Who Is The Most POWERFUL Europe State In 1939
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ต.ค. 2023
- #possiblehistory #ph
Source: correlatesofwar.org/data-sets...
If you like the content please like, comment and subscribe, it helps smaller channels like mine to get noticed!
If you want to support the channel you can go to my Patreon or become a member! You will get early access to video's and will be allowed to suggest priority video subjects!
/ possiblehistory
Feel free to follow or join our social media platforms:
/ possiblehistory
/ possiblehistor1
/ discord
/ possible_history0
Possible Extra's a channel where we do not necessarily history related stuff, like podcasts and more!
/ @theobserverph
Data Animations made with flourish.studio
Most of our music by Beta Records. He's great, check him out!
Link: goo.gl/peHHCX
A lot of other music by Kevin McLoad. The Copyrightfree Music Creator
/ kevinmacleodarchive
![แฟนแนวใด๋ - ยูริ โตเกียวมิวสิค [OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4_XVMuhhbsU/mqdefault.jpg)
This actually makes Italy's military performance in the war make so much more sense than explaining every military failure individually. When you realize that Italy was a minor power pretending at being a major power, it really comes together
I mean, the Axis only had one REAL Great Power and that was Germany. Even Japan could hardly be a Great Power let alone a Major one when compared to the UK and USSR since they had a smaller Navy than the Brits and way smaller army than the Soviets plus less natural resources than either while Germany was able to compete because they could fund an army capable of breaking the Soviets and weren't reliant on sea lanes for the bulk of their resources like the brits.
Also, pretty interesting, that all this problems can be recalled to WW1.
In ww1 Italy utilized basically all his iron deposit and didn't basically had any at the start of WW2.
It didn't have the market to sustain an heavy military spending.
It actually started to invest in energy production before ww2 with projects like the Vajont (rip to all the soul that were lost).
The italian population was of 38 millions at the time, so, it's normal that at least they have half a million man ready.
So yes, Italy lack the resources to sustain the war (it is largely know that Italy demanded Germany what the German state produced in 2 year in just some months).
So, Italy wasn't ready, even if you let them decades.
Maybe they can create a somewhat respectful navy with Germany resources to protect the Mediterranean... Still, it would have took decades.
It was fun to write this, corrections are appreciate and bye from Italy.
The French also where really low
Tbh italy was in a weird situation. They had the power do dominate over minor powers like Bulgaria or Albania. But they didn’t have the economic weight to go eye on eye with the other great powers. They were something of a middle power, they couldn’t really punch above their weight like prussia in the 18-19 th century but they were clearly over what we call „minor“ powers of that era
I wouldn't call Italy a minor Power, their Navy was big and decent enough. They were just the bottom of the big players
In future videos you should calculate military spending as a total value, because it would better reflect how much money the country would spend in total, for example over 10 years. Building military takes time. In such a system, the USSR would probably outpace Germany in total spending, which makes sense given the mass of equipment they had at the beginning of the war.
For example, the Soviets had more tanks than the rest of the world combined in 1941 (most of them were light models, but they still had to spend something on such masses of equipment).
Yeah, this ranking is effectively just a gradient, calculating who increased the most in the year before the war
Absolutely agree and will!
There's also the fact that, as Russia has shown lately, spending doesn't always correlate directly to actual capabilities. The Nazi DIC was plenty corrupt, and their military was heavily divided, with the Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe, and SS having their own procurement systems and rarely cooperating, with things getting even worse once Goering decides that just having the Fallschirjaeger isn't enough and decides to start making Luftwaffe Field Divisions.
@@possiblehistoryYo, at 11:27, you made a mistake when you dropped down to the minor powers, you said “Poland, *France*, and Belgium” when France was a major power
Also, I have no idea why you put Ireland right below Lithuania when you could have just put them above it, since they have the same score
@@Maxzes_sorry but France wasn't really a major military power or even economic power
Scotland has been the most powerful country since 6000BC
Agreed
You are correct! And i have proof
1.scotland is in a Union with england wales and northern ireland and OBVIOUSLY scotland leads that union and is the true lord of the colonies the capital only is london is because scotland gave mercy to england!
NO! Bulgaria is a more powerful state!!!🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬
Rather relatable comment
@@GreenTheoriwhich was *a mistake*
I feel like navy strength not being taken into account made the UK, France and Italy seem much weaker than they actually were. Also, instead of military spending, it would've been better if you had compared the amount of military equipment the countries had (i.e. how many tanks did Germany have?) as Germany had to build up their army from scratch while the other nations had a better foundation.
Completely true. The difference in naval power was so laughably large that Germany barely bothered to mobilise their navy besides submarine interdiction because they knew it would be decades before they could match the Brits. The Brits absolutely destroyed the Italian navy early on, and in a surprise twist, also destroyed the French navy after their surrender to prevent the Germans and/or Vichy government from using the ships against Britain. Even the US and Japanese fleets didn't match in tonnage, and that's not even accounting for the Commonwealth fleets.
i agree as well, but it's pretty hard to calculate, you can't give a Battleship or an Aircraft Carrier the same score as a Destroyer or Submarine.
@@Gigagato_measure it in overall tonnage
I agree, this should be a sixth metric used.
I'm sure that navy spending was included in the military spending category. However, I don't think that sailors were included in the soldier count when they should.
It would be interesting seeing this but through all 6 years of the year, comparing each year's statistics
years of the year
@@big-potato-srworld year 2
We need a 1914 one, there the stats will definitely be closer and it's going to be interesting to see minor nations' stats
It would be Luxemburg of course.
And if not could you look at a timeline where everything went perfect for Luxembourg?
Clearly, Lichtenstein surpasses even the great state of Luxembourg.
Luxembourgish Bohemia forever 💯💯💯
@@bobagingo_ Personal union and forming greater germany later xD
The scum of Liechtenstein could never even compare to the might of the great nation of Luxembourg.@@0th_Law
in that timeline luxembourg would be leader of german-french union or something
I know that including the colonies would be a bit much, but equally it seams a bit harsh to discount them entirely
How about the colonies count as 3/5ths.
It kind of makes sense when you consider what actually happened; the French got knocked out almost immediately and therefore their colonies didn't matter (and had nowhere near the potential of the British colonies anyway), while the British colonies were almost entirely engaged against Japan, not Germany, with the exception of South Africa (which did nothing) and Canada (which could have been included but really would not have changed much).
@@plasmakitten4261By 1939, the focus was pretty much only on Germany, as neither Italy nor Japan had yet joined the war. Also, Canada was the third largest force D-Day onwards and was a very important force in that part of the war. Australia (and New Zealand) also played noticeable roles in the North African campaign, even after they were already fighting Japan. India was the only country that was almost entirely focused on Japan, and even then, before they were at war, the main force in the liberation of Ethiopia came from India.
The colonies absolutely played a big part in the Western theatre of the war, Canada and Australia being the standouts particularly in D-Day and Italy.
perfection@@benshiotsu8553
@@12D_D21 All true, but from a purely statistical perspective, i.e. how this video did it, the only colony that would really appreciably shake up the results would be India with its massive population and economic potential.
Great video. Some potential improvements for the future:
-Naval tonnage would be a good category to add, especially as building up a navy is quite a slow process, unlike increasing military spending or mobilising more soldiers
-Iron/steel production seems rather over represented. Obviously it's important, but it's not like those are the only resources needed. Potentially include other resources and/or lower the wight of this category, as it doesn't make much sense for Luxembourg to be over half as strong as the Netherlands, who is less than half as strong as Belgium
-While it makes sense for colonial populations to count as much as European populations, not counting them at all seems a bit unfair to the colonial powers. possibly counting them at the relative rates of conscription, or doing something simple like counting them as 1/10th the European population
-Military spending should probably be the sum of the pat 10 years, or possibly a weighted average. A country that massively increases military spending in 1939 would not have anywhere near the military strength of one that had been consistently spending at this rate
And some corrections for this video:
-Since this is for 1939, Poland should be included with the allies for the combined scores while Italy shouldn't be added to the axis. This gives the allies 136 compared to Germany's 149
-When sorting the list, you've for some reason got Finland and Norway out of order, putting them significantly higher than they should be
Agreed on the Naval tonnage aspect. Iron and steel production is rated so highly because it signifies the heavy industry capabilities of a country.
This is absolutely *brilliant*! You have GOT to do 1914 and 1815 (after Congress of Vienna)! Besides that I reckon 1945 after WWII ended would be interesting. Maybe also one after the formation of Germany in 1871, and comparing it to Europe before in 1869/70? Regardless, this is awesome, I would be very happy if more videos like this got made
1945 would be USUSUSUSUSUSUSUSUSUS
1945 would be a total wash in favor of the Americans.
I love that moment of hesitation before you counted ireland as a baltic state xD
What this video has taught me: Italy and France are failures, Germany strong, Soviets also strong, USA is cracked
I do like this video but I do think the colonial empires should have counted for more as while you are correct that an Indian does not have as much effect on the war as a Brit, a Siberian has an equally small effect but the main thing I have a problem with is not including the colonial empires in production numbers, as a ton of steel is a ton of steel from Britain and from India (maybe minus a bit from transport costs)
He could've counted JUST the Commonwealth, which disregards the majority of Africa and all of their tiny islands, instead of just the british isles, and that probably would've resolved this.
Yeah but he would have to add population, which is just crazy, also have you heard about the Siberian divisions?
@@martinrosenbergerthe sad thing is the video doesn’t have quality
@@martinrosenberger of course I’ve heard of the Siberian divisions but (tbh I am assuming here) ethnic Russian soldiers posted in Siberia are very different to rural ethnic Siberian peasants in war contributions and I obviously meant the peasants. Also saying it’s crazy to add the population is my point, the population of the empires was a major factor in why they were so powerful and not including that in some way doesn’t give a good evaluation of relative strength. The fact that 2.5m Indians fought for the uk and not for Germany is obviously a factor in their relative power levels
@@josephknott6174 Not really, even if they aren’t ethnically the same, they still hold Russian culture, if it was like Britain we would have seen them try independence when the USSR fell, but no Siberia is a fundamental part of Russia and also where all the industry was send during WW2
And yeah that’s fair but it’s just not the same, we are talking about 1939 also
Great video as always.
I would really like to see more of this format, especially the development during the war and for WW1.
I know its out of pocket but its really scary to think about just how many soldiers the soviets had if none died it could have even become 30 milion men fighting and and also sad to think about how one in three people born in 1923 died
If the Soviets hadn't lost so many soldiers, I think the overall number of troops wouldn't have changed much. It is about maintaining an 'effective' force not just pumping out as many troops as possible if it isn't necessary.
Soviets would rather put more people into mines and factories to increase production or increase logistic personnel to increase its frontline troop's effectiveness.
@@DOSFS you are right there
Wait what? Bulgaria wasn't the strongest one? I'm very surprised.
Haha yes im very suprised as well😅
I cant believe how this channel manages to create a ton of series that are really interesting. I wish one day you could update once a day. Keep it up!
Sadly, this channel's production quality is way too high for one video per day
Sadly he leaves most of his series after one or two episodes
this being a new series is extremely interesting, one of my favorite videos on this channel so far
Can you do the most powerful country ( in the world ) in 1962 ? I’d like to see how the USSR and the west compare to eachother
It's the US. The USSR was still recovering economically from WW2 at that point. At the end of the 60s up to the mid 70s would probably be their most powerful period.
It is quite simple. US was and is a Superpower. USSR was spending something like quarter of they economy on military, only to keep up. And huge hunk of that was stolen from member states.
@@MajinOthinus ahh ok , i figured the 60s since it was the time of khruchev
US and USSR would probably be rougly equal, I think the US would win the chart but not nearly by enough to crush the soviets on their own, same thing if you get NATO vs Warsaw Pact AND China, otherwise NATO would probably outpower warsaw quite badly.
@@elgrandefleau7359Idk, the usa economy hugely outpaced the soviet one.
This video has been really interesting from what Ive seen so far and Id be happy to watch other videos like this
Loved the video, I hope to see more of these in the futur!
There are so many variables you can add to this (and pick apart, too), but I think this was a great format and hope to see more!
If you're interested in adding categories, I would also add fleet tonnage/number of aircraft. States absolutely increased tonnage during the war, but Germany was never able to challenge the Royal Navy, for instance. It might bump up Italy, too, as they had a pretty large fleet. Another interesting variable would R&D spending as a percentage of GDP, or aggregate numbers. That'd be interesting since it measures a non-tangible resource for states, too!
Great video!
Although i do understand leaving out the British Dominions, i feel like its unfair to complete ignore the Empire that Britain had, esspicaily the more developed areas such as Canada and Australia. I do also feel you should of added sailors into the soldier count to account for the royal navy. Still an amazing video as always love them and keep up the great work!!
4:40
The numbers are extremely funny, although this is more easily explained by the fact that the Benelux region excluding parts of netherlands were one of the first places where the Industrial revolution spread at times being second only to Britain itself.
Great concept, I hope that you change the categories depending on what’s relevant for that time period
Perhaps a good addition to this new series would be "who was the most powerful state before the crusade of varna"? I believe it's interesting, because the ottomans won, but did they win out of luck, higher technology or just because they had more men? It's not only that, however. Because this was also a very important war in the history of europe and the ottomans, so it could be interesting to think about. This could however also be hard, because there aren't many concrete numbers for energy consumption, soldier counts, etc. And many metrics used in this video wouldn't fit.
It seems like they won due to the usual reasons why the Crusades failed: When the Pope is the one calling the Christian armies together, what happens is that they are extremely disorganized and have a huge range of potentially conflicting motivations. There was also an element of luck: Feudal warfare had the near-universal instant win button of "kill the enemy king", and the Ottomans managed that with Wladyslaw III's death, large due to the king's rather suicidal charge at the Ottoman center.
@@plasmakitten4261that is indeed true. That does not stop us however from pondering a bit more
@@rafalsitar well the other thing is that you have to remember that modern metrics of mobilization mean pretty much nothing in feudal standards. There would never be a standing army, for example, so soldier count as a metric would fluctuate wildly between campaigns; industrial capacity was 0 for basically everyone, so energy consumption is kinda meaningless; military spending wasn't a thing since armies were raised by feudal levy; centralized nation states didn't even exist so the whole concept of a state being stronger than another is kinda flawed; and mostly the only useful metrics of war-winning ability would be population, presence of any amount of professional soldiers, quantity of money held in reserve, internal stability, and skill of leaders.
One issue I could see is the data not being as available in the 1400s as it is in the 1930s.
@@AlexiosTheSixthI have stated that in my original comment already
This video is amazing. I love your content but this one is so cool!
I really like this video, very interresting and unique. You describe difficult thing in simple term really great work
Nice video man
Great job Possible History! Loved the video could you do one of these except WW1?
These statistics are good but they miss one thing: sustainability. How sustainable is the level of spending, number of soldiers, etc. This might have been an area the Germans fall short on, having effectively been mobilised for quite some time whilst powers like britain emerged from the Great Depression with a more sustainable economy
great britians economy litearlly collapsed from fighting in WW2
@@tenanaciouzBritain’s economy never really healed
Uk economy never falls because it never recovers
@@tenanaciouzit never collapsed it just faced issue. The German economy collapsed.
@@kordellswoffer1520Yeah lol Germany was literally a burning ruin but it is the UK that collapsed
Great video PH! I’d really love to see a part 2 to this video about the pacific powers with details on Japan, China, Australia, the Raj etc and see how they compare to each other and Europe
Can you continue the your series Warlord era of China series? I really enjoyed and it was very informative.
Neat series!
Super cool concept 👍
I want to see more pls
I loved this! Also, this was posted on my birthday
I really like this new concept of videos I'm watching your videos for the past month and i am becoming a big fan of your channel hope to see more amazing videos from you. Love From Pakistan❤
PLEASE MAKE A SERIES OUT OF THIS
Would be cool to see a video like this but done in 2000 or 2020. Comparing traditional powers and rising powers
I really hope this series continues
Great video! I also would like to watch something similiar about europe at the start of the 7-years war
I would love a video on how you would prepare Italy for the war
Love the Concept, please do more!!!!!!!
So i have a few problems with that list. 1. The number of Polish soldiers is far too low. I assume that the numbers come from the begining of the year before the mobilization in Poland. In september 1939 however Polish forces had 936 000 people to 1.8milion of german forcws. I belive that yhe soviet troops in the far east should be substracted from the total amount of the soviet forces. And obviously Poland sjould be counted as a part of the allies. But nice video either way gj keep it up!
I love this series
It would be cool to see a graph of each country's power over time
this video is really great maybe make a 1914 version aswell!
Amazing video! I’d be interested in seing a modern world version as well
I love this video, if it’s possible, I would suggest 2022 Europe
Interesting video.
I think the one key ingredient you are missing is something that would show economic health of each country. For example, through 1938-39 Germany's economy was on the precipice of collapse as funding was funnelled into the military, to the point that conflict and expansion was inevitable - it was that or the country's economy would go up in smoke.
It would also help explain the actions of other countries, appeasement made sense because France and the UK knew that they could maintain a state of war for longer than Germany.
Very nice series, i would love to see years like 1756, 1803, 1914 and 2023
Great film as usually. I would see film like that from the time of congress od viena
Video suggestion: what if Bohemia won the battle of marchfeld?
Love this
Where did you get the source on the statistics
I'd love to see either ww1 (of course) or the Napoleonic wars, the latter being almost more interesting as I have a feeling it might reflect France's outnumbered position while a later date (around the time they got beaten back) could reflect on how much of a tactical blunder Napoleon made
i think that compering Napoleonic France with the whole (insert number) coalition would reflect that but if im not wrong France was by far the most powerful country in Europe at the time
I like this type of video. Could you do this again but in later years of world war 2? Like maybe 1942. Also, it would be cool if you included japan and china.
Possible History will you do the same kind of video for europe in 1914, just before WW1?
I would love to see it ^^
Very cool new vid
Just wanted to say hi PH I think you should continue the wars from the past series u did with Russia and USA
Awesome
Awesome idea, personally I'd like to see this concept of video in the congress of Vienna but the data is probably difficult 5o get
Would love to see a video like this for 1936 and 1942 or '43! 1910, 1914 and 1917 could also be interesting.
Those italy statistics are shocking!
What if Austria-Hungary was made of chocolate?
Cool video concept. Do cold war 1978 or something like that next time.
what maps do you use and how can i get them to create my own alternate history
Do 1914 also cool video🎉
Great video as always. You made a slight error at 11:30 it is Spain not france.
You should do the Napoleonic wars next.
Can you somehow do this with the whole world in ww2? It will be very hard to make but it would be interesting to see
Anyways, amazing video as always
You need to do the same for each year of ww2
The discord link in the channel info section seems outdated btw.
Idea for future videos: what if everything went perfect for an ideology or religion e.g. anarcocommunsim, monarchism for the former or paganism for the latter. Looking at Ideologies would be quite interesting in my view Looking at sociopolitical trends and how historical events could shape them. Religions would be a bit more of a 'how do we make this side win' but It might be cool to look at whether the rise of the Abrahamic faiths in the west was inevitable or whether they could have been halted following the outcome of some battle.
What's the name of the last song at the end of the video?
Nice
can you release a download to your maps?
couple of suggestions for future videos like this.1914, 1799, 1815, 1960, 2023, 19th century over time
I would love to see a video for 1913/14.
In future videos, you should do one about 1942
If I have to guess, it'd be Germany or the USSR, but I'd honestly give Germany an edge in 1939.
Purely 1vs1? The Soviets should lose. The Red Army is significantly weaker than in 1941 and without even the reforms gained from the Winter war. The Soviets don't get any assistance and German industry doesn't have to fight a high tech war with American and British industry, meaning that Soviet air power likely never recovers. Now if Germany would "win" that war in any sense but the technical is another question, but I doubt the Soviets are capable of winning it.
I think in a 1 v 1 situation it completely depends on the state of German trade. If France and the uk maintained a trade embargo against Germany then Germany loses rather easily to the USSR. If you give Germany access to British or American Oil than I can very easily see Germany winning a war with the USSR.
@@ionehodge6838 Probably yeah. Though they didn't exactly "lose easily" to the USSR even with the UK in the war.
@@MajinOthinus Germany actually grew in power until 1942 and was the biggest power until 1943 after that the soviets and Americans became stronger and Germany obviously weaker
Excellent.
this video should just be called "clowning Italy for a solid 15 minutes"
Could you do this for WW1 as well?
Roasting Italy should be the actual title
I think that discounting the colonies entirely did a great disservice to the allies. Maybe in future you could put in an approximation, or calculate them included at a lower percent (e.g. 10-15%)
When you get right down to it, it was more that France lost in 1940, than Germany won. French generals relied upon their experiences of the last general war and when Germany achieved a seemingly unstoppable breakthrough, they panicked.
Professor Michael Beckley uses GDP by multiplying GDP by GDP/capita. Thus producing a metric that balances economies that are efficient with those that have lots of people.
I love it when Possible History uploads a video
💯🔥🇳🇱
What map do you use?
You should do modern day africa
You should include naval tonnage in this as well
Only problem there is what type of navy you have is far more important, given WWII proved how much more useful aircraft carriers were than many other types of ships for projecting power, especially before modern rocketry.
I would very much like to see, what a 1983 (NATO vs Warsaw Pact, perhaps with China as a third Party) version of this video would look like
Also what is the music at the end? It's just so good
do one of these for modern europe or ww1
You should do this in the modern day
I’d love to see this at the height of the Napoleonic wars
Please do a video about "what if everything went perfect for Romania"
Great video! Cant wait For more! Idea: Austria wins the austro prussian war
While a good video, and some good metrics, there are some weaknesses, esp England, and lesser France and Italy.
England, France and Italy had major naval assets/battleships from WWI they did NOT have to build like Germany did, so that is part of their lesser expenditures. And while you may not want to count the colonies, they were a part of the soldiers, England used at lot of Indian div in the Western Desert and in Africa campaigns. Also when you avoided the colonies, you also avoided the commonwealth/dominion countries of Canada, South Africa and the ANZACS. They probably should have been at least in the Pop count, at least a %.
This shows more war readiness rather than power in a war tbh. Good vid though ❤