@@jdr617 yeah but some decisions put on the list were super idiotic as in super American-centric, they changed some events in the last few years but not (at least not on their own) the overall balance of power in the world - bay of pigs, Vietnam, Iraq war, Iran intervention.. if you look on a few hundred years from now, will they have significantly changed the course of history? some defeats indeed speed up the timeline of rise or decline of a superpower but they may not cause it in themselves (Iraq might have shifted things the most of the 4 I mentioned but isn't even as impactful as e.g. the US isolationist policy after WW1, non-ratification and withdrawal from League of Nations and 14 point plan)
More like the only 20 things the Mojo writers remembered from high school. Mojo is a clickbait channel. Why are you giving them your time? Unless you want someone easy to rant at.
Yeah, this list is incredibly U.S and 20th century focused. How they haven't included the burning of the Library of Alexandria, yet have included Little Big Run and some travellers I've never heard of getting lost and dying (which happens literally every single day worldwide) is completely beyond me.
Which burning of the library of Alexandria do you mean? The first, second or the possible third and fourth? I mean the first was almost certainly a mistake, but the later burnings likely weren't mistakes and pretty much part of the goals.
Burning of the library of Alexandria is way over blown, not nearly as much information was lost as people think I’d recommend doing some research on it, I totally changed my opinion when I did.
@@blakenorton8360 I'd say that Genghis Khan's sacking of Baghdad and the library there was a much, much greater disaster, as not only were many of the texts saved from Alexandria housed there, but also many works of the Persian, Greek, Egyptian, and Roman nations.
WatchMojo isn't really doing justice to the thousands of costly mistakes in history because rather than produce their own historical documentaries, they edit together clips from ACTUAL documentaries. WatchMojo's scope of Human History is limited to what documentaries have been produced that they've been able to take clips from.
WatchMojo is pretty much entirely based around the idea of "I just found this out, I have to tell someone." It seems like all their lists are written by someone while the credits of a documentary are still rolling in the background. No-one's going to WatchMojo for expert insight into super obscure events from 1353 but still, it's like they are just an aggregator for the top Netflix documentaries of the week.
I’m surprised VTH never contested WatchMojo for them mentioning Pearl Harbor and Operation Barbarossa. When it comes to the World War II “mistakes” many videos explain that Operation Barbarossa was the best decision the Germans could’ve done as both nations were thinking of invading each other at some point, the Austrian painter scheduled his invasion earlier due to Germany’s need for oil as despite Romania being Germany’s best friend in Europe, they still aren’t able to produce enough oil in order for them to be comfortable against the USSR so knocking them out right now is the go to option. The fact that the Soviets also humiliated themselves in the Winter War against Finland makes it more convincing as well. When it comes to Pearl Harbor, the problem was how the attack went for Japan, not that they attacked it in the first place, during the attack most of the important ships the United States had was doing a drill at the time. In addition, the Japanese weren’t able to destroy important structures such as the naval repair yards and the fuel storage tanks meaning that the damaged the United States experienced on the 7th would be heal itself much faster than it could’ve. TIKHistory made a really good video on why Germany lost World War II. Military History Visualized made a good video on why Japan would lose no matter what they did.
@@burnypython8230I can agree with you on Barbarossa. But the Attack on Pearl Harbor is where I draw the line. Japan had no way of winning a war against the US. Even if the Carriers were in harbor and the docking facilities were hit. It would be catastrophic for sure. However Japan’s whole strategy revolved around causing so much bloodshed and surprise that the Americans would either bend the knee outright or be so crippled that the Japanese would be able to make such a strong foothold in the Pacific that the Americans would find it too costly to fight. The Pearl Harbor attacks did not shock the Americans into a submissive stance. If anything it enraged them enough that they were willing to defeat the Japs whatever the cost. Japan also did not have the resources of the US. Japan is an island nation with few natural resources so much so they were reliant on conquering other lands to get those resources. America did not have that problem and once America switched into War Time mode there was no stopping them. The US could churn out ships, planes and tanks (far superior tanks might I add. Japanese tanks were garbage due to prioritization on the Navy. Even the M3 Lee which was outdated in Europe by 1942 was still very much deadly in the pacific.) far faster than the Japanese. Once the US gets going they would simply out produce the Japanese and overwhelm them. Even if the whole US Pacific fleet Aircraft Carriers were wiped out the US could simply build them back in a Year once they are up and running. The Japanese Strategy of fighting the Americans was flawed from the start. More success at Pearl would certainly make the Pacific front longer and more bloody. The Japanese might even be able to take Hawaii. But they would be fighting a losing battle.
@@mike04574 They could have used still pictures and included actual meaningful decisions. Plenty of places to get still pictures. This list is absolute trash. Especially the Ukraine war.
@@InferiisHe also thought that WWI was lost because Germany had to fight on the Eastern and Western front, and yet did the very same thing, mistakenly believing that Britain was not a threat. It reminds me of the old joke: "Have you learned from your mistakes?" "Yes, and I'm going to repeat every single one!"
The crazy thing about Napoleon was he didn't have to invade Russia. He was bogged down in Spain and instead of focusing there...well you know. Also, it's hard to understate how big Napoleon's defeat was for the history of Russia and really the world. Europe would look very different most likely had Napoleon not been defeated so badly.
basically the same with Hitler. If he stays neutral with the USSR and focuses on the western front, he may have won the war (although there's still the option that the US then plays a bigger part defeating Germany. However, in this case the USSR is not a part of the equation and the cold war doesn't happen)
Yeah Germany was always racing against the clock in WW2. I think without the UUSR against them and the US out of the war directly, the allies would have sued for peace and Germany probably kept austria and half of poland and some other parts of central europe. I've heard Hitler invaded USSR because he was afraid USSR would do it first, which is not a crazy thought.@@Inferiis
The preemptive strike argument. One of the reasons why Hitler believed the conquest of the Soviet Union would be a walkover was the poor showing of the Red Army in the winter war with Finland, invaders have discovered that waging war on Russia hasn’t worked out well, when its been the other way around, it hasn’t worked out well for them.
Hitler was getting the oil he wanted from the Soviet Union before he invaded, imagine the Africa Corps having the manpower and recourses of the Barbarossa assault.
@@Inferiis Both are wrong. Both had little to no choice but to invade russia. Napoleon wanted to defeat the British. And he could not beat their navi. So the only he was able to do was to force main europe to trade with them. And Russia ignored that. If he would have done nothing other countries would have done the same. And with Nazi Germany, the extermination of Russian people was always a main goal. And they needed more Oil. While the Stalin gave Hitler Oil, it was not enough to fuel the whole war.
The consequences for eastern Europe, as a result of the fracturing of the Roman Empire after the Fourth Crusade, were, I think, hugely significant - not to mention the consequences for the Turkish beyliks in Anatolia (or potential lack thereof). There could be so many, many other examples from other parts of the world that could easily rank far higher (in terms of consequences alone) than some of the US-centric examples here, as you say, Chris.
The division between 2 administration for the Roman Empire (West and East) was probably the thing that helped the empire survive another 1,000 years even after losing Europe. The definitive ending of the empire by the Ottomans was a world changing event, that's for sure.
@@KrafanioIt kept its presence in Europe during those 1000 years though. Plus he means the fracturing of the Byzantine Empire after 1204, not the division of Theodosius in 395.😉
The fracturing of the East Roman Empire was already ongoing before the Crusade. It may have cut off a few decades from the eventual duration, but it did not start or cause that.
@@alexlocatelli2876 Got it, although even after the fracture of the Roman "Byzantine" Empire around 1204 one of those "fractured groups" managed to regain the capital Nova Roma-Constantinople and prolong the life of the empire for almost another 300 years. The life of the Roman Empire in medieval times, (what many know as "Byzantine") was one of real struggle to survive. I guess everything in this world has to have a beginning and an end, makes you think about the current world powers and what their possible endings would look like.
He definitely has underestimated this, he’s not an expert in this area, believe he has underestimated the Byzantines a few times before. Considering how many times the Byzantine have bounced back before this the impacts of the Latin empire extended the instability
yeah at the same time it’s been overblown. yeah sure it’s the worst unintentional nuclear disaster but gotta hand it to the Soviets, they cleaned up pretty well. nature always reclaims what’s hers 🤷♂️
@@charliewenthe4411 " nature always reclaims what’s hers " well, the area is still inhabitable, and will be possibly till the end of humanity at this pace :D
@@charliewenthe4411 Not really yes they avoided a complete tragedy, but still radioactive dust that managed to get out still is the reason why so many people in Europe are suffering from cancer or at least eastern Europe. Let's not forget that Soviets tried to igonre the entire thing and hid the evidence if not the fact that USA was able to fing out what heppened then it would become a complete disaster, so yeah if not the Americans Soviets would hid the entire thing and likely Cherynobl would end up being problem till now and it still is a minor problem even after Americans reacted.
About the Chernobyl disaster: I think you can make a fairly good case for this actually being a top 20 mistake because of the major hit to the reputation of nuclear energy that it caused. This led to a dramatic decrease in construction and research in the nuclear power sector which lead to most countries refocusing on fossile fuels instead. So a lot of the environmental and climate damage as well as many of the millions of lung and heart desease cases that were caused by fossile fuel co2/fine particle emissions can in fact be traced back to this disaster. Great video though. I always enjoy your perspective.
I should've done some scrolling first because I just made pretty much the same comment, Lol. Though I also did leave a recommendation for Kyle Hill's "Half-Life Histories" series too. If you haven't seen it before you absolutely should, it's fascinating stuff.
Could you also argue that the shift in focus to fossil fuels like oil probably had some influence in geopolitics? Oil and gas play a major role in the world.
@@vinylrecord1102 Possibly, but arguing that any particular conflict would not have happened without the Chernobyl disaster is probably very difficult. Most conflicts have a multitude of causes and oil would not have been completely worthless even with more nuclear power. So while it almost certainly made issues worse you can't blame it for any particular event.
I absolutely agree. Public opinion of nuclear energy took a massive hit after Chernobyl. Such a clean, abundant and efficient energy source was put on the backburner due to NIMBYism. But like he says, if it wasn't Chernobyl, another disaster would have had the same effect.
Not done with the vid yet, but I was going to post essentially the same comment. The directly countable deaths are bad, but, the damage that this did to nuclear power overall, and the impacts that had to the climate overall certainly put it on the top 20. Fukushima put the period on the argument, but without Chernobyl, Fukushima would be seen as not a big deal, as there wouldn't have been panicked evacuations that killed far too many people, compared to the zero people that have died to any radiation effects of the incident.
I think arguably Mark Antonys decision to invade Parthia could be on here. Before that point, his eastern "empire" was a real power house and he was the main protagonist in defeating Cassius and Brutus. His failed invasion weakend him militarily and politically, which allowed Augustus (then Octavian, but really Agrippa as a military man) to destroy his forces later. Due to this, Augustus could form his empire, which dominated europe, west asia and north africa for the next 3 to 4 centuries (byzantium for 15 centuries) and whose effects we can feel to this day. So his mistake ultimately led to something arguably good, but for him, it was still a huuuuge mistake with enormous consequences.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. At the time of Parthia's invasion, Augustus already controlled the richest and militarily the most "juicy" land in the whole of the Empire - Italy. Thus, in wealth and manpower he was in an inifinetely better situation. North Africa was providing the food. Gaul the auxilaries. Spain the surplus gold and silver. On average, the eastern part of the Roman Republic was richer, yes, but the concentrated wealth was and will be in Italy. His food situation was good, given he controled Egypt. How about soldiers - here he is shown to be pretty weak. The biggest reccruitment centers for soldiers were all in the West. When we compare the two - Mark Antony and Octavian, Octavian holds most advantages, so it was only natural that he won.
Only that Marc Anthony winning could have caused a very similar Empire to rise, just under a different family (or it might have prolonged the civil war until no more Julio Claudian Pretenders to the throne were around to "Avenge Gaius Iulius"...)
The truth is not really known because so much ancient writings discount/dismiss the political talents of women. For Anthony's errors I would look after the failed Parthian campaign. I think Anthony's big mistake was probably due to Cleopatra,and their underestimation of Octavian's scheming. Truth be told Anthony was not a good politician unlike Crasus, Caesar and Pompey Magnus before him ( as you hilighted in his failures in Parthia), he should have known his limitations (like Agrippa did) but I think the political decisions were in this case mostly driven by Cleopatra. His actions at Actium also show he had no idea how to plan a fight at sea and should have found a more competent naval commander to act on his behalf. If you want more info..... find a copy of Prof. Peter Green's book 'Alexandra to Actium ', but be warned it's a university level text book on the period and it has huge numbers of references if you want to fall deep down that rabbit hole.
Egypt was stupid rich and the bread basket of the Mediterranean. Antony controlled Egypt, thus he was at a massive advantage. Parthia was an unnecessary distraction, the original poster is correct. Rome's influence on Europe is objectively a net good.
Chris! I’ve been watching your channel for several years now and I just guessed a point you were going to make before you said it! I’m weirdly proud of myself!
Man, I absolutely love your channel! The algorithm put it in my path while watching some Over Simplified. As someone who was in college when BuzzFeed was launched, I have grown to be a fan of "listicles" from time to time, but as an adult who has developed more in depth interests, it's can be frustrating. I love you "de-simplification" and explanations of these existing videos. Now, please excuse me while I binge your entire reacts playlist.
I can see Austria's decision to invade Serbia making the list, because it enabled all of those other WW1 battles, but singling-out individual battles is silly.
In 1995, we (my family and I) drove from the Presidio of Monterey to Boise. We had some snacks, including a bag of potato chips, which had been packed at sea level. Before reaching the summit of Donner Pass, the changing air pressure caused the bag to explode. A very high elevation.
I agree -- and good post. This was really the last gasp of British and French imperialism. It was hopeless, disastrous and calamitous, and it really set the course for many of the conflicts in that region since then. The U.S. should have broken with the British and French over it, and by endorsing it, we shot ourselves in the foot for the following century. We have never been a neutral arbiter in that region, and casting our lot with the Franco-British takeover was the first mistake in a long chain of them.
@@johnalden5821 all true. I would say, though, that the last gasp of British and French imperialism was the Suez Crisis invasion of Egypt in 1956. The way that combined American and Soviet pressure managed to force them to back down really showed everyone that Britain and France were no longer the colonial superpowers they had once been. One can even reasonably argue that the event was critical for European integration and the development of the EU, as it forced Britain and France to make common cause to make sure they would remain relevant on the world stage.
I agree that it was stupid, but i honestly don't think they could have done something that didn't cause many conflicts. That area of the world just has too many different groups that hate each other and fight for the same land.
@@anderskorsback4104 France still maintains a sort of indirect colonial empire to this day. They never really gave that up. They operate using finance in place of brute force, but the empire is still there and France is taking in a lot of profit from it.
Knowing WatchMojo's style, my expectations were low for this. I imagined you'd consider 1 or 2 to actually be huge mistakes and just roll your eyes at the other 18. I'm pleasantly surprised that you agreed with several (I think 6-7) of them as definitely worth considering to be top20. I'm not a history buff but I always enjoy your videos and explanations as an education source. Thanks for doing what you do!
I like the mass appeal of WatchMojo. Those guys and gals built a massive brand, but I agree with your description of “surface level”. Nothing but respect all around, glad you were able to add some deeper context
Since you seem to have idea can we get your list of the top 20 or at least maybe Top 10 worst decisions in history? I think it would be cool to know your list and reasons for the events on your list.
I vaguely remember something about Guy Du Chalic slandering another medieval surgeon for hand washing and this caused lack of hygiene in surgery till Ignaz Semmelweis. 500 years of not washing hands probably caused as many deaths as the world wars perhaps.
Yet another original video that I couldn't make it through until you bring your insights. It literally takes garbage from Mojo and makes it quality. TY for what you do :).
Worth noting that Afghanistan is not the Middle East, it’s mainly part of the Indian Subcontinent with the north being in Central Asia. I think the former presence of al Qaeda (an Arab group), and then 20 years of lumping it in with Iraq, have combined to confuse a lot of people on that. I’m not even sure how many people who follow geopolitics realize that, so it’s not surprising that a general entertainment channel like WatchMojo would make that mistake.
Watch mojo is not only too US centric but often outright favours minor or wrong examples over major ones. In the "biggest traitors" video they put a guy that changed from the democratic party to the Republican party( not sure why he would be a traitor) but mir Jafar (one of the most infamous traitors) wasn't even on the list. In their famous military ships video they stacked it with US ships that are not well known outside the US but the iconic Yamato didn't make the list and almost all the ships were American.
WatchMojo is also despicably leftist, which is why they put Joe Lieberman (the guy who switched political parties to the Republican side) as one of the worst traitors. In their list of "Celebrities we liked before they got too political," the majority of them were conservative, even though most politically-charged-to-the-point-of-annoying celebrities are liberal. Also, in their list of "celebrities that allegedly murdered someone," they included Laura Bush, even though the "murder" was an honest accident. And yet the Clintons' alleged murder of Vince Foster (which you'll never convince me wasn't an orchestrated event) was nowhere to be found.
I'd LOVE to hear what are your Top 10 or Top 20 worst mistakes in history. What I think could be labeled as a huge mistake: Alexanders neglect of having a successor. However, since he died very young, the war among his macedonian generals may have been inevitable. Even if he would have appointed a successor in his last weeks, it would have probably not changed a lot. I am curious what you guys think about this topic. In general, I think it is extremly difficult to make such a list - because in essence you need to know ALL of history. One may know a huge lot about the antics, about Greece, about Rome, maybe know a lot about the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as well. But what about e.g. Asia? That's why I guess such a list will always be very controversial and difficult. Still, I'd be very interested in your ranking :)
Yeah, Japan didn't invade Korea during World War II, 'cause they'd had control of it for decades already. And referring to the Mongol Khan as "Genghis" as if it's his first name,🙄.
You captured the Donner Summit area beautifully with the way you described it. Was fortunate to live close to the area and really got a chance to understand the Donner story from my time there. Don’t want to get stuck in those mountains during snow. Not. Fun. Ask me how I know! 😅 Camping is top tier though. Highly recommend.
I think it is a great mistake that of the Anglo-Saxon warriors that in the middle of the battle of hastings thought "seems that the Normans are running away, let's finish them all", as that battle did really changed the course of history
Romanian here, i remember learning about China and asia in the 7th grade i believe, in world history, and we did cover China's struggles with the European Empires in 1800s, the boxer Rebbelion, WW1, WW2, it's civil war and the communist Era (with both the Long March and The Great Leap Forward) up to the 1990s(and yes we also covered the Tianamen Square masacre, but it was only a side note). We also covered other asian countries such as Japan, the struggles of Vietnam and Korea, but not in great detail, and part of it was through the perspective of the Impact of European Colonial Empires had in that part of the world. I don't know if it is still covered today, BUT BACK IN MY DAY it was covered. Not in much detail, but it was covered
WatchMojo gives me a vibe like they take their lists from Reddit posts or somebody's Quora answer, then just edit some random clips together while they read from the first search result on Google for each topic. Never have I gotten the impression that they actually understand or have insights to share about the information they're presenting. But hey, if they don't have anything useful to say, it gives Chris more opportunity to expand on it. So I guess I can see why their videos would make sense for a VTH reaction.
Genghis Khan was so impactful on what was then Persia that the population of the area did not return to pre Mongol levels until the late 20th or 21st century.
The Chernobyl argument could be how it impacted the world's view on the safety of nuclear power. Had it not occurred, we may be way further along the transition towards clean energy than we currently are as a global community.
Fourth Crusade is within my top 10. Without it, I doubt Eastern Europe and even some parts of Anatolia would have fallen to Turkish rule. Eastern Rome had been pushing back the Turks just before the fourth crusade, and I doubt we would see an Ottoman Empire if romans hadn’t been weakened so much.
@@AbdulRahman-uw4nd That's completely untrue. The men responsible for the Sack of Constantinople had already been excommunicated, meaning they could not receive the Sacraments, because they had attacked a Catholic city at the Venetian Doge's request rather than the Ottomans in Egypt.
I don't begrudge Watchmojo for being what they are. At least they don't shy away from it. And frankly, if this was titled "An unsorted list of famous bad decisions" it would be fine for the most part, especially for clickbait.
I feel for Chris right here; A history teacher watching a history video made by People with only a surface knowledge of history. I totally would watch a biggest mistakes of history list put together by you!!
I would like to argue with your statement about Fourth Crusade if you don t mind. It was a history and outcome changer definitely. In the XII. century under Komenios dynasty, Byzantium was a major power one more last time, it recaptured the whole Balkans and most of Anatolia as well except the center, which was kinda useless economically anyway. Had the fourth crusade didn t happen, they would have surely kept their status ( or even conquer Syria one more time) and probably hold the Osman Empire in bay even before they became dangerous. But the sack of Constantinaple ended their status for once and for all and they had no more hope about recovery.
I would argue that the Byzantine Empire could of defeated the Turkish tribes,and forcing them to Syria, and the rest of the Muslim controlled territory.
Great post as always, Chris. Yeah, WatchMojo is in the same category as Looper and such. Very superficial content but worth a watch on occasion depending on the topic. Totally agree on the problem with "recency bias"...great term for it. The fact that you comment so eloquently on videos that you haven't pre-watched always amazes me.
How about China, adopting isolationism, in the 14th hundreds, when their technology where ahead of most other Countries. Their Fleet reaching Africa before the European. But then they stopped investing in treasure fleets, and even declared sailing from the Chinese coast in a multi-masted ship a capital offense. Imagine how the World could have looked if they have continued to explore and make trade routes.
Hell they probably would’ve engaged quite a bit in imperialism later and started colonizing much of the world. Lots more places would be speaking mandarin I imagine
Hell they probably would’ve engaged quite a bit in imperialism later and started colonizing much of the world. Lots more places would be speaking mandarin I imagine
@28:02, the picture that was paused on, the markings on his head indicate that military member, with agony on his face, has had a tourniquet applied. In marker it’s T followed by the time the tourniquet was applied. Most often if we didn’t have a market, it was in their blood. War is brutal.
Depends on a variety of presets. Worst for whom? Over what time period of consequences? First domino to fall? Alternatives available? Weighing the bad outcomes against good outcomes? Morality of such decisions. Etc…
Yeah, if we change something in the past past, it’ll lead to a rabbit hole and spiral out of control to a point we can’t comprehend, thanks for bringing it up
Worst from whose perspective? That's the problem with such lists. Some mistakes some large empires did that led to their downfall might have actually been beneficial for the advancement of humanity.
One of the problems with watchmojo is they usually do pulls. So they probably didn't thoroughly research this but relied on essentially your average youtube watcher to give them 20 suggestions.
18:57 I looked at that article, and it was whoever posted that for twitter, not TIME Magazine itself or the people who wrote the article. The article in question is called "How Ukraine's Dam Collapse Could Have 'Generational' Consequences," The description of the article says that and someone comparing a nuclear accident to a (semi) natural disaster like that is apples and oranges, it just doesn't work.
While I agree Gallipoli wasn't all on Churchill and it certainly doesn't deserve a spot on this list Churchill is considered a downright enemy of Australia. Starting with Gallipoli and then in WW2 as PM he vehemently opposed the withdrawal of Australian troops from North Africa to return to defend Australia against Japan stating "if it falls we'll get it back later". He simply didn't give af
I think another reason why the Aztec decision to invite cortez was not one of the worst decisions, is that disease would have destroyed the empire anyway. Sooner or later, the Autec empire would have crumbled anyway.
didn't expect Iranian history to make it to the list two times. appreciate the representation. in Iranian history we still ridicule and damn Khwarazmshah muhammad the second's decision, as it led to brutal invasion and destruction of Iran lands, people, culture and books. though some still say with little proof that it was a set up from the Khan giving them reason to invade such relatively powerful empire.
The mongol invasion of Khwarazmian empire really was set off by the dumbest of things resulting in unimaginable slaughter. Basically Genghis khan reached out to Muhammed II and they made a trade deal. However one of these traders sent by Genghis was killed by a guard and his merchandise stolen. Even then Genghis sent envoys to demand this guard be punished at which point Muhammed promptly maimed the envoys and sent them back. Estimates are all over the place due to few people being able to keep track of the death toll while trying to survive themselves but we know that the area was left depopulated for centuries recently emptied land turned into pasture for mongol horses. There were more than few muslim writers proclaiming God's wrath or even the end of the world due to how complete the destruction was. Definitely a decision that deserves its place in top 20 worst ever made.
The event that turned Baghdad from the center of Islamic civilization to a near backwater, leading to the rise of non-Arabic Islamic empires, such as the Ottomans and Safavids dominating Mesopotamia and the Levant
The Monguls smashed modern day Iraq and Iran, arguably the center of Islamic civilization. If you've every wondered how the muslims had mathematics, scholars, developed algebra, were ahead in science, and generally far advanced of western Europe during the early dark ages, then move the clock forward and and Western Europe is ahead while the Muslim countries have fallen behind, technologically, scientifically, and many other ways; A lot of the answer is "The Monguls happened" to them. Hard to argue this is not as fateful a decision as they come.
Chris, please address the error of Custer’s rank. He was NOT a general at Little Big Horn. His commission as a Major General expired in 1866. At the time of his death he was a Lieutenant Colonel.
Jared Harris was also, talking about history, cast as historical figure Francis Crozier in 'The Terror'. An adaptation of the novel by Dan Simmons. It's a fictionalized account of the lost Franklin Expedition that includes some supernatural elements. Although, the real history is far horrific enough, in my opinion.
My favorite fun fact about that series is that the cast were coming back from filming a scene outside Budapest and happened upon a bus crash. They helped the survivors and the poor folks thought the actors were their ancestors ferrying them to Heaven!
Another point on the Aztecs. Even if they had beaten every single army the Spanish had sent, the Aztecs would still have collapsed because of one thing… smallpox. There’s some new studies showing that smallpox and other diseases were far more devastating that initially thought. It’s also very possible smallpox had actually already beaten the conquistadors to the Aztecs. And weakened them a lot.
smallpox was a big factor of the fall of Tenochtitlan, and made it very easy. absolutely nobody would survive even if Hernan Cortes would be defeated. They probably wont even survive until another army comes cuz they have pathetic medical knowledge and immune systems
Be careful Chris, if I remember correctly watchmojo we’re pretty notorious for striking people for using their videos. That may have changed in recent years however
I believe that Churchill said in his memoirs he did not want the invasion of Gallipoli, he just wanted to use the old battleships that were doing nothing to put some pressure on Ottomans, but then there were mines in the channel, and they couldn't demine without taking the coastal forts and it basically escalated from simple "use some old battleships" to full scale invasion. Of course question is how much we can believe his account, he might be ret-conning history a bit to wash his hands over it and he still has some responsibility as the first lord of admiralty anyway.
Byzantium was already delicate as hell by the time the Crusaders sacked it. It's walls held, but it never recovered. Many years passed by. The Slavs and the Turks encroached. Eventually, almost inevitably, Byzantium fell.
And that was it. The Roman Empire had run it's course. With that, Mehmet drew the curtain down on 2,000 years of human endeavor. The crusader sack of Constantinople hardened the schism between the Orthodox and the Roman churches. There was no greater Christian community to come to Constantinople's aid. For that reason, I would agree that that the sack of Constantinople during the IV Crusade, was among the worst mistakes in history.
Here's my top 5 of the worst mistakes in history: 5: The natives giving food to the pilgrims. 4: von Pappen going "let's make this Adolf-guy chancellor. That'll shut him up." 3: Iron Maiden replacing Bruce Dickinson with Blaze Baley. 2: Tommy Salo's attempt to save a shot from the neutral zone in overtime at the Olympics in Salt Lake City. 1: Watching WatchMojo.
I could argue that the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the most costly (although they kind of did mention it with the Austria-Hungary one). Without that, there’s no WW1, which means no Treaty or Versailles, which means no WW2. No WW1 also means Germany wouldn’t send Vladimir Lenin to overthrow Russia, meaning no Communism, meaning no Cold War, meaning Russia and the West are still probably friends today, meaning no Ukraine war. Hitler also wouldn’t have risen to power meaning no Holocaust. Pretty much every major political event since the assassination is directly caused by it
Personally I would definitely put the fourth crusade in the top 20. Without it the Anatolian Beys would never take western Anatolia including one ruled by a certain Osman. Which means the Eastern Roman empire would survive for much longer perhaps until today, there would be no creation of the Holy League, no siege of Vienna, the age of discovery would probably be postponed as well. The impact is huge in my opinion.
Very true, however I don't think the Byzantine Empire would be around today. In it's place would most likely be a larger Greek nation state. Encompassing what is in our timeline Greece, Bulgaria, Albania, Cyprus and at least most of Anatolia.
The fourth crusade greatly weakened the Byzantines in a way they never really recovered from. Maybe they're not around today, but it's arguable their demise would have been slowed down by at least 100-200 years. That means the muslim invasions of Eurpoe don't happen. Pretty big mistake
I grew up in Northern California and my family went skiing most years when I was a kid so I’ve driven through the donner pass more times than I can count. I’ve been stuck in a couple bad storms there as a result and let me tell you, even in a CAR it is absolutely terrifying. I’ve thought a lot about how insane I think those people were for braving that. I can’t even imagine how terrifying it was for them but top 20 in history? Absolutely not.
I think this would make a lot more sense if they made the scope of the Top 20 more narrow, like, "20 Worst Military Blunders in US History" or something like that. Calling it the worst in all of history is a bit of a weird choice, but I guess it's a bit more eye-catching, and WatchMojo is all about playing that algorithm.
Would you ever do any more of those 'fascinating photos from history you may not have seen' videos, I loved the ones you did last year. It seems like a subject you could find almost endless examples of.
Cluster’s record was solid primarily because he was lucky. He took chances that paid off. His superiors looked at him highly but his men must have realized that, sooner or later, he was going to get them killed - and he did.
I would say in worst decisions ever : -Hannibal’s decision not to attack Rome directly after the battle of Cannae which let Rome rebuild its forces and win the war in the end - Napoleon III’s decision to attack Prussia in 1870 which led to the end of the second French empire, the ceasing of Alsace-Moselle, the formation of the German empire and for French political and social turmoil who led to the bloody events of the Parisian commune - in the série of don’t attack Russia in the winter : Gustav Adolph of Sweden who after defeating Denmark, Poland and Russia received a peace offer from the latter, refuses it, keeps fighting, gets caught by the Russian winter, loses most of his army, has to go in exile in Turkey, comes back home 5 years later with Denmark and Poland at war against him again, dies in battle in Norway which causes Sweden to sue for peace, losing a big chunk of land around the Baltic Sea which put an end to Sweden being a major European power
@@greglane5607 i saw the History marche series on him and they said it’s pretty much a misconception because he had a navy not far away able o blockade around and Rome didn’t had the forces to garrison everything and the Carthaginians were very capable at besieging and had what was necessary
In reference to the Swedish one, you're thinking of Charles XII not Gustavus Adolphus. GA started the era of Swedish dominance with his victories in the 30 years War, until his death. Charles XII ended the era of Swedish dominance as you said by attacking Russia after they sued for peace, because he felt the only way to end a war should be by the destruction of his enemies.
I would put Varus' Lost Legions (Battle of Teutoburg Forest). Varus had time to turn back, he could have saved his legions. Instead they were wiped out, and the Romanization of Germany was halted indefinitely
I am unsure how to phrase it, but I think the decision of Publius Quinctilius Varus to take the route he did or to trust Arminius would be in my Top 20 for sure. It resulted in the Battle of Teutoborg Forest, stopped the roman conquest of Germania for centuries and maybe those of Augustus in general. I am wondering whether this could have at least delayed (probably not stop, the disastrous emperors would still have done their thing) the fall of the western roman empire due to at least some of the tribes that migrated and invaded the western roman empire being actually part of one of the empires. But there is a few hundred years of history in between which I don't know much about. Would be interested to hear of someone more knowledgable than me about this.
To anyone wondering the same, I just found a very interesting video called "What if rome conquered Germania?" made by Monsieur Z, dealing with points like "What if the disaster of Teutoburg Forest didn't happen"
I clicked on this video to see why you're facepalming on the thumbnail. 😂 My initial reaction to the original video was: "I don't know, some of these don't sound like they belong on this list." But I'm no history expert. Always enjoy the learning experiences.
Most items on this list were only bad decisions in hindsight and would have been heralded as brilliant had they worked out, which is something that can be said about literally every decision that goes wrong
Its a weirdly titled video - these are nebulous mistakes. Where is Thomas Midgely? He made the mistake of introducing CFC and TEL and almost destroyed the globe.
I would really love to hear your top 20...even though I sort of think putting the entire human history into lists like this is probably a bit silly, I think it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
Japanese fully invasion China could also be the worst decision ever. Regardless of how bloody the consequence is, this decision was not approved by the Japanese highest officials but was made by some bloodthirsty Japanese soldiers who wanted to gain glory and rise up in ranks. But the war had no objectives and the japaneses didn't know when and where to stop. So they came up with a reckless idea: conquer the whole china. Taking the costals and ports was a easy job for japanese but taking a continental size of land need tremendous amount of resources and manpower for which the Japanese didn't have. Eventually, Japanese had dug into a war they could not afford and indirectily tiggered the war with America.
Yeah, and for two reasons. One, as you said, China was fighting against Japan until the war ended. There's no guarantee Japan, just because of pure numbers, doesn't get bled out of China eventually anyway, making the whole war not worth it. Two, it gets them sanctions from the US when they're already concerned about resources, which gets them a war Yamamoto said they had to win in six months or be screwed.
I would also add one that could arguably be here the mongol invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281. It was a very risky and very costly campaign and by sheer bad luck due to 2 typhoons this basically saved japan. These failures showed that the mongolian empire was no longer invincible 2/3 of the army that was sent to invade japan was destroyed, most of the chinese and korean fleets were also destroyed which then lead to more division and weakened the empires image and political position internally and externally in a massive way. This campaign was definately one of the major threads on the tapestry that unraveled the mongolian empire because because in less than 100 years later the empire was gone.
With regards to your words about the Fourth Crusade and the sacking of Constantinople, it did not alter the situation in Europe too much; the Christians held the city but the Byzantines took it back shortly after. What it did was hammer the final nail in the coffin that was the Byzantine Empire. The empire was already losing a bunch of money and the Crusaders took what wealth was left and the Byzantines never really recovered. It just accelerated the decline of the empire.
I can't believe the donner party made it on the list, but the Scottish attempt to found a colony in Panama. They spent 25% of their countries entire wealth of the time, and thought they would be trading wool in the tropics with the natives. It led to the Scottish/English union to cover the resulting debts when the venture failed.
Turning off my alarm and telling myself, "just 5 more minutes," is undoubtedly one of the worst mistakes in history
Right up there with "just one more youtube video before I go to bed"
@@erickburnham4870 it's suddenly 4am and you got work at 8
The exact mistake I’ve repeatedly made this very night as it is 1:12am and I have to be up for work in a few hours XD
The invention of the snooze button.
Just slightly behind 'I do'. 😄
You should make a top 20 or their list of worst decisions in history. I’d love to see your list and hear why
Dude yes. I didn’t hear you mention one alternative after slamming their list
Except Lincoln
yes we would love that.
Yesss
@@jdr617 yeah but some decisions put on the list were super idiotic as in super American-centric, they changed some events in the last few years but not (at least not on their own) the overall balance of power in the world - bay of pigs, Vietnam, Iraq war, Iran intervention.. if you look on a few hundred years from now, will they have significantly changed the course of history? some defeats indeed speed up the timeline of rise or decline of a superpower but they may not cause it in themselves (Iraq might have shifted things the most of the 4 I mentioned but isn't even as impactful as e.g. the US isolationist policy after WW1, non-ratification and withdrawal from League of Nations and 14 point plan)
Number One: “In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Terry Pratchett right? Great author
@@joshuacampbell1625 Douglas Adams. Hitchhiker's Guide. Relatively similar styles though.
@@brianhall4182 yeah think I had a Mandela effect moment lol.
But hey, at least the big bang burger bar is nice, isn't it?
@@joshuacampbell1625 GNU Pterry.
Watch mojo deciding to make historical content is one of the Top 20 worst mistakes in history
aloha
Videos like this from WatchMojo are "history for those who don't really want to learn history"
yeah watchmojo is known for trash lists
Its not just history
Its more like everything lol
Watchmojo sucks
I would slightly modify your excellent suggestion for WatchMojo's motto...they are "history for those who want to learn history wrong." 😁
Well it is a Canadian Channel so it doesn’t surprise me that their info on US history is incorrect. I don’t think they even learn about us.
More like the only 20 things the Mojo writers remembered from high school.
Mojo is a clickbait channel. Why are you giving them your time?
Unless you want someone easy to rant at.
Pete Carrol calling a passing play in the Super Bowl has to be up there
I hate that you remind me of this.
So bad.
As a Seahawks fan, you killed me.
“Oh no!!” Throws headset 😂
I’d put that top 3 without a doubt
Yeah, this list is incredibly U.S and 20th century focused. How they haven't included the burning of the Library of Alexandria, yet have included Little Big Run and some travellers I've never heard of getting lost and dying (which happens literally every single day worldwide) is completely beyond me.
Classic WatchMojo...
Which burning of the library of Alexandria do you mean? The first, second or the possible third and fourth? I mean the first was almost certainly a mistake, but the later burnings likely weren't mistakes and pretty much part of the goals.
I mean as far as I recall the burning of the library of Alexandria was probably just an accident.
Burning of the library of Alexandria is way over blown, not nearly as much information was lost as people think I’d recommend doing some research on it, I totally changed my opinion when I did.
@@blakenorton8360 I'd say that Genghis Khan's sacking of Baghdad and the library there was a much, much greater disaster, as not only were many of the texts saved from Alexandria housed there, but also many works of the Persian, Greek, Egyptian, and Roman nations.
I'm so sorry but watching Chris's face during number 19 just had me DEAD, this man was dying inside LMFAO
It’s so apparent 🤣🤣🤣
19th: 40 deaths
18th: 500,000 deaths
That escalated quickly 😂
And then his face at the end when seeing Wilson :)
Pure disgust lmao 🤣
Makes for good stories to scare kids, but ultimately had no effect whatsoever for the history of the U.S.
WatchMojo isn't really doing justice to the thousands of costly mistakes in history because rather than produce their own historical documentaries, they edit together clips from ACTUAL documentaries.
WatchMojo's scope of Human History is limited to what documentaries have been produced that they've been able to take clips from.
WatchMojo is pretty much entirely based around the idea of "I just found this out, I have to tell someone."
It seems like all their lists are written by someone while the credits of a documentary are still rolling in the background. No-one's going to WatchMojo for expert insight into super obscure events from 1353 but still, it's like they are just an aggregator for the top Netflix documentaries of the week.
I’m surprised VTH never contested WatchMojo for them mentioning Pearl Harbor and Operation Barbarossa. When it comes to the World War II “mistakes” many videos explain that Operation Barbarossa was the best decision the Germans could’ve done as both nations were thinking of invading each other at some point, the Austrian painter scheduled his invasion earlier due to Germany’s need for oil as despite Romania being Germany’s best friend in Europe, they still aren’t able to produce enough oil in order for them to be comfortable against the USSR so knocking them out right now is the go to option. The fact that the Soviets also humiliated themselves in the Winter War against Finland makes it more convincing as well. When it comes to Pearl Harbor, the problem was how the attack went for Japan, not that they attacked it in the first place, during the attack most of the important ships the United States had was doing a drill at the time. In addition, the Japanese weren’t able to destroy important structures such as the naval repair yards and the fuel storage tanks meaning that the damaged the United States experienced on the 7th would be heal itself much faster than it could’ve. TIKHistory made a really good video on why Germany lost World War II. Military History Visualized made a good video on why Japan would lose no matter what they did.
dont most youtbuers use clips from actual documentaries?
@@burnypython8230I can agree with you on Barbarossa. But the Attack on Pearl Harbor is where I draw the line. Japan had no way of winning a war against the US. Even if the Carriers were in harbor and the docking facilities were hit. It would be catastrophic for sure. However Japan’s whole strategy revolved around causing so much bloodshed and surprise that the Americans would either bend the knee outright or be so crippled that the Japanese would be able to make such a strong foothold in the Pacific that the Americans would find it too costly to fight. The Pearl Harbor attacks did not shock the Americans into a submissive stance. If anything it enraged them enough that they were willing to defeat the Japs whatever the cost. Japan also did not have the resources of the US. Japan is an island nation with few natural resources so much so they were reliant on conquering other lands to get those resources. America did not have that problem and once America switched into War Time mode there was no stopping them. The US could churn out ships, planes and tanks (far superior tanks might I add. Japanese tanks were garbage due to prioritization on the Navy. Even the M3 Lee which was outdated in Europe by 1942 was still very much deadly in the pacific.) far faster than the Japanese. Once the US gets going they would simply out produce the Japanese and overwhelm them. Even if the whole US Pacific fleet Aircraft Carriers were wiped out the US could simply build them back in a Year once they are up and running. The Japanese Strategy of fighting the Americans was flawed from the start. More success at Pearl would certainly make the Pacific front longer and more bloody. The Japanese might even be able to take Hawaii. But they would be fighting a losing battle.
@@mike04574 They could have used still pictures and included actual meaningful decisions. Plenty of places to get still pictures. This list is absolute trash. Especially the Ukraine war.
The worst decision in history has to be Franz Ferdinand's driver making a wrong turn 😂😂
If watch mojo said that I would have absolutely pissed myself 😂
Alternatively you could also say that chosing a driving who isn't familiar with Sarajevo was a bad choice, given the rising tensions with nationalists
A wise person once said, "history is new people making the same old mistakes".
Thanks for helping JD.👍
Hitler is the "perfect" example. As said in the video they even studied Napolen's Russian "adventures" yet made literally the same mistake
@@InferiisHe also thought that WWI was lost because Germany had to fight on the Eastern and Western front, and yet did the very same thing, mistakenly believing that Britain was not a threat. It reminds me of the old joke: "Have you learned from your mistakes?" "Yes, and I'm going to repeat every single one!"
The crazy thing about Napoleon was he didn't have to invade Russia. He was bogged down in Spain and instead of focusing there...well you know. Also, it's hard to understate how big Napoleon's defeat was for the history of Russia and really the world. Europe would look very different most likely had Napoleon not been defeated so badly.
basically the same with Hitler. If he stays neutral with the USSR and focuses on the western front, he may have won the war (although there's still the option that the US then plays a bigger part defeating Germany. However, in this case the USSR is not a part of the equation and the cold war doesn't happen)
Yeah Germany was always racing against the clock in WW2. I think without the UUSR against them and the US out of the war directly, the allies would have sued for peace and Germany probably kept austria and half of poland and some other parts of central europe.
I've heard Hitler invaded USSR because he was afraid USSR would do it first, which is not a crazy thought.@@Inferiis
The preemptive strike argument. One of the reasons why Hitler believed the conquest of the Soviet Union would be a walkover was the poor showing of the Red Army in the winter war with Finland, invaders have discovered that waging war on Russia hasn’t worked out well, when its been the other way around, it hasn’t worked out well for them.
Hitler was getting the oil he wanted from the Soviet Union before he invaded, imagine the Africa Corps having the manpower and recourses of the Barbarossa assault.
@@Inferiis Both are wrong. Both had little to no choice but to invade russia.
Napoleon wanted to defeat the British. And he could not beat their navi. So the only he was able to do was to force main europe to trade with them. And Russia ignored that. If he would have done nothing other countries would have done the same.
And with Nazi Germany, the extermination of Russian people was always a main goal. And they needed more Oil. While the Stalin gave Hitler Oil, it was not enough to fuel the whole war.
The consequences for eastern Europe, as a result of the fracturing of the Roman Empire after the Fourth Crusade, were, I think, hugely significant - not to mention the consequences for the Turkish beyliks in Anatolia (or potential lack thereof). There could be so many, many other examples from other parts of the world that could easily rank far higher (in terms of consequences alone) than some of the US-centric examples here, as you say, Chris.
The division between 2 administration for the Roman Empire (West and East) was probably the thing that helped the empire survive another 1,000 years even after losing Europe.
The definitive ending of the empire by the Ottomans was a world changing event, that's for sure.
@@KrafanioIt kept its presence in Europe during those 1000 years though. Plus he means the fracturing of the Byzantine Empire after 1204, not the division of Theodosius in 395.😉
The fracturing of the East Roman Empire was already ongoing before the Crusade. It may have cut off a few decades from the eventual duration, but it did not start or cause that.
@@alexlocatelli2876 Got it, although even after the fracture of the Roman "Byzantine" Empire around 1204 one of those "fractured groups" managed to regain the capital Nova Roma-Constantinople and prolong the life of the empire for almost another 300 years.
The life of the Roman Empire in medieval times, (what many know as "Byzantine") was one of real struggle to survive.
I guess everything in this world has to have a beginning and an end, makes you think about the current world powers and what their possible endings would look like.
He definitely has underestimated this, he’s not an expert in this area, believe he has underestimated the Byzantines a few times before. Considering how many times the Byzantine have bounced back before this the impacts of the Latin empire extended the instability
Also can we talk about the irony that Cherynobl was literally doing a SAFETY TEST when the worst ever nuclear meltdown happened
yeah at the same time it’s been overblown. yeah sure it’s the worst unintentional nuclear disaster but gotta hand it to the Soviets, they cleaned up pretty well. nature always reclaims what’s hers 🤷♂️
@@charliewenthe4411 " nature always reclaims what’s hers " well, the area is still inhabitable, and will be possibly till the end of humanity at this pace :D
@@charliewenthe4411 Not really yes they avoided a complete tragedy, but still radioactive dust that managed to get out still is the reason why so many people in Europe are suffering from cancer or at least eastern Europe. Let's not forget that Soviets tried to igonre the entire thing and hid the evidence if not the fact that USA was able to fing out what heppened then it would become a complete disaster, so yeah if not the Americans Soviets would hid the entire thing and likely Cherynobl would end up being problem till now and it still is a minor problem even after Americans reacted.
About the Chernobyl disaster: I think you can make a fairly good case for this actually being a top 20 mistake because of the major hit to the reputation of nuclear energy that it caused. This led to a dramatic decrease in construction and research in the nuclear power sector which lead to most countries refocusing on fossile fuels instead.
So a lot of the environmental and climate damage as well as many of the millions of lung and heart desease cases that were caused by fossile fuel co2/fine particle emissions can in fact be traced back to this disaster.
Great video though. I always enjoy your perspective.
I should've done some scrolling first because I just made pretty much the same comment, Lol. Though I also did leave a recommendation for Kyle Hill's "Half-Life Histories" series too. If you haven't seen it before you absolutely should, it's fascinating stuff.
Could you also argue that the shift in focus to fossil fuels like oil probably had some influence in geopolitics? Oil and gas play a major role in the world.
@@vinylrecord1102 Possibly, but arguing that any particular conflict would not have happened without the Chernobyl disaster is probably very difficult. Most conflicts have a multitude of causes and oil would not have been completely worthless even with more nuclear power. So while it almost certainly made issues worse you can't blame it for any particular event.
I absolutely agree. Public opinion of nuclear energy took a massive hit after Chernobyl. Such a clean, abundant and efficient energy source was put on the backburner due to NIMBYism. But like he says, if it wasn't Chernobyl, another disaster would have had the same effect.
Not done with the vid yet, but I was going to post essentially the same comment. The directly countable deaths are bad, but, the damage that this did to nuclear power overall, and the impacts that had to the climate overall certainly put it on the top 20. Fukushima put the period on the argument, but without Chernobyl, Fukushima would be seen as not a big deal, as there wouldn't have been panicked evacuations that killed far too many people, compared to the zero people that have died to any radiation effects of the incident.
WatchMojo. Pretty sure this is the dark place Simba's dad told us to never go...
I think arguably Mark Antonys decision to invade Parthia could be on here. Before that point, his eastern "empire" was a real power house and he was the main protagonist in defeating Cassius and Brutus. His failed invasion weakend him militarily and politically, which allowed Augustus (then Octavian, but really Agrippa as a military man) to destroy his forces later. Due to this, Augustus could form his empire, which dominated europe, west asia and north africa for the next 3 to 4 centuries (byzantium for 15 centuries) and whose effects we can feel to this day. So his mistake ultimately led to something arguably good, but for him, it was still a huuuuge mistake with enormous consequences.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. At the time of Parthia's invasion, Augustus already controlled the richest and militarily the most "juicy" land in the whole of the Empire - Italy. Thus, in wealth and manpower he was in an inifinetely better situation. North Africa was providing the food. Gaul the auxilaries. Spain the surplus gold and silver. On average, the eastern part of the Roman Republic was richer, yes, but the concentrated wealth was and will be in Italy. His food situation was good, given he controled Egypt. How about soldiers - here he is shown to be pretty weak. The biggest reccruitment centers for soldiers were all in the West. When we compare the two - Mark Antony and Octavian, Octavian holds most advantages, so it was only natural that he won.
Only that Marc Anthony winning could have caused a very similar Empire to rise, just under a different family (or it might have prolonged the civil war until no more Julio Claudian Pretenders to the throne were around to "Avenge Gaius Iulius"...)
The truth is not really known because so much ancient writings discount/dismiss the political talents of women.
For Anthony's errors I would look after the failed Parthian campaign. I think Anthony's big mistake was probably due to Cleopatra,and their underestimation of Octavian's scheming. Truth be told Anthony was not a good politician unlike Crasus, Caesar and Pompey Magnus before him ( as you hilighted in his failures in Parthia), he should have known his limitations (like Agrippa did) but I think the political decisions were in this case mostly driven by Cleopatra.
His actions at Actium also show he had no idea how to plan a fight at sea and should have found a more competent naval commander to act on his behalf. If you want more info..... find a copy of Prof. Peter Green's book 'Alexandra to Actium ', but be warned it's a university level text book on the period and it has huge numbers of references if you want to fall deep down that rabbit hole.
Egypt was stupid rich and the bread basket of the Mediterranean. Antony controlled Egypt, thus he was at a massive advantage. Parthia was an unnecessary distraction, the original poster is correct. Rome's influence on Europe is objectively a net good.
not even close
Chris! I’ve been watching your channel for several years now and I just guessed a point you were going to make before you said it! I’m weirdly proud of myself!
Nice. Good job!
Your video are special to me because it’s essentially like sitting down watching a history video with a buddy. Top tier, thanks for everything you do.
I support this too !
Man, I absolutely love your channel! The algorithm put it in my path while watching some Over Simplified. As someone who was in college when BuzzFeed was launched, I have grown to be a fan of "listicles" from time to time, but as an adult who has developed more in depth interests, it's can be frustrating. I love you "de-simplification" and explanations of these existing videos. Now, please excuse me while I binge your entire reacts playlist.
I can see Austria's decision to invade Serbia making the list, because it enabled all of those other WW1 battles, but singling-out individual battles is silly.
In 1995, we (my family and I) drove from the Presidio of Monterey to Boise. We had some snacks, including a bag of potato chips, which had been packed at sea level. Before reaching the summit of Donner Pass, the changing air pressure caused the bag to explode. A very high elevation.
Clearly, buying that bag of chips should be on the list. Maybe around number 17 or so.
@@trevorperkins4585I’d say 2 or 1
The Sykes - Picot agreement is another one. It directly created the Middle East that we know today and everything that resulted from it.
I agree -- and good post. This was really the last gasp of British and French imperialism. It was hopeless, disastrous and calamitous, and it really set the course for many of the conflicts in that region since then. The U.S. should have broken with the British and French over it, and by endorsing it, we shot ourselves in the foot for the following century. We have never been a neutral arbiter in that region, and casting our lot with the Franco-British takeover was the first mistake in a long chain of them.
@@johnalden5821 all true. I would say, though, that the last gasp of British and French imperialism was the Suez Crisis invasion of Egypt in 1956. The way that combined American and Soviet pressure managed to force them to back down really showed everyone that Britain and France were no longer the colonial superpowers they had once been. One can even reasonably argue that the event was critical for European integration and the development of the EU, as it forced Britain and France to make common cause to make sure they would remain relevant on the world stage.
Definitely yes.
I agree that it was stupid, but i honestly don't think they could have done something that didn't cause many conflicts. That area of the world just has too many different groups that hate each other and fight for the same land.
@@anderskorsback4104 France still maintains a sort of indirect colonial empire to this day. They never really gave that up. They operate using finance in place of brute force, but the empire is still there and France is taking in a lot of profit from it.
Knowing WatchMojo's style, my expectations were low for this. I imagined you'd consider 1 or 2 to actually be huge mistakes and just roll your eyes at the other 18. I'm pleasantly surprised that you agreed with several (I think 6-7) of them as definitely worth considering to be top20. I'm not a history buff but I always enjoy your videos and explanations as an education source. Thanks for doing what you do!
I like the mass appeal of WatchMojo. Those guys and gals built a massive brand, but I agree with your description of “surface level”. Nothing but respect all around, glad you were able to add some deeper context
Thanks!
Since you seem to have idea can we get your list of the top 20 or at least maybe Top 10 worst decisions in history? I think it would be cool to know your list and reasons for the events on your list.
I vaguely remember something about Guy Du Chalic slandering another medieval surgeon for hand washing and this caused lack of hygiene in surgery till Ignaz Semmelweis. 500 years of not washing hands probably caused as many deaths as the world wars perhaps.
Yet another original video that I couldn't make it through until you bring your insights. It literally takes garbage from Mojo and makes it quality. TY for what you do :).
Worth noting that Afghanistan is not the Middle East, it’s mainly part of the Indian Subcontinent with the north being in Central Asia. I think the former presence of al Qaeda (an Arab group), and then 20 years of lumping it in with Iraq, have combined to confuse a lot of people on that. I’m not even sure how many people who follow geopolitics realize that, so it’s not surprising that a general entertainment channel like WatchMojo would make that mistake.
That's quite the thumbnail... man watch mojo doesn't do a good job outsourcing it's script writing.
the disappointment in your face at 19:07 is priceless.. i didn't know about that article but that is funny..
Watch mojo is not only too US centric but often outright favours minor or wrong examples over major ones. In the "biggest traitors" video they put a guy that changed from the democratic party to the Republican party( not sure why he would be a traitor) but mir Jafar (one of the most infamous traitors) wasn't even on the list. In their famous military ships video they stacked it with US ships that are not well known outside the US but the iconic Yamato didn't make the list and almost all the ships were American.
Man in Bengal we still spit on any slightest mention of the name Mir Jafar lol no way they missed him.
Watchmojo is a far left youtube channel, so anything Republican is evil to them.
@@zan4336 they did 😅
WatchMojo is also despicably leftist, which is why they put Joe Lieberman (the guy who switched political parties to the Republican side) as one of the worst traitors. In their list of "Celebrities we liked before they got too political," the majority of them were conservative, even though most politically-charged-to-the-point-of-annoying celebrities are liberal. Also, in their list of "celebrities that allegedly murdered someone," they included Laura Bush, even though the "murder" was an honest accident. And yet the Clintons' alleged murder of Vince Foster (which you'll never convince me wasn't an orchestrated event) was nowhere to be found.
WatchMojo is very left wing. I stopped watching them years ago.
I'd LOVE to hear what are your Top 10 or Top 20 worst mistakes in history.
What I think could be labeled as a huge mistake: Alexanders neglect of having a successor.
However, since he died very young, the war among his macedonian generals may have been inevitable. Even if he would have appointed a successor in his last weeks, it would have probably not changed a lot.
I am curious what you guys think about this topic.
In general, I think it is extremly difficult to make such a list - because in essence you need to know ALL of history.
One may know a huge lot about the antics, about Greece, about Rome, maybe know a lot about the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as well.
But what about e.g. Asia?
That's why I guess such a list will always be very controversial and difficult.
Still, I'd be very interested in your ranking :)
Even if you think it would be hard, you can’t deny that 40 travelers dying to the weather is not a top 20 in history
WatchMojo always make bad decisions in their videos in my experience. Do some research, guys
They produce clickbait trash and nothing more.
Nah, research is too.much overhead for their business 😂
Yeah, Japan didn't invade Korea during World War II, 'cause they'd had control of it for decades already. And referring to the Mongol Khan as "Genghis" as if it's his first name,🙄.
They're too busy hiring narrators who over pronounce foreign words arbitrarily.
I mean when the topic is all of history that is a large task. Then again if you aren’t up for it- don’t make the video.
You captured the Donner Summit area beautifully with the way you described it. Was fortunate to live close to the area and really got a chance to understand the Donner story from my time there. Don’t want to get stuck in those mountains during snow. Not. Fun. Ask me how I know! 😅 Camping is top tier though. Highly recommend.
I think it is a great mistake that of the Anglo-Saxon warriors that in the middle of the battle of hastings thought "seems that the Normans are running away, let's finish them all", as that battle did really changed the course of history
I had this very same thought. The way the anglo-saxons lost England still breaks my heart.
Romanian here, i remember learning about China and asia in the 7th grade i believe, in world history, and we did cover China's struggles with the European Empires in 1800s, the boxer Rebbelion, WW1, WW2, it's civil war and the communist Era (with both the Long March and The Great Leap Forward) up to the 1990s(and yes we also covered the Tianamen Square masacre, but it was only a side note). We also covered other asian countries such as Japan, the struggles of Vietnam and Korea, but not in great detail, and part of it was through the perspective of the Impact of European Colonial Empires had in that part of the world. I don't know if it is still covered today, BUT BACK IN MY DAY it was covered. Not in much detail, but it was covered
Maybe the worst mistakes in history are the friends we didn't make along the way.
The Donner Party: 40 people died
The Carolean Death March: 4000 soldiers and Sweden's great power status
WatchMojo gives me a vibe like they take their lists from Reddit posts or somebody's Quora answer, then just edit some random clips together while they read from the first search result on Google for each topic. Never have I gotten the impression that they actually understand or have insights to share about the information they're presenting.
But hey, if they don't have anything useful to say, it gives Chris more opportunity to expand on it. So I guess I can see why their videos would make sense for a VTH reaction.
20:01 Jared Harris was spectacular in the first season of "The Terror", the show about the Lost Franklin Expedition
Genghis Khan was so impactful on what was then Persia that the population of the area did not return to pre Mongol levels until the late 20th or 21st century.
The Chernobyl argument could be how it impacted the world's view on the safety of nuclear power. Had it not occurred, we may be way further along the transition towards clean energy than we currently are as a global community.
Number 1: CGP Grey trying to attack Vlogging Through History
Love your videos Chris! Thank you for keeping me through hard times.
I'm always looking forward to you're reactions to historical videos
10:45 Henry's rifle vs. the Trap-Door Springfield is the 1873 version of full-size vs. intermediate rifle calibers.
Fourth Crusade is within my top 10. Without it, I doubt Eastern Europe and even some parts of Anatolia would have fallen to Turkish rule.
Eastern Rome had been pushing back the Turks just before the fourth crusade, and I doubt we would see an Ottoman Empire if romans hadn’t been weakened so much.
It also likely contributed to solidifying the East-West Schism. Many Orthodox are still extremely pissed about it, and rightfully so.
It was terrible and jut ridiculous. The fact that the pope basically allowed the people todo whatever thy want as they would be forgiven is insane
@@AbdulRahman-uw4nd That's completely untrue. The men responsible for the Sack of Constantinople had already been excommunicated, meaning they could not receive the Sacraments, because they had attacked a Catholic city at the Venetian Doge's request rather than the Ottomans in Egypt.
"Twenty worst mistakes with a US only perspective"
I don't begrudge Watchmojo for being what they are. At least they don't shy away from it. And frankly, if this was titled "An unsorted list of famous bad decisions" it would be fine for the most part, especially for clickbait.
I feel for Chris right here; A history teacher watching a history video made by People with only a surface knowledge of history.
I totally would watch a biggest mistakes of history list put together by you!!
I would like to argue with your statement about Fourth Crusade if you don t mind. It was a history and outcome changer definitely. In the XII. century under Komenios dynasty, Byzantium was a major power one more last time, it recaptured the whole Balkans and most of Anatolia as well except the center, which was kinda useless economically anyway. Had the fourth crusade didn t happen, they would have surely kept their status ( or even conquer Syria one more time) and probably hold the Osman Empire in bay even before they became dangerous. But the sack of Constantinaple ended their status for once and for all and they had no more hope about recovery.
I would argue that the Byzantine Empire could of defeated the Turkish tribes,and forcing them to Syria, and the rest of the Muslim controlled territory.
Great post as always, Chris. Yeah, WatchMojo is in the same category as Looper and such. Very superficial content but worth a watch on occasion depending on the topic. Totally agree on the problem with "recency bias"...great term for it. The fact that you comment so eloquently on videos that you haven't pre-watched always amazes me.
How about China, adopting isolationism, in the 14th hundreds, when their technology where ahead of most other Countries. Their Fleet reaching Africa before the European. But then they stopped investing in treasure fleets, and even declared sailing from the Chinese coast in a multi-masted ship a capital offense.
Imagine how the World could have looked if they have continued to explore and make trade routes.
Hell they probably would’ve engaged quite a bit in imperialism later and started colonizing much of the world. Lots more places would be speaking mandarin I imagine
Hell they probably would’ve engaged quite a bit in imperialism later and started colonizing much of the world. Lots more places would be speaking mandarin I imagine
@28:02, the picture that was paused on, the markings on his head indicate that military member, with agony on his face, has had a tourniquet applied. In marker it’s T followed by the time the tourniquet was applied. Most often if we didn’t have a market, it was in their blood. War is brutal.
Wait… if you’re a history teacher, why don’t you make your own list of top 20 worst decisions in history?
That's a terrific idea!
I feel like it’s pretty much impossible
Depends on a variety of presets.
Worst for whom? Over what time period of consequences? First domino to fall? Alternatives available? Weighing the bad outcomes against good outcomes? Morality of such decisions. Etc…
Yeah, if we change something in the past past, it’ll lead to a rabbit hole and spiral out of control to a point we can’t comprehend, thanks for bringing it up
Worst from whose perspective? That's the problem with such lists. Some mistakes some large empires did that led to their downfall might have actually been beneficial for the advancement of humanity.
In the US civil war Jefferson Davis was more of a Micromanager than Lincoln
One of the problems with watchmojo is they usually do pulls. So they probably didn't thoroughly research this but relied on essentially your average youtube watcher to give them 20 suggestions.
18:57 I looked at that article, and it was whoever posted that for twitter, not TIME Magazine itself or the people who wrote the article. The article in question is called "How Ukraine's Dam Collapse Could Have 'Generational' Consequences," The description of the article says that and someone comparing a nuclear accident to a (semi) natural disaster like that is apples and oranges, it just doesn't work.
While I agree Gallipoli wasn't all on Churchill and it certainly doesn't deserve a spot on this list Churchill is considered a downright enemy of Australia. Starting with Gallipoli and then in WW2 as PM he vehemently opposed the withdrawal of Australian troops from North Africa to return to defend Australia against Japan stating "if it falls we'll get it back later". He simply didn't give af
He gave af. But about English, not Australians or New Zealanders or Irish or Indians or Canadians or Scots or anybody else except English.
@@Ghatbkktrue
@@Ghatbkk Yep. He was famously chased out of Scotland.
Jared Harris - also great in The Terror first season as Captain Francis Crozier. Amazing on history based horror mini-series.
I think another reason why the Aztec decision to invite cortez was not one of the worst decisions, is that disease would have destroyed the empire anyway. Sooner or later, the Autec empire would have crumbled anyway.
didn't expect Iranian history to make it to the list two times. appreciate the representation. in Iranian history we still ridicule and damn Khwarazmshah muhammad the second's decision, as it led to brutal invasion and destruction of Iran lands, people, culture and books. though some still say with little proof that it was a set up from the Khan giving them reason to invade such relatively powerful empire.
The mongol invasion of Khwarazmian empire really was set off by the dumbest of things resulting in unimaginable slaughter. Basically Genghis khan reached out to Muhammed II and they made a trade deal. However one of these traders sent by Genghis was killed by a guard and his merchandise stolen. Even then Genghis sent envoys to demand this guard be punished at which point Muhammed promptly maimed the envoys and sent them back. Estimates are all over the place due to few people being able to keep track of the death toll while trying to survive themselves but we know that the area was left depopulated for centuries recently emptied land turned into pasture for mongol horses. There were more than few muslim writers proclaiming God's wrath or even the end of the world due to how complete the destruction was. Definitely a decision that deserves its place in top 20 worst ever made.
Agreed. Some historians argue that the region still hasn't recovered.
@pergos1 it still may not have. Temujin was really angry man
The event that turned Baghdad from the center of Islamic civilization to a near backwater, leading to the rise of non-Arabic Islamic empires, such as the Ottomans and Safavids dominating Mesopotamia and the Levant
The Monguls smashed modern day Iraq and Iran, arguably the center of Islamic civilization. If you've every wondered how the muslims had mathematics, scholars, developed algebra, were ahead in science, and generally far advanced of western Europe during the early dark ages, then move the clock forward and and Western Europe is ahead while the Muslim countries have fallen behind, technologically, scientifically, and many other ways; A lot of the answer is "The Monguls happened" to them. Hard to argue this is not as fateful a decision as they come.
6:22 I remember when my dad and I traveled through that area in the dead of winter. It took 12 hours just to drive across Tahoe. It was terrible.
Chris, please address the error of Custer’s rank. He was NOT a general at Little Big Horn. His commission as a Major General expired in 1866. At the time of his death he was a Lieutenant Colonel.
That always annoyed me.
Jared Harris was also, talking about history, cast as historical figure Francis Crozier in 'The Terror'. An adaptation of the novel by Dan Simmons. It's a fictionalized account of the lost Franklin Expedition that includes some supernatural elements. Although, the real history is far horrific enough, in my opinion.
That was exactly what I thought when I watched it. Why would you want to add a polar bear demon to a story that's already 90% horror.
My favorite fun fact about that series is that the cast were coming back from filming a scene outside Budapest and happened upon a bus crash. They helped the survivors and the poor folks thought the actors were their ancestors ferrying them to Heaven!
A really bad one in hindsight: The Chinese government not greasing the civil service exam results of the guy who started the Taiping Rebellion
Or Austran art school not accepting that one Painter to their school
why
Another point on the Aztecs. Even if they had beaten every single army the Spanish had sent, the Aztecs would still have collapsed because of one thing… smallpox. There’s some new studies showing that smallpox and other diseases were far more devastating that initially thought. It’s also very possible smallpox had actually already beaten the conquistadors to the Aztecs. And weakened them a lot.
smallpox was a big factor of the fall of Tenochtitlan, and made it very easy. absolutely nobody would survive even if Hernan Cortes would be defeated. They probably wont even survive until another army comes cuz they have pathetic medical knowledge and immune systems
Well the Spanish didn't exactly send "armies" they mostly used divide and conquer to play the Aztecs rival tribes against them.
Be careful Chris, if I remember correctly watchmojo we’re pretty notorious for striking people for using their videos. That may have changed in recent years however
It's awfully ironic that they do that considering their entire channel is based on fair use.
Honestly Chris is the only thing that makes their trash-video watch-able.
that would be terrible as Chris himself is basically introducing his channel us all
I believe that Churchill said in his memoirs he did not want the invasion of Gallipoli, he just wanted to use the old battleships that were doing nothing to put some pressure on Ottomans, but then there were mines in the channel, and they couldn't demine without taking the coastal forts and it basically escalated from simple "use some old battleships" to full scale invasion. Of course question is how much we can believe his account, he might be ret-conning history a bit to wash his hands over it and he still has some responsibility as the first lord of admiralty anyway.
Byzantium was already delicate as hell by the time the Crusaders sacked it. It's walls held, but it never recovered. Many years passed by. The Slavs and the Turks encroached. Eventually, almost inevitably, Byzantium fell.
And that was it. The Roman Empire had run it's course. With that, Mehmet drew the curtain down on 2,000 years of human endeavor.
The crusader sack of Constantinople hardened the schism between the Orthodox and the Roman churches. There was no greater Christian community to come to Constantinople's aid.
For that reason, I would agree that that the sack of Constantinople during the IV Crusade, was among the worst mistakes in history.
Great video!
Here's my top 5 of the worst mistakes in history:
5: The natives giving food to the pilgrims.
4: von Pappen going "let's make this Adolf-guy chancellor. That'll shut him up."
3: Iron Maiden replacing Bruce Dickinson with Blaze Baley.
2: Tommy Salo's attempt to save a shot from the neutral zone in overtime at the Olympics in Salt Lake City.
1: Watching WatchMojo.
@jailow8310 Not on purpose. :)
I liked Blaze:)
I could argue that the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the most costly (although they kind of did mention it with the Austria-Hungary one). Without that, there’s no WW1, which means no Treaty or Versailles, which means no WW2. No WW1 also means Germany wouldn’t send Vladimir Lenin to overthrow Russia, meaning no Communism, meaning no Cold War, meaning Russia and the West are still probably friends today, meaning no Ukraine war. Hitler also wouldn’t have risen to power meaning no Holocaust. Pretty much every major political event since the assassination is directly caused by it
Your reactions to "list" videos are my favorites!
Please make your own list of top 20 worst mistakes! If it’s not too much time. Would love your list!
Personally I would definitely put the fourth crusade in the top 20. Without it the Anatolian Beys would never take western Anatolia including one ruled by a certain Osman. Which means the Eastern Roman empire would survive for much longer perhaps until today, there would be no creation of the Holy League, no siege of Vienna, the age of discovery would probably be postponed as well. The impact is huge in my opinion.
Very true, however I don't think the Byzantine Empire would be around today. In it's place would most likely be a larger Greek nation state. Encompassing what is in our timeline Greece, Bulgaria, Albania, Cyprus and at least most of Anatolia.
The fourth crusade greatly weakened the Byzantines in a way they never really recovered from. Maybe they're not around today, but it's arguable their demise would have been slowed down by at least 100-200 years. That means the muslim invasions of Eurpoe don't happen. Pretty big mistake
I grew up in Northern California and my family went skiing most years when I was a kid so I’ve driven through the donner pass more times than I can count. I’ve been stuck in a couple bad storms there as a result and let me tell you, even in a CAR it is absolutely terrifying. I’ve thought a lot about how insane I think those people were for braving that. I can’t even imagine how terrifying it was for them but top 20 in history? Absolutely not.
When WatchMojo says "top" they mean "most commonly known". They are extremely basic by design
I think this would make a lot more sense if they made the scope of the Top 20 more narrow, like, "20 Worst Military Blunders in US History" or something like that. Calling it the worst in all of history is a bit of a weird choice, but I guess it's a bit more eye-catching, and WatchMojo is all about playing that algorithm.
Would you ever do any more of those 'fascinating photos from history you may not have seen' videos, I loved the ones you did last year. It seems like a subject you could find almost endless examples of.
To be fair, the chinese probably talk less about the great leap forward than anyone else.
Gallipoli was a great idea that just very badly executed
Cluster’s record was solid primarily because he was lucky. He took chances that paid off. His superiors looked at him highly but his men must have realized that, sooner or later, he was going to get them killed - and he did.
I would say in worst decisions ever :
-Hannibal’s decision not to attack Rome directly after the battle of Cannae which let Rome rebuild its forces and win the war in the end
- Napoleon III’s decision to attack Prussia in 1870 which led to the end of the second French empire, the ceasing of Alsace-Moselle, the formation of the German empire and for French political and social turmoil who led to the bloody events of the Parisian commune
- in the série of don’t attack Russia in the winter : Gustav Adolph of Sweden who after defeating Denmark, Poland and Russia received a peace offer from the latter, refuses it, keeps fighting, gets caught by the Russian winter, loses most of his army, has to go in exile in Turkey, comes back home 5 years later with Denmark and Poland at war against him again, dies in battle in Norway which causes Sweden to sue for peace, losing a big chunk of land around the Baltic Sea which put an end to Sweden being a major European power
Hannibal lacked the siege capability to sack Rome. Hannibal beat Rome time after time on an open battle field but couldn’t siege Rome.
@@greglane5607 i saw the History marche series on him and they said it’s pretty much a misconception because he had a navy not far away able o blockade around and Rome didn’t had the forces to garrison everything and the Carthaginians were very capable at besieging and had what was necessary
In reference to the Swedish one, you're thinking of Charles XII not Gustavus Adolphus. GA started the era of Swedish dominance with his victories in the 30 years War, until his death. Charles XII ended the era of Swedish dominance as you said by attacking Russia after they sued for peace, because he felt the only way to end a war should be by the destruction of his enemies.
@@annekelly3485 oh yeah absolutely
My bad I confused them thanks for correcting
I would put Varus' Lost Legions (Battle of Teutoburg Forest). Varus had time to turn back, he could have saved his legions. Instead they were wiped out, and the Romanization of Germany was halted indefinitely
Maybe it should be called the most well known historical mistakes instead of the biggest mistakes.
2:00 who was that Russian officer that _didn't_ react to a warning bell with nukes? That may have been the best "non-action decision" to date
I am unsure how to phrase it, but I think the decision of Publius Quinctilius Varus to take the route he did or to trust Arminius would be in my Top 20 for sure.
It resulted in the Battle of Teutoborg Forest, stopped the roman conquest of Germania for centuries and maybe those of Augustus in general. I am wondering whether this could have at least delayed (probably not stop, the disastrous emperors would still have done their thing) the fall of the western roman empire due to at least some of the tribes that migrated and invaded the western roman empire being actually part of one of the empires. But there is a few hundred years of history in between which I don't know much about. Would be interested to hear of someone more knowledgable than me about this.
To anyone wondering the same, I just found a very interesting video called "What if rome conquered Germania?" made by Monsieur Z, dealing with points like "What if the disaster of Teutoburg Forest didn't happen"
I clicked on this video to see why you're facepalming on the thumbnail. 😂 My initial reaction to the original video was: "I don't know, some of these don't sound like they belong on this list." But I'm no history expert. Always enjoy the learning experiences.
I like the think of these decisions as “single person decisions”…if that’s the case, Gavrilo Princip deciding to eat a sandwich has to be #1
Or Franz Ferdinand's driver taking a wrong turn
Man I was hoping you'd comment on this video when I watched it lol the look on your face while watching it is very telling, i love it
Most items on this list were only bad decisions in hindsight and would have been heralded as brilliant had they worked out, which is something that can be said about literally every decision that goes wrong
Its a weirdly titled video - these are nebulous mistakes. Where is Thomas Midgely? He made the mistake of introducing CFC and TEL and almost destroyed the globe.
I would really love to hear your top 20...even though I sort of think putting the entire human history into lists like this is probably a bit silly, I think it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
Japanese fully invasion China could also be the worst decision ever. Regardless of how bloody the consequence is, this decision was not approved by the Japanese highest officials but was made by some bloodthirsty Japanese soldiers who wanted to gain glory and rise up in ranks. But the war had no objectives and the japaneses didn't know when and where to stop. So they came up with a reckless idea: conquer the whole china. Taking the costals and ports was a easy job for japanese but taking a continental size of land need tremendous amount of resources and manpower for which the Japanese didn't have. Eventually, Japanese had dug into a war they could not afford and indirectily tiggered the war with America.
Yeah, and for two reasons. One, as you said, China was fighting against Japan until the war ended. There's no guarantee Japan, just because of pure numbers, doesn't get bled out of China eventually anyway, making the whole war not worth it. Two, it gets them sanctions from the US when they're already concerned about resources, which gets them a war Yamamoto said they had to win in six months or be screwed.
I would also add one that could arguably be here the mongol invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281. It was a very risky and very costly campaign and by sheer bad luck due to 2 typhoons this basically saved japan. These failures showed that the mongolian empire was no longer invincible 2/3 of the army that was sent to invade japan was destroyed, most of the chinese and korean fleets were also destroyed which then lead to more division and weakened the empires image and political position internally and externally in a massive way. This campaign was definately one of the major threads on the tapestry that unraveled the mongolian empire because because in less than 100 years later the empire was gone.
With regards to your words about the Fourth Crusade and the sacking of Constantinople, it did not alter the situation in Europe too much; the Christians held the city but the Byzantines took it back shortly after. What it did was hammer the final nail in the coffin that was the Byzantine Empire. The empire was already losing a bunch of money and the Crusaders took what wealth was left and the Byzantines never really recovered. It just accelerated the decline of the empire.
You will find most of the wealth of Constantinople in Venice, Italy.
I once had a professor who was Greek and he mentioned once during a lecture that while on a trip to Istanbul he spat on the grave of Enrico Dandalo.
I can't believe the donner party made it on the list, but the Scottish attempt to found a colony in Panama. They spent 25% of their countries entire wealth of the time, and thought they would be trading wool in the tropics with the natives. It led to the Scottish/English union to cover the resulting debts when the venture failed.