.
The US Navy versus the Royal Navy would have been so epic.
Carrier air power would have decided it decisively in the American's favor
Her Majesty's Royal Navy is formidable but they would not have fared well against the US for one reason alone. Sheer production ability. The US had an absurd amount of aircraft carriers by the end of WW2. Plus the US is on another continent which makes hitting their shipyards and factories way more difficult. The Royal Navy only mopped up the Kriegsmarine because they outnumbered them severely. That would not have been the case against the US. It would probably be somewhat even for the first few years, but the US would easily win the long war of attrition.
@@CrimsonUltrafox not to mention with all their superiority on almost everything, from intelligence to numbers, the u boats still managed to be a major pain in the ass until 43-44 when they simply couldnt/wouldnt produce more.
the us navy is the equivalent to the red army, simply being able to trade casualties at a rate so overwhelming for the enemy that you just cannot defeat them singlehandedly
The way it should've been.
Maybe at the beginning but the US was pumping out so many ships by 1943 they would have overwhelmed them.
You can see that the USA is a real powerhouse, able to rebuild an entire part of their army, so switching sides is the real turning point, this was an interesting and amazing video
It's not about the USA if the Soviets join the Axis. Axis was the winner.
@@julesemma7249 Well if you've seen the video about what if the soviet union joined the axis, you'll see that it has become a stalemate because of the axis their lack of naval power and the allies their lack of land forces
@@Shadow_KnightDPM It would also be a dead end if Joseph Stalin was not killed. And in the clip where Soviets join the Axis, it shows that the Core is more powerful and weaponized than the Allies. even if they didn't win and if you take the US Fight the Nazis alone. The United States will lose. It's not really about the United States.
@@julesemma7249 if soviet joined allies would of won
@@ockyway8086 Stalin himself said that without American lend lease, Germany would have won
Thank you for all the time and effort you put into this. Was very well done and thought provoking
The battle of bermuda was such a thrill, even tought that is a report, is like watching a roulette, hoping for the best.
This is an intriguing scenario, bravo! Its like a HOI4 game taken off the historical setting.
So the first big point of divergence here - Japan declaring war on the axis in 1940, is plausible enough. They were Britain's ally in WW1 after all. Its hard to see exactly what the Japanese would gain here (the Italian concession at Tianjin is hardly a prize). The British might permit them to occupy Vichy French Indochina and guarantee access to the oil supplies in the Dutch East Indies in return for their help against the Axis in the Atlantic and North Africa, though I doubt they'd have been happy about it.
The next part - where the Japanese still carry out Pearl Harbor, is where I feel this scenario runs off the deep end a bit. In reality the British would be horrified by such an act. Faced with a choice between Japan and the USA as an ally, Churchill would never have chosen the former, even at the risk of Britain immediately losing its far east colonies. He would at least have renounce their alliance, quickly order the Japanese fleet and army units to depart, or outright have attacked them to help the USA.
Events might have been a bit more plausible if there was a more gradual escalation to war, or outright American aggression. For instance, maybe Macarthur or some other trigger-happy American commander decides to provoke an incident around the Philippines, 'accidentally' bombing a Japanese ship like the Panay incident of 1937 but in reverse. The Japanese respond by mining Manilla Harbor and things escalate from there.
A war between Britain and America in 1941 still seems very unlikely, but I like how you've explored the idea.
Yeah I agree with@homeworld22. In the video, while both Britain and America were at peace although on opposite sides with Japan, why would the US sink the British Ships? Even if they were carrying supplies for Japanese use. They would have just instructed them to turnaround as the British did to the American convoy near Sweden (in the video). A little bit of a stretch to go from lend-lease (the British were lobbying the Americans very hard to be more involved in both timelines) to War with one another.
Although overall I did enjoy the video and realise you had to come up with something why the Americans would join the Axis side. The likely truth is America would have stayed neutral rather than enter a conflict with Germany against Britain. That in itself may have been enough to alter the outcome of the war.
I agree, but he still did a good scenario on the japanese not only threatening to take all of the colonies but also cripple india and it's surroundings making them lose a lot, not just the small colonies in the far east (edit) and without it's allies, defending Africa would've been a nigh impossible challenge since at that point the USA were neutral and a lot of Americans were actually pro-nazi so it's not super far fetched
I agree. Let's say the Americans would have sunk those ships, it would most likely have been due to misidentification or stray shot, not intentional aggression. Even then, Churchill would not have wanted to declare war on the United States. That sort of move would not only remove any meaningful manufacture of weapons, ammo and equipment, it also would have opened a second front. I'm not sure what a more reasonable explanation would have been for this, but it is interesting to think about.
Also, while the supply of oil from Britain would not have been able to replace the American means, it would have, at least, allowed some time for the Japanese to determine a more reliable source of oil, maybe even attacking the Soviet oil fields Germany had later on in the war. (I am only at 13:00 when writing this comment)
" Japan declaring war on the axis in 1940, is plausible enough. They were Britain's ally in WW1" So was Italy.
@@yisus4681 “A LOT of Americans were pro- Nazi? Where did you get this nonsense? There was a loud group of supporters but not numerically significant
"Hmmm. Sounds like the war isn't going so well." "For who?" "Everyone..."
America would like to disagree still :D
@@vicemontey4297 what?
@@SteventheOrigin America still won the war and was the deciding factor of it. So yeah America would like to disagree still :D
@@vicemontey4297 who used nucelar weapons to win? Hmmm i do belive that was america cus they couldnt stop japan
@@sandroblechinger4737 What? I am pretty sure everybody agrees that using the nuclear weapons was a bad idea and unnecessary to close out the pacific theater. If anything we should have withheld the nuclear weapon and used it on a different war as to not lose the element of surprise. SO what if it would cost 1 million more American lives we could have unified north and south Korea or forced the USSR and CCP to submit to us later on had we not nuked Japan during WWII. This is stupid to claim that the US was having troubles closing out Japan. It was only a matter of time that Japan would surrender nukes or no.
EDIT: Japan lost all hope when they failed at midway and lost at coral sea. It was over they would only make last stand attempts to the bitter end. Even then Imperial Army and Navy realized it was over. You're telling me Japan was a threat when they couldn't even field a sizable air and naval presence by 1945? You're insane. How do you think Imperial Japan would win against an all in America without a navy or air force?
The video: “a lack of experienced officers, and very few saw combat of any kind”
Douglas McArthur: allow me to introduce myself-
This is literally a Hoi4 alternate timeline XD
That is
@@AxeltheKing1000 Nekopara?
57:50, thank you, someone actually acknowledges the atrocities of Stalin.
"To the victor goes the history books," unfortunately.
Always happy to see Stalin called out for his shit. Never forget.
@@rhylin26 I hate how everybody blames Germany for the holocaust but nobody talks about the other atrocities made by the allies like the famine of India by the UK, all the sh*t than the URSS made in Europe, how USA drop two of the most letal weapons in the history and other things
@@mastersamp9192 I mean Germany is to blame for the Holocaust
And that wasn't even the half of it.
@Mason Murchison When did the US give Germany weapons, protection, vehicles and other stuff during WW2? Or are you talking about West Germany after the war?
It's rare when UA-cam recommends something good and interesting. Great alternative history really well made and great realistic outcomes following events.
US veteran here, and that line: "The US Navy Battleships had never been tested in combat except for their diving ability at Pearl Harbor," had me dying! 🤣🤣
foul
I love this absolutely, but my only real critique besides the lend lease importance to Soviet Supply is the Sino-Japanese Front. ROC China was heavily factionistic and Chiang Chi-shek wouldn’t have attempted to surrender his national army, without an internalized threat. The Communists and Nationalists at this period would’ve most likely became more aggressive, due to the threats all around them. The Potential Guerrilla Warfare, even if a surrender is given to Britain(which I will say is the most realistic), would be almost impossible for the IJA, as in the war as a total, 2/3’s of the IJA were bogged down in stalemate with China. I’m highly skeptical that the Kuomintang, Warlords, and Communists would just have lessened capability to fight the Japanese, as mostly the Chinese United Front was practically already a Guerrilla War. The Soviet invasion of Xinjiang/Sinkiang is really the deciding factor here, as Communist Chinese feeling betrayed could be a more loyal and aligned to their Chinese brothers in arms, which could end up paving a more dangerous ROC. I just feel there are huge amounts of variables to assume China just throws down arms and to negate their actions effects on Japanese War Effort.
I thought of the same, but then again, it is essentially fiction, so suspension of disbelief came in midway through the video.
@@bonkbonk420 Try asking the real world powers.
The *_World Bankers_* and their soldiers, the *_Freemasons._*
Purse strings control the world governments.
@@canadiankewldude I HATE THE ANTI-CHRIST, I HATE THE ANTI-CHRIST
What is your critique of lend\lease importance to Soviet supply?
with britain being on the opposing side,I'm not sure that china could've held out as long as it did being surrounded on all sides,american help would've been all but impossible to send, especially with the loss of the philippines.
I would believe Detroit would have been one of the first US cities attacked due to the industrial presence, including auto factories changed over to bomber and tank production. Plus you add in Henry Ford’s alleged sympathy towards Nazi Germany. Conversely, the US would have likely taken Windsor which is separated by Detroit by the mile wide river, and Windsor is the gateway to Toronto, which would also have been pinched by an assault from Buffalo. That would have knocked out a huge portion of Canada’s power production.
You
I drive by the old tank plant everyday on my way to buy drugs
you're black shut up
@@complimentbot7015 your white you belong in the mountains!
@@nicholas.e5158 no I'm not. You're* btw
I like your story, although some bits are a bit of a stretch, such as America going to war with Britain, but is not really that big of a deal. However the one big problem I have with it is the end result. Despite essentially being the masters of the world, alongside the United States, Italy and Germany take relatively little in the way of territory. It makes sense in our timeline, with the democratic countries condemning war for conquest in Europe, but for fascist Italy and Germany that would be no problem, Mussolini even proclaimed that he wanted to reestablish the Roman empire. Additionally Hitler despised the Soviets, yet in this he basically ends war with them with only relatively minor concessions.
Adolf would have taken ALL of European Russia right up to the Urals, and probably demanded Iran and Saudi Arabia. He would have been swimming in oil.
I think Germans would take atleast all the land on the west side of Urals
And Italians would take all of north african colonies
Well, in both timelines, the Soviets were pushing the Germans back slowly but surely. Plus, the only reason the USA joined the Axis in this video was bascause of Japan's alliance with Britain and the Soviets. Japan and America were going to war with each other anyway, and that would have inevitably led to war with Japan's allies, whether it be Germany/Italy or Britain/USSR
I think you greatly underestimate the factor of continental hegemony. It'd be a totally new dimension.
@@anglozoomer there was that treaty with Poland that lead to war too.
The thing is, the origins of "War Plan Orange" was part of a larger plan known as "Red-Orange", which was the US against a UK-Japan alliance in the Pacific. The two nations were closely allied, until the 1920s when Japanese expansion and tensions with the US caused the UK to pull out.
Maybe in this timeline the tiger and panther tanks would actually get good transmissions from the US EDIT: wow guys thanks for the likes! Also, i dont know much about the Sherman, but they seemed to fit the role of medium tank well enough to be a good tank. I’m more of a german tank enthusiast myself, and when you match the Sherman up against tigers, panthers, and king tigers yeah they fall a bit short in the armor/armament catagories, but thats because all of those were basically heavy tanks by the allies standards.
Our tanks weren't all that great...
@@mitchellsmith4690 *laughs in M4 Sherman, easily the best blitzkrieg tank of the entire war*
@@attackmaster519 Sherman with 88. Angled Tiger 1 Front armor and a actual practical use of a Tiger 2 and several other tanks. This truly has my mind on overdrive.
Transmission? The transmissions where fine, the panther had a weak final drive though.
@@attackmaster519 You need to study up on your history of armored vehicles...marginal gun until the Canadians put the 17 pounder on it, mediocre armor, high profile, nicknamed the Ronson...
A true well made "movie", alternate histories are pretty interesting even being scary sometimes, good work
Hello!
Stalin: Loses 300,000 citizens
Also Stalin: *Pours Vodka*
stalin do everything to keep his power even if he have to everyone
In our timeline, the soviets lost millions. 300k is a drop in the bucket. They lost over 600k soldiers in a single encirclement. But I still have trouble believing that the soviets would lose. They outnumbered the Germans 12 mil to 8 mil. And German tanks tended to be overcomplicated.
So the scenario presented with the US help allowing a stalemate until Stalin gets assassinated is plausible. But even then, I doubt Hitler would allow anything less than the creation of a full Lebensraum, which the US would utterly despise. Especially after the US sees the concentration camps.
@@ColinTherac117 Hitler going on east the main reason was not lebensraum but destroying bolshevism. The idea that germany should get more lebensraum existed even before hitler due to british naval blockade in ww1 which hurt the german people and created a food crisis. I doubt Usa is any morally superior to the third reich, when it provoked the axis powers always the war, they even had camps themselves for germans, italians and japanese. Throwing nuclear bombs, War agitating, eisenhowers deathcamps. Ofc I Soviets and The germans also had crimes. But I dont think Usa is in any moral position to judge.
@@ColinTherac117 What camps? ;)
That part got me dead 😂😂
"Japan is now within range of B-29 bombers" welp that's a wrap
The 29 was a disaster... there are parts of the globe that have multiple wind shifts at increments of altitude and the 29 was reduced to low level fire bombing most of the time because the bombing site was useless at anything but lower altitude... and took a lot of casualties...
@@charlesbukowski9836 "The 29 was a disaster.."
Except it wasn't.
Fire bombing is generally conducted at lower altitude. Fire bombing was used as it created more damage than concussive bombs.
The sites weren't so much "useless" as there was little experience bombing from the jet stream.
300 planes lost compared B17 losses was trivial.
Except if Japan was allied with Great Britain then the Japanese would have had access to their engine technology so the B-29 would have been in for a bit of a hard time. American aircraft carriers with their wooden decks would have still sunk whereas any British ones would had the bombs bouncing off them and stayed floating and fighting as the Japanese found out.
With Japan on the "other" side, Russia wouldn't have kept so many troops in Siberia which could have then been committed to their Western (Germany's Eastern) Front.
I legitimately snorted lmao
@@charlesbukowski9836 High altitude was disaster for sure. The US was unaware that the jet stream even existed. That being said, the low level fire bombing campaign was devastating. In the end it was a massive success. So successful , in fact, there were no targets left to bomb.
a very important thing I would like to add about the construction and testing of the nukes is that in ww2 the Germans had control of the largest production plant for rare heavy water. heavy water was used largely in the production of nuclear bombs back then so having them as an ally would have probably accelerated the process
Didnt it get blown up by Commandos? I remember reading a story about it happening in Norway.. Maybe there was more than 1..
Yeah, but not in this timeline. @@benn1s
WAIT A MINUTE!
That's the Battlefield V story!
They had by *far* the world's largest uranium enrichmemt plant as well. That's what Auschwitz was. It used more electricity than Berlin.
Then after the surrender and the U-Boat carrying secrets and material came to the U.S., our stockpile of enriched uranium magically multiplied overnight, far beyond what we had before. We also magically went from 5 years to a completed bomb to direct production which was finished in a couple months.
You documentate this thought up history timeline like it happened for real, it sounded so believavle and real
I love your videos, I speak Spanish and your subtitles help me a lot to understand English and I have fun with your stories, thank you very much and keep it up
"We fought the wrong enemy."
-General George S. Patton
Patton was wrong. The USSR was bad but Nazi Germany was evil.
@@Philitron128 Wow. If you actually believe Germany was worse then the USSR, then the brainwashing has really been effective.
Why don't you prove that Germany was worse then the Soviet Union, instead of repeating what you are told by society on a daily basis? It's so much easier to repeat things you have been told rather then do your own research on them and come to your own conclusion. Do that, and maybe then I will have at least an ounce of respect for you.
@@ronlacker326 Ok, how about starting WW2 with the express purpose of conquest and genocide. Maybe the Holocaust? Let's also look at the genocide of Slavs. Get fucked you Nazi sympathizer.
0_0
Don't worry white Americans are a minority now
I think instead of upgrading the shermans with the 88mm, the germans would probably just use the same gun as on the panther as it is lighter and could more easily fit into the sherman without major redesigns. Plus, I'm not even sure the 88mm would even fit in the sherman.
i think the turret must be modified
I think only the later war Shermans, like the M1A3E2 "Jumbo" tanks, could probably fit the German 88 on the turret, as many "Jumbo" tanks were upfitted when armored resistance was expected.
Most certainly the M26 Persing could have handled the German 88 as a main cannon, had the US joined the Axis.
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : V2 rockets wouldn't be used against Japan. Germany wouldn't fight Japan, only the US would.
That being said, I think that at some point, what would be of more interest would be the German jet fighters, like the Me-262 and the He-163. Those would be of interest to counter the Japanese Zero threat, and if fitted to bombers, jet engines would allow much faster bomber air speeds.
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : Depends on the experimental weaponry you're talking about.
I don't think the US would have seen any purpose in weapons like the rail-car artillery guns or the Mauser super-heavy tank.
The only weaponry I think the US may have wanted is the same rocketry tech we got in this timeline, as well as the "Leopard" tank the Germans were looking at building after the Tiger tanks, especially the Tiger II, proved problematic. Most people don't know that had Germany won, they would have built the first 70-ton MBT. (I don't consider the Tiger II an MBT, simply because it was never used offensively. It was literally a mobile pillbox.)
@@ChristopherAgreda-i2j : What most people don't know or remember is that the equivalent of the German MG-42 was not the Browning M2 .50 cal. HMG, but the M1919 Browning .30 cal. LMG.
Like the MG-42, the M1919 used by the US Army was a two-man operated, belt-fed LMG that was largely used when an infantry squad or platoon needed a heavy weapon. Most M2 HMGs were tank or vehicle-mounted, not carried by infantry. The M1919 Browning .30 cal. LMG was the World War II predecessor to the M60E1 used in Vietnam, the M60E4 used in Gulf War I, and the M240 SAW used in Afghanistan.
"The US navy's battleships were never tested for war except for their diving ability at Pearl Harbor" had me laughing
The entire US naval pacific theater of war: "Am I a joke to you?"
Dont worry, the ones that were diving were old, useless vessels, they took the good ones out before the attack, because they knew, what will happen. Its part of modern warfare.
@@willymueller3278 that and most of the ships were sunk in shallow water and were raised repaired and back in the fight fairly quickly. While technically a success for the Japanese navy, the major thing it accomplished was pissing off the USA
I would say "shots fired" but I'd be nearly 80 years too late.
@@jond7754 And the USA had a reason to go to war, they let it happen.
I enjoyed this very much. Really gets you thinking about things the way they were compared to what might have been. I think that if Germany and the United States were together as allies in WWII, the outcome would have been more lopsided than this video depicted. Militarily, the two countries complimented each other quite well.
No way the US would have worked with those mass-murderous. Get real.
@@michaeldietrich852 US blaming for mass murders? Lmao
@@michaeldietrich852 The whole point of this video is what if. Get an idea for once.
@@michaeldietrich852 like we didn't work with the russians?
@@michaeldietrich852 lol, what an ignoramus
This was honestly one of the best alternate history videos I have EVER seen, and I watch a LOT! It was so very realistic, and entirely plausible! Thank you so much for this video, and keep up the excellent work!
Except for leaving the Soviets largely intact, and going THAT easy on the Brits...
I love how this alternative history is told as if it has happened
I feel so sorry for you that you think this is possible never mind plausible...
The Nazi's will left wing National Socialist who also Allied with the Soviet Union at the beginning of World War II.
nice profile picture! 1. FCN 💪🏻❤️
Amazing one hour long video. Its like watching an alternate history movie.
I don't think most people realize how close this came to being a reality toward the end of the war when the US in particular realized the Russians were not going to stop at Berlin
Yep Patton wanted to just keep going and take the fight to the Soviets.
Churchill warned the Americans that this could happen but they chose to ignore him.
I think Roosevelt had a deep dislike and mistrust of the Nazis, he'd never go to war on their side. Fact is he used Pearl Harbour as an excuse to go to war against the Nazis.
@@thefurrybastard1964 Germany made that decision for Roosevelt as they declared war on the US, true he didn't like the Nazi's but he also never wanted to fight them and waste American lives, Roosevelt didn't like the Soviets either, he also hated Britain, Churchill especially calling him a bumbling drunk, and France more as he despised the old ruling Imperial European powers and blamed them for Europe's, and the world's, problems and believed they should fall to "Soviet barbarism and domination and hope that after a few decades of occupation they (the Soviets) become less barbarous". Yet he sided with Britain out of convenience, its more accurate to say he'd never go to war on any of their sides, Japan's attack at Pearl Harbor and Germany's declaration of war just made America a defacto ally, but more importantly the war America entered was their own war with their own goals and agenda, not necessarily in aid of the other nations, especially Britain's as Churchill's goal and original plan to get America to help (which failed) was to preserve the British Empire which Roosevelt wanted dismantled, and thanks to Japan's attack, Roosevelt got his wish because Britain needed an ally to survive but with America fighting their "own war" had to bend to America's terms. Whether you like him or not, Roosevelt had a brilliant mind and played the European powers as well as Congress, while simultaneously keeping American popular opinion which is what earned him his third term in the first place, to catapult America to the top. So as OP, and the video stated, this very well could have happened at the slightest historical change, with America potentially entering the cold war with the Nazi's and/or the Soviets at the wars end, even another war between the surviving European powers afterwards in the years or decades that followed, along with many other possibilities, the further you get from our timeline the harder it is to predict following scenarios.
@@Jeremiah71603 Nah Roosevelt prefered Britain, altough i dont think he would have declared unless pearl harbor or any other major event. He would never join Axis.
This is way better than any ww2 movie ive watched, can't wait for the Cold War episode!
Well you’re gonna have to wait Vietnam came before the cold war really picked up steam
"Shortly after Britain declares war on the US, Bernard Montgomery was overheard saying that he fears we have awakened a sleeping giant."
Lol
Yes and Montgomery was a Hero in our timeline definitely interesting he would never have been known as one. No Americans no d-day he would never be known for his victory in Normandy. Therefore he would be just another casualty of war.
@@tommyboy889 Monty made his name in North Africa defeating Rommel's depleted Afrika Korp.
@@adamelam6385 I didn't know that thanks for the info
Or at least we don`t have to worry about friendy fire
I didn't realize how bizarre this alternative reality was until the point where American B-17s were bombing British cities... So hard to fathom. But this is such an amazing what if video.
Incredibly underestimated alternative historian, this man has made several high quality scenarios but has been obscure. Always appreciate his videos.
This sounds like a game of Hearts of Iron IV read out loud.
with non-historical focus
@@snaymer1858 Why so?
@@ham4da Because the historical focus of the United States will never conclude an alliance with Germany, it's history.
@@snaymer1858 I mean they did ally with the soviets so it's not that hard to believe.
@@apex_blue no with historical ai focus the ai would focus mainly on what happened historically
Jumbo: Never thought I'd die fighting side by side with a Tiger
Tiger: What about side by side with a friend
Jumbo: Aye I could do that
🙂👍
Lmao American wehraboos be like
war thunder, fight with as jumbo with tigers
@@Shvetsario Found the Wehraboo
I'm crying rn
Very interesting alternate history. I do appreciate the effort that went in to it. This is the first video I have watched on this channel. I do hope it has only improved from here. Proofreading, proofreading, proofreading. Cheers and best of luck with all of your endeavors!