The worst part of this is the idea that the soviets would hold on with their landmass, they would 1000% have Siberia and central Asian territory from the civil war idk what this is or why they wouldn't fight for that, and if they did have Siberia and central Asian territory they would have done better in the war and probably wouldn't have lost like they did here, I also don't think the central powers would stop soviet expansion unless into Poland, just don't think you thought about this scenario realism much but its well animated.
the civil war ended in 5 years in our timeline with a soviet victory, do u think that with a russian empire that wasnt exhausted in ww1 wouldve lost in 4 years? also the revolt was caused by the people that wanted the war to stop mainly, so if russia wasnt in a war the revolution would have much less support. in my opinion it is unrealistic how the soviets captured anything at all.
When what if italy dosent switch sides Edit: Tbh y'all telling some truths, although when I mean "Italy switch sides" I mean what if they stayed loyal to the Triple Alliance, although it's my fault for not saying thay
Fantastic animation here! I love how you greatly improved the style here! Anyways, with the USSR replacing the Russian Empire in 1914, it would be definitely a Central Powers victory, since in real life Russia kept the Central Powers busy for 3 years. Without the Eastern Front, Germany would have much more troops to overrun France. Serbia meanwhile would be in a far more difficult situtation fighting a war of attrition against Austria-Hungary and the latter's forces wouldn't be repelled so easily, not to mention Bulgaria's entry into the war. Italy and Romania would stay neutral due to not risking a war against the more powerful Central Powers. Sweden attacking Norway would be ironic, since they were in an union like Austria-Hungary just a few years ago.
Nonsensical. Nothing here makes sense. I know this is alternative but what justification would the Germans have to roll over France?Would they even be interested?Hötzendorf would've probably encouraged the austrians to declare war on Serbia but I don't see much Entente involvement here too without a major player in the east for their cause. The Ottomans also had no interest to join. It's just Enver blowing up Russian stuff from newly bought German warships which gave the Russians a justification to declare war on the Ottomans in retaliation. I don't see Ottomans joining here. Why did Greece join the central powers? King Constantine had no interest in joining the central powers but rather to maintain neutrality as influenced by his wife. He knew the Greeks would never fight along with the Bulgarians. I don't see Greece joining either side this time but they would surely allow the Serbian and Entente troops. If Constantine tries to do it, he'll be overthrown. Moreover, I'm pretty sure that the support would've been minimal for totally 'kicking' out the Tsar. A Bolshevik state at that time is extremely unrealistic. I know you wanted to find a justification for the video title but still. These are my all concerns,I don't want replies with 'nerd' emojis or anything. I have a lot other arguments to make but whatever. I know you put time and effort into this.
@@ivruge Logic is important. It is historical so it should have semi-realism if not realism. If it was all about watching random lines move on a map then this would be RU-vid kids material.
Bro decided to completely ignore the role of Belarus and Ukraine in the Civil War and thinks Bolshevik liberation of Ukraine is some Putin's invasion 🤦🏻♂️
Even the founder of Ukrainian People's Republic sided with Bolsheviks. Which means that Vinnichenko's Ukraine would be on the Soviet side, just like Belarus
Belarusians have never had a strong enough state structure of their own to exist independent for at least a couple of days. And separatist movements too. Illogical from the very beginning.
Moreover, I think that the great powers would take advantage of this revolution. Obviously, at a minimum, Germany would most likely go to war with the newly formed Poland, and could also invade the Baltics.
Moreover x2, the Bolsheviks were against the war. Most likely, they would not have participated in the First World War, but began their expansion later.
@@TheAustrianAnimations87 я уверен, что наше правительство рассчитывало быстро ввести войска, устроить переворот и закончить войну. Но у этих идиотов ничего не получилось. А сейчас эта война просто заработок для них. Капиталисты наживаются на войне.
Little nitpicks: if France fell WW1 would have ended. Especially if Russia isn’t even in the war since Britain was not super pro war. Also the central powers should have had more men on the east since there was no western front and Poland and Ukraine had actual legitimate governments.
Very weird concept. Like, why would bolshevik revolution happen in 1910 at the first place? Then, why civil war stops just after reds get Western Russia? Whites wouldn't be ok with communists just control most important part of Russia. The same goes for reds: why would they let whites control Siberia with all its resources. These two goverments should't let each other exist, that's how civil war works. Then a minor issue, but I think the new communist country should be named Russian SFSR. Soviet Union was proclared only in 1922, uniting several nomimally indepensent soviet republics into one coutry. But you didn't show any other soviet republics but Russia. And the main issue. Why did Soviet Union attack Ottomans. Did they join WW1 by this? But bolsheviks were very anti-war back then. Especially they were against WW1. Or did they want to "export" revolution to other countries by invading them? That was Trotsky's idea, but you didn't say that Trotsky took more power in Soviet goverment or something. And even if Soviet Union decided to "export" revolution, they'd firstly fully get Ukraine as well as maybe other newly independent states (Poland and Baltic states), and only then invading such major entity as Ottoman Empire.
Brother, what would have happened if the Ottoman Empire had not lost the Balkans and Tripoli? Do it bro, I am Turkish.🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷As a Turk, I support you and you are loved.
It wouldn't last long with a strong germany and austro hungary and ottoman empire and the british and french likely being extremly concerned about a bunch of radical Bolsheviks take over in russia. Plus japan would proabbly still try and nab Siberia.
inaccurate map. the ottomans still held control over novi pazar, southern rumelia, northern greece, albania,macedonia, and tripolitania, they only lost them in 1911 and 1912.
If Qing won the opium war,suppressed the taiping rebellion, abandon the isolationist policy, modernized then participated in ww1 on the side of Central Powers what will happen?
They will be surrounded by the Entente, which is not very ideal The Qing will be fighting on three fronts (The Russian Front, Japanese Front, and the British-French Front)
No, it doesn't make sense to move the Bolshevik Revolution to 1910. It would make more sense to have it between 1905 and 1907 since that was historically when the actual "First" Russian Revolution took place.
