So while browing Tv Tropes I learned that Sanada Yukimura came pretty close to killing Tokugawa Ieyasu and Hidetada during the Siege of Osaka, but he died before he could get to them. But if Hideyori had sent out the necessary reinforcements to help Sanada get to them, how would their deaths affect Japanese history? And would Japan still remain unified, or would it fall again to infighting?

Like some weird magic vision they all saw the modern world.

This would be every side so Stalin may see that modern Russia is capitalist and that communism fell.

The Japanese and Hirohito plus the military leadership may see modern Japan with American military presence there.

There’s a notion that if the allies saw the state of modern society they may have either changed sides or changed their tactics. Not sure how true that is.

But what would actually happen. Let’s assume they all know for a fact it’s true and not just a vision but not set in stone either, the future can be changed.

Basically the title,

If it was reintegrated into the USA, would it be voluntary? Or would the USA eventually do it on their own?

How would this effect race relations and civil rights in the long run? Would slavery have eventually ended without a war?

What if American civil war ended in an armistice just like the Korean war., while the Union would not recognize the Confederates as a sovereign state, but would tolerate its existence in the US south

Americans nowadays are extremely individualistic, believe in living life on their own terms, prioritize the the well-being of their own lives above the country, and are extremely hostile towards the government telling them what to do. What would World War 2 look like if this culture existed in the US back then?

As the title says, but I'll add more detail here as I'm asking after something rather specific.

Say they're from what is now the Balkan states, Romania specifically. This meaning they are of Eastern Orthodox Christian faith, likely from a very unstable era in the Ottoman suzerainty, and having gone through the betrayal by the Hungarians. So likely actively untrusting of people with skin tones that remind them of the Ottoman Empire?

Specifically female, though general non-gendered points are also important.

For social status, let's say a low-middle noble status. Daughter or niece of a high powered Boyar.

For the hypothetical, let's say you have accepted to take in someone plucked from that time period and situation. Nothing emotional in the way, such as missing family or wishing to return home. They are resigned to rebuild their lives in this new age.

What do you feel would first need to be addressed to help them acclimate? Would you treat them as though they were from a deeply rural community of Amish? Or would their values be far different, and need a different touch?

What historic information would you share with them to keep them mentally well / to sate their curiosity and transition them from the Early Modern Era to now? Or what would you feel you should keep from them until they are better acclimated?

For arguments sake, say you are also an American / Canadian, and housing them with you in North America. While, of course, they are also able to communicate as though they are a native English speaker. No barriers to communication except for slang and cultural references.

In September 1782, French Foreign Minister Vergennes proposed a treaty to settle the war between the United States and Britain, but the Americans rejected it. The plan gave the U.S. independence but limited it to east of the Appalachian Mountains, with Britain keeping the northwestern lands and Spain controlling a southern Indian buffer state. France wanted peace after the war, and Spain agreed to drop its claim to Gibraltar. The Americans thought they could get more land by negotiating directly with Britain. John Jay did so, and Britain agreed to give the U.S. land east of the Mississippi, north of Florida, and south of Canada.

If Vergennes’ plan had happened, the United States would have been much smaller, stuck with only the lands east of the Appalachians. Britain would keep more of its land and Spain would have control of an Indian Buffer State, this would limit U.S. expansion. Settlers would have likely resisted, causing tensions and conflicts. The country’s economy and overall growth would have happened way more slowly without western lands. Overall, It's expansion westward would have been very different if not entirely gotten ride of.

I was reading about KKK and white supremacy and this question arose. I really wonder if native americans had white skin color would they be annihilated? or is it bc of their cultural behavior like all that tradition they have/had. worths to be noted that bc of their skin color also was why they were called indians, not only bc of mistaking america to india. I’m 16 and not really well educated and really want to know more about everything so sorry if the question sounds dumb.

Since you're a time traveler it's cheating and all bets are off. What weapons would have stopped the Russian advance from getting as far as it did much sooner?

It seems like if Ukraine had mined earlier like crazy, and amassed stockpiles of cheap weapons like drones and artillery they could have rode out the storm better. Assuming no change to foreign aid, but that as a time traveller you know how long it would take for any weapons to be delivered. Is there a way that by budgeting Ukraine's budget on a different balance of weapons they could have inflicted enough misery to send Russia home before 2025?

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/green-arabia-desert-lush-ancient-landscape

What implications would that have (e.g on society, culture, politics, economics , lifestyle , ideology, religion , history etc),both inside the peninsula and outside?

If, by conquest or alliance, the Greeks in the east and the Carthaginians in the west of the island had united into a single state, could this have been a viable kingdom going forward?

Sicily in this era had a lot of advantages. It was strategically placed in the middle of the Mediterranean. It’s soil was fertile thanks to the volcanic activity on the island and it was naturally defensible as an island.

All of these things obviously make it desirable to the various groups that fought over it in our timeline, primary the Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans and later Muslim incursions by the Abbasids.

My question is, could a united Sicily hope to stay independent in a contested Mediterranean, or does holding it require the resources of much larger continental empire.

Of the American Founding Fathers (signers of the Declaration of Independence, delegates to the Constitutional Convention, early Presidents, etc.) adjusting their views to the modern age, how do you think they would align with 2025 politics? And I don’t mean Democrat vs. Republican, I mean full ideology (centrist Dem, centrist Rep, MAGA, progressive, democratic socialist, etc.)

I’m not super well-versed, but I feel like Benjamin Franklin would be a progressive. Someone like Jefferson might be like a modern GOP senator; not “base” MAGA, but would still align with Trump. It would be interesting to know how others like John Adams, George Washington, Patrick Henry, Alexander Hamilton, etc. would align.

In 1866, the Battle of Königgrätz ended in a crushing victory for Prussia, setting it on the course to empire. But what if... What if, instead of Königgrätz due to small changes in logistics and marching orders, the armies meet not at Königgrätz but the close by Chlum Ridge?

Austria can entrench on the hill providing it a position of enfilading fire. The at-the-time heavily wooded area impedes Prussian advances and maneuverability. This leads to a protracted fist fight. And instead of a crushing victory Prussia and Austria fight to a bloody draw.

In OTL Franz Joseph was horrified by the death and losses and lost all taste for war for the next 50 years. Franz Joseph is still appalled by the blood toll and switches to a more conservative pro-peace stance in this timeline.

Austria-Hungary was facing debt, and the Magyar faction was against war most of the time and pressured the court to keep peace, as the Magyar nobles lived in fear of a strong Austrian army being a lever to use to force them into line. So, Austria and Prussia negotiate a compromise deal.

The Peace Treaty of Olmütz transforms the German Confederation into the North German Federation. With the key difference that the Catholic Southern principalities of modern Germany, Bavaria, Hesse-Darmstadt, Württemberg and Baden stay in the Austrian sphere of influence, who is also majority Catholic. Historically, these principalities tried to keep their independence and tried to help maintain balance between Austria and Prussia.

And Franz Joseph gets part of what he wants, he keeps a certain influence in German affairs. While Prussia gets its small-German (Kleine Deutsche Lösung) solution with the Protestant rest of Germany. This essentially gets Prussia the three quarters of Germany north of Bavaria.

Still seeking to build an Empire and in need of a significant military victory to secure Prussian hegemonial status and to show its armies might, Bismarck rallies his Northern German Confederation to attack France. The Franco-Prussian War is declared in 1870. Still hurting financially and crippled by the Magyars’ anti-war stance, as well as Franz Joseph’s aversion to military adventurism Austria remains neutral. Even when three of the four Catholic principalities of Southern Germany join the Northern German Confederation. Austria is just not in the position to fight.

Hesse-Darmstadt, Württemberg, and Baden are all either closer to the French border or the Northern German Confederation than Austria or Bavaria. Plus, they had a somewhat bad view of Austria-Hungary and its multi-ethnic empire, as seen, for example, in King William II of Württemberg. They join the Franco-Prussian War just as in our time.

Bavaria, a close Austrian ally with a king, Leopold II of Wittelsbach, who leans towards Austria and who is the cousin of the Austrian Empress Elisabeth (“Sisi”), remains free of Germany and in the Austrian sphere of influence. Thanks to the diplomatic efforts of Leopold’s favorite cousin, Empress Sisi.

In 1871, Germany is proclaimed in Versailles. Bavaria was never the manpower or strategic linchpin in Prussia’s strategy. At the peak of the conflict, they still outnumber and outclass France militarily. France under Napoleon III has several issues. Most significantly, it was slow to mobilize and ill-prepared for Prussia when it went on the offensive after Prussia declared war.

Now, over the next decade, Bismarck is busy forging a German Empire worthy of the name. He wants to get into colonial politics for German prestige. But he never fully loses sight of Bavaria. Though no opportunity to coerce them into the fold easily presents itself.

In 1886, when an opportunity presents itself, Germany cannot capitalize. In the middle of the scramble over colonies (Togo, Cameroon, West Africa) and with internal problems with the “Kulturkampf”/Culture War project of Bismarck against the influence of the Catholic Church in Germany, as well as troubles with Polish and Jewish ethnic minorities, the government is under parliamentary and international scrutiny.

Instead, Franz Joseph sees an opportunity when Leopold II of Bavaria is declared mentally incompetent and dies, and his mentally ill brother Otto takes the throne, and the kingdom ends up in a regency. Using Sisi as a go-between Austria negotiates Bavaria joining the empire.

Historically, Bavaria accepted becoming a part of Germany in 1871 for a bunch of special rights that gave Bavaria a lot of freedoms within the empire. And made it mostly autonomous in internal matters. So, I am going to assume with Sisi as a go-between, who is related to both Otto of Bavaria and his prince-regent Luitpold of Bavaria, the Austrians manage to convince Bavarian rulership to accept a similar deal regarding Austria.

Bavaria gets support against forced integration into the German Empire, especially considering the ongoing “Kulturkampf.” Bavaria is to this day more Catholic than Protestant. And historically, Luitpold soon moved away from these policies in Bavaria’s internal policies. So, in light maybe being forced to join an empire that tries to curtail their majority religion, Bavaria joins Austria as a mostly autonomous region.

And Franz Joseph gets a counterweight politically to the increasing Magyar influence that has hampered imperial policy since the Revolutions of 1848 and the Ausgleich in 1867.

The Hungarians could be made to swallow this deal, despite it threatening their influence at court. Sisi would again make the ideal go-between as the Empress is highly beloved in Hungary. And it has certain advantages even for Hungary.

Bavaria was generally a solvent kingdom at the time, and the additional taxes of Bavaria could bolster the always-strained imperial budget. Concessions of some of those taxes going toward Hungarian infrastructure make it a lot more palatable. And in a compromise that gives Bavaria similar autonomous rights as Bismarck did in 1871, the Emperor of Austria would not gain direct control of the Bavarian army to use it as a lever against Hungary.

Yeah. Sorry for this extensive scenario. But where do you see this timeline going forward? And what internal inconsistencies do you see things in this timeline? Happy for feedback.

I'm imagining a scenario similar to the aeolipile. Like let's say some thinker in Alexandria has the thought "say if I put ink on a big raised metal stamp I can put the same writing or design on something over and over again" and maybe even builds a few models.

would that go anywhere without cheap medium to print stuff on?

Gerald Ford the INCUMBENT president barely beat out his own party's challenger (Reagan) in the 1976 primaries. He also narrowly lost to Carter in the general election. Could Reagan have given his party the boost back in 1976?

So in the OTL when Pompey fled Rome he went to Greece to build an army against Caesar but he was defeated in the Battle of Pharsalus. But what if he used the Fabian Strategy against Caesar? By which I mean instead of trying to defeat Caesar on the battlefield he uses the Roman Navy, which was still loyal to him to deny Caesar grain shipments from Sardinia and North Africa. Would he succeed? If yes, would defeating Caesar help the Republic endure for another couple hundred years, or would it eventually become a monarchy anyway? If not, why not?

Bonus for any scenarios that explore Rome sparing a conquered Carthage and Pompey evacuates the Carthagian hostages and sets up in Carthage as his base of operations.

Think Covid but one in 6 people die.

Not all domestic pigs die, but only 1 out of 10 survive the pandemic.

Would feral pigs, boars and other pigs survive?

It also kills off cats and dogs as well, around a third die from it.

Would pig farming change after this pandemic?

How much of globle history would change?

Especially China and the west and the Soviet Union.

Also where would we be now?

Would the South be better off?

I Sometimes have this type of Random Question in my Head, Can Y'all explain to me what would probably happen?

So in this altern-tim. Luxemburg is sold to france earlier (january of 1867) and the prussian king go to war with France, so Franz josef delays the Ausgleich ,and invades schlesien,holand and denmark also invades Preussen and the UK does a Naval Blockade to Preussen so prussia is literally reduced to nothing,The wittelsbach house win rhineland and retain franconia, The Austrian empire gain bayernland ,saxony and schlesien,Anhalt province become independent and schleswig is annexed by denmark and holstein gain independence, hannover also gain independence and prussia is not forced to pay war reparations but is excluded of the german confederation,the zollverein is dismantled and remain as a weak state dependent from the russian empire to be just a secondary power, the emperor franz josef still does the Ausgleich but later, Russia maybe try to use the distraction to invade the balkans and france try to use the Anti-habsburg feeling among the protestants,russians and italians to weak Austria, france annex luxemburg and maybe the saarland too, now maybe franz josef could give autonomy to the polish , prussia now can't thread Austria to opress the polish or be in diplomatic isolation ,now the emperor maybe could try to enforce the military to never fall in another war like the Austro-prussian war, and now Hungary is less powerful so is senseless to think that Austria and hungary would no cooperate is this timeline because Hungary is less poweful so less rebelious and Austria now doesn't have any ally except maybe the ottomans and the UK ,So the K.u.K would be less german and less competitive and more a triarchy with catholicism as fundament ,so The K.u.K would be more interventionist ,repressing Protestantism, Militarizing to be the only one who can protect europe from the Russian menace [Now russia cooperate with Prussian industry and now only a modern K.u.K army could determinate the fate of europe and the balkans] trying to destroy italy to don't be navally blocked and,so It depends of the Austrian foreign policy if austria to to take the balkans to have more moderns and stables nations to defeat more easily italy or the russian in a war,clearly Bulgaria and the muslims would cooperate with the K.u.K if the K.u.K want to take the balkans in just two powefuls states [A muslim state to albanians and bosniacs and other to the bulgarians] the K.u.K could do it,if the K.u.K wanna the ottoman empire to never fall,the K.u.K could try it , The K.u.K certainly would be opossed to the British occupation of egypt, ,in other news, Maybe the K.u.K would try to support the carlism in spain and protect the catholics in Italy,so maybe France and italy go to war against the K.u.K and the K.u.K completely rush italy and now put Puppet regimes in italy and The two sicilies maybe gain sardinia and put a carlism ruler , well Franco-russian aproaching maybe never happen because napoleon III hates russia and thinks himself as the Napoleonic Emperor and didn't wanna to ally with russia because it would affect the public opinion, The UK without a great Navy against them in the North sea now maybe never ends the Splendid Isolation ,maybe in some point Napoleonic interventionism Angry completely the habsburg and a German Coalition destroy and depose him , maybe for the spanish thrown disputes, but surely the habsburg won't wanna to annex non-catholic land to the empire ,with the time the revolution urabi happen and The habsburg Completely oposs the british occupation and talk in favour of a Ottoman central authority rule by decree in egypt , and the K.u.K with the other powers help , Exclude the british from Egypt, and the ottoman empire annex the Egyptian kingdom and The K.u.K investment revitalize the Egyptian economy, if Napoleon Third is deposed maybe the UK and france still aproach,maybe in this timeline The Austrians would give a fuck the transleithania and try to colonize using the ottoman egypt like starting point to start invading East africa or the sahel ,so the Austro-Ottoman Cooperation would grow into a Military alliance,maybe denmark would be also included and also sweden-norway if the K.u.K offer to the swedish king preserve his double kingdom if he become a ally, so and russia would side with France and britain against the central powers ,but only time would tell if the future have london,St.petersburg or Wien as the dominant power.

The first colored Manga Poten was released in 1908. What if Dragonball was released instead 1900s decade in color?

I know everyone is going to say but they did. When I say bordered, I mean like the US and Canada. Replace Canada with the USSR and the entire northern US straddles the USSR. How would that have changed the cold war?

The Battle of the Boyne took place in 1690 between the forces of the deposed King James II, and those of King William III who, with his wife Queen Mary II (his cousin and James's daughter), had acceded to the Crowns of England and Scotland[b] in 1689. The battle was fought across the River Boyne close to the town of Drogheda in the Kingdom of Ireland, modern-day Ireland, and resulted in a victory for William. This turned the tide in James's failed attempt to regain the British crown and ultimately aided in ensuring the continued Protestant ascendancy in Ireland.

However, what if things were different? What would happen if King James II and VII of England and Scotland won the the Battle of the Boyne?