In case you didn't know I have a second channel where I talk about history/geography/facts. It's called KnowledgeHub. Here is my video about what the lives of Knights were like. ruclips.net/video/2d2e08Z01Jw/видео.html (Also check out my Discord discord.gg/79jXFZs)
Douglas MacArthur: "Nuke em" Harry Truman: "No" Douglas MacArthur: "NUKE EM" Harry Truman: "NO" Douglas MacArthur: "Aw come on!" Harry Truman: "You're fired!"
@MrOverCritical1989 Honestly, we would not die immediately, but by 2018 we would all be at best dead, at worst, living in a primal nightmare of winter, starvation and disease.
Alt. univ. Cody: Hey its me again, today itll be another one of the Cody's campfire stories. Audience1: Is it another one of those alternate history things again ? Audience2: C'mon Cody, everytime its your turn you always go with this. Can't you tell something else ? Audience3: Dudes, be thankful that you CAN hear stories at the campfire like this. From tommorrow morning we will be moving through another one of the city ruins. Till we cross it, which might take a week or two we have to be constantly on our guard. That means no stories from tommorrow night. Thats why it is better you shut up and enjoy what you get. Cody: Yes, now listen, try to think what could've happened if that big nation...USA i think, would not have used that world ending bomb on that country...er, China probably. Audience2: Thats the thing that started all this ain't it ? But why would it matter? Such a dangerous thing would have led to ruins eventually anyway don't you think ? Cody: It might appear like that but think a bit harder. If that weapon wasn't used back then,...
@@duncanreeves225 After China took over ZhengBao Island, Soviet threatened China to return the land or else they will nuke Beijing. During 70's~80's, China has tight relationship with USA. In order to further tightening the relationship, USA provide nuclear protection to China (if Soviet nuke China, USA will nuke Soviet) Hence, Soviet then not dare to nuke China
@Justin y’all dropped bombs on our factory saying it was a “mistake” multiple times and sent planes to take picture of our military bases yall expect us to just sit and do nothing?
Cedric Crow It’s not that simple... I heard that if CCP did not enter the war, the USSR would, and meanwhile occupying the northeast of China, which was the most industrialized region at that time.
@@bigwhitesheep4451 Soviets did fight Japan for a brief period. For about a month. But USSR still got back some land Russian Empire lost in Russo-Japanese war.
I said easier on Britain, not France. The US would try to protect Britain because of the close ties they had, even in the face of an vengeful Germany. France on the other hand, would get fucked just as hard as Germany did in our timeline.
Imagine if we made a fusion bomb that didn’t require a fission bomb to set it off. There would be very little to no fallout. It would be as powerful as the H-bomb, with no long term side effects. Do you think we would have used the hell out of it?
it would be but the problem is no working pure fusion bomb exists as its a very damn difficult prospect but there also is a bit a fallout, it lasts about 3 times less but has way more radiation than normal fallout
No, because the main problem with nuclear bombs is not that they leave behind radiation. For example, under normal circumstances it takes around 2 days for 99% of the generated radiation to disappear. You actually have to make special "dirty" bombs in order to have massive long lasting radiation.
Highly recommend to anyone interested in this "What if" scenario, to read Bombs Away by Harry Turtledove. The reason Truman agrees with MacArthur in the book is that instead of breaking out of the encirclement at Chosin Reservoir, most of the UN forces are trapped and destroyed there. With precious few troops left in Korea, this leaves Truman in a difficult position. The resulting outcome is disturbing to say the least, considering how easily something like that could of actually happened in the early years of nuclear weapons and the Cold War.
I thought China warned them but U.S. forces refused to back down. MacArthur was extremely upset that the Chinese basically undid all his troops work in Korea in a time span of 72 hours, the success of the Chinese (which in turn he saw as his failure) deeply wounded him, which is why he was so stubborn about using nuclear weapons on China.
From what I understand, China warned the US about crossing the border. UN forces simply got "relatively close" (my words) to the border. I'd liken it to someone saying "don't punch me or I'll fuck you up" and you swinging at him but stopping a few inches from their face and they just fucking deck you in the face.
Stefan Ivanovski Then how illegal is the Cuban blockade? Cuba isn't even actually boardering the US and the US itself had already built missiles in Afghanistan against the Soviets, and yet the US made such a big deal out of it. How legal is that?
Legitpenguins69 I’d say it’s more along the lines of them warning you about punching them, you flip them off and then they deck the fuck out of you. Because China doesn’t give a fuck whether or not you actually did anything to them.
That’s why we used to call nukes “tactical” but now it’s a “strategic” weapon : you don’t let a tactician use a strategic weapon or the consequences might be dire.
@@Stacknasty69 True. Though, (AFAIK) the former have never been used so far. Doing so would have far-reaching diplomatic consequences and possibly open a floodgate no one wants to ever see open. So it would make sense that, even if they are low yield, their launch would need approval from the government rather than being 100% a military decision.
Honestly an important distinction to make. Macarthur might not have been the most humble of men, nor the most reasonable, but the thinking surrounding nukes have changed quite a bit. For all the likes of macarthur was concerned, it was just another bomb, another cog to abuse in warfare. Now we have a different understanding, one that the atom bomb is more than just a tool. It's something that could end mankind.
+Biggie Cheese One problem with that assumption - as previously stated, the nukes would have been used tactically rather than destructively. The targets would be along the Chinese/North Korean border, only a small fraction of China. There would be plenty of China left to declare war afterwards.
Harry S. Turtledove has a decent Alternate History trilogy that has the U.S. use nuclear weapons in China which brings the USSR into conflict with the US. A very scary scenario.
Why? I don't. We would have known more about the impacts of nukes very soon after that, and I don't see it not going back to MAD for very obvious reasons here.
@@rogueascendant6611 now now, let not talk about assassinating anyone, north korea wasn't meant to exist, but I don't think by taking out Truman The consideration would have been revoked.
Cisco Blue in reality that would never happen, mainly because the Americans didn't want another monarchy. The phrase "No taxation without representation" perfectly illiterates the reason as to why that would never have possibility to happen, because the people wanted to be represented and not be forced to follow a single person
Hi Cody! I'm a huge fan of your work. I have a suggestion for an alternate history scenario which I'm pretty surprised you haven't yet done - What if the Nationalists won the Chinese Civil war? I believe this is a very interesting idea to explore as a non-communist China would have enormous consequences for conflicts like the Korean War, the Vietnam War and in general the entire Cold War. Please, at least consider this scenario! Regards, Your faithful fan
Then China will be like India right now. Like, I hate both of them, however, it was indeed the communist China that really bonds people together at that time, at people really trusted them. The communist is egregious after WW2, so what I want to state is that both of them are assholes, that's why I like the concept of Capitalism better. Just keep in mind that there were two slightly different generations of Nationalists, therefore their concepts alter, and the new one is much much worse. Judging from that, I still prefer the government people get right now, as it won't last any longer, not more than 30 years. Still, I don't want China to become India.
Well then the name of the place of the place would become a lot more accurate. Also Michigan in general would probably become a radioactive wasteland. So not much would change, in fact it'd be an improvement as it would help balance the federal budget somewhat. That effect might be counterbalanced by increased spending in healthcare for the surrounding states though.
Ain't no party like a Pyongyang party because a Pyongyang party is mandatory. Plus who would pass up the opportunity to party with the supreme techno DJ of the world Kim Jong Untz-Untz-Untz-Untz-Untz
It didn't take long either to make the bombs bigger. 10 years and they were already too big. The what if's and the atomic scare were more than a mere scare but an inevitability. Another war and more technological leaps and Starship Troopers Mecha robo-suits with automatic nuclear machine guns woulda been real. The Death Star was already dreamed up by the Nazis in WWII just think what we would have in WWIII.
I would say option #3. What if the USSR used America's use of the bomb as an excuse to censure the US while appealing to the United Nations? The UN agrees and suddenly the USSR is seen more of a peace loving nation and gains political clout in the world while the US is seen as an aggressor and suffers political blow back. Especially during the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis when the UN had backed the US, but in this alternate timeline the UN takes sides with the USSR and allowed to keep their missiles in Cuba.
This could potentially lead to the Soviet Union winning the cold war, as more countries in Latin America and Africa would allying with the Soviet Union
That's unrealistic. First off, the UN doesn't have power over jack shit and nobody cares. Second, the balance of power in the UN wouldn't change in the slightest as all the countries that side with the US would never side with the USSR no matter what the US does because they need the US to protect them from gommunism, and all the countries that side with the USSR would always side with the USSR. Worst case scenario it sparks a gommunist revolution in France that's quickly supprssed by the military. You're assuming that the politicians in the UN actually have any morals. They don't, they never did, they just use moral-sounding excuses to do what benefits them in the long run. And after that kind of show of force by the US, especially in a time when the USSR didn't have that kind of raw power yet, it would benefit absolutely none of the US allies to distance themselves or to stop siding with the US in the UN. World politics is much less about morals and image than it is about interests and profiteering. It's much easier to do what you know is in your interests and then trying to justify that as moral through propaganda among your populous than it is to do what would actually be the moral, ethical thing, because in the end of the day people care much less about morality and ethics than they do about self preservation, which is entirely reasonable since ethics and morals is shit we made up and doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.
Well that's true that communism was a threat, but what was a bigger threat was "gommunism"! Communism's more sadistic brother. Founded by Gollum in the pursuit of total equality and to find "The Precious". It was said that Franco's Fascist Spain was still fighting gommunism up until the 1970's.
I'm not too sure about the Korean war but I think Aussie's did better than the US in terms of numbers. I don't know, but I know that's for certain regarding the Vietnam war.
Cody, you mentioned that at the beginning of the Korean war, nuclear bombs were still in their infancy. The USSR did not successfully make their own bomb until late 1949, (only a year+ before this scenario) and since their nuclear stockpile was so low, (estimated
Meh! Screw Europe, Go 'Murica! We elected Trump for a reason! Anyways, the year 1955 was the most realistic year that multiple sources could confirm the stockpile numbers. One source however does claim the USSR arsenal was a puny 15 RDS-1 bombs in March, 1951. So it is possible that USSR forces could not fulfill M.A.D., much less could they actually deploy a bomb over North America. It is also worth noting a different source says that in 1950 the US had 299 nukes, and Russia only 5. As you said it yourself "200 nukes is still enough to destroy every major city..." As for soviet conventional forces, if the west could get the first nuclear strike, it would leave the already man-power weakened Soviet army (From WWII) in disarray, allowing "better off" European forces to likely make territorial gains after an initial co-ordinated soviet attack. If the carpet bombing is successful, then Soviet military leadership would be near non-existent, and soviet arms replenishing would be crippled, if not, then impossibly doomed. Soviet nukes could still be deployed, but on an extremely small relative scale, and only against Europe. The longer the U.S. would wait, the more damage the USSR could do. Thinking of it now, soviet diplomacy would most likely just "bluff," and make the U.S. think it had more nukes than it actually did. Alternate history is really fun! But you are right. The United States would never unload its stockpile, but because of social, economic. and political reasons. But "It's fun to Theorize!"
The problem was that Russia really didnt have a long range strategic bomber capable of hitting U.S. cities. Alaska might get hit but there really isnt that much there to begin with. western Europe would get hit a few times. Aswell as South Korea and Japan. But if America intiated the war with multiple nuclear strikes and chinas and the soviets major cities and bases then it would be logisticly hard for them to drop nukes of their own.
If America never left Europe and continued on with their armies. After Japan then Moscow? Before the nuclear secrets were stolen, just keep fighting till communism is defeated? Then Russia and China would be competing much earlier and Japan and Korean might never of became what they are today. Samsung and my hentai all gone. What a boring future that would be. :(
Ansury Sayer That's what operation unthinkable was. Go to war with the soviets the minute after Riech falls. This plan was supported by General George S. Patton. You still have to remember that atomic weapons were a closely held secret by the U.S . government, until their international debuts in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The soviets wouldn't get their own bomb until 1949. Most importantly; as soon as the soviets had a nuke, America would have the perfect excuse to ramp up production. The US also needed to prepare defenses against said nukes. This is why you see so many civil defense programs, like the famous Bert the Turtle. (which first appeared in Jan. 1952, and lasted even throughout the Cuban Missile Crisis.) The main differences of Unthinkable and this scenario is A: soviet moral immediately after WWII, which was extremely high, and B: Production limitations. By production limitations, I mean the secrecy of the Manhattan project. If workers knew what they were making it would've likely lead to ethical resistance even before bombs were built. Builders of Little Boy and Fat Man didn't even know they were building a bomb, and were told lies ranging anywhere from making paperclips to toatsters, to God knows what! The truth is the U.S. didn't need to build bombs after WWII, until the soviets started the arms race with their own bomb. The cycle we see here is "America won't make nukes until the soviets can" and "The soviets need to develop a nuke before East vs. West tensions would arise." In conclusion; Directly after WWII there simply would not be enough bombs to destroy the USSR before their conventional army does major damage to Europe.
Russia may have had more men and more tanks. But you are forgeting that America had some of the best aircraft and pilots by the end of the war. That on top of superior numbers of said aircraft. Meant air supremacy would go to the U.S. and its allies though the struggle to get it would be costly. Which means the U.S. could use nukes. But only on the Eastern and Western fronts. As it would be to difficult to hit Moscow with the bombers of the time. But If the U.S. was willing to put the morals to the side like we did with japan. Then we wouldnt get bogged down in long drawn out sieges like leningrad or stalingrad. Just push the front untill we got close then nuke the city and push on. You also have to relize that american troops were far better trained and equiped then the russian army. The Germans still used bolt action rifles when they invaded and they got pretty far. America had semiauto rifles in mass production. As well as larger caliber submachine guns, pistols, and non-crew served LMGs. The only problem the russians would give us is tanks. As the soviet tanks were better and they had more of them.But America would still have air supremacy. So the soviets wouldnt be able to attack in mass tank formations without taking heavy loses. I fell as if the war would be held in a deadlock untill America could produce a tank that could rival the soviets. WHich could happen fast since the allies got almost all the German scientists after the war. And would have even more since we were fighting the Germans greatest enemy. The war would be long and costly maybe even longer and worse then the second world war. But I believe unless the Soviets stole our nuclear secrets like they did in our timeline america would win.
"The hot war" series by Harry Turtledove explains this alternate history pretty well. Its a series of three novels where the soviet union does get involved and invades western europe and also nukes are used like any other bomb.
+EPKingMaster Wrong, you didn't saw how broken inside at taiwan. They have be struggle with everything to keep themselves afloat form total bankurpt for decades because of internal corruption.
Wrong, if china split into serveal parts after the civil war, USSR would invade south destory the parts one by one, and took all of asia after whole china were annexed , and then they will be unstoppable.
KMT lost the war against communist due to heavy corruption. They used the war tax money to build villas for themselves, which is the one of the main reason US didn't want give too much support to the KMT. And after US's failure to get rid of communism out of China, US learned from its mistakes and began to fully support any regime from any country that is anticommunist despite their corrupted nature. For instance Iran, Libya, Chile, Vietnam,Korea and etc. Even if KMT won the war despite with heavy corruption. At best the situation would be like South Korea. At worse it would be like Africa or middle east. Not to mention Taiwan faced serious corruption and white terror after the civil war, and the first election only occurred in 1996.
Lord Beerus Eh probably not. It was the conflict that was driving the space race. We were going to send astronauts to the Mars, but then the USSR collapsed so a pin was put in that.
The US planned to strike Chinese territory. Radiation doesn't travel more than a few meters by itself and an atomic bomb doesn't carry enough radioactive material to cause a Chernobyl scenario. There would have been lots of deformed Chinese babies (if anyone even survived 50 nukes going off so close to each other), but the Koreans would have been fine.
Nathanator Tactical nukes are meant for battlefield situations using gravity bombs (unguided bombs), short-range missiles, artillery shells, and land mines. These would be used with friendly forces in proximity which would most likely cause many deaths of enemy troops along with friendlies. Unlike Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those are strategic nuclear weapons, which are meant for targeting areas that are not of battlefield significance but for economic destruction. Strategic nuclear weapons will produce an explosion on a larger scale of a tactical nuke. Strategic targets will usually include military bases, cities, towns, arms industries, and other hardened or larger-area targets to damage the enemy's ability to wage war.
Well if we did launch a nuke at China, I'd imagine they'd be all like "shit shit, who the fuck is shooting us?" "oh well, fire missiles!" and then France is like "shit guys, ze missiles are coming! Fire our shit!" "But I am le tired..." "...well, have a nap, ZEN FIRE ZE MISSILES!"
Actually, if there is no fire in the area of a nuke, i believe it's not going to be on fire. Nukes just have the massive pressure inside of a bomb the size of a couch. No fire included, just HUGE HUGE pressure
Just throwing this out there at the start, if this video idea interests you then Harry Turtledove is your man. First book in the Hot War series is Bombs Away.
Thats false he did say we were fighting the wrong enemy during world war 2. But thats because he relized how much of a problem the soviet union has become due to its vicktory over Germany. The Nazis could be bargained with. We even traded with them for a while. The soviets on the other hand only wanted to see America and all she stood for burn.
It's interesting that MacArthur who was so forward thinking in regards to the treatment of Japan after World War Two, gets it so wrong with the Tactical Nuking of Manchuria. Seems like almost a total one eighty.
Yes and no. I think MacArthur could see the future in the sense of recognizing where the dominoes will fall and I think he saw russia and China as problems, which he was right, so by flexing America's might in a small war that would scare nations because if America is willing to use a nuke for such a small war just think what they'll do in a full scale war.
@@DeadInside-ew8qb Problem that if both sides have access to similar weapons (this is if the Soviet were to supply them to the Chinese or come to their aid) then once it is used the other side has no excuse not use them and almost has to use them in self defense.. Similar to the proliferation of chemical weapons during WW I. Hence the reason of MAD, no one wants to be the first to pull the trigger, because they'll get the same in return. The fun and joy of brinkmanship.
I think one of the biggest effects of this would be on the Bandung conference in 1956 in Indonesia. It was a gathering of almost all post colonial nations from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Western powers and Soviets all freaked out and were extremely concerned that western power and influence could be pushed out as those nations would unify, primarily focused on economic unity, open borders, and eventually even a joint military force. This included nations like Nigeria, Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, and even China (as more of an observer status, however their prime minister did give one of the most famous speeches at the first conference) the concept of the third world came from these conferences, I believe it was the Pakistani prime minister who said there is the western capitalist 1st world, the Communist Soviet 2nd world, and then all of their post colonial nations seeking to rebuild an identity as the 3rd world (it was not derogatory back then as it is now) the amount of espionage, back room deal making and bribes, along with attempts at derailing or sabotaging certain discussions took place throughout the first few conferences. Nehru of India, along with Suharto of Indonesia really led the event. Many US allied (or ones that would later get US aid as a reward) came out strong against the Chinese and the idea of unifying many countries as anti capitalist and doomed to failure. Yet if this had happened a few years earlier I can see many really hearing China out who along with India and Turkey and Egypt, and Iran, along with smaller satellite powers genuinely wanted to form their own economic and political bloc to rival the others. This would have changed everything in massive ways. The early conferences are forgotten to many in the West but they were among the most important meetings in the 20th century. Just imagine if China had gotten the sympathy and backing of these nations in the conference and became a legitimate leader of numerous nations. The formation of a NATO type entity made up of very rich in resources and labour post colonial nations, who via their colonial experience had enough of a shared experience and history to warrant unity. Everything would be different, Beijing, Delhi, Istanbul, Cairo, Tehran, Jakarta, would be centers of the world more so than they are now, their would be rail systems linking Morroco to Bangladesh with free movement of peoples and new economic entities and powerhouses to rival and even trump Europe.
Truman was actually "fired" because he was almost more powerful than the President of the USA. To way over simplify, MacArthur had almost all of the freed-from-WWII -Japan Asian countries (including the the Japanese at this point) at his command and backing him. Plus he had nuke's at his disposal. He stepped down when asked . And the US Govt was terrified what might had happen if he had said no.
Idk I think I read this page saying KSA banned fallout 4. me.ign.com/en/ps4/113209/news/fallout-4-officially-banned-in-saudi-arabia Maybe I should go to Jarir and check out.
I do like the thought that Macarthur, after personally seeing the destruction that just TWO nuclear bombs had on such a powerful nation like the Japanese empire, which by the way were only used to end a world war, thought that a small scaled civil war required the use of FIFTY.
MacArthur is no hero. His father/grand father was General MacArthur presiding over American atrocities in the Philippines 1899. They slaughtered whole villages that would make My Lai blush. The family has a history of being blood thirsty towards the people of Asia
+Fox Ace not necessarily. Russia was improving in the wake of early industrialization and the emancipation of the serfs. You do miss out on Stalin's Five Year Plan, but it's entirely possible that the free market would have seen industrialization at a slower but longer pace, probably ending up with a better economy. The Tsar would have fallen one way or another before the present day.
Harry Turtledove wrote a series with a similar premise to this, "The Hot War." He came to mostly the same conclusion as the first scenario of this video, and things escalated into World War 3 very quickly, with lots of cities on both sides getting nuked. The implications for the future of that world are terrifying so far, and the series isn't even finished yet.
We would never come back from it, it would pretty much be the extinction of mankind. Fallout is better since you have radaway going for you. No such thin in real life.
Actually nuclear war isnt as bad as most media would make it seem. radation from madern nuclear weapons actually has a really short half life. You would be able to go out side without a gas mask or protctive suit in a matter of months. As long as you werent close (a few miles) from the impact sight. Most people living in major cities or near military bases would be dead yes. But after that not much else. The real problem comes from nuclear winter. All of the shit thrown into the sky would lower the global temp by a lot. And most animals and plants would die out from the initial radiation. If you were in africa or south america you would probable survive. But more then likely you would survive in a world with a destroyed economy and no goverment.
I agree Nuclear weapons are bad. I mean they keep us from having world war 3 and I've been waiting for that since I joined the Army. I'm just being factual that nuclear war doesnt mean the death of all of us. Just most of us.
Probably would make for a good Call of Duty game tbh. A Korean War game, advertised as just an ordinary game. Everything is normal, real battles take place, but then something strange happens from history. Airsupport is cut off, you just need to hold for a bit longer in the North. And then the nukes go off. The second half of the game is dealing with WW3. Then you have a sequel 2 or 3 years later fighting in radioactive Europe. Call of Duty really needs to get into Alternate History. The fact it's so obvious they've run out of ideas really just makes it insane they haven't gone into alternate history yet. An alternate history game would be hard to sell to people, but one that is a normal game and becomes alt hist? Yeah, that'd probably be fine.
In case you didn't know I have a second channel where I talk about history/geography/facts. It's called KnowledgeHub. Here is my video about what the lives of Knights were like.
ruclips.net/video/2d2e08Z01Jw/видео.html
(Also check out my Discord discord.gg/79jXFZs)
AlternateHistoryHub love your content! Keep it up!
hello
AlternateHistoryHub all of your channels are awesome
AlternateHistoryHub you should do if America successfully invaded Canada in the war of 1812
AlternateHistoryHub hey cody
"its like taking out a grenade during a little league hockey brawl" - Best line
Provocateur they aren't going to do that and even if they do they will fight later over the spoilers of war
Is-lame haha thats a good one
If hockey was allowed in war
canada would obliterate every other country
Chaotic good
Piroclanidis Russia called they said nope...
goo goo ga ga
-Atomic bomb, early 1950's
A-Bomb: How Are YOU??
H-Bomb: I'm YOU, But Stronger!!!
Atomic bomb really said: Use me for once.
boom boom bam bam
*_"It's not a phase mom!"_*
*_-Hydrogen bomb_*
@@justarandomsovietofficerwi2023 nice.
Douglas MacArthur: "Nuke em"
Harry Truman: "No"
Douglas MacArthur: "NUKE EM"
Harry Truman: "NO"
Douglas MacArthur: "Aw come on!"
Harry Truman: "You're fired!"
Jeffrey Herrera you fat illbred boy
@Jeffrey Herrera oh come on that's a bit harsh, sure he/she smells a bit but I wouldn't say they're revolting!
Anyone else reading this chat in an oversimplified voice?
@@rylencason4420 jokes on you i watched that video before i watched this one
Oh how i live oversimplified references
Truman: "All weapons are on the table"
MacArthur, circa 1951: *Oh yea, this is big brain time*
Someone should have assassinated Truman and let McArthur gained approval.
I seriously despised North Korea.
Its a mockery that shouldn't even exist.
@@rogueascendant6611 As much as I hate North Korea, I do not by any stretch believe that assassinating Truman would be the answer
@@rogueascendant6611 isint north korea an irrelevant state nobody cares about though? hardly worth getting rid of a president over.
@@tctlunar3488 it wasnt the answer, Its the question. THE ANSWER IS YES
@@sorcierenoire8651 No
In an alternate universe Cody is talking about an alternate history where America didn’t use nuclear bombs in the Korean war
no because we’d all be dead
@MrOverCritical1989 Then the soviets would have a reason to use nukes,and then we would all die.also i know this is an old comment
@MrOverCritical1989 Honestly, we would not die immediately, but by 2018 we would all be at best dead, at worst, living in a primal nightmare of winter, starvation and disease.
@@suggestiveguy they wouldn't use nukes because then USA could directly nuke russia.
Big dumb dumb
Alt. univ.
Cody: Hey its me again, today itll be another one of the Cody's campfire stories.
Audience1: Is it another one of those alternate history things again ?
Audience2: C'mon Cody, everytime its your turn you always go with this. Can't you tell something else ?
Audience3: Dudes, be thankful that you CAN hear stories at the campfire like this. From tommorrow morning we will be moving through another one of the city ruins. Till we cross it, which might take a week or two we have to be constantly on our guard. That means no stories from tommorrow night. Thats why it is better you shut up and enjoy what you get.
Cody: Yes, now listen, try to think what could've happened if that big nation...USA i think, would not have used that world ending bomb on that country...er, China probably.
Audience2: Thats the thing that started all this ain't it ? But why would it matter? Such a dangerous thing would have led to ruins eventually anyway don't you think ?
Cody: It might appear like that but think a bit harder. If that weapon wasn't used back then,...
What if micro transactions never existed?
$3.99 for answer
TyOrca 5 no more Activision
TyOrca 5 😂😂😂
We'd live in a paradise where no-one wants for anything and theres never any war
ooo ya
TyOrca 5 We would have a better games industry.
Then you'd have a new fallout game.
IT’S ALMOST HARVESTING SEASON FALLOUT : NEW KOREA
Fallout irl
COUNTRY ROADS
I’d play it
@@v4mp1anth3m4 me 2
USA: *didn’t nuke China*
Soviet Union in 1969: Fine, I’ll do it myself
Nixon: 😯
Sorry I don't get this reference, what are you talking about
@@duncanreeves225 On March1969, Sino-Soviet relationship broke apart due to The Battle of ZhengBao Island.
@@milokaw4193 but the USSR didn't nuke China in that conflict
@@duncanreeves225
After China took over ZhengBao Island, Soviet threatened China to return the land or else they will nuke Beijing.
During 70's~80's, China has tight relationship with USA. In order to further tightening the relationship, USA provide nuclear protection to China (if Soviet nuke China, USA will nuke Soviet)
Hence, Soviet then not dare to nuke China
@@milokaw4193 thanks, I didn't know that
what if i had a girlfriend?
Girl? Friend? What are these things?
oh there unpredictable females who can be greedy gold diggers crippling you financially till you run dry and go for another.
Multiple universes would break
Blasphemy!
Ryan Mckenna Well thats a little far fetched isn't it, lets stay within the realm of possibility.
What if the United Kingdom never cracked the enigma code?
That's a good one, hope he sees this
That's awesome.
The 115 YES IT MUST BE DONE
Poland*
YES MAKE IT HAPPEN
China and US stick fighting
US "drops nukes"
China "dude what the fuck?!"
Artemis lmfaoo 😭😭
Europe:- DUDE!!?
I read that last statement in torrette's guy's voice
Artemis
Hahaha i dont get it.
“ the Chinese crossed the border in *SECRET* “
Chinese soldier: * starts firing bullets *
For real, Chinese actually warned the U.S
@Justin y’all dropped bombs on our factory saying it was a “mistake” multiple times and sent planes to take picture of our military bases yall expect us to just sit and do nothing?
In Another Timeline:
"What if we never nuked China?"
Daniel Awesome no fallout refe- oh wait your pfp
But the Chinese shot first...
@@xxheartbrokexx100 we must repay Alaska!
Cedric Crow It’s not that simple... I heard that if CCP did not enter the war, the USSR would, and meanwhile occupying the northeast of China, which was the most industrialized region at that time.
@@bigwhitesheep4451 Soviets did fight Japan for a brief period. For about a month. But USSR still got back some land Russian Empire lost in Russo-Japanese war.
So in my Hoi4 campaign, me and my pals flattened Stalingrad with 4 nukes
@Wilhelm II. lol
I'm from Ukraine and i like it!
MacArthur: FUCKING NUKE THEM.
ahh nothing can beat a good hoi4 game with ur homies
I can do you one better
I flattened japan by nuking every province at once
What if big smoke never ordered food?
Ahmed Mustafa My god...
Ahmed Mustafa black hole
Ahmed Mustafa ww3
Ahmed Mustafa we wouldn't have made fun of him
CJ would have followed the damn train
“America certainly does win the war.”
Ya don’t say...
Ya but it becomes a pyrrhic victory in a way. Cause it leads to WW3 and end of civilization.
What if China attacked Alaska but America didn't make power armor
over 300 like, wow
Tym Avice lol, Fallout reference xD
Tym Avice XD
We'll never know for sure. But it's fun to theorize.
Tym Avice II
Interesting theory... Let me process that.
***Tactical asessement: red chinese victory... Impossible!***
China will feel how they chew 5 gum
Roman Snow that is a fantastic reference, well done my friend
Roman Snow
Stimulate your senses.
Power level > 9000
The_SkyDragons but their is only 7 bil people also not everyone in china lives in beijing
@@genericname5909 he meant 10 million
What if America joined the Central Powers?
Carolus Rex maybe a french or british hitler but definitely not as bad as the one we had
But there would be no democracies in Europe
(would have been pretty easy on Britain and France) nop certainly not
I said easier on Britain, not France. The US would try to protect Britain because of the close ties they had, even in the face of an vengeful Germany. France on the other hand, would get fucked just as hard as Germany did in our timeline.
+Carolus Rex but... if it wasn't for France America wouldn't have been here in the first place.
Imagine if we made a fusion bomb that didn’t require a fission bomb to set it off. There would be very little to no fallout. It would be as powerful as the H-bomb, with no long term side effects. Do you think we would have used the hell out of it?
Usa and russia: *takes notes*
The power to annihilate an entire city in an instance is still too dangerous.
it would be but the problem is no working pure fusion bomb exists as its a very damn difficult prospect but there also is a bit a fallout, it lasts about 3 times less but has way more radiation than normal fallout
@@30cal23 If we can learn to store antimatter, then you can use a few micrograms of that to initiate a fusion weapon. But we don't have that tech yet.
No, because the main problem with nuclear bombs is not that they leave behind radiation. For example, under normal circumstances it takes around 2 days for 99% of the generated radiation to disappear. You actually have to make special "dirty" bombs in order to have massive long lasting radiation.
Why don't North Koreans have books?
Because Kim Jong Un is a supreme reader...
Zach HILLARIOUS AND ORIGINAL
Badum dum!
AlphaChocolateTruffle (USING 55 YEAR OLD TANKS INTENSIFIES)
Walktheline ah accent racism jokes
AlphaChocolateTruffle (SOVIET UNIFORMS INTENSIFIE)
Alternate history...Alternate history never changes.
Justin Widle yes 👏👏👏👏👏👏
Do you have a geiger counter?
Alternative history.....has changed.
New AltHistory Video?!?
**explodes with excitement**
random petrol can HAHA PUNS!!
took me a second
gross
random petrol can the punk King holy shit
Pun***
The “Glassing over China & turning the border into a nuclear wasteland” quote kills me every time 😂. Need more ‘Nuclear what if’s” videos
Highly recommend to anyone interested in this "What if" scenario, to read Bombs Away by Harry Turtledove. The reason Truman agrees with MacArthur in the book is that instead of breaking out of the encirclement at Chosin Reservoir, most of the UN forces are trapped and destroyed there. With precious few troops left in Korea, this leaves Truman in a difficult position. The resulting outcome is disturbing to say the least, considering how easily something like that could of actually happened in the early years of nuclear weapons and the Cold War.
I thought China warned them but U.S. forces refused to back down.
MacArthur was extremely upset that the Chinese basically undid all his troops work in Korea in a time span of 72 hours, the success of the Chinese (which in turn he saw as his failure) deeply wounded him, which is why he was so stubborn about using nuclear weapons on China.
From what I understand, China warned the US about crossing the border. UN forces simply got "relatively close" (my words) to the border. I'd liken it to someone saying "don't punch me or I'll fuck you up" and you swinging at him but stopping a few inches from their face and they just fucking deck you in the face.
Stefan Ivanovski Then how illegal is the Cuban blockade? Cuba isn't even actually boardering the US and the US itself had already built missiles in Afghanistan against the Soviets, and yet the US made such a big deal out of it. How legal is that?
@@papel6280 well dumbass they are 90 miles away and u literally look over to come from key west
@@papel6280 Do you mean the ones in Turkey that the US quietly removed after the crisis?
Legitpenguins69 I’d say it’s more along the lines of them warning you about punching them, you flip them off and then they deck the fuck out of you. Because China doesn’t give a fuck whether or not you actually did anything to them.
"I hope you step on a lego"
I LMAO
LuckyTuxRBLX That's worse than a nuke
LuckyTuxRBLX ｃｙｋａ ｂｌｙａｔ
That is such a savage thing to say, when I did that the hospital was full of reporters who wanted to hear my story XD
Bill Anderson id say its a tie
LuckyTuxRBLX thats what im gonna say for now on
That’s why we used to call nukes “tactical” but now it’s a “strategic” weapon : you don’t let a tactician use a strategic weapon or the consequences might be dire.
Also, tactical nukes are low yield where strategic are high yield
@@Stacknasty69 True. Though, (AFAIK) the former have never been used so far. Doing so would have far-reaching diplomatic consequences and possibly open a floodgate no one wants to ever see open.
So it would make sense that, even if they are low yield, their launch would need approval from the government rather than being 100% a military decision.
Honestly an important distinction to make. Macarthur might not have been the most humble of men, nor the most reasonable, but the thinking surrounding nukes have changed quite a bit. For all the likes of macarthur was concerned, it was just another bomb, another cog to abuse in warfare. Now we have a different understanding, one that the atom bomb is more than just a tool. It's something that could end mankind.
@@Fuzen. Little Boy's yield would qualify as a tactical nuke by modern standards 🤷🏻♂️
8:00
US nukes China
USSR And China declare war on US
*USSR nuke europe*
Hey tf did we do now ?
Wololo l how can china declare war on US when chinas in ruins? oh wait
+Biggie Cheese
One problem with that assumption - as previously stated, the nukes would have been used tactically rather than destructively. The targets would be along the Chinese/North Korean border, only a small fraction of China. There would be plenty of China left to declare war afterwards.
you got instantly nuked by china and earth is doomed.
You know what NATO is?
That is why russia would nuke europe, they are what's the closest danger.
It was right after world war 2 Europe was still pretty much in ruins and American military was basically in control especially Germany and France
what if alternatehistoryhub was never created?
PylonBuffering A million people would suffer from depression.
We would be even dumber
PylonBuffering we will all be dead without Cody's sexy voice
Another channel would be.
PylonBuffering you wouldn't be here
Harry S. Turtledove has a decent Alternate History trilogy that has the U.S. use nuclear weapons in China which brings the USSR into conflict with the US. A very scary scenario.
@Chet Ripley turtledove.fandom.com/wiki/The_Hot_War
It's scary to think this was even considered by MacArthur.
Why? I don't. We would have known more about the impacts of nukes very soon after that, and I don't see it not going back to MAD for very obvious reasons here.
He was a little bit screwed in the head whenever he saw himself humiliated
Someone should have assassinated Truman and let McArthur gained approval.
I seriously despised North Korea.
Its a mockery that shouldn't even exist.
@@rogueascendant6611 now now, let not talk about assassinating anyone, north korea wasn't meant to exist, but I don't think by taking out Truman The consideration would have been revoked.
It'll be better if communism never existed
What if George Washington became King of America?
Cisco Blue good question
Lin Manuel Miranda couldn't have written "one last time"
assassin's creed?
Cisco Blue in reality that would never happen, mainly because the Americans didn't want another monarchy. The phrase "No taxation without representation" perfectly illiterates the reason as to why that would never have possibility to happen, because the people wanted to be represented and not be forced to follow a single person
It would be made into DLC for Assassin's Creed
Hi Cody!
I'm a huge fan of your work. I have a suggestion for an alternate history scenario which I'm pretty surprised you haven't yet done - What if the Nationalists won the Chinese Civil war? I believe this is a very interesting idea to explore as a non-communist China would have enormous consequences for conflicts like the Korean War, the Vietnam War and in general the entire Cold War. Please, at least consider this scenario!
Regards,
Your faithful fan
Mart kenyon In a way, America and the USSR wouldn’t be the biggest enemies. China and the USSR would be, since they share borders.
Then China will be like India right now. Like, I hate both of them, however, it was indeed the communist China that really bonds people together at that time, at people really trusted them. The communist is egregious after WW2, so what I want to state is that both of them are assholes, that's why I like the concept of Capitalism better. Just keep in mind that there were two slightly different generations of Nationalists, therefore their concepts alter, and the new one is much much worse. Judging from that, I still prefer the government people get right now, as it won't last any longer, not more than 30 years. Still, I don't want China to become India.
My PC glitches a lot, so there are a few typos as I didn't get the chance to correct them.
You'd be able to say this "天安门广场大屠杀" without the cops kicking in your door, and shutting off your internet.
@@jess8847 A genuine question, why do you hate both India and China?
Cold War GONE WRONG
Nuking China *gone wrong*
Gone sexual !
*3AM*
GONE NUCLEARLY WRONG
In the hood
6:48 Func fact: actually it was France who first discovered and used mustard gas
What if congress got REALLY high and dropped the entire United States nuclear arsenal on Hell, Michigan?
Kim Jong The Choo Choo Train of Bel-Air then I'd probably be ded
plot twist,it was actually detroit.
While we cannot know for sure, I think that it would kill at least a couple dozen people living there.
would Detroit really be any different?
Well then the name of the place of the place would become a lot more accurate.
Also Michigan in general would probably become a radioactive wasteland. So not much would change, in fact it'd be an improvement as it would help balance the federal budget somewhat. That effect might be counterbalanced by increased spending in healthcare for the surrounding states though.
Douglas "Gandhi" McArthur
LMFAO
Francesco Azzoni This is amazing
"Our words are backed with nuclear bombs"
it's so true XD
all the ppl who watch this that don't play Civ are going to be so confused... :P
Ain't no party like a Pyongyang party because a Pyongyang party is mandatory. Plus who would pass up the opportunity to party with the supreme techno DJ of the world Kim Jong Untz-Untz-Untz-Untz-Untz
lmfao
NOOOOOOOOOORRRRTTTHHHHHH KOOOORRRRREEEEAAAAAA BESSSSTTT KOOOORRREEEEA!
A Canadian Dildo bayonet best bayonet
Press Secretary Alex Jones lol wtf
Best Korea!
the best disco party in the world
RUclips has a sick sense of humor recommending this to me as I was talking about us - China relations
yo you can totally make a game out of this... oh, wait.
Its not really fallout tbh
It didn't take long either to make the bombs bigger. 10 years and they were already too big. The what if's and the atomic scare were more than a mere scare but an inevitability. Another war and more technological leaps and Starship Troopers Mecha robo-suits with automatic nuclear machine guns woulda been real. The Death Star was already dreamed up by the Nazis in WWII just think what we would have in WWIII.
he was basically trying to make the glowing sea
Hahaha A Much larger Sea than the one on Commonwealth 😂
That tactic is what Belka did in Ace Combat Zero.
Nice to see that one of the series' craziest events is somewhat grounded in reality.
"Nuclear inspection, what a joke."
"The use of Nuclear warheads, it would set up morale questions of its u-"
Me: -laughs in fallout with Davy Crockett nuclear catapult-
1:07
America: I hope you step on a Lego
Soviet:Cyka Bkyat
Understandable
Blyat
WHAT IF PABLO ESCOBAR WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT OF COLUMBIA
What if you were elected president of Colombia?
What if you spelled Colombia correctly?
Or maybe he meant the State of Washington, that was formerly named Columbia
Hell he basically was for a while.
Your spelling of Colombia just triggered me, please don't mispell it anymore.
I would say option #3. What if the USSR used America's use of the bomb as an excuse to censure the US while appealing to the United Nations? The UN agrees and suddenly the USSR is seen more of a peace loving nation and gains political clout in the world while the US is seen as an aggressor and suffers political blow back. Especially during the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis when the UN had backed the US, but in this alternate timeline the UN takes sides with the USSR and allowed to keep their missiles in Cuba.
Yeah, that sounds more plausible.
This could potentially lead to the Soviet Union winning the cold war, as more countries in Latin America and Africa would allying with the Soviet Union
ohh... nice move, Stalin would have seen the chance to swing the pendulum against us and would have taken it whole heartedly.
That's unrealistic. First off, the UN doesn't have power over jack shit and nobody cares. Second, the balance of power in the UN wouldn't change in the slightest as all the countries that side with the US would never side with the USSR no matter what the US does because they need the US to protect them from gommunism, and all the countries that side with the USSR would always side with the USSR. Worst case scenario it sparks a gommunist revolution in France that's quickly supprssed by the military.
You're assuming that the politicians in the UN actually have any morals. They don't, they never did, they just use moral-sounding excuses to do what benefits them in the long run. And after that kind of show of force by the US, especially in a time when the USSR didn't have that kind of raw power yet, it would benefit absolutely none of the US allies to distance themselves or to stop siding with the US in the UN.
World politics is much less about morals and image than it is about interests and profiteering. It's much easier to do what you know is in your interests and then trying to justify that as moral through propaganda among your populous than it is to do what would actually be the moral, ethical thing, because in the end of the day people care much less about morality and ethics than they do about self preservation, which is entirely reasonable since ethics and morals is shit we made up and doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.
Well that's true that communism was a threat, but what was a bigger threat was "gommunism"! Communism's more sadistic brother. Founded by Gollum in the pursuit of total equality and to find "The Precious". It was said that Franco's Fascist Spain was still fighting gommunism up until the 1970's.
“Using nuclear bombs against enemies in... Eastern Europe”
Is that how the Hungarian Uprising ends in this timeline?
Probably yes.
Nuke'em
Yes, along with Hungary
Warsaw Pact memebers could be nuclear test sites by this point
So glad you showed the Aussie troop.
Australia sent 2282 soliders to Korea, 339 dead , 1216 wounded , 43 missing , 26 captured.
Needed a Kiwi as well though.
I'm not too sure about the Korean war but I think Aussie's did better than the US in terms of numbers.
I don't know, but I know that's for certain regarding the Vietnam war.
Agreed.
BestAverageGaming Do you mean in terms of casualties or personnel sent to the conflict?
What if Czechoslovakia chose to fight in 1938 and won .
Chose*
Thank You.
Chode**
What if the Baltic states all started fighting against the USSR instead of being annexed?
I don't know about "won." Survived maybe
Cody, you mentioned that at the beginning of the Korean war, nuclear bombs were still in their infancy. The USSR did not successfully make their own bomb until late 1949, (only a year+ before this scenario) and since their nuclear stockpile was so low, (estimated
Meh! Screw Europe, Go 'Murica! We elected Trump for a reason! Anyways, the year 1955 was the most realistic year that multiple sources could confirm the stockpile numbers. One source however does claim the USSR arsenal was a puny 15 RDS-1 bombs in March, 1951. So it is possible that USSR forces could not fulfill M.A.D., much less could they actually deploy a bomb over North America. It is also worth noting a different source says that in 1950 the US had 299 nukes, and Russia only 5. As you said it yourself "200 nukes is still enough to destroy every major city..." As for soviet conventional forces, if the west could get the first nuclear strike, it would leave the already man-power weakened Soviet army (From WWII) in disarray, allowing "better off" European forces to likely make territorial gains after an initial co-ordinated soviet attack. If the carpet bombing is successful, then Soviet military leadership would be near non-existent, and soviet arms replenishing would be crippled, if not, then impossibly doomed. Soviet nukes could still be deployed, but on an extremely small relative scale, and only against Europe. The longer the U.S. would wait, the more damage the USSR could do. Thinking of it now, soviet diplomacy would most likely just "bluff," and make the U.S. think it had more nukes than it actually did. Alternate history is really fun! But you are right. The United States would never unload its stockpile, but because of social, economic. and political reasons. But "It's fun to Theorize!"
The problem was that Russia really didnt have a long range strategic bomber capable of hitting U.S. cities. Alaska might get hit but there really isnt that much there to begin with. western Europe would get hit a few times. Aswell as South Korea and Japan. But if America intiated the war with multiple nuclear strikes and chinas and the soviets major cities and bases then it would be logisticly hard for them to drop nukes of their own.
If America never left Europe and continued on with their armies. After Japan then Moscow? Before the nuclear secrets were stolen, just keep fighting till communism is defeated? Then Russia and China would be competing much earlier and Japan and Korean might never of became what they are today. Samsung and my hentai all gone. What a boring future that would be. :(
Ansury Sayer That's what operation unthinkable was. Go to war with the soviets the minute after Riech falls. This plan was supported by General George S. Patton. You still have to remember that atomic weapons were a closely held secret by the U.S . government, until their international debuts in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The soviets wouldn't get their own bomb until 1949. Most importantly; as soon as the soviets had a nuke, America would have the perfect excuse to ramp up production. The US also needed to prepare defenses against said nukes. This is why you see so many civil defense programs, like the famous Bert the Turtle. (which first appeared in Jan. 1952, and lasted even throughout the Cuban Missile Crisis.) The main differences of Unthinkable and this scenario is A: soviet moral immediately after WWII, which was extremely high, and B: Production limitations. By production limitations, I mean the secrecy of the Manhattan project. If workers knew what they were making it would've likely lead to ethical resistance even before bombs were built. Builders of Little Boy and Fat Man didn't even know they were building a bomb, and were told lies ranging anywhere from making paperclips to toatsters, to God knows what! The truth is the U.S. didn't need to build bombs after WWII, until the soviets started the arms race with their own bomb. The cycle we see here is "America won't make nukes until the soviets can" and "The soviets need to develop a nuke before East vs. West tensions would arise." In conclusion; Directly after WWII there simply would not be enough bombs to destroy the USSR before their conventional army does major damage to Europe.
Russia may have had more men and more tanks. But you are forgeting that America had some of the best aircraft and pilots by the end of the war. That on top of superior numbers of said aircraft. Meant air supremacy would go to the U.S. and its allies though the struggle to get it would be costly. Which means the U.S. could use nukes. But only on the Eastern and Western fronts. As it would be to difficult to hit Moscow with the bombers of the time. But If the U.S. was willing to put the morals to the side like we did with japan. Then we wouldnt get bogged down in long drawn out sieges like leningrad or stalingrad. Just push the front untill we got close then nuke the city and push on. You also have to relize that american troops were far better trained and equiped then the russian army. The Germans still used bolt action rifles when they invaded and they got pretty far. America had semiauto rifles in mass production. As well as larger caliber submachine guns, pistols, and non-crew served LMGs. The only problem the russians would give us is tanks. As the soviet tanks were better and they had more of them.But America would still have air supremacy. So the soviets wouldnt be able to attack in mass tank formations without taking heavy loses. I fell as if the war would be held in a deadlock untill America could produce a tank that could rival the soviets. WHich could happen fast since the allies got almost all the German scientists after the war. And would have even more since we were fighting the Germans greatest enemy. The war would be long and costly maybe even longer and worse then the second world war. But I believe unless the Soviets stole our nuclear secrets like they did in our timeline america would win.
Mcarthur would be laughing at you today
?
Why?
I am also curious.
Probally cause of tensions in China and Korea
because there Covid outbreak is gonna kill more people than those nukes would have
*insert forced fallout reference*
I don't want to set the world on fire
It's three dog. Owww!
Hey Boy what are you doing here?
Democracy...IS NONE NEGOTIABLE!
@@JARedwolf100 COMMUNISM.. IS DEATH lol
"The hot war" series by Harry Turtledove explains this alternate history pretty well. Its a series of three novels where the soviet union does get involved and invades western europe and also nukes are used like any other bomb.
What if North Korea fell tomorrow?
Good topic. But it's not really "alternative" or "history"
Isaiah Gordon not "hub either"
Massive refugee crisis , warlords and loose WMDs
John O'Malley probably be taken over by China
it won't.
A lot of people loving this alternate timeline apparently did not finish the video or they think they know better
“I hope you step on a lego”
Harry Turtledove did a series on this btw
Pls make
What if the Kuomintang(Nationalists) won the Chinese Civil War/What if the Chinese Civil War never happened?
+EPKingMaster Wrong, you didn't saw how broken inside at taiwan. They have be struggle with everything to keep themselves afloat form total bankurpt for decades because of internal corruption.
Wrong, if china split into serveal parts after the civil war, USSR would invade south destory the parts one by one, and took all of asia after whole china were annexed , and then they will be unstoppable.
Saviliana
While the rest of the world does...nothing?
Grass Brassington YES PLEASE
KMT lost the war against communist due to heavy corruption.
They used the war tax money to build villas for themselves, which is the one of the main reason US didn't want give too much support to the KMT.
And after US's failure to get rid of communism out of China, US learned from its mistakes and began to fully support any regime from any country that is anticommunist despite their corrupted nature. For instance Iran, Libya, Chile, Vietnam,Korea and etc.
Even if KMT won the war despite with heavy corruption. At best the situation would be like South Korea. At worse it would be like Africa or middle east. Not to mention Taiwan faced serious corruption and white terror after the civil war, and the first election only occurred in 1996.
Love the detail you go to in creating your videos. Even the fact that you used a 48 star U.S. flag for the time period in question.
Nuclear airbursts do not create much (if any) local fallout. You need ground bursts for that.
What if America and the Soviet Union united together during the Space Race?
Viet_balla We would probably be on Mars already by now.
Lord Beerus Eh probably not. It was the conflict that was driving the space race. We were going to send astronauts to the Mars, but then the USSR collapsed so a pin was put in that.
it almost happened but since JFK was assasinated, Khrushchev didn't trust Johnson and the deal was broken
Viet_balla That's almost what happened. A lot of projects like the ISS are collaborations.
the ISS was launched in 1998, well after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
China would know how it feels to chew 5 gum
What if Tecumseh was able to make the United Indian Confederacy of America?
PyroA he did a video like that already
No. That is different.
If the objective is to create a "radioactive sea", airbursts aren't the way you go about doing that.
Wow, just think about it... we'd have twice the LCD TVs and pro Starcraft players :-O
The US planned to strike Chinese territory. Radiation doesn't travel more than a few meters by itself and an atomic bomb doesn't carry enough radioactive material to cause a Chernobyl scenario.
There would have been lots of deformed Chinese babies (if anyone even survived 50 nukes going off so close to each other), but the Koreans would have been fine.
Well, there will be chinese super mutants. ;)
What if the Byzantine Empire never fell?
Gregory Gwynn yes !!!
Gregory Gwynn THIS
*Held off the arab invasions
Yes, this is a good idea. I feel the Byzantine empire is neglected a fair amount in history.
they didn't fall to the Arabs
But what if the Korean war was just Korea? No Soivets, Chinese, or Americans. Just Koreans.
north would win, America gave south Korea little (in terms of weapons) So they didn't stand much of a chance against the soviet armed north.
Magni56 the North Koreans got guns and tanks from china and ussr. That's why they were more prepared
jiman kim So every one would die from swamps?
I LOVE YOU exactamundo
South korea would be one giant labour camp
9:11
I don’t see how being a general and a war hero makes someone automatically “not an idiot”
I would actually say it’s the opposite
1:07
"I hope you step on Lego"
WOAH! US calm down man! Cease fire you sick. With all respect for both aggressions on both sides, that's to much!
we need guns that fire legos. but that would be a War crime.
we need guns that fire legos. but that would be a War crime.
Nuke em!
No!
Nuke em!
OH COME ON!
You're fired
why is it called a tactical nuke, does it blow up shit more tactically?
Nathanator
Tactical nukes are meant for battlefield situations using gravity bombs (unguided bombs), short-range missiles, artillery shells, and land mines. These would be used with friendly forces in proximity which would most likely cause many deaths of enemy troops along with friendlies.
Unlike Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those are strategic nuclear weapons, which are meant for targeting areas that are not of battlefield significance but for economic destruction. Strategic nuclear weapons will produce an explosion on a larger scale of a tactical nuke. Strategic targets will usually include military bases, cities, towns, arms industries, and other hardened or larger-area targets to damage the enemy's ability to wage war.
Did you know they actually had a Nuclear mortar system! As an Army Mortarman I would love to fire that.
*_@Fenrirthewolf_*
I'm no expert on mortars, but wouldn't that radioactive shell drop relatively close to your own position?
AdalRoderick yep, we even tested it and had people walk into it (this was in the 50s)
Well if we did launch a nuke at China, I'd imagine they'd be all like "shit shit, who the fuck is shooting us?" "oh well, fire missiles!" and then France is like "shit guys, ze missiles are coming! Fire our shit!"
"But I am le tired..."
"...well, have a nap, ZEN FIRE ZE MISSILES!"
I don't want to set the world on fire
I just want to start a flame in your heart
I don't want to *set* the world on fire
I want to watch it *burn*
lol
i only want to tear it apart
Actually, if there is no fire in the area of a nuke, i believe it's not going to be on fire. Nukes just have the massive pressure inside of a bomb the size of a couch. No fire included, just HUGE HUGE pressure
What if the Dutch never liberated themselfes from the spanish?
Hermanos
The HRE didn't form the German Empire
+bloodyuser What if Mandela never liberated South Africa from the Dutch?! LOL!
Answer: China would be the host country of the emo weeaboo ashfur defense squad
Just throwing this out there at the start, if this video idea interests you then Harry Turtledove is your man. First book in the Hot War series is Bombs Away.
We also think that MacArthur was getting a bit, power hungry, in his older age after WWII.
Fiaura The Tank Girl Who wouldn't after what the Nazis did?
I don't think so he was basically seen as war hero at that time and he could be elected to presidency if he tried but he just decided to lay low.
He lost his marbles in his old age
Thats false he did say we were fighting the wrong enemy during world war 2. But thats because he relized how much of a problem the soviet union has become due to its vicktory over Germany. The Nazis could be bargained with. We even traded with them for a while. The soviets on the other hand only wanted to see America and all she stood for burn.
"The Nazis could be bargained with."
That's exactly what the French, British and Russians tried.
Didn't work that well.
I'd assume that there would be allot more rice crispys
Ayyyyyyyy lmao
themagicnipple this needs to be top comment
LMAO!
Damn..
They should have done it. Korea should have been saved, and it's unrealistic to think that they would go this far.
It's interesting that MacArthur who was so forward thinking in regards to the treatment of Japan after World War Two, gets it so wrong with the Tactical Nuking of Manchuria. Seems like almost a total one eighty.
Yes and no. I think MacArthur could see the future in the sense of recognizing where the dominoes will fall and I think he saw russia and China as problems, which he was right, so by flexing America's might in a small war that would scare nations because if America is willing to use a nuke for such a small war just think what they'll do in a full scale war.
St. Petersberg you clearly missed something
MacArthur just saw the utility of tactical nukes, just as the Russians have. The U.S. has had a policy of not using nukes against soft targets though.
@@DeadInside-ew8qb Problem that if both sides have access to similar weapons (this is if the Soviet were to supply them to the Chinese or come to their aid) then once it is used the other side has no excuse not use them and almost has to use them in self defense.. Similar to the proliferation of chemical weapons during WW I. Hence the reason of MAD, no one wants to be the first to pull the trigger, because they'll get the same in return. The fun and joy of brinkmanship.
@@DeadInside-ew8qb Well the only times they used them they were used against soft targets (cities)
I think one of the biggest effects of this would be on the Bandung conference in 1956 in Indonesia. It was a gathering of almost all post colonial nations from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Western powers and Soviets all freaked out and were extremely concerned that western power and influence could be pushed out as those nations would unify, primarily focused on economic unity, open borders, and eventually even a joint military force. This included nations like Nigeria, Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, and even China (as more of an observer status, however their prime minister did give one of the most famous speeches at the first conference) the concept of the third world came from these conferences, I believe it was the Pakistani prime minister who said there is the western capitalist 1st world, the Communist Soviet 2nd world, and then all of their post colonial nations seeking to rebuild an identity as the 3rd world (it was not derogatory back then as it is now) the amount of espionage, back room deal making and bribes, along with attempts at derailing or sabotaging certain discussions took place throughout the first few conferences. Nehru of India, along with Suharto of Indonesia really led the event. Many US allied (or ones that would later get US aid as a reward) came out strong against the Chinese and the idea of unifying many countries as anti capitalist and doomed to failure. Yet if this had happened a few years earlier I can see many really hearing China out who along with India and Turkey and Egypt, and Iran, along with smaller satellite powers genuinely wanted to form their own economic and political bloc to rival the others. This would have changed everything in massive ways. The early conferences are forgotten to many in the West but they were among the most important meetings in the 20th century. Just imagine if China had gotten the sympathy and backing of these nations in the conference and became a legitimate leader of numerous nations. The formation of a NATO type entity made up of very rich in resources and labour post colonial nations, who via their colonial experience had enough of a shared experience and history to warrant unity. Everything would be different, Beijing, Delhi, Istanbul, Cairo, Tehran, Jakarta, would be centers of the world more so than they are now, their would be rail systems linking Morroco to Bangladesh with free movement of peoples and new economic entities and powerhouses to rival and even trump Europe.
Taking out a grenade during a little league hockey brawl 😂😂😂
Truman was actually "fired" because he was almost more powerful than the President of the USA. To way over simplify, MacArthur had almost all of the freed-from-WWII -Japan Asian countries (including the the Japanese at this point) at his command and backing him. Plus he had nuke's at his disposal. He stepped down when asked . And the US Govt was terrified what might had happen if he had said no.
''nuked'' translated in the dutch means fucked
Man is Man How appropriate.
Man is Man
what is U.S. fucked China lmao
ZeUbermensch123 LMFAO
Man is Man kappa pride!
That's not true i'm dutch fucked is geneukd
What if "The Pig War" lead to an actual war? That would be pretty interesting to see! Thank you for being so awesome Cody! Keep it up!
...WW3?
@@lukeskywalker82 no luke, the pig war happened in the early 1800s
@@K.Pershing ah I thought the guy meant Bay of Pigs. Tnx. Didn't know about that.
What if America Had Nuked China? Son, just play Fallout series and you will know.
Max Thriller no. China would've been way weaker in that case.
Fallout is banned in KSA. Now can you tell me dad?
BomberWah he is a Japanese not arab you should focuses on his profile picture
BomberWah it's not I live there and I play it
Idk I think I read this page saying KSA banned fallout 4.
me.ign.com/en/ps4/113209/news/fallout-4-officially-banned-in-saudi-arabia
Maybe I should go to Jarir and check out.
I do like the thought that Macarthur, after personally seeing the destruction that just TWO nuclear bombs had on such a powerful nation like the Japanese empire, which by the way were only used to end a world war, thought that a small scaled civil war required the use of FIFTY.
Ya
MacArthur is no hero. His father/grand father was General MacArthur presiding over American atrocities in the Philippines 1899. They slaughtered whole villages that would make My Lai blush. The family has a history of being blood thirsty towards the people of Asia
What if he Tsars never lost control of russia
Noobish Squeaker he already have a video "what if russian revolution never hapoened"
+Fox Ace not necessarily. Russia was improving in the wake of early industrialization and the emancipation of the serfs.
You do miss out on Stalin's Five Year Plan, but it's entirely possible that the free market would have seen industrialization at a slower but longer pace, probably ending up with a better economy.
The Tsar would have fallen one way or another before the present day.
Noobish Squeaker He already did that one
War... war never changes...
War has changed...
War changed
Relax, cucks, it's a quote from the fallout games.
On the bright side though, you are technically correct, the best kind of correct.
I hope it does...into something less so.
LitGeekSquad Official My quote is from MGS -_-
"Hey U.N lets actually do something" lol
Olorin TheWise because China wasn't a permanent member and Soviet Union boycotted the UN Security Council.
US forces: push the line towards Chinese border
Chinese: I am about to end this man's whole career
What if the Treaty of Versailles was never passed, and, instead, Wilson's 14 Points were all accepted and implemented after WWI?
Hitler wouls become a world famous artist and then those damn reds would probablh try something
Laughing tree
Nope there wouldnt be a dictator taking over Europe (at least not a german one)
8:25 that dude looks so happy that he finally got to use his nukes.
Harry Turtledove wrote a series with a similar premise to this, "The Hot War." He came to mostly the same conclusion as the first scenario of this video, and things escalated into World War 3 very quickly, with lots of cities on both sides getting nuked. The implications for the future of that world are terrifying so far, and the series isn't even finished yet.
Everyone: Finally WW2 has ended
America: Im about to ruin this man whole career
I know this is a joke, but both USSR and the western allies started cold war. Just saying.
If it did. 70% of my stuff wouldn't be here.
Well it would still be here expected made in USA and higher priced.
a 2nd weeb country..
Kim Junk Moon ¥
Oh god
I rather have a weeb country than a communist one
Chris Lancour i rather have a communist one
PLAcookingcompany ZTZ99 i believe ya now that i look at the first 3 letters of your name
Hell yeah
"I'm gonna bomb the shit out of them" - Donald Trump
Cody, you may have just predicted the future.
We would never come back from it, it would pretty much be the extinction of mankind. Fallout is better since you have radaway going for you. No such thin in real life.
Actually nuclear war isnt as bad as most media would make it seem. radation from madern nuclear weapons actually has a really short half life. You would be able to go out side without a gas mask or protctive suit in a matter of months. As long as you werent close (a few miles) from the impact sight. Most people living in major cities or near military bases would be dead yes. But after that not much else. The real problem comes from nuclear winter. All of the shit thrown into the sky would lower the global temp by a lot. And most animals and plants would die out from the initial radiation. If you were in africa or south america you would probable survive. But more then likely you would survive in a world with a destroyed economy and no goverment.
Fenrirthewolf Nukes are still really shit. Stop trying to sugar-coat it.
I agree Nuclear weapons are bad. I mean they keep us from having world war 3 and I've been waiting for that since I joined the Army. I'm just being factual that nuclear war doesnt mean the death of all of us. Just most of us.
Fenrirthewolf 99.99% of us
Probably would make for a good Call of Duty game tbh.
A Korean War game, advertised as just an ordinary game.
Everything is normal, real battles take place, but then something strange happens from history. Airsupport is cut off, you just need to hold for a bit longer in the North.
And then the nukes go off.
The second half of the game is dealing with WW3.
Then you have a sequel 2 or 3 years later fighting in radioactive Europe.
Call of Duty really needs to get into Alternate History. The fact it's so obvious they've run out of ideas really just makes it insane they haven't gone into alternate history yet.
An alternate history game would be hard to sell to people, but one that is a normal game and becomes alt hist? Yeah, that'd probably be fine.
that sounds like good idea