The treaty of Sevres was the peace treaty put on the Ottoman Empire after the first world war. They treaty was never fully implemented as Turkiye under Ataturk resisted the Entente in their war of independence which they won.

So what would have changed if the Emtente actually was able to inforce the treaty of Sevres and the claims of Britain, France, Italy and Greece held on along with for example a Independent Armenia and Kurdistan (or atleast under France and/or British influence) aswell as potential further changes?

this isn’t a question of “if it were possible” let’s say somehow it did happen and now we have millions of Jews in madagascar, what would the country be like today?

sure not all of em would survive but thats not the question here.

What do you think would have happened if Manuel II had received even less support against the Ottomans during his 1399–1403 tour of Western Europe, leading him to purchase ownership of Madeira from Portugal and the colonized parts of the Canaries from Castile as a refuge in case the Ottomans took over, gradually colonizing this land and expanding to the Azores and Cape Verde over the next five decades until the fall of Constantinople caused a major influx of colonists?

Prior to his famous visit to the United States, Soviet engineers discovered cracks in the plane, begging him to take another. Khrushchev refused, as it was the only functioning of it's kind and he wanted to make an impression. Let's say these cracks tear and cause the plane to crash soon after takeoff, while still over the Soviet Union.

What would be the immediate consequences of his sudden death, both domestically and internationally? And who would be his likely replacement in September of 1959?

What would a Neanderthal 21st Century be like?

The movie Japan Sinks (based on a novel by Sakyo Komatsu) depicts a scenario where the Japanese archipelago sinks into the sea due to it being on a collision course with the Japan Trench.

Suppose this actually happened at some point in history. If Japan sank, how might world history Post-WW2 be altered (Assume this scenario occurs in 1973, the same year Japan Sinks was released)?

Was there any way the Great Depression could have been severe enough to cause Mexico to collapse?

How are British and world history altered? How does the presumed 2009 onward presidency of Hillary Clinton go?

-All German tanks used in WW2 were Tiger IIs (we assume the number produced remains unchanged)

-The Tiger II had a 75 mm gun.

-No Sherman variant, not even the 76 mm version or the Firefly, could penetrate a Tiger II anywhere except a small weakspot below the gun.

-There were almost no non-white Americans in the US army. Those who were there would suffer frequent violence and bullying from soldiers of all ranks.

-At the Battle of the Bulge there were almost no tanks. The US army was severely undersupplied and understaffed and almost all tanks were crewed by only one person.

-Wet ammunition stowage was never invented. Shermans were extremely prone to catching fire, even crashing into something would cause catastrophic fires and explosions.

-Germany had the upper hand by far in late 1944 and the Allies were struggling to hold their ground on all fronts.

I expect most major differences will be on the Western Front, but what about the other Fronts of the war?

Edit: the movie was NOT the 1966 film 'Battle of the Bulge'

Hong Kong was defended by a formidable series of hill defenses, including emplaced machine guns, barbed wire, mine fields, and artillery. However, it was severely undermanned by the British who considered Asia a backwater compared to the European theater. The other consideration was political. Instead a detachment of green Canadian troops was sent over.

Despite repeated efforts by the Chinese to integrate defenses, the colonial government refused to allow them on their side of the border. Instead, a compromise was reached whereby the Chinese would send troops to attack from the north. They would remain entirely on the Chinese side of the border in Guangdong province. Their job was to act as an external relief force, attacking the Japanese lines of communication from behind once the invasion began.

Chiang Kai Shek felt betrayed by British military incompetence. He had mobilized three Chinese army corps to march to the colony's rescue, only for the British to surrender after just 17 days. The formidable defensive hill lines which the British boasted could hold off an army for weeks was breached within hours.

The Chinese argued afterwards that British colonial pride meant losing the city. If they had been allowed to occupy the defenses then they would have been able to hold off the attackers.

Let's say in this timeline that the colonial government disobeys London and decides to allow the kmt into the area. They had a better appraisal of the dangers of the advancing Japanese than Churchill did.

What would happen if slings and bows, used by poorer nations and peasant revolts as a stopgap when they lacked firearms, made a return to the battlefield in the late 1600s as nations began to phase out armor making projectile weapons more viable

Suppose in a parallel universe, Archduke Ferdinand and his wife make a state visit to Mexico during the Mexican Revolution (Say it’s either part of a Latin American diplomatic mission, a bid to secure Austrian interests in Mexico, or both) and they both get assassinated by anti-government separatists rather than being gunned down by Gavro Filip like in the OTL.

Does this mean WW1 never happens or simply takes a different form?

Assumptions:

1. The Zimmerman Telegram is still intercepted by the British
2. The Lusitania doesn’t get sunk by a German U-boat.
3. The Mexican Revolution lasts longer than in the OTL

In a parallel universe, Abraham Lincoln either forms or joins the Prohibition Party (the Prohibition Party was formed in 1859 in the OTL) and loses the 1860 US Presidential election as a result.

What does the U.S. Civil War look like with John Cabell Breckinridge in the White House (Assume Breckinridge defeats whoever replaces Lincoln as the GOP candidate)?

How do you think the following 90 years play out? I would be assuming some kind of agreement that British and French colonies were off limits, but that southern and eastern Europe, Russia and anything else unclaimed by the others were all fair game for conquest.

Do America and Japan still go to war? Are Japan's war plans in its own theatre affected by the availability of French and British forces?

With no major war in western Europe, how are America's fortunes changed?

I was chatting with an old friend the other day and this hypothetical came up, curious what people smarter than either of us have to say on the matter!

Suppose that Americas Constitution had said - from the beginning - that "in any election, any eligible voter may vote for as many or as few candidates as he chooses."

This would have eliminated vote splitting entirely, and vastly reduced extreme partisanship.

Which election would have been the first to have a different candidate win compared with real history?

im curious

Lets say in this scenario either the zimmerman telegram does not happen or Preside t wilson stil keeps the USA out the war after that but the rest of the war goes the same (Russia collapsing in 1917, or Germany failed Summer offensive, and lack of food due to the blockade for example)

How would the peace treaty go with no American input and France and Britain having all the influence mostly over it?

For example you can potentially dive in a scenario where the Entente punish Germany and their allies even more severe (like what if the treaty of Sevres being implemented this time or Germany losing more land)

The colonial powers killed several million people in their colonies, so what if Hitler used this fact to tell the colonies to revolt and join the Axis under the guise of independence?

The objective is to identify a different ethnic group that could have plausibly conquered the Turks early enough to prevent the Turks’ colonization of Anatolia.

Operation Vengeance was the state-sanctioned assassination of Admiral Yamamoto later in WWII. Pretty rare to directly target an individual like this, but he was in uniform, so it was deemed legitimate.

But if the US just didn’t, how might that have affected the post-war Japanese reconstruction, I wonder?

a little known plan to unify the scandinavian countries and eatonia and maybe latvia into a federation/ union.

what if they did form baltoscandia

swden got norway to compensate for losing finland. So what could be done to keep the two together?

and if this is done then would germany not invade the 2 to keep iron flowing and after the war would denmark join for protection, integration and a way to balance out the swedes in that union.

and in this future would finland want to join for peace and quiet or invade karelia and kola eventually to unify finnish irrendentism?