Historical Blunders: The Mistakes That Changed the World 

Nobody would know who you were if Keeps cured baldness. Not even you!!

A blunder requires real time carelessness. Not carelessness long after the fact. Thus, Russia selling Alaska was not a blunder. It actually made perfect sense not only at the time, but also the near future. In fact, even after the mini-gold rush, Alaska still would have been un-defendable by Russia and America was...itching to take it. The risk for Russia was still too great as it not only meant an issue with a future war with Britain, it also meant holding land that could cause a conflict with America as well.

Simon should apply Keeps to his scalp, not his chin. ❤

Crimean War finished in 1856 not 1865. Why would you make such blunder? There is indeed a connection to Crimean War. USA was Russian ally during that war, which was one of the reasons why Russia was the only ally of Lincoln during USA civil war. Alliance, that would be shuttered by Lincoln's assassination in 1865 by the Brits (they tried to assassinate Alexander 2 as well in 1866). Sale of Alaska on unfavourable terms (it was already well known that Alska had wast deposits of gold) was the last attempt to save the alliance. It failed.

Looking to follow Simon's hair growth.

Meant 1945...

I assume you meant 1945.

​@carolynmills513 you can edit comments

@@carolynmills513yeah you could confused my mightily there. At first I was like “How OLD are you if your dad was around in 1845” xD. Then I saw you were talking about WW2 and got even more confused xD

@@ravenblood1954 fat fingers!!! Lol

Which is true. Most people don't know that during the Russian Civil war America attacked the communist

Russia's army was a joke then, and it is a joke now. Let's get real here, people 🙄

I have been telling people that. The Russians would have lost it, but sold it to a country which had just been through a civil war and could block Britain.

During the Crimean War, an Anglo-French force attacked Petropavlovsk, the major port of Kamchatka, twice. Another war with Britain could have easily seen Alaska taken by the sea by a similar enterprise.

For much the same reason, Napoleon had sold Louisiana to the US in 1803. He knew that, during the almost constant state of war between France and the UK, British troops from Canada would easily outnumber any force France could muster on the North American continent.

Leftist lexical manipulations disable truth.

This fool is a propaganda mouthpiece and I would only expect to hear such foolish things spoken as facts

What can you expect? He also said Alaska was purchased for 17 million dollars, everyone knows it was 7.2 millions.

Only in death does duty end

That may seem funny until you consider that Kim Il Sung didn't step down despite going to hell in 1994 and is still president.

Imagine if Canada invaded Russia, Alaska

FYI: Alaska is a parasitic state. Every year the US government sends more money to Alaska than Alaska sends back to the USA.

$7.2 million is correct.

Not so much an ally but they didn’t have any qualms back then. A much better choice than dealing with their rival, Britain

​@@gideonmele1556 Russia was our ally in 1867 and had been an ally of the Union states throughout the Civil War. If it weren't for Russia and their threats against London to remain neutral, Britain may have sided with the Confederacy. They were poised to do so.

russia could have got more money if they didn't accept the first low ball offer.

US benefited by the fact that no one liked the British. We got the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska that way.

Just my opinion, but yes, the Brits would have destroyed Russia then, if they chose to do so. As a US soldier who trained with our NATO friends in western Europe in the 1980s, I can say with full conviction that the Limeys and the Frogs were both forces to be reckoned with. I have nothing but respect for those guys. Simply put, their special forces were second to none.

How did they react to learning that it was a sale?

@@user-ge8yn4ql4i invading Georgia, Armenia, and Ukraine.

I agree. It was a sale. What actually happened to the money is debatable, but it doesn't remove the fact of sale. Now, I also want to contribute a personal anecdote. I have lived abroad for a very long time and met a lot of Americans. But so far, none of them knew who Cassius Clay is. The story of Alaska sale is incomprehensible without him. But somehow, he is practically erased from history books. Are you aware of the guy? Muhammed Ali's name before converion to islam was Cassius Clay, but it was given to him in honor of that original Clay (just for your information)😉 Let me know if this information is of interest

@@dmitryisakov8769 How is the story of the sale of Alaska incomprehensible without what involvement of Cassius Clay? Thank you.

​@@philipliethen519 I will try not to go down too far down the history ;) During the election campaign in 1860, Lincoln was relatively dismissive or even hostile towards Russia. When civil war broke down in 1861 it could have become a breaking point for him, because immediately Britain and France offered support to South (inclusive initiative in recognizing South as legitimate political entity in international affairs). However, Cassius Clay was USA ambassador in Sankt-Petersburg. It was under his initiative that direct communication (letter exchange) between Lincoln and Alexander was established. Letters are quite fascinating in themselves. Particularly important the letter from Alexander describing the proposal from Britain and France on recognizing South. Alexander told Lincoln that not only he rejected the proposal, but he also declared that if Britain and France intervene, Russia would declare war on them. Russian fleet in New York and San-Francisco at critical moment of the war in 1863 was part of the same effort from Cassius Clay (British historians in early 20th century re-wrote/ridiculed that event), including the emperors order to Russian admiral, that in the event of British or France attack he submit his fleet under command of Lincoln. Emancipation of serfs in Russia took place in 1861. While there were multiple abolitionists around Lincoln, he was refusing to make abolition of slavery as focus in the Civil War. It was Cassius Clay, that personally delivered the copy of Russian Emancipation Manifesto to Lincoln in 1862, and kind of shamed Lincoln into pivoting and declaring abolition of slavery in 1863. Collaboration between Lincoln and Russia continued throughout the war. Cassius Clay particularly pushed for a telegraph line project that would connect USA to Europe through Alaska and whole Russian territory. That project was championed by Wester Union. And it is in the reports from this project one can find that everyone (both Russians and Americans) knew well by 1865 that Alaska had deposits of gold. However, after the end of civil war and more importantly the assassination of Lincoln everything went downhill. Note that within the year of Lincoln assassination the first attempt on Alexander’s life took place. It took them 4 attempts to kill him. By them I mean British puppet masters - too much data points towards them. However, even after Lincoln assassination Clay tried to maintain the alliance and he was pushing to telegraph project. But in 1866 trans-Atlantic telegraph line was complete making the east route less attractive. Clay tried to save this project, he also tried to preserve the alliance with Russia. It was him who proposed the idea of Alaska sale and he was working on that project. But his plan was to make it a vehicle to preserve alliance. But Seward was in pro-British camp. On Russian side it is important to understand that Alaska was not formally Russian. It was actually part of Russian-American company - a private corporation that was actually causing a lot of trouble for the emperor. So he actually wanted to break it. And from his perspective he was killing 2 birds with one stone. But he underestimated the influence of corruption. Including the fact that his ambassador Stoeckl was compromised by the company. By the time of sale, Clay was removed from his position and was marginalized. And the whole Alaska deal was repackaged. So now we know it a Sewards folly. This is just a gist of it. I think enough for the RU-vid post 😉)

Chop suey is widely believed to have been developed in the U.S. by Chinese Americans, but the anthropologist E. N. Anderson, traces the dish to tsap seui (杂碎, "miscellaneous leftovers"), common in Taishan (Toisan), a county in Guangdong province, the home of many early Chinese immigrants to the United States

Indeed. The Australian prime minister Sir Robert Menzies said, "In terms of world well-being, Florey was the most important man ever born in Australia".

This is true. The fact that no other country disputed the purchase tho…

The expansion of a primitive, tribal theocratic ideology beginning around 632 AD.

@@nyuuchan3563 And i will admit, i am a US Cavalry veterean. There were disputes. We still laugh about Custer. Tecumseh we revere. (I should clarify. Nations protested. My branch of the army behaved poorly)

@@grizzlygrizzlesounds like your describing Christianity in the 11th-13th century more than 632.

It was french territory. The Spanish gave it away.

Great. That almost pays for Ukraine. 🙄

@@ChicagoFaucet.etc.thankfully the more stable world economy pays for the aid to Ukraine more than ten times over. And the arms manufacturers flourish because of it. And it gives the us more international power that will pay for it. And that power will make the us sell even more arms to allies. Not helping Ukraine will be the end of the us being a superpower. Every single man outside of the us knows that. Sadly more and more people inside the us don’t have a clue of anything outside its borders. The ones that do support Ukraine.

​@@autobootpilootaptly surmised Sir.

@@autobootpiloot the US supplying Ukraine allow the US to get rid of older stock and allows us to make new munitions. So it’s a win at least for arms manufacturers

@@Docwilson91 even better, a lot of weapons given would have to be recycled in the US and is now given to Ukraine. They actually save money by giving it away, but on paper they write down the replacement as the amount of military aid given. That’s not fair and very misleading in my opinion. That isn’t the case with all weapons given obviously. Everything combined does cost a lot of money, but it’s worth it I think.

And the Great Game was far more important than what was seen as a vast, sparely populated snowfield that had some good sealing. Offloading that flank to a neutral third party for a nice chunk of change seemed like a good play until the gold and oil discoveries which to be fair, Russia wasn’t in a position to capitalize on even if the kept it.

i mean tbf they were worried about the brits taking it so they sold it to people who had a pretty solid recent track record of beating the brits

@@Sarindanvelor Solid track record? Are you forgetting the War of 1812 when the British threw the US out of Canada then marched into Washington and had a party in the White House before burning it down? By the end of the war, the US was practically bankrupt because of the British naval blockade. Track record indeed.

@@justonecornetto80 But then there was that little coda in New Orleans, before word of the treaty signing had reached the battling belligerents in the Gulf of Mexico. The Duke of Wellington's son-in-law met his end at the hand of Old HIckory.

And it hurt the Native Alaskans

Lol or you could view this video as "a hundred successes wont matter when a single mistake can change the destiny of the world."

Ya, the government in China and Russia is still in the dark ages.

Mao is as Mao does

Commies gonna Commie

Sparrows are omnivores. Like most other finches, they are opportunists.

Mao got almost everything wrong. 😅

He sets the deplorable record for killing the most people. Yes and china is still communist.

Biden: "Hold my beer."

@@grizzlygrizzle I don't like Biden but to think he is worse than Mao shows how uneducated you are.

​@@DubhghlasMacDubhghlasgive joe some time...and he will kill millions through nothing but gaffe.

The more I hear about that guy Mao the more I think he was a real jerk.

....or northern California?

The White Army probably would have fled to Alaska

Yeah, it would've been even colder. Gets pretty chilly up in Alaska.

Exactly. Think of it this way: Russia already has 5-6 Alaskas that they can actually defend; they're called Siberia. Siberia is loaded with gold, oil, titanium, diamonds, etc. It's just extremely poor bc all the money goes to the czar, the Party, or oligarchs, depending on the century. Put another way, this is like saying France should never have sold Louisiana to the US. They had only gotten back from Spain a few years before the sale, and had no ability to defend it. Selling both to the US were basically the countries getting paid to acknowledge the reality that they couldn't develop or defend the regions

I think Simon has a video on the Klondike and Alaska gold rushes. The Americans who went to the Klondike went through Alaska. The Nome gold rush was kind of a sequel and a lot easier to get to since it isn't hundreds of miles inland.

Very true. Fact Boi and some of his writers aren't really concerned about accuracy. US merchants in Seattle and in Skagway, Alaska Territory, made a fortune equipping people heading into Canada's Klondike.

​@@pmgn8444I'm sure they care. But with how many topics they cover and how many videos I don't particularly expect everything to be right but its still annoying.

Wikipedia points to the Klondike Gold Rush as a factor in populating Alaska. Although the Klondike is indeed in Canada, access was through Alaska, so Simon doesn't lose points on that. Both trails that were used to get to the Klondike originated in Alaska. It took the AlCan Highway to get a major road to tie the Yukon to the rest of Canada, several decades later.

"Why did Constantinople get the works?" ...... "that's nobody's business but the Turks!" has a better "ring to it."

He's a Lizard Overlord. Allegedly.

Only 5? Those are rookie numbers.

Thing is even for the time the sale of Alaska was extremely cheap. They very likely could’ve charged more for the territory and America still would’ve paid it.

@@baneofbanes Still does not fit the criteria for a blunder as a things value is relative. At the time the land held little value for Russia as they could not defend it and the little they could gleam from the land did not add any value to Russia or its economy coupled with the fact that anything they wanted to do with it came with a higher cost of transport over such a vast distance. To this day the land itself has little value and that is why its population is under 1 million despite its size.

@@baneofbanesthe concern was the US rejecting the proposal and the Brits just taking it. So either get cash or lose it anyway. If they knew oil and gold were there, that would be even more incentive for Britain to strike at that mostly undefended vast tract of snow. Giving the Brits ports so close to the Russian Pacific would have been even worse

Reality is Britain was never really romanised, we were always an uncivilised barbarian frontier that cost more to keep than was gained, that's why the Romans withdrew (as well as all those troops required to keep Britain under control led to an uncomfortably large force that every hundred years or so would give the commander the idea of setting off to try and conquer rome themselves).

Well if the attacking force new about your colaboration, sure. Otherwise by opening gates you would be killed as a regular enemy soldier.

When you say Cleetus do you mean the Resurrection of the Fiero?

The only videos of his I’ve seen (a LOT) all date back to 2020 at the oldest. He has videos much older than that??

Yep I'm pretty sure he was hoping it would lead to a war between Britian and the US if he got lucky...

In his casual russophobia Simon never told you that the reason was purely political and not economic.

​@@abrvalg321 russophobia? I sense a Russian troll

@@abrvalg321selling alaska was purely a goofy ass choice. the slavs there had been making GOOD ass money the decades they owned it. they sold it cus they were just scared of british and were poor because of crimea. there is no russian bias. they were driven into a financial hole because they wanted crimea, and that they have obliterated the otter population in alaska. so they goofily sold alaska. the end

They still consider Alaska to be Russian territory, and given half a chance they'll swipe it from us.

@@abrvalg321 Slava Ukraini, bot.

Seaward

Successful missions aren't interesting. Hence all the films about the Vietnam war.

Do tell?

Ayyyyyyyy We all have at least one

Choosing a wife because she's good in bed is up there, too.

I'd love to hear the rest of this story but it doesn't sound like it was entirely without its compensations :-)!

That's nobody's business but the Turks

yes

Idea-stealing has become quite commonplace these days.

@@grizzlygrizzle its frustratingly annoying and sad when you try your hardest to think outside the box just to have it ripped away from you

That accent is disconcerting...my closed captioning shows he actually said seven point two million.

Resentful because the byzantines wouldn't pay what he wanted they didn't have the cash. He blew himself up with one of his guns during the siege.