Welcome to /r/HistoricalWhatIf!

Do diplomatic relations change? Do we get friendlier or do things stay the same?

What if official ussr policy was to have Soviet soldiers forcefully rape and breed with German women in occupied territories to repopulate ussr? Stalin justification is revenge and reparations for population loss.

How would western allies react? How would others in the ussr react? Would Stalin be able to successfully implement this?

Previously, in 1857, just five years before the American Civil War, there was a War in Utah that was fought between the United States and the Mormon State of Deseret. Although the Utah War was inconclusive, the Mormons had to accept U.S. Federal Authority, but they were fine with that. However, what if they weren't fine with that? Let's say that the Mormons were very upset at the U.S. Federal Government taking over Utah and by the time the American Civil War began, they took back control of Utah with a Secret Army led by Brigham Young. After retaking Utah, they declare War on the United States and the Confederacy for being Non-Mormons. What would happen? 

If the Hohenzollers never were in control of the Duchy of Prussia, would that have effected their eventually domination of the german states? Like if it came under the the rule of the House of Wettin, some other house, or just stayed as the State of the Teutonic Order would the Hohenzollers still come to dominate Germany?

Disclaimer: For the record, I'm not pro or anti Vietnamese war or pro or anti South Vietnam. But given that Vietnam is a popular topic on alternate history subreddits, I'm curious on whether the war would turn out differently depending on certain events. That said I imagine some things would still turn out the same, so I'm listing those down below as well.

POD Events:

1. No neutrality agreement is made regarding Laos. Instead, the United States and their allies invade Laos to both prevent the communists/NVA from taking over and to disrupt the Ho Chi Minh Trail and the NVA's supply lines to the VC.
2. The UK, along with Australia and New Zealand, aids the United States with Vietnam, by sending former veterans of the Malaysian Emergency to assist with in training of the South Vietnamese forces.
3. Agent Orange isn't used in South Vietnam out of fear of impacting their South Vietnamese allies.
4. Expand on the Combined Action Program including creating a joint chain of command and an overarching strategy to create an interlocking network of thresholds designed to ward off VC Control.
5. Try to improve the ARVN by providing them with the necessary supplies, help them create their own networks of logistics, and training junior officers and soldiers to stop an NVA invasion and deal with the VC.
6. Introduce the CORDS program earlier and expand on it as part of the hearts and minds campaign.
7. Diem is overthrown and replaced by someone more competent like Thieu, or at least someone that recognizes how essential the ARVN and the local militia were in
8. Continue and expand on the CIDG program by supporting local militias like the Popular Forces, Regional Forces and the Montagnards to fight the Viet Cong and deny them the supplies they receive from the NVA via the Ho Chi Minh Trail, but avoid integrating them into teh ARVN.
9. Fortify the Mekong Delta and II Corps region around Saigon with US Forces, local militia, and reliable ARVN Forces. This will accomplish two things. It will remove any VC presence in the region and it will create a fall-back zone in the event of an NVA invasion.

Constant/OTL Events:

1. An invasion of North Vietnam is still off the table, as is bombing the North Vietnamese border with China, no one in DC wants to risk a nuclear war.
2. Either due to its own flaws or Colonel Thao's interference the Strategic Hamlet Program fails.
3. The air campaign against North Vietnam continues. Unfortunately, with the exception of Operation Pocket Money, the campaign is still overall ineffective like it is in the OTL. On the plus side it does spur the creation of the Top Gun program.
4. Continued the special forces/covert operations against the Viet Cong like the PsyOps program, Operation Eldest Son and Operation Thundercloud.
5. The ARVN still suffers from issues with manpower and military discipline.
6. Effectiveness of the Comparative Action Plan varies based on which members of the Squad knew Vietnamese cultural practices and language or how well they could pick up on it and how good of a tactical planner, manager, and diplomat the Squad leaders were. There will also be issues of corruption, with some militia leaders padding the payrolls of their platoons. There was also a general distrust of the American forces and the South Vietnamese government.

If the above events were to happen, would the war end sooner than in the OTL or later than in the OTL? And which side would win?

Sources:

To what extent was counterinsurgency actually successful in Vietnam? : r/AskHistorians

How effective was the Combined Action Program during the Vietnam War? What influence has it had on counter-insurgency policies and ideas since then? : r/AskHistorians

How close was USA to winning in Vietnam war? : r/WarCollege

ARVN ineffectiveness : r/WarCollege

CORDS: A New Pacification Program for Vietnam – Association for Diplomatic Studies & Training

Kopets, Keith F.pdf

I know the US has kinda of bad track record of directly or indirectly supporting and arming groups/leaders that initially align with their interests, then once in power become a threat to US so I'm sure Saddam would've eventually ended up at war with US, but without the catalyst of 9/11, I would assume there wouldn't have been the approval from the US senate or public support to invade Iraq had it not occurred. I also know Saddam wasn't well liked in the region or domestically and probably was at risk of being deposed by other foreign or domestic groups as well… but I wonder when and who would've successfully ended his regime if 9/11 hasn't spurred US support enough to invade Iraq and end the regime?

And I know the Bush administration had discussed invading Iraq prior to 9/11, but would they ever have gotten senate approval without the administration capitalizing on the legitimate national security concerns prompted by the terrorist attacks?

In this timeline, Vladimir the Great of Kyivan Rus' decides to remain with Slavic Paganism after thinking that Islam, Catholicism, and Orthodoxy all fricking suck. How would this affect history?

In this timeline, the US began this practice a year before the withdrawal, where they would leave behind women who did not want to leave

The women will be sent to Southeast Asia, Africa and the United States, respectively.

If this incident really happens, what will be the consequences?

I am aware that it would have most likely still happened, but by how much longer would his failed assassination attempt delayed WW1

In 1998, people and pigs began to fall ill in Malaysia. It was thought at first that this was an outbreak of Japanese encephalitis, but later testing showed that it was in fact the work of a previously-undiscovered virus. It was named the Nipah virus and the outbreak in Malaysia would end up claiming more than 100 human lives. Outbreaks of Nipah virus took place in Bangladesh and India ever since.

The Nipah virus comes from a species of bat, similar to the COVID-19 virus, SARS-CoV-2. While the Nipah virus can spread between humans via bodily fluids or being very close together, person-to-person transmission is limited and the virus is generally not considered airborne. If untreated, a patient can fall into a coma within 24 to 48 hours and has a 40-75% chance of dying.

What if, in place of SARS-CoV-2, a Nipah virus strain mutated to spread quickly between humans and an outbreak of the mutant Nipah virus went global?

Hillary Clinton decides to play ball and selects Bernie as her Vice President, how much does this affect the 2016 Election and the timeline?

The dictator Musharraf said that George Bush threatened to 'bomb Pakistan into the stone age' if he refused to assist the US but Pakistan has nukes?

If those 3 countries never agreed to give up there nuclear arsenal, would Russia had been less likely to become belligerent to the west?

Instead of the Dutch colonizing South Africa in 1652 a different nation does instead, maybe Portugal or England colonizes earlier than otl.

Context: ○ Every rebellion against the crown in hispanicamerica is crushed, however, the viceroyalties are heavily damaged.

○ Spanish Empire becomes more centralized.

○ Fernando VII sends his brother Carlos María Isidro De Borbón to rule the Viceroyalty Of New Spain as the King (so no Carlist wars happen ITTL).

• Could the Spanish Empire resist an invasion by the United States?

• If such resistance failed, could there be a future attempt at revenge or retaliation?

• Could the Spanish Empire reclaim Louisiana?

What if for some reason, the Nazis instead of invading the USSR, decided to exterminate the people of Norway, France, Belgium, Denmark, and Netherlands. How will things change if the Nazis treated the people in these countries like the Slavs?

A lot of People think that Germany and Germans instantly denazified when the Second World War ended, but that's just a misconception. Before the 1960s, a huge chunk of Germans were either indifferent, proud, or denied what they did in the Second World War. They were basically like Japan today if you tried bringing up a War Crime they did in the Second World War. It wasn't until 1968, when Willy Brandt was elected, that Germans felt bad about what they did in the Second World War. What if things were different? Let's say that Willy Brandt was never elected into German Chancellorship and thus his openness to discuss Nazi War Crimes never happened. Another German Guy becomes the German Chancellor, and he simply keeps the trend of Germans being indifferent, proud, or in denial when talking about Nazi War Crimes. How would Germany look like today if the Average German responded with, "It's tragic that it happened, but WWII was over 80 years ago; get over it," "Adolf Hitler's biggest mistake was that he didn't kill more of them," or "What do you mean the Nazis did that? It's nothing but Allied Propoganda." when you bring up a Nazi War Crime? This hypothetical Germany also has a Church where SS Men accused of War Crimes are enshrined within its walls (analogous to the Yasukuni Shrine). 

Let's say all Uranium on earth is pure Uranium-235, which would make production of nuclear weapons easier

what might’ve modern day syria looked like if he had stayed in power somehow, in spite of the Ba’ath party’s infighting?

It’s a commonly heard fact, had the Axis taken the Suez they’d of won or at least had a better chance at winning. But is this true? What would happen? How would they have reached the Canal?

Undoubtedly it was a vital route for the allies but was it really necessary?

May 1968 in France was marked by student protests, left-wing demonstrations, massive general strikes, and heavy suppression of protests by the police. At one point, President Charles de Gaulle fled the country to West Germany and met with General Jacques Massu to make sure military support is available, especially if Paris fell to revolutionaries and needed to be retaken with force.

What if military force indeed had to be used against the people, and France plunged into a civil war as a result?

Let's say the Egyptian monarchy hadn't been toppled in the early 1950s by the army but by the muslim brotherhood and subsequently we would have seen Islamist coups in other Arab countries, furthermore the leader of the Palestinian cause hadn't been Yasser Arafat but Ahmad Yasin.

In 1954, Walter O'Malley released plans for a $6 million new home for the Brooklyn Dodgers that included a movie theater, a shopping mall and possibly a retractable roof. O'Malley had a couple sites on the radar for his futuristic ballpark, but it was believed he had an eye on the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Avenue.

How would this have affected California Baseball? Would LA been given the New York Giants instead of the Brooklyn Dodgers? Would there have been a boom in domed stadiums in the late 50s/early 60s?

Focusing less on the manner in which it happens, but Britain is gone and the only Brits remaining are the EIC merchants/governors/etc. in EIC controlled areas of the Indian Subcontinent. This would be before the Battle of Plassey, but after Britain had established itself as the most powerful external trading force in the region.

In 1000 AD you had the shiite Fatimids controlling the Levant, the red sea coast of Arabia, Sicily and modern day Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. The Shiite Buyids controlled Mesopotamia and western Iran and shiite Qarmatians controlling the eastern half of Arabia. This only changed with the Seljuk invasions.

While sunnis were I think still the majority it would seem that overtime people would convert to make it easier to ingretiate oneself with one's rulers. So would Shia Islam over time have become dominant?

Suppose this situation occurs in 2018-2019 and China agrees to help.

What will be the outcome of this situation?

In TTL, the Hong Kong flu is far more contagious and deadly. It results in the death of 600 million people worldwide. This would make it the deadliest plague in human history. How will the following 50 years be different?