Twelve Insane Wars You’ve Never Heard Of. 

I struggle to use the word hate because it's the wrong word but anyway the point I'm making is the video is 25 minutes long, it posted 10 minutes ago but it's got 54 comments on it already ....... so how does that matchup ...... do people even bother to pay attention 1 iota before spouting off opinions, get these crazy people Rudyard..... Rudy Rudy Rudy Rudy!!!!!!!!!! Just fucking with you little buddy, keep it going ..... I imagine you on the Appalachian Trail and making a can of baked beans, same outcome: two cents of hot air

And now, how about battles that _almost_ changed history in a major way? For example... The Battle of Ramu, in the First Anglo-Burmese War. The Burmese won but retreated despite being a few days march away from taking British Chittagong because they pulled back to fight off a BEIC invasion of the Irrawaddy. The most important thing to remember is that the Anglo part of the 1st Anglo-Burmese War was entirely the British East India Company, without any interference from the Crown, and it nearly bankrupted them. The Burmese army returning home after Ramu to deal with the Company forces had little role in that, and probably saved the BEIC by limiting the amount of damage the Burmese could do to them. Instead, the Burmese press on and dive into the largely-undefended British Bengal, ravaging the BEIC's lands there and forcing them to pull back and abandon the war. This leaves Burma independent (and probably in possession of much of Bengal), the BEIC bankrupt and severely weakened, and a lot of formerly-subjugated Indian principalities are emboldened to break free from the BEIC's grip. Effectively, Britain is back to square 1 in eastern India.

Thanks for this financing tool, now I can fund my own wars!

Some ideas What if mithridates’ empire survived? What if Japan conquered Korea in the 16th century? What if guns or gunpowder weren’t invented?

Hey Whatifalthist, what do you think of Strauss Howe Generational theory? What do you think of it? Also, did you ever hear of Curt Doolittle? He sounds a lot like you when it comes to analyzing civilizations and what he calls "Success strategies,' or something like that. I find it quite intriguing to observe how abstract things like ideologies and nations often act like distinct organisms with specific niches, strengths, weaknesses, and needs to multiply or propogate, though I'm sure that observation is redundant, IDK.

Damn

@Vinny Zigzag 비니 지그재그 Indeed I mean we only got the Three Kingdoms Period because Emperor Ling had that mind-boogling trust on the Ten Attendants who destroyed the Han Dynasty's China for shits and giggles

Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too 2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue. The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too. The their situation was crazy as. Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest. All this done by people whom almost nobodys. Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons. Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad. China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest. Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold. Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea) Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system. They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.

@Vinny Zigzag 비니 지그재그 Who knew Kentucky is famous form fried chicken and starting a bloody civil war

This straight up sounds like a Shakespearean comedic tragedy.

@@Zeerich-yx9po Yes, the protestants technically won, but the Habsburgs still remained the emperor of the HRE and got to keep near all their territory. The religious status of the empire remained that whateved your ruler believes in, that you too are obliged to believe in. Also, Sweden went into decline relatively short afterwards (thanks to the Great Northern War). You could argue that nobody really won WW1 either, but in WW1, Germany was decimated considerably more than the Entante and lost territory (not talking about all the territory that the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires lost.) The major powers on either side failed to siege the other down. So yeah, even though the protestants technically won, their victory was mostly on paper. (Sorry if my english is bad, it is not my native language.)

I am german. After 30 Years War a german writer , Christoph von Grimmelshausen, who lived in those time wrote his in Germany wellknown book ,Simplicius Simplicissimus', which was a bestseller in late 17th century. I have read this book, which describes the life of a fictional man over the years of war. Rather intressing.

How about 100 years war?

Born during the war, grew up, joined the fighting and then died in it, yeah there's only been a few wars that ever lasted long enough to do that. The 100 Years War between England and France is sorta cheating the definition cause it was a hundred years of on again off again fighting, not a single coherent war. The US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq technically fit the bill a bit better since they both had one continuity for two decades. This is ignoring the fact no one quite knows what the point of those wars really is and more on the fact that everyone agrees that it's the same wars. The Hundred years war and many other long lasting conflicts are better described as a series of wars in short succession rather than a single conflict. Like how WWII is often thought of as WWI part II but no one would really argue it was the same exact conflict. Wars that last the 20ish years needed to have people die on the battlefield who were born during the same war, it's hard to name many of em. Part of what makes the recent quagmires so absurd.

@@Lusa_Iceheart it's not a few if you look toward the East, China "civil" wars usually lasted around 100 years

And the paraguayan president Francisco Solano López, the guy responsible for dragging a war they didn't have hope to win and who almost send all paraguayan adult males (And some non adults) to a slaughterfest... is considered a national hero in Paraguay. Thanks to the effort of a later dictatorship, but this is some major bullshit.

Its really sad that the Latin American countries never really found cohesion after the fall of the Spanish empire. The way the empire ruled was really flawed and it carried on to the modern day cultures and we still see the repercussions today.

​@@ektouge8700 Brazil would have become like a giant Netherlands today, but then the republic came...

@@Menezarian But like the Germans say “Jedem das seine” or “ In the end everyone get’s what they deserve.”

@@ektouge8700 whoever said this wasn't wrong

Horses deserve some love after serving as bio-tanks for ages.

I knew that Wallensteins real name was Waldstein , which means ,forrest rock', assumingly the name of first castle of his family. In Germany the names of many castles or noblemen end with -stein.

Wallenstein was of lower nobility, but invented the concept of war entrepreneurship : instead of hiring costly trained fighters, better enroll bunches of peasants, give them a musket or lance, an helmet and seven days training, nearly no money but the right of pillage, christened that an army and rent it to the emperor. The soldiers would learn their trade by practice, their number was so great that you could have several armies on the field, so no worry if one was defeated, and victorious or defeated Wallenstein became the richest man of Bohemia. A good part of the lesson learned for 30 years war was to keep entrepreneurs out of the war business, which became a state monopoly, and to separate combat form pillage. Unfortunately, we go the other direction since the 1990s and the contractors.

Wallenstein actually was ever bit a politician as a warrior. From autumn 1632 to spring 1634, he left the imperial army mostly twiddling thumbs, much to the chagrin of the region it was in, as the soldiers didn't limit themselves to twiddling thumbs precisely... Meanwhile, Wallenstein negotiated with Saxony to bring it out of the alliance of his enemies and later with a number of Protestant leaders to broker a peace. Which of course was why he was accused of treason and murdered on behalf of the Habsburgs who had no interest in peace at that point.

The history is there. U just need to read on it lol

Unsure was he the son of Antigonis? I know he was all over the place

@@Charles-gk7xx I mean kind of. There's some good modern scholarship by people like Farhad Kazemi. But in terms of Eastern Iranian history, the best we get in terms of primary sources is the Shahmenah by Ferdowsi, and much like the Indian sources that tends to mix myth (in this case Zoroastrian) with remembered history. Not to mention it is written after the Islamic conquests. You add into the fact that the Parthians have left us nothing, and all we have to go on is inscriptions and coinage. The history might be there, but the details are all incredibly murky.

@@Kai555100 nah different demetrius

Indians also made a musical type movie about demetrius invasion to their land, ending with the defeat of demetrius and his greek army by united indian forces. Search in youtube "gautamiputra satakarni" to see the full movie

Yeah, and unlike the Aussies, the Ecuadorians actually *won*! Truly, a triumph to mankind’s resolve!

Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too 2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue. The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too. The their situation was crazy as. Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest. All this done by people whom almost nobodys. Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons. Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad. China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest. Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold. Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea) Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system. They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.

Oh, give us a break! We are talking about the Galapagos Islands! A very delicate ecosystem and a world heritage... 😁 I bet you've never heard of the war of the people of Alberta, CA against rats! As far as I know they also emerged victorious 🤣

@@ailediablo79 do you have a life outside the internet?

@@MugOfJoe is that a real question? I just type it really fast. The real question is ,Did you give it a like?

Absolutely, so many conflicts and entire civilizations overlooked across Mesoamerica

Really?

that's freaking epic man, you living the dream

congrats

Dude that's so dope! 😂

Doubt. Muslims in the Middle East were known to take great interest in secular Greek manuscripts and didn’t burn them, but had them translated into Arabic. So why would they destroy secular Indian manuscripts? Makes no sense and seems like just an excuse Indians make for their lack of written secular history.

@@holyturtle1132 All cope. Historians agree that Indians did not have a significant tradition of secular written history.

@@joellaz9836 lmao says a european who knows next to nothing about India

If you’re writing cope, you’re the aushole

@@joellaz9836 Literally baseless assumptions by leftist historians with an agenda in mind. Please do tell me what was in the massive libraries of the greatest university of it's time, Nalanda, that took almost 3 weeks to burn down completely? What was in the university of Taxashila and Shardapeeth that it took invaders SO LONG to burn down? Know your shit before you talk or call other people's valid arguments bullshit. You just look like an idiot.

Taiping rebellion would be an awesome setting for an assassins creed game

@@jackfrost5808 ong

Anything in Sub-Saharan Africa would be met with screeches of racism. Since anything negative, facts, reality = racism i guess Taiping tho, yes. Please

A congo war game would be a bit strange since it happened very soon.

I think it's still a bit too soon for a Congo War game but a Taiping Rebellion game would be cool since I've always had a particular interest in the late Qing era

Britain performed poorly in that war

@@mint8648 maybe because of this they don't talk about that xD

I mean those guys are literally monsters of human beeings. I mean the islanders not the british as usual lol

From what I have studied, the war had less than 800,000 deaths.

thanks

The only war I never heard of on this list is Demetrius' war. How the Greco bactrian state might be the most cursed state in history (other than the Taiping state).

@@Eh-nj4qj no need, the satisfaction of finally be "the minutes guy" is enough pay for me

@@philswiftreligioussect9619 yeah pretty much same

Byzantine*

The war also directly led to the principle of national soverignty that now governs much of international relations... though some guy in Russia didn't get the memmo, it seems.

"His Realm, His Religion," as well as the Treaty of Wesphalia, are my two big takeaways from 30 Years War. The fact that the 80 Years War was concurrent with it was pretty interesting. Captain GARS, the end of the HRE's centrized leadership, and our favorite French cardinal... so many interesting things going on in the early 1600's.

@@eurodoc6343 Multiple guys in America also didn't get the memo.

Studying the Thirty Years War is pointless without first studying the Hussite War which it was the continuation of.

@@ArawnOfAnnwn the American Colonies were formed as sovereign religious states. Rhode Island was for the Quakers, Massachusetts for the Puritans, Carolinas for Anglicans and so on. The whole concept of a United States was for the states to be sovereign. It appears you didn't get the memo about American history.

I believe the Roman Empire and the Persian Empire signed an "Eternal Peace" in the late 6th / early 7th century...

In the past 300 years alone they did it for the seven years war, the Napoleon ice war, ww1, and ww2. Not a very good track record

Don't forget the Pacific Rim war, and WW3... Oh wait, those mistakes are still to come.

Rome and carthage once signed something like it, also egypt and the hittite empire in the bronze age had maybe the earliest version - the hittites were the first to transition away from bronze. Both were great peace treaties that were effective for a long time.

The issue isn't that Brazil pushed the war too far, but rather Solano Lopez never sued for peace and kept riling up Paraguay into combat, so many lives would have been spared if he had been more sensible, there was zero chances of Paraguay turning the tables and yet he kept doubling down further and further into a war he never had a chance to win in the first place. He threw everyone he could into the battlefield, even children, and went into hiding trying to resist to the very end. Add precarious infrastructure and tropical diseases to that and you have a recipe for disaster.

Guerra do Paraguai foi uma batida de pelada . Todos os envolvidos eram países pobres fodidos .Solano Lopez era um doido .Tais como os Kims da Coréia do Norte . E para piorar .Essa guerra inflou demais o ego dp Exército Brasileiro que depois deu o golpe republicano .

@@hanoi9316 Kim Jong un taking notes for 2030 plain be like :

@@hanoi9316 tá falando bosta, Brasil e Argentina name não eram pobres pohha nenhuma, Brasil durante o periodo imperial era uma das maiores potências globais, maior que os EUA que fez atè os britanicos hesitarem, que eram a maior potência global da época.

@@rb98769 what I mean is Paraguay in 2 years of war was already destroyed, as you said Solano Lopez send children to the war.

Edwin Stevens was from Connecticut, not Kentucky, but the point still stands. Just crazy

Imagine being such a narcissist that when a random guy tells you about Jesus you develop a massive god complex and start one of the deadliest wars in history.

That shit would have happened sooner or later anyway. Massive famines after overpopulation are unfortunately chinas go tos.

Have to incorporate the Philippine Insurrection into it though.

Brutal? It was a soft conflict

I never thought about Russo-Polish War (1654-67) as interesting, but it's maybe because at same time we had great war against Sweden which was one of the biggest in our history.

Grouping it with Swedish Deluge would be better

That's what happens when you treat people so harsh that it wasn't even necessary, they contributed almost nothing and ended up hated and mostly forgotten, the Assyrian independence movement in Iraq is alright but i hope they don't make another empire lol.

You should therefore be one of the most qualified people to project current events into the near-to-mid future. Care to give us the quick and dirty version of how this "fourth turning" will go?

i knew almost all already with varying degrees of knowledge but i agree i would love to forget it and relearn it all again

I knew most of them as well but good to learn about the few I didn’t know

Same

@@CmdrCorn imo, a fourth turning's can't happen anymore due to nukes. we will see nuclear obliteration before another powershift happens. so uhh, enjoy your last years?

I'll start an Onlyfans. 😂😂😂 JK, but that's literally what the apps Pearl and Pillar I'm launching now are about

@@WhatifAltHist ayyy

@@WhatifAltHist Holy crap he responded to me. I LOVE your stuff man. Please make sure to advertise those apps in your future videos. As an American son of Russian immigrants I would also really love your take on everything that is going on. Keep kicking ass man.

I wanna as well

Hahahaha I can relate.

lmao same

there are on average 2 major wars per century between the military powers of the world, or known world to each region (depending on the time in history), we are due for our next one now

Nuclear weapons have prevented the major powers from waging a total direct war. At least so far.

we shall see. with war going on in ukraine, the war could spread to neighbouring countries. the West isn't safe either

I think the two biggest wars we are likely to see in this century are a U.S. vs China War over Taiwan and war between Iran and an alliance of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Israel, Saudi Arabia and possibly the U.S. I don't think a war over Taiwan would go nuclear, and it would be purely concentrated in the South China Sea. I'm not sure about the second scenario though.

That’s deep man.

Wasn't the general executed and his skin used to make a war drum by his followers?

Momins hate books of history and knowledge till today.

There was a similar episode in China. The ruling dynasty decided to suppress Confucianism, and so the philosophy almost died out, except that some people managed to hide copies of important books so they wouldn't be destroyed.

Outside powers ..you mean muslims?

@@rishiraj1508 Probably, right? I mean, the Greeks pretty much stayed out (except that one invasion in the video), the Persians couldn't get in, the Mongols couldn't get in. It wasn't until the Islamic/Mongol hybrid Mughals that North India was defeated by invaders.

@@hoi-polloi1863 exactly ..we lost everything ..nalanda , Kashmir ....good books and knowledge burnt.....

Malik kafur's conquests Samudragupta's conquests could also be considered

These are soo undertated even whatifalthis don't know about them lol I would add Malik Ambar's wars, Naderian wars and Afghan conquests to list

@@gocool_2.0 yassss totally missed those

@@aksaraylicelali lol

@@aksaraylicelali Malik Ambar the absolute Chad. I visited his tomb

It strange, since here in Europe that war has been pretty well covered in news every now and then. Ruandan genocide part of it especially.

@@jhutt8002 Similar to the war in Yemen if it doesn’t move people then the news is pretty lax about covering it. Which is said no matter what the loss of human life is tragic no matter the nationality or ethnicity. Think we’ve evolved quite a bit as a species but as long as people in power want what others have I believe war and conflict will occur.

I'm going to be real with you Kraut gives some biased history.

Ever listened to Mark Felton or Drachinfel? I must warn you...those channels are addictive to history buffs. Do not watch if your history rotation is already full of "to watch" videos.

@@saddamhussein7181 Everyone does, that's why it's important to cross reference.

Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too 2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue. The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too. The their situation was crazy as. Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest. All this done by people whom almost nobodys. Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons. Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad. China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest. Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold. Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea) Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system. They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.

i love how sus is just a part of our vocab now due to how far reaching the amogus memes have reached

Yes that's interesting there are Indians records of Darius and other Persian kings who came before Alexander to India and there are also records of Selucus Nicator but not a single mention of Alexander

some records were recovered with the help of Chinese sources as well. Also, along with Taxila there was a Nalanda University which attracted students from all over the east. It was burnt for 3 months along with 9 million books by a Turk, Khilji.

@@avibcci1297 Khilji was Turkic not Mughal

@@siddharthtyagi8980 oh yes. I am sorry

And also goes over how Hinduism didn't really have such one single governing philosophy,it had several sects and as such this is unlikely to be the case. Considering how Southern Indian kingdoms tended to be largely Hindu aswell,yet have recorded their histories but have also been less prone to plunder and invasion due to more advantageous geography. Regardless didn't Buddhist,Jain,Parsi etc sources still record history throughout India? Although it could be true that largely the state culture in India didn't focus on Archiving history as heavily as other states,it still would have occurred independently regardless due to the sheer diversity in philosophy and even religion at play here.Considerable amounts of them however are regardless still unverifiable,twisted with mythology or destroyed leading to this less clearer and relatively less detailed picture of history in India when compared to say Europe or China.

That is quite true. The Japanese had a water force but it wasn't a navy. Their ships were smaller than their Sino-Korean counterparts and were unfit for prolonged engagements or even just long voyages in general. China and Korea simply had a true naval doctrine and the ship designs, tactics, and strategies that reflected it. Toyotomi Hideyoshi was aware of this and tried to buy some European ships of the line but failed.

fun fact: the Koreans acutally used stabilized rounds with tips made from low-carbon metal (weighing up to 20 kgs ) to target Japanese ships. look up 대장군전 on google and you'll see images of it.

@@kmk8168 Thanks. Appears to be the Korean translation for rocket. Boy, with high velocity, those things would cut through a wooden ship like butter!

thanks for pointing this out, his original explanation of "brilliant tactics" and "tidal pools" were dissatisfying, especially since we were introduced to a japanese army that had clear advantages over nearby states.

Without yi sun shin, japan decimated almost the entire korean navy

Buddhist Greeks? 😳

I’m in a Alexander the Great class now that has graduate students as well and some dude is doing a paper on them. It’s crazy how little records we have on them.

Records may be few but a fair amount is known or speculated, and many coins and statues have been left behind. I once saw an exhibit dedicated to images of the Buddha made in Gandhara: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhara

@@Atabanza Yup. Menander I was the first known Buddhist of 'European' descent. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menander_I

@@Zeerich-yx9po I know

When did this take place?

Yeah the anglophone community there hate the Francophones

@@noahtylerpritchett2682 It's still going on today, that's the crazy part. The Ambazonian War is this large conflict throughout Cameroon by an English-speaking rebel group (Cameroon mostly speaks French). The rebels want to create a state known as Ambazonia and are going to any lengths to achieve this.

@@noahtylerpritchett2682 yep, this is still going. Not as hot as the wars in Mali or Libya or Nigeria, and certainly not as bad as the conflicts in Assam-India that nobody talks about. And really, _nobody in Western Media _is talking about Assam, as far as I'm aware, not in a conflicht 50 years old.

You said an Indian Genghis Kahn, how about a Mi'kma'ki version, Property lines include: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZbZ4XGKCBf4.html Turtle Island, South Africa, South America, Australia, Northern Glacial Waters. All lands and waters devoted to Environmental policy supporting strong ecosystems. The Majority of the Planet was managed as such for Generations, up until the 1500s when the process was halted Lack of productivity over such a large area, it would support international standards. Without them, it would lead to the Black Path, or the War path of each of the 4 races.

Same, I can only name the panzer III. And that’s just from HOI4

T-34 and Tiger I. You don't need much else.

That's one I didn't know about, the Chichimeca War was similar in the North, defeated Spanish through guerilla tactics

Then end with Ashoka conversion to Buddhism and ultimately end of Marya smaraj.

@@avibcci1297 nothing like budhism and hinduism. ashok was following budha dharma before kalinga war.

Japan was notorious for their pirates for previous centuries up to the Imjin War. No other Asian countries had enough soldiers trained enough to fight Japanese warriors-turned-pirates one-to-one. Japanese pirates were Somali pirates on steroids, looking for loot outside civil war Japan. China and Korea relied on different solution to this. China used their abundant manpower to create a formation of soldiers that could "boss-raid" a single samurai. Meanwhile Korea went all-in on ranged weapons like bows and artillery because Korea never had the luxury to outnumber the invaders. Instead, people would evacuate into fortifications on the hills and then rain down projectiles until the invaders called it quit. Even now South Korea has more self-propelled howitzers in active service than the US, and "the other Korea" is welding two howitzer barrels back to back to shoot far enough to hit Seoul from the DMZ. Meanwhile Japan sucked at logistics by sea because they had been fighting a land war on an island that is bigger than the Korean peninsula. They had little opportunity to experience what is like to feed hundreds of thousands of soldiers fighting on a land across the sea. (Of course I would say as a Korean that Yi the naval Jesus was the bigger reason they froze and starved in Korean winter :P)

Some other weapons used by Koreans include a medieval verion of a grenade launcher, (unguided) anti-ship missiles, and Rocket-propelled artillery(named Hwacha)

There is also the hypothesis that the newly formed government of a unified Japan really wanted to get rid of the giant hordes of unemployed soldiers who had fought all throughout Japan for generations. So send them to another country to pillage and burn to their hearts' content. If huge numbers of them die in Korea, at least they won't cause trouble in Japan.

@@Yora21 well it seems imvading korea was always a useful way of getting rid of excess soldiers for japanese warlords. Though possibly a secondary objective opposed to empire building when a huge chunk of your adult male populations job is fighting gotta keep them busy after all

Speaking of the last one: I've heard that until relatively recently rural German mothers would scare their children with Swedes, the same way American ones scare them with the Boogy-man, or us Swedes talk of trolls. The Swedish version of "speak of the devil" translates into something like "when you speak of the trolls, they're almost in the hall," supposedly there's a Czech version that translates to "speak of the Swede and he's already round the corner."

demetrius was defeated by prince agnimitra

Taiping Rebellion: Same Demitrius - Same An Lushan Rebellion - No Congo War - Only because of Armchair General Imijin War - Same War of the Triple Alliance - No Great Northern War - Yes Byzantine-Sassanian War - Yes because of Extra History War of Spanish Succession - Heard about it once Rise of the Mauryans - Know somewhat because I am of Indian descent (still not as much as North Indians) 30 Years War - Just read a very brief summary in a history book Overall, RU-vid and the Internet have actually taught me more history than school has

@@theflyingpenguin5270 Ha, isn't that true

@@longtimelurker2184 Very true

lmao yes

Mexicans and Peruvians also feel that pain too.

Suggestion thread! The No Ataturk and Vikings in America videos are awful and badly need updates. What if the Zulus won? What If the Incas crushed the Spanish? (We were promised this a long time ago.) What if Napoleon beat Russia? Good departure point would Sweden teaming up with France. What if the US never annexed the Philippines? What if Abraham Lincoln never got shot? What if King Phillip beat the English? What if any/all West African empires became superpowers? What if Russia won the Crimean War?

What if Britain won the Suez Crisis?

What if the Taiping Rebellion succeed? What if Hawaii remained independent? What if the Ottomans took Vienna in 1683?

@@arcticlaw9198 he actually did that last one

@@arcticlaw9198 he did What if the US never annexed Hawaii.

Byzantine

Yeah Heraclius really deserves more attention. Maybe even an epic or tv series about his life. How he rose to the throne of a crumbling empire, saved it from total defeat, managed to restore the empire to its pre-war borders, and then start some rebuilding. The end? Nope, then the muslim conquests commence and manage to undo a lot of his progress. He's ben called the emperor who lived too long for a reason.

@@ImMaxi Heraclius was one of the most famous byzantine emperors, I don't know how he hasn't got more attention. Also a shame what he fought so hard for was not meant to last.

trajan did similar, allowed rome to exist for another 100 years

My wife is Korean and I only found out about it when I went there for the first time. We went to the Admiral Yi museum and saw the giant statue of him and his turtle ship in Seoul too.

@@ARWest-bp4yb It's nice that they celebrate him now, but the way his government treated him at the time...

@@boobah5643 Yeah, politics has always been a dirty game. Some things never change.

In the game Age of Empires II there is a mission where you play as admiral Yin's army trying to kick out the japanese out of Korea. so, not totally ignored.

China and india sparked the little renaissance the muslims had i once heard and read

Sup harsh

Not quite true. Written records were rare, but by no means does that mean that they didn't exist. I have no clue why he stated that.

​@@hititmanifydo you mean the Islamic golden age? It was mainly the Muslims own archivments, predominantly done by Persians. The Islamic state that was created after the lose of the richest provinces of the Eastern Roman empier and all of greater Iran was richt in population, culture and education. The Iranians esentialy continued what they were doing during the sassanid era.

It was also the bloodiest war in American history per capita. It alone lead to Manifest Destiny and the expansion of the west and had such a huge impact on the American collective psyche.

Or the other way around too

@@tedarcher9120 not really heraculius was a one of a kind emperor and the Byzantine’s were far weaker than the Sassanians after the war. The reason for the Islamic conquest of the Sassanian empire was that after khosrow parviz’s death the empire went through 6 shahs. Originally the Arabs only wanted Mesopotamia but the Sassanians kept attacking them and that foreign policy divided the empire and led to civil unrests and that’s what truly led to the fall of the Sassanian empire.

@@godscroissant1539 true 👍

You conveniently left out the fact that the Arabs had a numerically and technologically inferior army, as well as lesser experienced forces They were hungry desert dwellers and still managed to pull an unthinkable feat. You gotta give credit for that as well.

@@themercifulguard3971 I am an admirer of Persian & Roman history but I also have to admit that they've reached an unimaginable feat & I'll give them credit for that.... Although one point in which you are mistaken is that they didn't have an inferior number at all.... Most sources show that in all of the Islamic conquests the armies of the Muslims 90 percent of the times was just as big & as numeric as the armies of their opponents (they sometimes had even more numbers !!!) ,,,,, *However this doesn't change the fact that they had much worse & inferior armors & weapons I agree* ....

He's pretty good at what he does. But you should always check with another source. Kraut is a pretty great one.

I agree, Kipling was pretty enlightening

@@LoganLS0 also History Scope

Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too 2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue. The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too. The their situation was crazy as. Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest. All this done by people whom almost nobodys. Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons. Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad. China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest. Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold. Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea) Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system. They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.

Yeah there’s a lot history and geopolitical channels on RU-vid. I can’t help to think that maybe the reason why I like his channel so much is because of his interesting maps and how he explain things throughout history, society and civilization. Also Caspian report, good times bad Times, brains 4 breakfast, history matters, politics with paint, armchair historian, Call Me Ezekiel, oversimplified, poly matter, extra credits, history scope, name explain, Kraut, CGP Grey, country explained, Logan productions, overly sarcastic productions, m. Laser history, kings and generals, Historian Civilis, geo history, knowledge hub.

lmao 👍🤣

I still have PTSD from the Cola Wars of the 80s. There was also the horrific Flame broiled vs Fried burger wars of the 80s which pitted Der Köning des Burgers and Lord McDonald of the House of Ronald.

Or Britney vs Christina, the ultimate y2k battle.

@@k.j.hulander2204 the casualties in that one were horrific.

@@rjohnson1690 The burger wars were particularly brutal, as both sides would commonly target civillians.

Also incentivized the Portuguese to investigate alternate routs to China, leading to the exploring Africa and discovering America. So that is definitely a war with wide-reaching secondary effects.

"Boi"? Your spelling of "boy" gives away how old you are. 15 -16?

@@waynemarvin5661 You focusing on that for no fucking reason and trying to insult me for no fucking reason without even an argument gives away some things about you as well.

​@@waynemarvin5661 cry

pfp checks out

@@kaiserteddie9564 As we say in France, when the wise man shows the moon, the idiot looks at the finger.

@@lahire4943 that's cool. The spring and autumn annals also speak of that metaphor. idiocy is kinda universal really

Absolutely terrible description of the Great Northern War as well. This guy knows nothing about the subject

@@user-unos111 my bad actually, I misheard "craftiest" as "crapiest"

“Christian”

Christians from the west who met the Taipings didn’t even regard them as being very Christian, but more extreme heretics.