Play World of Tanks for FREE here: tanks.ly/3LStzky and earn exclusive rewards! Dive into alternative history by taking down enemy tanks in epic battles
As a non-American, I've see the Korean war mentioned often by characters or movies and tv series from that era, so I always assumed Americans at the time were as knowledgeable about Korea as they were Vietnam. Which is nothing besides war and offensive depictions.
@@lucinae8512The two aren't the same the Korean War is a different Generation of Americans. Command was also different. The US could've won Vietnam if command was more competent and if the media wasn't as involved as it was. War is complex, let's just be grateful the US has the allies that it has in Asia.
@@miguelzurita3216 I think Korea was also winnable if it wasn't for the Hubris of US command. Had they consolidated around mid-late October 1950 - rather than ignoring the fact that the Chinese might intervene, denying the fact that the Chinese had intervened, and acting like it would all be over by Christmas (yes, US command literally said this at the time) - I think the outcome would have been very different. They may not have been able to fully unite the peninsula - but it absolutely would have been considered a victory. The reason the Chinese were able to push the UN forces back as far as they did was largely because the UN forces overextended themselves.
@@ianroscablu that’s not true at all. The primary goal was of course full unification, but the general reason for intervening after the invasion in the first place was just to ensure the pro Western capitalist state would even exist by the end of the year. And on that front they absolutely succeeded while the North totally failed their aim to unify and destroy southern statehood
One of the nicest men I've ever met was under 5 years old during the Korean war. His large family was extremely wealthy in the northern part of Korea but when the war broke out, they had to leave everything behind and travel south. They barely made it to South Korea. He was a super nice man that my parents befriended at church and truly cared about me when I was dealing with suicidal thoughts and severe depression. My parents had a get together at the house one time and he came into my room and encouraged me to keep painting Funko Pops and Amiibo (one of the only hobbies I had enough motivation to do during that time). He was a great man. I only learned of his crazy childhood at his funeral last year. Insane to think how different his families life could've been had they not escaped. RIP Moo Yung
The south winning with nukes would arguably have more impact on the global stage then if the north won, since the nuclear taboo is being questioned, and there could potentially be many more nations thriving for a nuclear bomb seeing whatever happened, hoping not to be the third.
The south could defeat the north without nukes by simply getting rid if Singman Ree in the '40s. The US never liked Singman Ree because we always knew he was a lunatic. Before the War Singman Ree was committing massacres left and right. The US was actually more afraid of Ree then we were of the North. Because Ree was being a maniac the US did not let the South build up a significant army. They had no tanks, no air force, no rocket launchers. All they had were some rifles and land mines. When the North invaded the South was basically defenseless. Now in an alternate timeline if Ree wasn't put in charge or wasn't a lunatic the South would have been allowed to build up a proper army. A real army made of South Koreans would have stood a good chance of defeating the North. China only jumped into the war because America was involved. If the US stayed out of the War that means China doesn't get involved either. This opens the door for South Koreans to completely defeat the North on their own.
@@coygus Depending on how it happens, a western-aligned Korea but one that did so on its own without heavy US/International support means they could become the East-Asian equivalent of Finland or Sweden, aligned with the west but politically staying neutral (no US bases in Korea for example) so as not to spook the Chinese and to an extant, the Soviet Union. I think that's something the PRC could potentially accept and if Korea can maintain decent relations with both China and the USA via neutrality it opens up a radically unique foreign policy for Korea and can help turn Korea into the "middleman" between the US and China, sorta like Vietnam or Singapore IRL.
@@Novusod well Rhee are former president of provincial government and he was most pro American, that why US decided to support him but he are too chaotic and corrupt. Kim Gu are more better option but guy are hard to control
@@Novusodwell unfortunately for south because soviet only agree let north invaded south if china help them, mean china will still intervene but later US entrance more likely give better result because they are more prepared with china intervention but more likely stalemate ended in pyongyang and wonsan line
25:17 "In his youth, Park Chung Hee was a member of the Korean Workers Party." Another interesting fact; during Park Chung Hee's coup, North Korea actually cheered on his "military revolution" (because they thought he was _still_ one of their own). They were completely unaware that he had turned full _anti_-communist in the preceding years LOL
Well Park Chung Hee brother is communist and got executed by rhee government and Park himself nearly got execute but Paik Yu Sip save him. Park Chung Hee is famous example of former Manchukuo who successfully enter WPK but not really surprised he join southern branch who mostly running by Domestic faction who more open than northern branch who mostly running by guerilla, soviet, and yenan faction who mostly anti japanese.
Park strikes me as the brutally pragmatic sort of politician who will make whichever allies he needs to get ahead. I bet in the scenario where the north wins, he definitely wouldn't try to correct them on that and try to play it off like he had stayed a member this whole time. A fairly high-ranking RoK army who's (seemingly) been a KWP supporter this whole time, that's a valuable asset who might be able to find his way into the leadership and rise up the ranks quickly. It'd be kinda funny if he eventually ends up being the leader of Korea in both the north and south victory scenarios.
Korean War saved Chiang Kai-Shek - his regime was basically abandoned by the US after it lost the Chinese Civil War, but the Korean War made USA help it again.
Yeah Truman already kind of did do the scenario he described where he gets involved in Vietnam because of the loss in Korea. Not winning Korea is exactly what pushed him to help the Republic of China more.
Truman already planned to help him, korean war just pushed him more to help Chiang and don't mention Mao send troops who supposed to landing on taiwan to Korea instead
@@JarrodFrates yeah, you right. I think even without US intervention, Kmt can still hold Taiwan due to strait who bit far from mainland and their navy and airforce who are more superior than CCP like they even can't take smaller island near fujian from kmt.
I believe in the 2nd scenario where S. Korea 'wins', China would've negotiated a bufferzone in the mountainous region of N. Korea as compensation for their participation and to settle communist refugees that will inevitably flee Syngman Rhee's regime, which they'll probably annex in a couple years; this would lead to a significant Korean diaspora in China that may help modernize the country a bit quicker due to the N. Koreans having experience with heavy industry when China was still melting steel in people's backyards.
It would be hard for them to negotiate a buffer zone since Manchuria is already separated from Korea by a major river. At most they might get a DMZ on the banks of the river... God imagine fighting for a beachhead in that area in a potential ww3. The fortifications and complications of river crossings would make Normandy 1944 look like Normandy 1964. Also you know some idiot (probably commie) would try and order infantry to try and cross it in mass during the winter only to get sunk by artillery.
Adding on it would be really hard to make Koreans give up that mountain since that mountain is Mt. Baekdu which is culturally and mythologically extremely important to Koreans. Although there may not even be need for a buffer zone due to the mountains already basically being one and has been historically. Like how Switzerland is protected from Europe
There are already 2 million ethnic Koreans living in China many of whom have family in Northern Korea. They either fled Japanese rule or they moved to Qing China for better opportunities starting in the 1860s. You can see this when China had its famine in the late 1950s many Koreans crossed the border to seek help from their families in Northern Korea you can see this in reverse in the 1990s.
@@SiPakRubah There was a black bear trying to climb over a fence at an Air Force base in Duluth, Minnesota, during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The guards at first thought the bear was actually a team of Soviet commandoes trying to sabotage the base which held fighter jets which would've intercepted Soviet bombers carrying nuclear weapons over the Arctic Circle.
18:30 the north already had naval mines near incheon. A south Korean officer undercover as a North Korean soldier stole the map of the naval mines and sent them to the Americans which was crucial in the success of the incheon landings.
The Korean War movie "Incheon" is fascinating af. Here we have: McArthur being played by the british Laurence Olivier, a crutical and box-office reception so bad the film did not even get home release and the fact it was literaly financed by a cult. It absolutely deserves a documentary
Whenever I hear “Korea” and “cult” in the same conversation, I immediately think of the Moonies. Glad to know I wasn’t wrong here, tho I’m surprised they actually made a film. But considering how the founders literally grew up in North Korea right as the war broke out, I’m not surprised it made such a big impression on them.
Nope, chinese will still join because Stalin, Mao and Kim already make agreement he could advance to South if China assist North Korea in war because Soviet didn't want to involved much and stop at parallel is still risky because KPA will still to tried to advance south and RoK Army will still advance North because Sygman Rhee just like kim il sung, stubbornly tried to reunify whole peninsula under his government. Only allies could do is to make defense line in pyongyang and wonsan to prepare from chinese first assault instead going further and opposite for China is to not stop at seoul instead make further advance at south.
China from the start allready got involved not military in the begining but political and with aids to the north i suggest you to watch the good youtube chanel the Korean war made by the same people of World war two
The thing about McArthur’s advance is that it had US troops march directly into the PLA’s trap. If he hadn’t ignored Truman’s explicit orders and ordered that advance, the PLA likely would not have been able to so rapidly and successfully turn the tide. Also, McArthur was not fired for disobeying those orders or for demanding to use nukes. He was fired for refusing to issue new orders to respond to the PLA advance - he basically just stopped paying any attention to Korea, so Truman had to replace him.
@@mimorisenpai8540That ignores Chinese Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai's statement of October 3, 1950. He specifically said China would intervene if, and only if, US forces crossed the 38th Parallel. October 7th, US forces crossed the 38th Parallel, and Chinese forces responded on October 19th .
People tend to forget that around the time of the Korean War America was fighting a mini internal war of military doctrines within its own military: The Revolt of the Admirals. Around this time, the Navy and Marine Corps were facing huge budget cuts and were operating within the shadow of a mushroom cloud. Sure, they made massive victories during WWII that many were proud of, but none of that really mattered with the foundation of the Air Force and a new fleet of B-36 Peacemaker bombers. Many within the Army even argued that. Omar Bradley said “I predict that large scale amphibious operations will never occur again.” But with the Korean War, the short comings of a defense policy primarily focused on nuclear weapons was put on full display. Truman found that he couldn’t even enforce a naval blockade of the Korean Peninsula due to the massive budget cuts of the Navy. Nobody expected a conventional military invasion after WWII, but that’s exactly what happened. So the Navy was vindicated; they got their super carrier, and the Marines got to stick around. And all this ended right at the major strategic victory in Incheon. So imagine if the Revolt of the Admirals carried on for just a few days longer. Imagine if internal bickering between major military branches caused America to lose Korea. Even making the Revolt of the Admirals go on for longer would be enough to make it so that North Korea would win the Korean War.
Interesting, I'm just on my last stretch through Heinlein's Starship Troopers and he actually brings up numerous times how the Mobile Infantry is still 100% necessary to get the job done because the navy's big guns are incapable of securing a proper victory. I'm seeing some parallels here.
Soviets in 1950: "We're very upset, so we're going to boycott the UN Security Council! That'll show those western capitali-" US, UK, France, Republic of China: "Anyone object to sending a multinational force to kick the North Koreans out of the South? No? None at all? A single objection would derail swift intervention. No? Alright. Cowabunga it is."
Some of my favorite scenarios in history are when events happened because somebody wanted to make a principled stand and so they choose not to participate. What almost always happens is that the people they were standing against are now free to do what they want and it's always really funny because, like, what else did you think was going to happen?
@@bluebubbadog2080 The only problem is that then they'd have a Vietnam situation before Vietnam even happened. They enter a war and even with all its successes on the battlefield, without wide ranging diplomatic support, it means nothing.
3:15 slight correction here, it's true that South korea had prior forces who used to be part of the japanese army, but some of them actually came from resistance forces too (like the KLA, etc) which actually were allied with US and Britain during ww2.
I much prefer these new AHH videos that go straight into the interesting scenario. Unlike his older videos, where most of the video was spent explaining to Cody why this scenario is unrealistic, then just spending two minutes on the scenario (which we could guess anyway)
@@George-W-bush-21y Ye, I’m a staunch leftie, and while the narrative may be used for unsavory purposes (not sending aid to Ukraine for example), it is a genuine truth. In a late capitalist society, large corporations are the ones that are in charge of the nation, not the people or politicians. It is in the complex’s best interest that the US be a warmongering nation.
It was heavily noted at the time that most North Koreans in senior positions of any note also had a Japanese background, even if they defected, that institutional culture was deeply rooted in both the North and the South. Northern soldiers were known to not take prisoners, and that if you surrendered to the Chinese (who were keen to take prisoners so they could reeducate them) they would sometimes be forced to violently defend you from the Northerners. South Korean officers were known for brutality, against others and their own men, they saw the conscripts almost as not human, being barely trained civilians, allied soldiers learnt that if they complained about the South Koreans begging for food or dumpster diving their officers immediately call them over and shoot them. The hilarious thing is that both the North and South pretend this history doesn't exist, that they bravely resisted the Japanese and that the freedom fighters formed their countries (where as their countries were actually formed by the new colonial powers out of the old collaborators, and indeed in the South to begin with the American occupation government was reluctant to remove the Japanese themselves, as they were running a tight ship, were less corrupt and more of them understood English).
Wow, a weeaboo defending supposed japanese competence, ya love to see! Reminds me again who thought blowing up some of Americas ships would be a decisive blow that would.. Make America *not* declare war? And who's rivalry between amry and navy was so bad that they were literally fighting and sabotaging each other.
More specifically, the claim of japanese involvement is vastly overblown here. There were some that had connections(Maybe I'm not actually seeing anything credible, but maybe you've found stuff I haven't.) but 98% of it was actually russian and chinese training, as well as veterans from fighting Japan during ww2 and anti-Japanese sentiment was still massive in all of asia at the time.
"North Koreans in senior positions of any note also had a Japanese background" can you name these individuals? To my knowledge this isn't true at all. North Koreans of senior positions were either groomed by the USSR, guerilla fighters that fought alongside the Chinese, or long time political activists from the last days of the Joseon Dynasty. And to my knowledge anyone who had a Japanese background as in went to a Military school in either Manchukuo or Japan ended up a hardcore nationalist. The brutality you mention isn't even a mark of the Japanese. Honestly as racist as this sounds, it was just a mark of Asia at the time. The acceptance of surrendering to Chinese troops by Nationalist was because the Nationalist Army was defecting in the millions, not an exaggeration, after the first year of the Chinese Civil War. It would not have been practical to motivate your enemy into continue fighting you. If you look at how the Chinese Civil War was being conducted before the Japanese "united" them, you will find many examples of brutality. South Korea was established by mostly Japanese collaborators, but I'm really skeptical about the claim that Japanese collaborators had any role in North Korea as there was a massive purge that followed when the USSR took control. The communists went to every village and city, established Kangaroo courts where they picked out landowners, police chiefs, and any other community leaders, accused them of betraying the Korean people and then depending on how many protested they either spared or executed them on the spot. This led to a mass exodus where anyone afraid of being judged guilty by the Communist definition fled South and subsequently those who fled enacted retribution against Communist/Socialist sympathizers there.
@channeldud most independence nation of that time we're made up of collaborators. Most Western European countries politicians were made up of nazi collaborator. Most African and Asian countries were made up of European collaborator. The unfortunate truth is
The US navy is still superior to China, the USSR and the DPRK combined, so a scenario where Japan, Taiwan and Jeju are used as a bulwark against communist Asia is likely.
@@jdotozTrue. If that were the case, this government in exile would be far more dependent on American support than Taiwan was OTL. That is, of course, if the USA would bother supporting a small island like Jeju.
You forgot possibly the biggest change that would have resulted from NK winning: Mao's son wouldn't have died. He was killed by an American airstrike in 1950. And without a clear heir Deng was able to eventually succeed and set China on its current trajectory. Had Mao's son lived, it's quite likely you'd have had a bit of a Mao dynasty going on, not unlike the Kims. And he may not have turned China towards socialism with Chinese characteristics. (read:capitalism)
I doubt that mao would've been able to establish much of a dynasty without some larger internal conflict since the reformist groups in the government took power from him even during his lifetime. He was much more of a beloved figurehead that had a lot of sway with the people but not the political heads, as opposed to kim il sung who had a much tighter grip on the actual ruling part
...China is full blown communist, even if they use the boons capitalism against the west. The cultural revolution in China was worse than the USSR gulags and the Holocaust combined.
For the DPRK victory senario, Japan would be pressured to do a full-on remilitarization now that ROK can't act as a buffer. This would involve a re-establishment of the Japanese military through abolishing or heavily modifying article 9. Without a pacifist culture taking hold, deployment of troops in support of the US wouldn't be out of options. I don't see militarism taking much hold on postwar Japan, though it would make Japan even more of a major power in Asia as they'll probably have everything they do IRL but with a more potent military with power projection capabilities and possibly combat experience.
@mimorisenpai8540 The increased anti-communist sentiments along with the increased number of Korean refugees that are inevitable in this senario could definitely destabilize Japan though probably not by that much. Aside from Japanese xenophobia, the Koreans themselves will keep themselves distinct from the Japanese for very understandable reasons.
@@mimorisenpai8540 Yes, but also a lot would be anti-communist refugees. Nevertheless, Koreans could be ostracized by some Japanese for suspected communist sympathies.
I feel something that should’ve been included on the “if NK won” portion should’ve been how that would change Japan. We’re talking about a country that would’ve massively reinvested into its military much sooner, overturned its self-defence policies within its constitution, and likely joined multilateral mutual defence pacts including counties like Australia or the UK. Japan would’ve been much much more scared of the communist bloc without a heavily militarized South Korea in its way. Japan would’ve become the bulwark against communism in the pacific that America wanted it to be. We’re talking about a fully involved great power who likely would’ve contributed in conflicts like Vietnam and Afghanistan the same way South Korea did in our timeline. Japan’s foreign policy has always been very heavily tied to the actions and situations of China, Korea, and the Manchurian region. If the entire East Asian region bar Taiwan was that hostile towards Japan, there is zero chance they don’t fully militarize, especially when America was heavily encouraging them to.
Don't mention Japanese communist parties will more stronger because of dprk and ccp support and with whole korea under communist will make zainichi korean will more supportive with communist and this will become advanced for JCP
So basically unified Korea is Argentina. Lots of arable land Weak institutions Rotten Capitalism mixed with state socialism and communism imaginery and culture With population centered in big urban sites and lots of poverty.
@@thedeadlysquidward1641 Argentina is actually going pretty well, and has been pulling ahead recently compared to their overwhelmingly leftist or cringe nationalist Latin American peers, who are mostly just stagnating (not good when your economy is still underdeveloped) But due to Argentinas Prime minister being pro western and anti Marxist/China it’s made him a huge target for unflattering propaganda mostly from anti western and communist circles. It’s why Reddit utterly hates the guy
Hardly. It's even worse- united Korea would be Pakistan, with a near-identical population, GDP, GDP/capita and HDI level to Pakistan's in the 1950's. Wedged in between Russia and China (just with Japan supplanting the place of India). Hell, even IRL, South Korea historically based its economic policies and 'Five Year Plans' directly upon those originally developed by Pakistan for itself (but actually carried them out to their conclusion, whereas Pakistan ditched them to self-destruct its prospects by going to war with India instead, in an effort to conquer Kashmir). Pretty much the same as an already unified Korea under Rhee's deranged rule, or even Park's, would almost certainly never cede its territorial claims over 'the Third Korea' of Manchuria/Manchukuo, and could possibly (or probably, in the case of the former ruler) infiltrate its forces into Manchuria to precipitate an insurgency against Chinese rule, same as the Pakistanis did in Kashmir. And China also offered Pakistan a full-blown military intervention on their behalf, in their war against India in 1965 IOTL, same as it had for North Korea. Only for Pakistan to reject it on the basis that "Hell nah, we're not godless commies! Besides the West'll cut us off from world trade if we accept your help, and turn us into another North Korea! And WE MATTER way more geopolitically than KOREA did, so the USA's sure to march in and join our aggression against the filthy socialist Indians, even more than it did South Korea against China!" So, yeah. With a different precedent, regarding how the Korean War transpired ITTL? There's a pretty good chance that Pakistan could wind up being this TL's equivalent of South Korea, and unified Korea winds up becoming this TL's equivalent of Pakistan.
25:51 both north and south korea is honestly a dystopia in different ways even in the current timeline. the north is, the north, and south korea has become so driven for profit and lifeless that suicide rate is like second highest in the world and birth rates are literally rock bottom (which is bad for a society that requires so much exportation to keep its economy afloat). south korea really needs to have some social reforms to make itself just livable even.
one was completely bombed with a significant portion of their population killed and forced to fend for themselves after the collapse of ussr and is under constant threat, the other is a result of typical american imperialism and installing dictators to puppet countries
I imagine an often repeated line from opponents of social reform is 'Hey, you've got it better than the DPRK, so suck it up.' Your account does gel with one story from my wife of how many of the South's women are refusing to marry/have kids because of horrible problems with discrimination and misogyny. (Also gels with my 22 years of happy wife=happy life.) Oh, and without checking, Imma guess the country with the #1 suicide rate is Japan, right? It'd explain why anti-depressants are selling so well there in recent years...
You guys don't even live here. And you're judging this place with limited info. Dystopian capitalist state? You've gotta be kidding me. It's a nice country to live in, with it's ups and downs. But I'd say my country is a rather nice one to live in. We don't starve, we have good infrastructure, people are educated, we don't have to worry about getting shot in school, we have democratic system that actually allow the people to drive away dictators and awful presidents, and there's lots of things for people to enjoy. Dystopia? Highly doubtful.
Korea reminds me a lot of a couple of friends of mine in knew in middle school. A pair of twins where one of them was sent to a troubled teen institute for something very minor and the one who was sent away came back during high school completely traumatized and never quite functioned right again and was just sort of this traumatized husk for the rest of high school with behavioral issues from that and is just barely getting by these days. His brother just sort of stopped socializing after a while and just only focused on school and later work and while he's very successful there's just something deeply unsettling with how he hasn't cared about anything that isn't work or school since then. He just slaves away then drinks on friday watches sports on the weekend or works through it and you literally cannot get him to do much else. Basically not letting Korea sort itself out was a terrible idea.
The British almost destroyed the Viet min during their short occupation at the end of the war, it was never about troop numbers, the British were experienced in counter-insurgency, the conscripts who took over from them in Vietnam and Indonesia (interestingly in that case the British had to rearm the Japanese to fight along side them and save the Dutch civilian population) most certainly were not. Deployment wouldn't necessarily mean victory, the Americans have a nasty habit of ideological rigidity (South Vietnam was plunged into political chaos because they didn't like that the dictator was a Catholic, and mildly reactionary, rather than a 'liberal dictator', if such a thing can be said seriously) and fighting everything like a conventional war. The had a distaste for local alliances and constructing patronage systems, as well as rulers with the strength to keep order, or who had separate interests, they also refused to run a system of reeducation camps or to pursue the war systematically, the British were literally around at the time and gave them advice, and dispite the fact that the Australian contingent outperformed them by using British doctrine for insurgency and jungle warfare they failed to adapt. The claim that it was about will is largely redundant, the Americans played by rules they themselves didn't set (and ones they did set but were stupid), they made life a lot harder for themselves.
Don't forget that the British also had to learn Counter-insurgency the hard way, it's just not as well remembered because they rallied back and won the second Boer war handily. The British had decades of experience both with Counter Insurgency operations and with colonial occupation, which the US didn't. The Vietnam war was really the first one of its kind for the US, as even its few colonial wars and uprisings were fairly small in scale, and what few lessons that were learned by troops being forgotten with the frequent decimations of the US army between conflicts (like the major reductions in fighting capability between SA/Philippines and WWI)
@@steviechubbs5238 The British also did better than the French after learning that being too heavy handed makes victory harder which they learned in the late 19th century the French did not.
@@Ushio01 oh yeah, the French were experts on making themselves hated. Algeria, the Sahel, Indochina, they always seemed to know how to turn the locals against them.
North Korean/Sino-Soviet victory scenario: slightly better intel and supply routes, inaction by the US/UN for just a bit longer USA/South Korean victory scenario: [SEA OF IRRADIATED COBALT]
Actually US and RoK could win without nuke, this if MacArthur didn't fell into China trap and listening to Truman advice. First and Second wafe Chinese army not that numerous but because of weaker defense, they could turn situation quickly, this is same blunder north korea do earlier and China do later.
Can't believe this video actually has the North's victory turn out better in the end. I don't know enough to contest any part of the train of thought, and I don't know if I would even want to, but it's so bewildering.
@22:34 "Park Chung Hee" is introduced here using the Korean naming convention (i.e. surname/family name first), but you refer to "Rhee Syng Man" throughout the video using the Western naming convention (i.e. surname/family name last). @5:42 Not generally how you pronounce "Acheson". Aiming for constructive criticisms. Thank you for your videos!
What if the Svalbard dispute was resolved differently/wasn’t resolved at all? Up until 1920, the now Norwegian island chain of Svalbard in the Arctic Circle was claimed by not just Norway, but also The Netherlands and Denmark (which is where Smeerenburg, a now abandoned Dutch-Danish whailing settlement, comes from), as well as the UK - it would be interesting to see how a world where a different party owned the islands would look like; would Norway take this lying down or at least try to make it as difficult as possible for the owner to enforce the claim? Could it perhaps become an alternate haven for the Dutch/Danish government following Germany’s invasion in 1940? Would it become similar to how Iceland or The Faroe Islands operate(d) within the Danish sphere of influence? Could it perhaps have remained as terra nullius or a free economic zone like Antarctica? Maybe it could’ve become a part of Russia following an influx of Russian settlers that already happened in our timeline? Definitely an overlooked part of colonial history that I would like to see explored
You probably won't read this, but I'd love it if you did an episode on what if the little ice age never happened. It'd be very cool to see how it would change the world as we know it.
Hey here's a suggestion out of the blue. You should continue the History of American Politics series you started like 8 years ago on Knowledge Hub. I would genuinely be interested in that
@@jakespacepiratee3740 it sorta happened with Sakhalin changing hands a few times in the last 2 centuries and ultimately ending up with the Soviets. They could've made it the Japanese SSR I guess?
"Whether Communist or Capitalist, Korea is a dystopia in different ways." Honestly, true IRL as well. When talking to Korea, I have to remind people that the South was also dictatorship
Another point to consider for the North Korea victory is the lack of a necessity for Ma Zedong to pull Chinese divisions away from their staging ground in Fujian for a naval invasion of Taiwan. That invasion may still go ahead. And if Truman decided to get involved in the Chinese Civil War... Well...
Topic idea: What if a medieval style society rose in the US Midwest. Maybe a tribe, or group of tribes developed in ways similar to how societies evolved in Euopre, or maybe Norse explorers use the the St. Lawrence gulf/river to find the great lakes and either settles and makes trade with back home, or something happens forcing them to stay and have to adapt. Or a combination of the above. Big stretch and unlikely, but popped into my head so thought I'd suggest it. 😅
16:41 That was not the first time in military history when that question was asked. Think of the 19th century Geneva Conventions and the fact that the Axis didn’t use chemical warfare against Allied soldiers
I think you discount the fact that Mao was very influential in the Chinese decision to get involved in Korea. If Mao had listened to different people and been a bit more caring towards his own population (crazy thought I know). China may have been less involved in the conflict.
War. War never changes. In the year 1945, my great-great grandfather, serving in the army, wondered when he’d get to go home to his wife and the son he’d never seen. He got his wish when the US ended World War II by dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The World awaited Armageddon; instead, something miraculous happened. We began to use atomic energy not as a weapon, but as a nearly limitless source of power. People enjoyed luxuries once thought the realm of science fiction. Domestic robots, fusion-powered cars, portable computers. But then, in the 21st century, people awoke from the American dream. Years of consumption lead to shortages of every major resource. The entire world unraveled. Peace became a distant memory. It is now the year 2077. We stand on the brink of total war, and I am afraid. For myself, for my wife, for my infant son - because if my time in the army taught me one thing: it’s that war, war never changes
Play World of Tanks for FREE here: tanks.ly/3LStzky and earn exclusive rewards! Dive into alternative history by taking down enemy tanks in epic battles
hi there
You already did this one, cool thumbnail though.
Hey man, love your videos! Have you ever thought about doing one on the business plot?
What if Nikita Khrushchev never gave Crimea to Ukraine?
What if the Indo-European migrations never occurred? What if European colonialism never happened? What if Arabia was Green??
You missed THE BIGGEST CHANGE! With a clear victory of either side, the hit TV show MASH is never made!
Ah thats sad
Without MASH the Super Bowl decisively wins the TV viewership war decades earlier, rather than having to wait until 2010.
NOOOO
Cue suicide is painless theme song
Maybe we are in the best timeline after all...
Representing the accurate mentality Americans have about this war by forgetting about Korea in the middle of a video ABOUT the Korean war.
As a non-American, I've see the Korean war mentioned often by characters or movies and tv series from that era, so I always assumed Americans at the time were as knowledgeable about Korea as they were Vietnam. Which is nothing besides war and offensive depictions.
@@lucinae8512The two aren't the same the Korean War is a different Generation of Americans. Command was also different. The US could've won Vietnam if command was more competent and if the media wasn't as involved as it was.
War is complex, let's just be grateful the US has the allies that it has in Asia.
@@miguelzurita3216 I think Korea was also winnable if it wasn't for the Hubris of US command. Had they consolidated around mid-late October 1950 - rather than ignoring the fact that the Chinese might intervene, denying the fact that the Chinese had intervened, and acting like it would all be over by Christmas (yes, US command literally said this at the time) - I think the outcome would have been very different.
They may not have been able to fully unite the peninsula - but it absolutely would have been considered a victory.
The reason the Chinese were able to push the UN forces back as far as they did was largely because the UN forces overextended themselves.
@@alanmichael5619 the US would not consider the DPRK still existing, albeit diminished, as a victory, anymore than the current state of affairs.
@@ianroscablu that’s not true at all. The primary goal was of course full unification, but the general reason for intervening after the invasion in the first place was just to ensure the pro Western capitalist state would even exist by the end of the year. And on that front they absolutely succeeded while the North totally failed their aim to unify and destroy southern statehood
The real question is, what if anyone won the Finno-Korean Hyperwar?
Hmmm true
Perhaps if there wasn’t a Lumerian disappearance
We need a 300 hour video about that
Yakub won that war
Dimetridon would have ate them
One of the nicest men I've ever met was under 5 years old during the Korean war. His large family was extremely wealthy in the northern part of Korea but when the war broke out, they had to leave everything behind and travel south. They barely made it to South Korea. He was a super nice man that my parents befriended at church and truly cared about me when I was dealing with suicidal thoughts and severe depression. My parents had a get together at the house one time and he came into my room and encouraged me to keep painting Funko Pops and Amiibo (one of the only hobbies I had enough motivation to do during that time). He was a great man. I only learned of his crazy childhood at his funeral last year. Insane to think how different his families life could've been had they not escaped.
RIP Moo Yung
The south winning with nukes would arguably have more impact on the global stage then if the north won, since the nuclear taboo is being questioned, and there could potentially be many more nations thriving for a nuclear bomb seeing whatever happened, hoping not to be the third.
The south could defeat the north without nukes by simply getting rid if Singman Ree in the '40s. The US never liked Singman Ree because we always knew he was a lunatic. Before the War Singman Ree was committing massacres left and right. The US was actually more afraid of Ree then we were of the North. Because Ree was being a maniac the US did not let the South build up a significant army. They had no tanks, no air force, no rocket launchers. All they had were some rifles and land mines. When the North invaded the South was basically defenseless. Now in an alternate timeline if Ree wasn't put in charge or wasn't a lunatic the South would have been allowed to build up a proper army. A real army made of South Koreans would have stood a good chance of defeating the North. China only jumped into the war because America was involved. If the US stayed out of the War that means China doesn't get involved either. This opens the door for South Koreans to completely defeat the North on their own.
@@Novusod I don't know, I think if a western aligned Korea made it to the Chinese border Map would be quick to intervene
@@coygus
Depending on how it happens, a western-aligned Korea but one that did so on its own without heavy US/International support means they could become the East-Asian equivalent of Finland or Sweden, aligned with the west but politically staying neutral (no US bases in Korea for example) so as not to spook the Chinese and to an extant, the Soviet Union.
I think that's something the PRC could potentially accept and if Korea can maintain decent relations with both China and the USA via neutrality it opens up a radically unique foreign policy for Korea and can help turn Korea into the "middleman" between the US and China, sorta like Vietnam or Singapore IRL.
@@Novusod well Rhee are former president of provincial government and he was most pro American, that why US decided to support him but he are too chaotic and corrupt.
Kim Gu are more better option but guy are hard to control
@@Novusodwell unfortunately for south because soviet only agree let north invaded south if china help them, mean china will still intervene but later US entrance more likely give better result because they are more prepared with china intervention but more likely stalemate ended in pyongyang and wonsan line
25:17 "In his youth, Park Chung Hee was a member of the Korean Workers Party."
Another interesting fact; during Park Chung Hee's coup, North Korea actually cheered on his "military revolution" (because they thought he was _still_ one of their own).
They were completely unaware that he had turned full _anti_-communist in the preceding years LOL
Well Park Chung Hee brother is communist and got executed by rhee government and Park himself nearly got execute but Paik Yu Sip save him.
Park Chung Hee is famous example of former Manchukuo who successfully enter WPK but not really surprised he join southern branch who mostly running by Domestic faction who more open than northern branch who mostly running by guerilla, soviet, and yenan faction who mostly anti japanese.
@@mimorisenpai8540 why you called him "manchukuo"? I thought that term was reserved for the japanese puppet statw in Manchuria.
@@SIGNOR-G he served in manchukuo imperial army
@@mimorisenpai8540 ahh i see.
Park strikes me as the brutally pragmatic sort of politician who will make whichever allies he needs to get ahead. I bet in the scenario where the north wins, he definitely wouldn't try to correct them on that and try to play it off like he had stayed a member this whole time. A fairly high-ranking RoK army who's (seemingly) been a KWP supporter this whole time, that's a valuable asset who might be able to find his way into the leadership and rise up the ranks quickly.
It'd be kinda funny if he eventually ends up being the leader of Korea in both the north and south victory scenarios.
Korean War saved Chiang Kai-Shek - his regime was basically abandoned by the US after it lost the Chinese Civil War, but the Korean War made USA help it again.
Thank god for the North Koreans saving the Chinese government from further aggression from West Taiwan then
Yeah Truman already kind of did do the scenario he described where he gets involved in Vietnam because of the loss in Korea. Not winning Korea is exactly what pushed him to help the Republic of China more.
Truman already planned to help him, korean war just pushed him more to help Chiang and don't mention Mao send troops who supposed to landing on taiwan to Korea instead
@@mimorisenpai8540How was Mao going to get the troops across the Taiwan Strait?
@@JarrodFrates yeah, you right.
I think even without US intervention, Kmt can still hold Taiwan due to strait who bit far from mainland and their navy and airforce who are more superior than CCP like they even can't take smaller island near fujian from kmt.
I believe in the 2nd scenario where S. Korea 'wins', China would've negotiated a bufferzone in the mountainous region of N. Korea as compensation for their participation and to settle communist refugees that will inevitably flee Syngman Rhee's regime, which they'll probably annex in a couple years; this would lead to a significant Korean diaspora in China that may help modernize the country a bit quicker due to the N. Koreans having experience with heavy industry when China was still melting steel in people's backyards.
It would be hard for them to negotiate a buffer zone since Manchuria is already separated from Korea by a major river. At most they might get a DMZ on the banks of the river... God imagine fighting for a beachhead in that area in a potential ww3. The fortifications and complications of river crossings would make Normandy 1944 look like Normandy 1964. Also you know some idiot (probably commie) would try and order infantry to try and cross it in mass during the winter only to get sunk by artillery.
Adding on it would be really hard to make Koreans give up that mountain since that mountain is Mt. Baekdu which is culturally and mythologically extremely important to Koreans. Although there may not even be need for a buffer zone due to the mountains already basically being one and has been historically. Like how Switzerland is protected from Europe
There are already 2 million ethnic Koreans living in China many of whom have family in Northern Korea. They either fled Japanese rule or they moved to Qing China for better opportunities starting in the 1860s. You can see this when China had its famine in the late 1950s many Koreans crossed the border to seek help from their families in Northern Korea you can see this in reverse in the 1990s.
@@stevenbaksh5545 to which china has already taken advantage of multiple times lmao
Oh, MacArthur would gladly give China a buffer zone
Thumbnail goes hard
Goes really hard indeed.
Wanna know who else is hard
@@Twiggo_The_Foxxo MY MOM
Thumbnail goes hard
Thumbnail goes hard (very)
Rhee being exiled to seems to be a canon event in any alternate path.
Because he hate by everyone
The US and USSR after almost slaughtering the entire world because of a tree
“Almost lost my cool there”
Also one time because of a bear in Minnesota. Ursus americanus, not Tu-95.
@@jlillercontext?
@@SiPakRubah There was a black bear trying to climb over a fence at an Air Force base in Duluth, Minnesota, during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The guards at first thought the bear was actually a team of Soviet commandoes trying to sabotage the base which held fighter jets which would've intercepted Soviet bombers carrying nuclear weapons over the Arctic Circle.
@@nate9331 It could've been, they trained belugas.
Who knows what they're are up to.
“In the United States, the Korean War is often known as the forgotten war”
*War of 1812 sobs in the corner*
It shouldve been luxembourg and their army of like 20 people
That's Liechtenstein
@@JoeMomma213 no?
@@JoeMomma213 no Luxembourg sent an army of 20 people to korea
@@MarathonRunner432 oh sorry, I thought you were talking about that time when Liechtenstein fought a war with 20 soldiers, my bad
The first of many colonies they would establish over the course of the next 100 years
18:30 the north already had naval mines near incheon. A south Korean officer undercover as a North Korean soldier stole the map of the naval mines and sent them to the Americans which was crucial in the success of the incheon landings.
Can we get a movie about THAT?
The Korean War movie "Incheon" is fascinating af. Here we have: McArthur being played by the british Laurence Olivier, a crutical and box-office reception so bad the film did not even get home release and the fact it was literaly financed by a cult. It absolutely deserves a documentary
Whenever I hear “Korea” and “cult” in the same conversation, I immediately think of the Moonies. Glad to know I wasn’t wrong here, tho I’m surprised they actually made a film.
But considering how the founders literally grew up in North Korea right as the war broke out, I’m not surprised it made such a big impression on them.
Honestly, had MacArthur actually followed orders and not spooked the Chinese into fighting, shit might have actually ended
Nope, chinese will still join because Stalin, Mao and Kim already make agreement he could advance to South if China assist North Korea in war because Soviet didn't want to involved much and stop at parallel is still risky because KPA will still to tried to advance south and RoK Army will still advance North because Sygman Rhee just like kim il sung, stubbornly tried to reunify whole peninsula under his government.
Only allies could do is to make defense line in pyongyang and wonsan to prepare from chinese first assault instead going further and opposite for China is to not stop at seoul instead make further advance at south.
China from the start allready got involved not military in the begining but political and with aids to the north i suggest you to watch the good youtube chanel the Korean war made by the same people of World war two
The thing about McArthur’s advance is that it had US troops march directly into the PLA’s trap. If he hadn’t ignored Truman’s explicit orders and ordered that advance, the PLA likely would not have been able to so rapidly and successfully turn the tide.
Also, McArthur was not fired for disobeying those orders or for demanding to use nukes. He was fired for refusing to issue new orders to respond to the PLA advance - he basically just stopped paying any attention to Korea, so Truman had to replace him.
@@simian9200 yeah he too obsessed go to war with china and forget to make defense line in north
@@mimorisenpai8540That ignores Chinese Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai's statement of October 3, 1950. He specifically said China would intervene if, and only if, US forces crossed the 38th Parallel. October 7th, US forces crossed the 38th Parallel, and Chinese forces responded on October 19th .
I remember watching the original video you made for this scenario like, 8 years ago. Crazy how time flies
@JuanEnriqueFloresJrI feel fuckin old lmao
That was 8 years ago?
@JuanEnriqueFloresJrme three
2016 was 8 years ago..... fuck
Damn
People tend to forget that around the time of the Korean War America was fighting a mini internal war of military doctrines within its own military: The Revolt of the Admirals. Around this time, the Navy and Marine Corps were facing huge budget cuts and were operating within the shadow of a mushroom cloud. Sure, they made massive victories during WWII that many were proud of, but none of that really mattered with the foundation of the Air Force and a new fleet of B-36 Peacemaker bombers. Many within the Army even argued that. Omar Bradley said “I predict that large scale amphibious operations will never occur again.” But with the Korean War, the short comings of a defense policy primarily focused on nuclear weapons was put on full display. Truman found that he couldn’t even enforce a naval blockade of the Korean Peninsula due to the massive budget cuts of the Navy. Nobody expected a conventional military invasion after WWII, but that’s exactly what happened. So the Navy was vindicated; they got their super carrier, and the Marines got to stick around. And all this ended right at the major strategic victory in Incheon. So imagine if the Revolt of the Admirals carried on for just a few days longer. Imagine if internal bickering between major military branches caused America to lose Korea. Even making the Revolt of the Admirals go on for longer would be enough to make it so that North Korea would win the Korean War.
Interesting, I'm just on my last stretch through Heinlein's Starship Troopers and he actually brings up numerous times how the Mobile Infantry is still 100% necessary to get the job done because the navy's big guns are incapable of securing a proper victory. I'm seeing some parallels here.
Am I wrong or is half of this comment from a Templin Institute video on orbital bombardment.
Soviets in 1950: "We're very upset, so we're going to boycott the UN Security Council! That'll show those western capitali-"
US, UK, France, Republic of China: "Anyone object to sending a multinational force to kick the North Koreans out of the South? No? None at all? A single objection would derail swift intervention. No? Alright. Cowabunga it is."
Some of my favorite scenarios in history are when events happened because somebody wanted to make a principled stand and so they choose not to participate. What almost always happens is that the people they were standing against are now free to do what they want and it's always really funny because, like, what else did you think was going to happen?
@@zacheltringham8524 and this is why the "I don't vote becuase there is no point" people are stupid.
I don't think the US would care if the Soviets vetoed the resolution, they would have sent troops to Korea regardless
@@bluebubbadog2080 real
@@bluebubbadog2080 The only problem is that then they'd have a Vietnam situation before Vietnam even happened.
They enter a war and even with all its successes on the battlefield, without wide ranging diplomatic support, it means nothing.
For no reason at all, can we get an alternate history if Garibaldi, that Italian guy, accepted Lincoln’s offer to be a general in the Union army?
I don’t think there’d have been much a difference other than the Union winning sooner- assuming he was any good at what he did.
The uniter of Italy? That'd have greater consequences for Italy than the US.
For the US, sure, but his impact on Italy was massive, being the biggest influence on Italian unification.
in this world forest gump never meet Bubba and no Bubba Gump shrimp
im referring to the first scenario
😔
3:15 slight correction here, it's true that South korea had prior forces who used to be part of the japanese army, but some of them actually came from resistance forces too (like the KLA, etc) which actually were allied with US and Britain during ww2.
6:59 I love how this implies that Jeju Island would basically become Korean Taiwan in this timeline.
I much prefer these new AHH videos that go straight into the interesting scenario. Unlike his older videos, where most of the video was spent explaining to Cody why this scenario is unrealistic, then just spending two minutes on the scenario (which we could guess anyway)
2:59 click here to skip ad
Thanks
Huh...this Cody guy sounds a lot like the guy from PointlessHub
Guys I have a theory- they’re different channels run by the same guy.
@@ContentEnjoyer-gm3ky How could one man manage two channels at once? Preposterous I say!
well, there's an idea for the next What If scenario
@@ContentEnjoyer-gm3ky Source?
@@ContentEnjoyer-gm3kya GAME theory
But there WAS a winner, Cody! The military industrial complex!
So the United States, got it.
Cool north Korean propaganda
@@George-W-bush-21ythe military industrial complex isnt propaganda, eisenhower himself recognized it 🤦♂️
@@beserker9890 he said that we should live side by side in the end of the speech a small clip doesn't mean he hates the military complex
@@George-W-bush-21y Ye, I’m a staunch leftie, and while the narrative may be used for unsavory purposes (not sending aid to Ukraine for example), it is a genuine truth. In a late capitalist society, large corporations are the ones that are in charge of the nation, not the people or politicians. It is in the complex’s best interest that the US be a warmongering nation.
It was heavily noted at the time that most North Koreans in senior positions of any note also had a Japanese background, even if they defected, that institutional culture was deeply rooted in both the North and the South. Northern soldiers were known to not take prisoners, and that if you surrendered to the Chinese (who were keen to take prisoners so they could reeducate them) they would sometimes be forced to violently defend you from the Northerners. South Korean officers were known for brutality, against others and their own men, they saw the conscripts almost as not human, being barely trained civilians, allied soldiers learnt that if they complained about the South Koreans begging for food or dumpster diving their officers immediately call them over and shoot them.
The hilarious thing is that both the North and South pretend this history doesn't exist, that they bravely resisted the Japanese and that the freedom fighters formed their countries (where as their countries were actually formed by the new colonial powers out of the old collaborators, and indeed in the South to begin with the American occupation government was reluctant to remove the Japanese themselves, as they were running a tight ship, were less corrupt and more of them understood English).
Fuck off with this imperial japanese shit. That is NOT how any of Korean history went down post Korean War
Wow, a weeaboo defending supposed japanese competence, ya love to see! Reminds me again who thought blowing up some of Americas ships would be a decisive blow that would.. Make America *not* declare war? And who's rivalry between amry and navy was so bad that they were literally fighting and sabotaging each other.
More specifically, the claim of japanese involvement is vastly overblown here. There were some that had connections(Maybe I'm not actually seeing anything credible, but maybe you've found stuff I haven't.) but 98% of it was actually russian and chinese training, as well as veterans from fighting Japan during ww2 and anti-Japanese sentiment was still massive in all of asia at the time.
"North Koreans in senior positions of any note also had a Japanese background" can you name these individuals? To my knowledge this isn't true at all. North Koreans of senior positions were either groomed by the USSR, guerilla fighters that fought alongside the Chinese, or long time political activists from the last days of the Joseon Dynasty. And to my knowledge anyone who had a Japanese background as in went to a Military school in either Manchukuo or Japan ended up a hardcore nationalist.
The brutality you mention isn't even a mark of the Japanese. Honestly as racist as this sounds, it was just a mark of Asia at the time. The acceptance of surrendering to Chinese troops by Nationalist was because the Nationalist Army was defecting in the millions, not an exaggeration, after the first year of the Chinese Civil War. It would not have been practical to motivate your enemy into continue fighting you. If you look at how the Chinese Civil War was being conducted before the Japanese "united" them, you will find many examples of brutality.
South Korea was established by mostly Japanese collaborators, but I'm really skeptical about the claim that Japanese collaborators had any role in North Korea as there was a massive purge that followed when the USSR took control.
The communists went to every village and city, established Kangaroo courts where they picked out landowners, police chiefs, and any other community leaders, accused them of betraying the Korean people and then depending on how many protested they either spared or executed them on the spot. This led to a mass exodus where anyone afraid of being judged guilty by the Communist definition fled South and subsequently those who fled enacted retribution against Communist/Socialist sympathizers there.
@channeldud most independence nation of that time we're made up of collaborators. Most Western European countries politicians were made up of nazi collaborator. Most African and Asian countries were made up of European collaborator. The unfortunate truth is
Wouldn't Jeju probably remain a Korean Taiwan?
The US navy is still superior to China, the USSR and the DPRK combined, so a scenario where Japan, Taiwan and Jeju are used as a bulwark against communist Asia is likely.
Hard to say. It's closer to the mainland than Taiwan is, and a lot smaller. Easier to fortify, but less room for any sort of independent development.
@@jdotoz Yeah. I suspect it'd probably end up annexing itself to the United States, or maybe Taiwan.
@@jdotozTrue. If that were the case, this government in exile would be far more dependent on American support than Taiwan was OTL. That is, of course, if the USA would bother supporting a small island like Jeju.
@@cyrilkhoury19Perhaps they could have directly ocuppied it or allow the DPRK to take it
You forgot possibly the biggest change that would have resulted from NK winning: Mao's son wouldn't have died.
He was killed by an American airstrike in 1950. And without a clear heir Deng was able to eventually succeed and set China on its current trajectory.
Had Mao's son lived, it's quite likely you'd have had a bit of a Mao dynasty going on, not unlike the Kims. And he may not have turned China towards socialism with Chinese characteristics. (read:capitalism)
This is a really interesting idea!
I doubt that mao would've been able to establish much of a dynasty without some larger internal conflict since the reformist groups in the government took power from him even during his lifetime. He was much more of a beloved figurehead that had a lot of sway with the people but not the political heads, as opposed to kim il sung who had a much tighter grip on the actual ruling part
Is hard for Mao to make dynasty because unlike Kim, CCP leadership have more balanced than WPK
...China is full blown communist, even if they use the boons capitalism against the west. The cultural revolution in China was worse than the USSR gulags and the Holocaust combined.
Also China would have persued taiwan much more aggressively. Sence he admired things like Korea prevented him from doing so.
What if we kissed under the nuclear hellfire
What if we romantically walked across the beaches of the irradiated cobalt sea
I took a dookie
Your goddam right
For the DPRK victory senario, Japan would be pressured to do a full-on remilitarization now that ROK can't act as a buffer. This would involve a re-establishment of the Japanese military through abolishing or heavily modifying article 9. Without a pacifist culture taking hold, deployment of troops in support of the US wouldn't be out of options. I don't see militarism taking much hold on postwar Japan, though it would make Japan even more of a major power in Asia as they'll probably have everything they do IRL but with a more potent military with power projection capabilities and possibly combat experience.
Don't mention Japanese Will more cautious with Zainichi Communities and possible will try to disband JCP and some faction in SDP.
@mimorisenpai8540 The increased anti-communist sentiments along with the increased number of Korean refugees that are inevitable in this senario could definitely destabilize Japan though probably not by that much. Aside from Japanese xenophobia, the Koreans themselves will keep themselves distinct from the Japanese for very understandable reasons.
@@kamikazeviking3053 don't mention DPRK will have more stronger influence to Korean communities there
@@mimorisenpai8540 Yes, but also a lot would be anti-communist refugees. Nevertheless, Koreans could be ostracized by some Japanese for suspected communist sympathies.
Does that affect the production of anime?
1:14 hey i saw that, Wii Play Tanks went HARD. no other tank warfare game will ever top this masterpiece. Fight me.
Core memory unlocked
Gone but not forgotten
My paternal grandfather was an Army paratrooper in Korea. He never talked about the war until about 3 drinks later.
The if anyone won War of 1812 sequel we didn’t need but we’re getting it anyway.
I feel something that should’ve been included on the “if NK won” portion should’ve been how that would change Japan. We’re talking about a country that would’ve massively reinvested into its military much sooner, overturned its self-defence policies within its constitution, and likely joined multilateral mutual defence pacts including counties like Australia or the UK. Japan would’ve been much much more scared of the communist bloc without a heavily militarized South Korea in its way. Japan would’ve become the bulwark against communism in the pacific that America wanted it to be. We’re talking about a fully involved great power who likely would’ve contributed in conflicts like Vietnam and Afghanistan the same way South Korea did in our timeline. Japan’s foreign policy has always been very heavily tied to the actions and situations of China, Korea, and the Manchurian region. If the entire East Asian region bar Taiwan was that hostile towards Japan, there is zero chance they don’t fully militarize, especially when America was heavily encouraging them to.
Don't mention Japanese communist parties will more stronger because of dprk and ccp support and with whole korea under communist will make zainichi korean will more supportive with communist and this will become advanced for JCP
So basically unified Korea is Argentina.
Lots of arable land
Weak institutions
Rotten Capitalism mixed with state socialism and communism imaginery and culture
With population centered in big urban sites and lots of poverty.
Unified korea will be richer than Argentina
Is Argentina this bad, I thought it was supposedly the most developed country in South America
@@thedeadlysquidward1641 Argentina is actually going pretty well, and has been pulling ahead recently compared to their overwhelmingly leftist or cringe nationalist Latin American peers, who are mostly just stagnating (not good when your economy is still underdeveloped) But due to Argentinas Prime minister being pro western and anti Marxist/China it’s made him a huge target for unflattering propaganda mostly from anti western and communist circles. It’s why Reddit utterly hates the guy
@@thedeadlysquidward1641the country went bankrupt like 5 times
Hardly. It's even worse- united Korea would be Pakistan, with a near-identical population, GDP, GDP/capita and HDI level to Pakistan's in the 1950's. Wedged in between Russia and China (just with Japan supplanting the place of India). Hell, even IRL, South Korea historically based its economic policies and 'Five Year Plans' directly upon those originally developed by Pakistan for itself (but actually carried them out to their conclusion, whereas Pakistan ditched them to self-destruct its prospects by going to war with India instead, in an effort to conquer Kashmir). Pretty much the same as an already unified Korea under Rhee's deranged rule, or even Park's, would almost certainly never cede its territorial claims over 'the Third Korea' of Manchuria/Manchukuo, and could possibly (or probably, in the case of the former ruler) infiltrate its forces into Manchuria to precipitate an insurgency against Chinese rule, same as the Pakistanis did in Kashmir.
And China also offered Pakistan a full-blown military intervention on their behalf, in their war against India in 1965 IOTL, same as it had for North Korea. Only for Pakistan to reject it on the basis that "Hell nah, we're not godless commies! Besides the West'll cut us off from world trade if we accept your help, and turn us into another North Korea! And WE MATTER way more geopolitically than KOREA did, so the USA's sure to march in and join our aggression against the filthy socialist Indians, even more than it did South Korea against China!" So, yeah. With a different precedent, regarding how the Korean War transpired ITTL? There's a pretty good chance that Pakistan could wind up being this TL's equivalent of South Korea, and unified Korea winds up becoming this TL's equivalent of Pakistan.
Thought I was about to watch a Oversimplied video when I saw the thumbnail
Please do a sequel to The Fallout Wars
Sigma
Bump
25:51 both north and south korea is honestly a dystopia in different ways even in the current timeline. the north is, the north, and south korea has become so driven for profit and lifeless that suicide rate is like second highest in the world and birth rates are literally rock bottom (which is bad for a society that requires so much exportation to keep its economy afloat). south korea really needs to have some social reforms to make itself just livable even.
one was completely bombed with a significant portion of their population killed and forced to fend for themselves after the collapse of ussr and is under constant threat, the other is a result of typical american imperialism and installing dictators to puppet countries
I imagine an often repeated line from opponents of social reform is 'Hey, you've got it better than the DPRK, so suck it up.' Your account does gel with one story from my wife of how many of the South's women are refusing to marry/have kids because of horrible problems with discrimination and misogyny. (Also gels with my 22 years of happy wife=happy life.) Oh, and without checking, Imma guess the country with the #1 suicide rate is Japan, right? It'd explain why anti-depressants are selling so well there in recent years...
South korea even if it's a democracy become a total Dystopian Capitalist state so yhea like cody said bothe korea in a way are like the same
You guys don't even live here. And you're judging this place with limited info. Dystopian capitalist state? You've gotta be kidding me. It's a nice country to live in, with it's ups and downs. But I'd say my country is a rather nice one to live in. We don't starve, we have good infrastructure, people are educated, we don't have to worry about getting shot in school, we have democratic system that actually allow the people to drive away dictators and awful presidents, and there's lots of things for people to enjoy. Dystopia? Highly doubtful.
@@mrhonkhonk6116 yeah i mean it might be democratic but the corporations there have more say than the people by like a wide margin
bro was cooking with that thumbnail
I really liked the somehwhat off topic rambling during the North korea scenario 14:55
This channel is so bingeable
Until you start getting your masters in history with a focus on 19th and 20th century history and realize how wrong it is in so many ways.
Wow, I'm actually pretty proud of you, Cody. Every word of this was awesome
"The agricultural South and the industrial North"?? [Battle Hymn of the Republic plays]
Battle hymn of the democratic people’s republic.
Dixie plays
Korea reminds me a lot of a couple of friends of mine in knew in middle school. A pair of twins where one of them was sent to a troubled teen institute for something very minor and the one who was sent away came back during high school completely traumatized and never quite functioned right again and was just sort of this traumatized husk for the rest of high school with behavioral issues from that and is just barely getting by these days. His brother just sort of stopped socializing after a while and just only focused on school and later work and while he's very successful there's just something deeply unsettling with how he hasn't cared about anything that isn't work or school since then. He just slaves away then drinks on friday watches sports on the weekend or works through it and you literally cannot get him to do much else.
Basically not letting Korea sort itself out was a terrible idea.
I know it's a small thing, but the typewriter sound between sections is so nice, I'm not sure why it tickles me so much
Singmun Rhee fleeing to Hawaii is a canon event
The British almost destroyed the Viet min during their short occupation at the end of the war, it was never about troop numbers, the British were experienced in counter-insurgency, the conscripts who took over from them in Vietnam and Indonesia (interestingly in that case the British had to rearm the Japanese to fight along side them and save the Dutch civilian population) most certainly were not.
Deployment wouldn't necessarily mean victory, the Americans have a nasty habit of ideological rigidity (South Vietnam was plunged into political chaos because they didn't like that the dictator was a Catholic, and mildly reactionary, rather than a 'liberal dictator', if such a thing can be said seriously) and fighting everything like a conventional war. The had a distaste for local alliances and constructing patronage systems, as well as rulers with the strength to keep order, or who had separate interests, they also refused to run a system of reeducation camps or to pursue the war systematically, the British were literally around at the time and gave them advice, and dispite the fact that the Australian contingent outperformed them by using British doctrine for insurgency and jungle warfare they failed to adapt. The claim that it was about will is largely redundant, the Americans played by rules they themselves didn't set (and ones they did set but were stupid), they made life a lot harder for themselves.
Don't forget that the British also had to learn Counter-insurgency the hard way, it's just not as well remembered because they rallied back and won the second Boer war handily. The British had decades of experience both with Counter Insurgency operations and with colonial occupation, which the US didn't. The Vietnam war was really the first one of its kind for the US, as even its few colonial wars and uprisings were fairly small in scale, and what few lessons that were learned by troops being forgotten with the frequent decimations of the US army between conflicts (like the major reductions in fighting capability between SA/Philippines and WWI)
@@steviechubbs5238 The British also did better than the French after learning that being too heavy handed makes victory harder which they learned in the late 19th century the French did not.
And yet the US refused to listen to British advisors for the Vietnam War. Why?!
@@Ushio01 oh yeah, the French were experts on making themselves hated. Algeria, the Sahel, Indochina, they always seemed to know how to turn the locals against them.
@@steviechubbs5238 or yk in France itself. Why do you think we never had a British Revolution?
thats the best thumbnail ive ever seen on your channel
Video idea: What if the korean war ended in a stalemate
The thumbnail is so good, it fooled me into thinking oversimplified uploaded.
Ad over 2:59
Danke
25:26, yes, he event sent S Korean troops to Vietnam to prove that he was not a commie. Very overlooked component of the Vietnam War.
North Korean/Sino-Soviet victory scenario: slightly better intel and supply routes, inaction by the US/UN for just a bit longer
USA/South Korean victory scenario: [SEA OF IRRADIATED COBALT]
Actually US and RoK could win without nuke, this if MacArthur didn't fell into China trap and listening to Truman advice.
First and Second wafe Chinese army not that numerous but because of weaker defense, they could turn situation quickly, this is same blunder north korea do earlier and China do later.
Its really funny to me to hear these videos after finding you first on Pointless Hun. So informative.
5:51 you said "diddy"
Real
They gave South Korea baby oil
Frfr
22:54 lasted until yesterday, actually
Can't believe this video actually has the North's victory turn out better in the end.
I don't know enough to contest any part of the train of thought, and I don't know if I would even want to, but it's so bewildering.
HOLY SHIT I JUST REALIZED YOURE THE GUY THAT LOVES ROLAND EMMERICH MOVIES FROM THAT ITHER CHANNEL!
I love your stuff, dude.
@22:34
"Park Chung Hee" is introduced here using the Korean naming convention (i.e. surname/family name first), but you refer to "Rhee Syng Man" throughout the video using the Western naming convention (i.e. surname/family name last).
@5:42
Not generally how you pronounce "Acheson".
Aiming for constructive criticisms. Thank you for your videos!
iirc Syngman Rhee preferred the western naming convention. Indy Neidell talks about it in his series on the korean war
@@BDP0408because he spend some time of his life in US, this is when he started to become pro with US.
As soon as I saw this video, I was worried McArthur was gonna be happy about it
Oh golly, this comment section surely will be healthy.
Totally
Indeed
Could be worse
I mean as a communist I didn't find this video too bad, especially considering he's a liberal
@@GodSpaghetti I don't really care about his political views I just like to watch his content
Love the videos, man. Keep it up!!!
22:57
yeah, literally
This sentence was ominous hearing it now. It almost rang too true
I thought the thumbnail was a new oversimplified video for a second, I got so excited😭
What if the Svalbard dispute was resolved differently/wasn’t resolved at all?
Up until 1920, the now Norwegian island chain of Svalbard in the Arctic Circle was claimed by not just Norway, but also The Netherlands and Denmark (which is where Smeerenburg, a now abandoned Dutch-Danish whailing settlement, comes from), as well as the UK - it would be interesting to see how a world where a different party owned the islands would look like; would Norway take this lying down or at least try to make it as difficult as possible for the owner to enforce the claim? Could it perhaps become an alternate haven for the Dutch/Danish government following Germany’s invasion in 1940? Would it become similar to how Iceland or The Faroe Islands operate(d) within the Danish sphere of influence? Could it perhaps have remained as terra nullius or a free economic zone like Antarctica? Maybe it could’ve become a part of Russia following an influx of Russian settlers that already happened in our timeline?
Definitely an overlooked part of colonial history that I would like to see explored
Boosting this!
Way too obscure, hardly anybody has even heard of those islands.
You probably won't read this, but I'd love it if you did an episode on what if the little ice age never happened. It'd be very cool to see how it would change the world as we know it.
don't know if you see this, but the 1951 iranian coup could make a nice alternate history episode, considering how much it changed the middle east
Hey here's a suggestion out of the blue. You should continue the History of American Politics series you started like 8 years ago on Knowledge Hub. I would genuinely be interested in that
Thumbnail had me thinking oversimplified dropped a new vid lmfaooo
Just discovered this channel and I love everything. The commentary (both content and delivery) and the information is top tier!
I woulda won
Nah, I'd win.
what you all on about, we all know i'd win
what you all on about, we all know i'd win
There you go Cody that is the next video that off-topic rant about Vietnam
More interesting scenario: What if Japan was split like Korea after WW2?
I believe he already made that scenario?
@@JeffDvrx Where?
@@JeffDvrxhe did Germany and Italy someone might have done a split Japan
@@jakespacepiratee3740 it sorta happened with Sakhalin changing hands a few times in the last 2 centuries and ultimately ending up with the Soviets.
They could've made it the Japanese SSR I guess?
Well Japan will turn into another korea and Vietnam.
Nice pic of Trogdor in the closing, excellent video as always!
No matter who won, Rhee is always ending up in Hawaii
I was about to re-watch this scenario yesterday. Glad I waited
15:13 I mean, what if the north just, surrendered after being pushed back so far
Video quality has gone up so high tbh. As someone whos been watching for a year, its nice seeing a positive change Cody
Remake?
Yes
"Whether Communist or Capitalist, Korea is a dystopia in different ways." Honestly, true IRL as well. When talking to Korea, I have to remind people that the South was also dictatorship
4:21 - I laughed out loud 😂
Yup
You made this 10 years ago and sounded so different. Its pretty cool how you changef
Another point to consider for the North Korea victory is the lack of a necessity for Ma Zedong to pull Chinese divisions away from their staging ground in Fujian for a naval invasion of Taiwan. That invasion may still go ahead.
And if Truman decided to get involved in the Chinese Civil War...
Well...
American will involved if Chiang coud hold huai and yangtze border
Topic idea:
What if a medieval style society rose in the US Midwest.
Maybe a tribe, or group of tribes developed in ways similar to how societies evolved in Euopre, or maybe Norse explorers use the the St. Lawrence gulf/river to find the great lakes and either settles and makes trade with back home, or something happens forcing them to stay and have to adapt.
Or a combination of the above.
Big stretch and unlikely, but popped into my head so thought I'd suggest it. 😅
1:18 was that Wii play, tanks?
Yep
I'm glad I am not the only one to notice - for a moment I thought he was gonna be sponsored by a decade and a half old Wii game 😂
Great video
16:41 That was not the first time in military history when that question was asked. Think of the 19th century Geneva Conventions and the fact that the Axis didn’t use chemical warfare against Allied soldiers
Those aren't fission bombs
love your videos man. ive been watching since the fallout videos and you never fail to dissapoint 🙏🙏🙏
Can you do what if the allies won WW2?
???
@@doconovan lol
???
I feel like we are getting new videos more frequently. Love your videos have been a fan for years.👍
I think you discount the fact that Mao was very influential in the Chinese decision to get involved in Korea. If Mao had listened to different people and been a bit more caring towards his own population (crazy thought I know). China may have been less involved in the conflict.
1:23 “what better way to break trough solid enemy lines than in this bad boy” shows a m3 Stuart a light tank used mostly for reconnaissance
Return of an old video.
War. War never changes.
In the year 1945, my great-great grandfather, serving in the army, wondered when he’d get to go home to his wife and the son he’d never seen. He got his wish when the US ended World War II by dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The World awaited Armageddon; instead, something miraculous happened. We began to use atomic energy not as a weapon, but as a nearly limitless source of power.
People enjoyed luxuries once thought the realm of science fiction. Domestic robots, fusion-powered cars, portable computers. But then, in the 21st century, people awoke from the American dream.
Years of consumption lead to shortages of every major resource. The entire world unraveled. Peace became a distant memory. It is now the year 2077. We stand on the brink of total war, and I am afraid. For myself, for my wife, for my infant son - because if my time in the army taught me one thing: it’s that war, war never changes
I really needed this video now thanks a ton
Thanks for the informative knowledge you provide to viewers like me!
lasted till TODAY then continued some more
Yeah hearing that sentence now sounds pretty ominous. Almost literally lasted until today