I've watched many videos about a Confederate States victory, but all of these videos sometimes contradict each other.

So I'm asking what a realistic outcome of a CSA victory would be.

I'm not asking how they achieved it, that's up to you, but rather looking at the consequences: politically and culturally, both for the two Americas and for the rest of the world.

Finally, what would happen regarding the most prominent issue of the conflict: Slavery.

Philip II was only 46 when he was assassinated, and his son Alexander was only 20. Shortly after his ascension to the throne of Macedon, Alexander launches a Balkan campaign and the rest is history, until Alexander's own death at age 33. What happens if Philip lived longer, say, to age 50, or 60? Does Alexander still become The Great if he becomes king and starts conquering at a much older age? Does the Achaemenid Empire still fall, does the Hellenistic civilization still become such a defining force of the ancient era? And what else does Philip accomplish during the extra years of his rule?

I know that England does not have Salic law, but let’s assume that, following the First World War, women were excluded from the line of succession to prevent a foreign monarch—specifically a German one—from ruling the United Kingdom. The family, now known as the Windsors, accepted this measure in an effort to demonstrate their British identity.

The subsequent years unfold much as they did in our timeline: Edward VIII abdicates in favor of George VI. However, since George VI had no sons, the throne passes to Henry, Duke of Gloucester, in 1952, now Henry IX.

Thus, Henry IX reigns until his death in 1974. While William of Gloucester’s life would likely have taken a very different path, let us assume that he, too, dies without children, and Henry’s second son becomes Richard IV of the United Kingdom.

What would the United Kingdom be like today with another Richard on the throne? How would the public perceive his heir, Alexander, and the next in line, Xan?

On the other hand, what would have become of Elizabeth? Assuming she still married Philip, would she have converted to Orthodoxy? Would Philip have continued using his mother’s surname, Mountbatten, or would he have ended up opting for his paternal one?

Would Charles have married Camilla from the very beginning?

Thanks to lend lease USSR managed to turn tides of war, defeat Germany and become a hostile superpower, which was threatening western civilisation for half a century. Cold war also caused a lot of bloody wars (Korean, Vietnam and other), almost ended civilisation in likely nuclear exchange, and created such states as Pol Pot`s Cambodia, Mao`s China and North Korea, with extremely heavy human toll. Lend lease to yesterday`s enemy, knowing well that he will turn your weapons against you as soon as he recovers, had disastrous consequences later. No one could predict in 1941 that World War 3 will not happen because of nukes, after all.

Even without hindsight, would not it make much more sense for US and Britain not to prop up such hostile state as USSR? They were never on friendly terms - quite the opposite, Soviets wanted to take over the world in communists revolution (even though Stalin formally dismisses such a goal, he kept expandind and intervening, like Spain, wherever he could) and kill all capitalists. They also attacked and annexed independent states, just like Hitler. When war started, it soon became obvious that Germany will not win quickly and will get bogged down. So even without lend lease Germany was unlikely to take over entire USSR and its resources.

So what if instead of making communists stronger Allies waited (fighting only where is neccessary, like Africa, and starting bombing campaign, of course), while two sides exhaust each other? Since fight to death was inevitable, given how much they hated each other and how genocidal Eastern front was. And then bomb, nuke and defeat whoever is winning. Then no one would be left to keep threatening the world.

So what if the British Assassination or Kidnapping of George Washington succeeded in 1776?

I ask because Europe is so Rome-ified culturally. Art, government, symbolism, language, architecture, religion, etc. What would it be like if the modern societies of Europe derived these aspects of their culture more from their pre-Roman traditions? What can we speculate about how the arts, government (or lack thereof), symbolism, language, architecture, religion would have developed from their Gaulish, Germanic, and Brittonic cultures, and what this would look like in today's Europe?

I apologize this is my first post here and I didn't know where else to discuss this thought experiment. But imagine let's say during ww2 after defeating japan the relationship between China and the US grows extremely. How would you think the world would be shaped if two powerhouses were two of the closest allies?

I would believe protection and technology would be way more advanced

OTL context:
1. History of Gnosticism
2. The origins of Gnosticism
3. How Gnosticism came to be

Would it thrive or fail?

OTL Dalton Minimum lasted from 1790 to 1830 and was a period of colder climate, what if it developed into the end of current interglacial period? From the 1820s, global mean temperature dropped at least 4 degrees in a few decades, making places like Moscow, Ulaanbaatar, Montreal, Qiqihar uninhabitable. Crop yield collapsed in Western Europe, North America, North China and Korea. It took hundreds of years for glaciers to expand to similar levels to Last Glacial Maximum.

Will this cause a refugee crisis as people rush to leave cold places? Will it change the dynamic between colonial powers and their subjects? I don't think this will cause the collapse of human civilisation as modern science and steam engine alread existed in the 1820s, but it will probably slow it down drastically. People probably had enough technology to survive but not enough to artificially reverse the new glacial period.

Say he makes last minute plans to accompany Ferdinand on his state visit to Sarajevo, and gets assassinated in his place.

How would this change WW1 and the fate of Austria-Hungary when Franz Ferdinand immediately becomes emperor?

How could it ever be possible? What challenges will they face? What advantages will Malaysia have?

Lenin was only 53 when he died and was in poor health for a long time.
What if he had been a health man, didn't smoke or drink and lived to the age of 63, 73, or 83 and stayed sharp minded?

Would he stay in power? He would be around for the Winter War and WW2, would that had been different?

I understand he didn't trust Stalin, would he somehow rid of him?

In the late 1690s the then Kingdom of Scotland tried to establish a colony in what is now Panama.

It was an unmitigated disaster. 80% of the colonists died. And bankrupted Scotland.

It probably led to the Act of Union, which led to the British Empire.

What would the world and Scotland look like if Darien was a success?

Those familiar with the history of the atomic bomb would likely know that before the Trinity test, Teller, Oppenheimer and Compton were worried that the atomic bomb would set off a self-sustaining nuclear reaction that would burn through the atmosphere and end all life on Earth.

These fears would prove to be unfounded, but what if they were partially right?

What if instead of destroying the atmosphere, the Trinity test blew a hole in the ozone layer in the atmosphere above New Mexico?

For the purposes of the scenario, let's assume that the damage to the ozone layer cannot heal itself and gradually worsens between 1945 and 1965.

How would the United States respond to discovering that its first atomic test had caused a global environmental catastrophe? Would atmospheric nuclear testing be prohibited? How would this affect the Cold War, the environmentalist movement and the Space Race?

What would everyday life look like in New Mexico? Would people gradually adapt to living under a changed sky or would the entire state become uninhabitable? What happens to the other states in the American Southwest?

I understand Nathaniel passed from illness which damaged the progress but what if he survived and continued the battle? How would that shape American culture and race politics?

I don't want to hear any bullshit about ww2 (unless thats your honest opinon you sick fuck)

In our world, the interior of Australia is a vast desert and over 90% of the continent's population lives on the coasts. But how might the continent's history have played out of the interior had forests and plains instead of a desert? Might some great civilization comparable to Egypt or Mesopotamia have risen up?

Could an actually officially independent Egypt, as opposed to the de facto autonomy of the period, have actually existed? At least until the Europeans start eying the Suez, or dreaming of a Cape to Cairo railroad? Both examples are British but interest in the region may change in this scenario.

One of the bigger hurdles that Im aware of is that this would significantly weaken the Ottomans, thereby undermining the stability of the region, and perhaps more importantly, their use as a pawn in local affairs for the major powers. An independent mega Egypt may be a counter weight to the Ottomans, but Im not sure such a thing would be necessary.

If they were a useful tool for matters in their own region though, that might give them a better chance. Also an alliance or guarantee from a major power COULD help, but they are unlikely to do such a thing without expecting something in return. Like a protectorate deal for instance.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter, but I’m not very familiar with much of these topics and would like to get some input from who is.

*If you can’t tell I’ve been playing Victoria 3 as Egypt, and wanted to know more about if the Oriental Crisis and such had played out differently.

**Im typing this on mobile so sorry if this has poor grammar.

Okay, so I'm prefacing this with, the Nazis lose the war anyway, we all know that, this is just more of a "I wonder if one small change could have made major changes to the war?" question. And I came to one name.

Juan Pujol García.

If you aren't familiar with him, he's a Spanish man who decided in World War 2, he wanted to help the Allied cause. So he went to the British embassy and asked if he could help out. They said no.

So he said, no problem, I'll do it myself. (But probably in Spanish.) Man creates a fake identity as a fanatical fascist. Goes to the Nazis. Says he wants to help them out. They say, absolutely, go to Britain, start spying for us.

He moves to Lisbon. Collects travel guides and train schedules and newsreels and magazine ads about Britain. Starts spinning fantastic bullshit to feed the Nazis. Anyone who knows Britain would recognize he's lying. The Nazis think he's great. Tell him to start building a spy network. So he starts making up names to create some imaginary spies. They've got backstories. At one point he says one of them died to excuse the delay on some news.

British intelligence, meanwhile, is hearing about the Nazis getting the reports from some network of spies hidden in Britain. Start searching furiously. Finally get their hands on the reports the Nazis are reading and... Realize this is all fake.

Short version is, the British find Garcia, bring him over to Britain, and he feeds the Nazis fake intelligence for the rest of the war- well, some of it's fake, some of it is true that is just delivered a little too late. It all leads to one conclusion: Germany loved him. Awarded him the Iron Cross for his service. Notably, to award the Iron Cross to anyone who didn't fight on the front lines required Hitler's personal approval. The service was, of course, over the radio. Meanwhile Britain loved him even more, for obvious reasons- four months after he got the Iron Cross, Britain named him a Member of the Order of the British Empire, one of the few people in the war to receive high honors from both sides.

Now, what I've rambled to here is: I've read speculation that the constant reports from Garcia helped the Nazis feel like they didn't need to invest more on infiltrating the British, so his counter-intelligence operation was incredibly effective, especially for something that started with a guy doing it all on his own initiative out of an apartment in Portugal.

So, it's obviously kind of an impossible question to really get to details on, but it's something to wonder about: What if he never started doing this? What if the Nazis didn't have this source for what they thought was reliable information in the UK, and made more efforts to infiltrate and spy on the British war effort?

A series of skirmishes and provocations in Poland lead to the Russians declaring war on the Germans shortly after the British and French declare war.

Things go very badly for the Nazis and by early 1941 they're on the verge of collapse.

How does history play out from there?

So according to a Ted-Ed video, during the Irish Potato Famine the Ottoman Sultan had planned to donate 10,000 pounds for famine relief. However, he was talked down to 1,000 pounds to avoid embarrassing the British Monarch Queen Victoria who had only donated a measly 2,000 pounds for famine relief.

But what if the Ottoman Empire had found a way to donate the other 9,000 pounds to help the Irish like through the Quakers who were providing humanitarian relief to the Irish however they could.

How would the scandal affect British-Irish relations and British-Turkey relations?

austria was allowed to join the EU but not NATO to appease the ussr. what if they joined NATO for some of these senarios

1. the ussr collapses in 1991 and they apply for it then. The agreement was with the ussr not the russian federation.

2. the annexation of crimea made them break and join NATO.

3. the hot war of russo ukraine 2022 spooked them to joining.

4. when russia invaded chechnya. CAN choose between the 1st and 2nd chechan war.

5. the russo Georgia war.