I am sorry, I appear to have made a mistake, there was in fact a war between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Russians in 1792 (not sure how I missed that), so that one was a failure as well!
Fret not! The video was crystal clear and it actually showed all the possible ways a perpetual peace is enforced stricto sensu whilst searching for all the possible results in the query, so it's a win-win situation!
Yes, it was a war, about the 3rd May Constitution. Some spoiled magnats didn't liked the ideas of modernity and reforms, so they started a Targowica Confederacy, which called Russia for help. It was also the same war, where Polish War Order Virtutti Militari was created, by the Stanisław August Poniatowski, to honour victory of his much more talented nephiew - General-Major Józef Poniatowski. It was first Major Victory from the Sobieski's times. First victory, in the End of Times. But i think that that "Eternal Peace" between Russia and Poland was not succesfull. Russians fought in many wars on polish lands, like in the Northern War, or the 7 years war, where both Russians and Prussians were fighting on Polish lands, and devastating them during marches, as any other army of the XVIII century was doing, despite polish neutrality. In elections of August III and Poniatowski, russian troops were present at the Elective Sejm, and literaly were taking polish main legislative body hostage. Do not foregt also the Bar Confederacy, in 1768-1772, where most of the nobles got so much sick of russians, so they decided to kick them out of Poland. One of thier leaders was the Kazimierz Pułaski, or Casimir Pulaski how Americans know him. It was a regular war, that took place on the polish lands again. All of the partitions were backed up by russian military. So despite "no war" in theory, in practice it was an infringement of peace treaty, and even by the XVIII century standards, it was a clear breach.
That’s a bit too lenient tbh, yall humans aren’t peaceful at all, always so greedy (hmmm) Edit: I mean for the whole of diplomacy, not perpetual/eternal peace
@@demilembias2527 yes, the mad philosophy and mentality stopped that, survival of the species is more important than increasing territory or influence or interests or spreading an ideology to an enemy
@@villagernewsletter3577 doesn't stop even people in modern America fearmongering and trying their hardest to manufacture consent for a war with China, despite China and America in no way posing existential threats to each other, and a war between the two in fact posing a great existential threat to both.
the Polish-Russian treaty lasted till 1792 since that year the Polish-Russian War of 1792 broke out due to the Polish 3 May Constitution and it result in the Second Partition of Poland. But overall great video
I'd be curious to see a look at the relative power, both millitary and economic of european entities since the 1200's. Was france almost always twice the population of it's nearest competitors? How did the habsburgs compare demographically?
Great video man! I assure you i wasnt sick of you saying Perpetual Peace over and over!😊 Speaking of treaties: What if Henry V survived to ensure the Treaty of Troyes was honored and the Anglo-Franco kingdom was born?
An other failed one is the Hungarian-Yugoslav Treaty of Eternal Friendship. One of it's three points was literally "Permanent peace and eternal friendship will exist between the Kingdom of Hungary and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia." It was signed in December, 1940. Not quite four months later, in April, 1941 Hungary joined Germany and Italy in the invasion of Yugoslavia. It was one of the most dishonorable moment of our history, and Prime Minister Pál Teleki committed suicide because he could not talk Regent Miklós Horthy out of the decision. Of course, if we want to be really technical, the Independent State of Croatia was created on April 10, and the Hungarian troops joined the invasion on April 11, so some historian argue that Hungary never really inveded the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (which country had signed the treaty)... but Yugoslavia officially capitulated only on the 17th, so its a really weak argument.
You could argue the entente cordiale did fail during ww2. In ww2, France was split between vichy France and free France. Even the British recognised vichy France, but this didn't stop Britain attacking vichy French ships and invading vichy French colonies such as Syria.
Great video 👌 but I feel like the Baqt between muslim Egypt and christian Nubia should have been mentioned too. It lasted almost 700 years, possibly the longest lasting treaty in history.
You could have mentioned the Treaty of Windsor (1386) and the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance, with the former being considered the cornerstone of relations between Portugal and England/ Great Britain/ The UK ever since
Technically, the 1904 treaty between Britain and France was perpetual since the Third French Republic that signed it was ended by the Nazis in 1940. The French resistance and their oversees colonies then became a new entity (Free France and the France Fourth French Republic after WW2) under Charles De Gaulle.
You should make a video on how the Polish -Lithuanian commonwealth could have possibly survived (at least in some capacity) until the modern day. Obviously you would need to start from years before it came into being, but i think with a bit more political common sense, it could have survived, provided the Soviets kept it as its own individual SSR and didn't split it up.
50%, damn that’s high. Perpetual peace sounded like a fairy tale to me at first and not something that would really happen, like even in this era where we have organizations like the un there are still multiple wars going on in Africa, the Middle East, etc. and ofc the Ukraine one which has been going since 2014 Now I’m thinking of an alt hist scenario where a perpetual peace treaty was signed after ww2…how things would change and all and if it would uphold
In 1941 there was a "Treaty of Eternal Friendship between Yugoslavia and Hungary" which kinda can be considered a treaty of perpetual peace, i probably dont have to say but the treaty didnt last long...
Also hungary’s prime minister killed himself when germany told him that they were going to invade. He didn’t want to be considered an oathbreaker so he killed himself before he befell that indignity.
Can you make a video on what if Richard the lionheart survived surprisingly There's not a single alternate history video about Richard the lionheart on what if he survived, which is surprising since if he survived, a lot of history would have changed
Honestly I don’t think that much would’ve changed. If he survived then the Angevins would’ve held their possessions in France for much longer. But he still likely would’ve never had legitimate children, and Philip of France was younger than Richard and therefore would’ve likely outlived him anyway and even if not so, then I’m sure his son would’ve still reconquered France during John’s reign and John probably would’ve still signed the Magna Carta as a result. So all it really would do is prolong the inevitable. But feel free to make points against what I said, I’m actually genuinely curious as to why you think otherwise.
The Entente cordiale from it's track record to it's raison d'etre (primary contemporary objectives) is one of the most resilient and successful diplomatic agreement/understanding of modern ages. (Through some very conflictual times, diverging and even competing interests at times)
In my opinion, the partitions meant aggression, illegal aggression and the dismantling of the Polish-Lithuanian State. Therefore, the treaty was a failure. Now, can I have your body pillow?
Love ur vids :). I had an idea for an alternate history scenario as well, What if Austria took Bavaria instead of Lombardy-Venetia in the congress of Vienna?
@@stekra3159 Well I was mostly interested in the effects that would happen during and after the 1848 revolutions as Austria is (most likely) not at war with Lombary and they have far more germans in their empire, so ethnic tension may be reduced and they can start assimilating similar groups like the Czechs
@@Aahmpowerwhile leaning towards the entente before Britain only joined ww1 because the Germans invaded Belgium who was friends with Britain the Germans would still do that meaning Britain which still get dragged in
I'm not sure if there's a proposition of "eternal peace", but it's worth to mention the almost millennia of friedly relations between England and Portugal. Maybe a video about alliances could look at it.
Let's not forget that an important element here is the resumè ! For example : had the eastern Roman empire not been a hypocritical fickle ally more than several times in the past the Sassanid Persians would not have straight up disregarded the perpetual peace treaty as yet another Roman ruse to buy time while gaining power and invade... A similar case happened again and again throughout the history of diplomacy You get the idea
Hey possible History. Another great video! Do you know if it is possible to find a full text of the Ewiger Landsfrieden anywhere? I would love to give it a read
7:56 As an Ukrainian, I strongly ask you to not show Crimea as a part of Russia. Doing so you legitimate the military occupation. If your point was about "de-facto" control, why wouldn't you paint all of occupied Ukrainian territory under Russian military? I mean, it has the same status as Crimea: 1. Captured by force 2. A part of Russia according to their laws 3. Had a fake referendum 4. Isn't recognised by the rest of the world (except for freak countries, such as Syria or North Korea). Thank you♥️
I like that you don't count the French Republic as the same as the Kingdom of France. Far too many forget how different countries become under different regimes.
No offense, but, why didn't you include anything outside of the European sphere? I'm no historian, but it is quite surprising that there were no perpetual peace treaties between other powers in other continents. Still an excellent video!
There technically were wars opposing the partitions of Poland, notably, Kosciuszko Uprising, when Kosciuszko and his rebels rebeled against Russia and Prussia during second Partition. The conflict begun with Kosciuszko committing coup d'etate and declaring himself leader of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. As such, if recognising Kosciuszko's goverment as proper Polish Lithuanian government, it could be argued that the treaty was broken. Also, even if not accounting for that, all Partition were done by military crossing the borders and proclaiming the annexation. It was still invasion, Polish government simply didn't fight back. So, I would argued it still broke the treaty.
Regarding Poland... I'd say the treaty worked. War happens when politics broke down and the war was avoided. Violence was done to the state and people of Poland, but the polish people still exist.
Giving the policy of cultural Russification imposed by the Russian Empire on Poland after the Partitions, which was a consious attmept of the Tsars at marginalizing, persecuting and ideally elliminating Polish language, culture, identity and the Catholic faith, the fact that Polish People still exist is not a result of a successful Treaty of Perpetual Peace. Rather it's the result of Polish ressistance and result of the failure of Russian anti-Polish policies enforced after they broke the Treaty (there actually was a Polish-Russian war in 1792).
@@Radonatorr yeah, it's impossible to know how things would have gone if Poland refused to go down without a fight. The partition of Poland is what happens when the leaders of the country have no interest in protecting their own people. Petty lords who would rather work for themselves. The same sort of things we see today. Leaders need to be accountable
@@BiggestCorvid That's quite simplistic point of view. The corruption among the szlachta nobility, breakdown of the political system and long decline of the state were for sure main reasons for the fall of PLC. But the last king of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Stanisław II August, did actively try to improve the situation in the country in the aftermath of the 1st Partition. He worked hard to reform and strenghten the state. He was the main brain behind the Commission of National Education, the first such institution in the world as well as the Constitution of the 3rd May which was the first constitution in Europe and second one in the world. There were quite a few notable leaders in the Polish political, cultural and military sectors that supported his attempts. And exactly the fact that there were people in Poland trying with success to make things better was a threat to Russia, Prussia and Austria which made them invade and conduct the remaining 2 Partitions. The official reason why Russians invaded Poland in 1792 was to abolish the new Polish constitution and political system. So paradoxically the reason for Poland's death was Poland's attempts to reform and save itself.
Yo this is absolutely silly but what if Napoleon was American, prussian, british or Russian either one really it would be interesting to see how his approach to war would be with these different circumstances
Possible History How will you think the vietnam war would have play out it the U.S was communists? would the U.S still join the war but helping north vietnam instead? if so will the war last just 1 year or will it lasted 10 year like in our timeline? would The British and the French support south vietnam in this scenario and possibly even send they troop to south vietnam?
I am sorry, I appear to have made a mistake, there was in fact a war between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Russians in 1792 (not sure how I missed that), so that one was a failure as well!
Got it man! Incredible video nonetheless, You rock!
It was the time when Moscals took PLC land with other 2 empires
I will revive the Hittite empire and declare war on aegypt
Fret not! The video was crystal clear and it actually showed all the possible ways a perpetual peace is enforced stricto sensu whilst searching for all the possible results in the query, so it's a win-win situation!
Yes, it was a war, about the 3rd May Constitution. Some spoiled magnats didn't liked the ideas of modernity and reforms, so they started a Targowica Confederacy, which called Russia for help. It was also the same war, where Polish War Order Virtutti Militari was created, by the Stanisław August Poniatowski, to honour victory of his much more talented nephiew - General-Major Józef Poniatowski. It was first Major Victory from the Sobieski's times. First victory, in the End of Times.
But i think that that "Eternal Peace" between Russia and Poland was not succesfull. Russians fought in many wars on polish lands, like in the Northern War, or the 7 years war, where both Russians and Prussians were fighting on Polish lands, and devastating them during marches, as any other army of the XVIII century was doing, despite polish neutrality. In elections of August III and Poniatowski, russian troops were present at the Elective Sejm, and literaly were taking polish main legislative body hostage.
Do not foregt also the Bar Confederacy, in 1768-1772, where most of the nobles got so much sick of russians, so they decided to kick them out of Poland. One of thier leaders was the Kazimierz Pułaski, or Casimir Pulaski how Americans know him. It was a regular war, that took place on the polish lands again.
All of the partitions were backed up by russian military. So despite "no war" in theory, in practice it was an infringement of peace treaty, and even by the XVIII century standards, it was a clear breach.
A 50% success rate maybe the most greatest achievment by humans in diplomacy ever.
That’s a bit too lenient tbh, yall humans aren’t peaceful at all, always so greedy (hmmm)
Edit: I mean for the whole of diplomacy, not perpetual/eternal peace
We did a pretty good job stopping nuclear war so far, especially in the modern world, 80 years is quite a long span of time.
@@demilembias2527 yet...
@@demilembias2527 yes, the mad philosophy and mentality stopped that, survival of the species is more important than increasing territory or influence or interests or spreading an ideology to an enemy
@@villagernewsletter3577 doesn't stop even people in modern America fearmongering and trying their hardest to manufacture consent for a war with China, despite China and America in no way posing existential threats to each other, and a war between the two in fact posing a great existential threat to both.
"Eternal peace" between Russia and Poland always sounded like a bad joke to me during history lessons
Spirit vs Word.
*3+ players PvP boardgames flashbacks*
Because it is XD
🇷🇺🤝🇵🇱
the Polish-Russian treaty lasted till 1792 since that year the Polish-Russian War of 1792 broke out due to the Polish 3 May Constitution and it result in the Second Partition of Poland.
But overall great video
You are absolutely right, my bad, not sure how I missed that one
Don't forget about russian intervention in 1733 during the convocation sejm
The Hittite-Egyptian peace treaty lasted 69 years, only ending by outside factors. Nice.
Let me know when this comment gets 69 likes so I can add a like to it
@@concept5631 its 69 likes
@@gg_plays7647 *49
@@concept5631 *🤓
@@concept5631 It's at 66 likes now
I'd be curious to see a look at the relative power, both millitary and economic of european entities since the 1200's. Was france almost always twice the population of it's nearest competitors? How did the habsburgs compare demographically?
Absolutely love that idea, will look into it!
The Haabsburgs basically managed to keep up anti french alliances for a few hundred years. At least that's what Im thinking from the top of my head.
Read Capital in the 21st century
"If the Entente Cordiale counts as a treaty for perpetual peace, it has, for now, succeeded." For now (menacingly)....
Great video man! I assure you i wasnt sick of you saying Perpetual Peace over and over!😊
Speaking of treaties: What if Henry V survived to ensure the Treaty of Troyes was honored and the Anglo-Franco kingdom was born?
An other failed one is the Hungarian-Yugoslav Treaty of Eternal Friendship. One of it's three points was literally "Permanent peace and eternal friendship will exist between the Kingdom of Hungary and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia." It was signed in December, 1940. Not quite four months later, in April, 1941 Hungary joined Germany and Italy in the invasion of Yugoslavia. It was one of the most dishonorable moment of our history, and Prime Minister Pál Teleki committed suicide because he could not talk Regent Miklós Horthy out of the decision.
Of course, if we want to be really technical, the Independent State of Croatia was created on April 10, and the Hungarian troops joined the invasion on April 11, so some historian argue that Hungary never really inveded the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (which country had signed the treaty)... but Yugoslavia officially capitulated only on the 17th, so its a really weak argument.
You could argue the entente cordiale did fail during ww2. In ww2, France was split between vichy France and free France. Even the British recognised vichy France, but this didn't stop Britain attacking vichy French ships and invading vichy French colonies such as Syria.
Ehhhhhhh, at best you could call it a civil war, but really Vichy was just a puppet government
But we can argue that it a different regime.
@@masonhandforth1369 why does that make it a legitimate government? Why should that government be considered part of France?
Then again, we can't forget about Free France
the UK was defending the territorial integrity of the French Republic it considered to be the rightful successor to the 3rd French Republic.
Great video 👌 but I feel like the Baqt between muslim Egypt and christian Nubia should have been mentioned too. It lasted almost 700 years, possibly the longest lasting treaty in history.
You could have mentioned the Treaty of Windsor (1386) and the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance, with the former being considered the cornerstone of relations between Portugal and England/ Great Britain/ The UK ever since
That’s not really a treaty of perpetual peace though because they never really went to war with each other in the first place
A one sided relationship where portugal held up their end of the bargain but Britain didn't
@@sasi5841 The Pink Map
@@Sceptonic what?
But Portugal and England were technically never at war,so it isn't a perpetual peace treaty.
If only those treaties worked man. Peace is such a crucial part on maintaining a stable state.😢😢
True but sometimes war is better then peace
@@psgamer-il2pt el estadounidense menos beligerante:
@@papalol1327 I am Australian
Sadly wars are now fought to divert attention from internal issues and unite the people against a common enemy.
@@psgamer-il2pt 🤨🤨🤨
Well, Gandhi (from Civilization) knows that perpetual peace is only possible when all that is left from your enemies is radioactive ash.
Dude I'm so glad I found your channel, Watching your videos gives me the same feeling of when I was first getting into history.
I'd love to see more Roman althistory, especially on Justinian. Perhaps a more realistic althistory of the conflicts he had with the west and east.
Technically, the 1904 treaty between Britain and France was perpetual since the Third French Republic that signed it was ended by the Nazis in 1940. The French resistance and their oversees colonies then became a new entity (Free France and the France Fourth French Republic after WW2) under Charles De Gaulle.
You should make a video on how the Polish -Lithuanian commonwealth could have possibly survived (at least in some capacity) until the modern day. Obviously you would need to start from years before it came into being, but i think with a bit more political common sense, it could have survived, provided the Soviets kept it as its own individual SSR and didn't split it up.
50%, damn that’s high. Perpetual peace sounded like a fairy tale to me at first and not something that would really happen, like even in this era where we have organizations like the un there are still multiple wars going on in Africa, the Middle East, etc. and ofc the Ukraine one which has been going since 2014
Now I’m thinking of an alt hist scenario where a perpetual peace treaty was signed after ww2…how things would change and all and if it would uphold
A lot of the wars in Africa and the middle east are not actually interstate wars, so they don't really count
In 1941 there was a "Treaty of Eternal Friendship between Yugoslavia and Hungary" which kinda can be considered a treaty of perpetual peace, i probably dont have to say but the treaty didnt last long...
Also hungary’s prime minister killed himself when germany told him that they were going to invade. He didn’t want to be considered an oathbreaker so he killed himself before he befell that indignity.
But didn't Hungary have clains in territories like Vojvodina?
9:03 who's gonna tell him he spelt switzerland wrong
Sheisehzbheland
@@NicolasTheKingphoenix10 neironichno shte ti razshirq anusa tolkova kolkoto da moje glavata mi da vleze i da ti lija chervata
What if Ivan the Sixth wasn't usuped ?
What if Mary I gave birth to A son ?
What if Richard III won the battle of Bosworth ?
Can you make a video on what if Richard the lionheart survived surprisingly
There's not a single alternate history video about Richard the lionheart on
what if he survived, which is surprising since if he survived, a lot of history would have changed
Interesting
Honestly I don’t think that much would’ve changed. If he survived then the Angevins would’ve held their possessions in France for much longer. But he still likely would’ve never had legitimate children, and Philip of France was younger than Richard and therefore would’ve likely outlived him anyway and even if not so, then I’m sure his son would’ve still reconquered France during John’s reign and John probably would’ve still signed the Magna Carta as a result. So all it really would do is prolong the inevitable. But feel free to make points against what I said, I’m actually genuinely curious as to why you think otherwise.
Top much of a change and way too unpredictable
"Perpetual peace"
You hear the kings and politicians say as they hold out one hand to shake and hold a dagger behind their backs with the other
The Entente cordiale from it's track record to it's raison d'etre (primary contemporary objectives) is one of the most resilient and successful diplomatic agreement/understanding of modern ages.
(Through some very conflictual times, diverging and even competing interests at times)
what with "The Eternal Peace Treaty" ("Wieczysty Pokój" in polish) (between plc and ottoman empire signed in 1533)
In my opinion, the partitions meant aggression, illegal aggression and the dismantling of the Polish-Lithuanian State. Therefore, the treaty was a failure.
Now, can I have your body pillow?
Love ur vids :). I had an idea for an alternate history scenario as well, What if Austria took Bavaria instead of Lombardy-Venetia in the congress of Vienna?
It woud no longer be the austria we konow and the baveryens woud grauch about it.
@@stekra3159 Well I was mostly interested in the effects that would happen during and after the 1848 revolutions as Austria is (most likely) not at war with Lombary and they have far more germans in their empire, so ethnic tension may be reduced and they can start assimilating similar groups like the Czechs
Took both, diplo wins dude why not get both when the austrians helped so much
I just can't imagine those diplomats doing anything else than laughing when signing those treaties
Damn this one’s another hit
Man I wish the world had perpetual peace
We might need a new global treaty of perpetual Peace.
Not gonna happen soon with the Middle East and all that.
It might actually be more feisable in the 21st century
Could you do a video about what if Germany from 1939, suddenly, teleported to the world of 1914?
Hope it’s good
What if vampires were real I have been asking every single Alternate history creator Since at least 2014 for this can someone deliver
what kind of vampires and should vampires be explained by magic or genetics as a mutation.
Sad congress of vienna noices
What if the entente cordial failed?
The British Empire stays neutral during WW1, maybe
@@Aahmpowerwhile leaning towards the entente before Britain only joined ww1 because the Germans invaded Belgium who was friends with Britain the Germans would still do that meaning Britain which still get dragged in
what about vichy france in ww2? they were at war with the british
The first time I have ever heard of this kind of treaty was from Episode 1 of the Tudors
This has the same energy as "The war to end all wars" LMAOOOOOO!
I'm not sure if there's a proposition of "eternal peace", but it's worth to mention the almost millennia of friedly relations between England and Portugal.
Maybe a video about alliances could look at it.
10:57 What happened to that map?
What about the treaty of universal and perpetual peace signed at the clothe of gold at Calais?
Whoooooo love this
Bahrain and the Uk also signed one
Let's not forget that an important element here is the resumè !
For example : had the eastern Roman empire not been a hypocritical fickle ally more than several times in the past the Sassanid Persians would not have straight up disregarded the perpetual peace treaty as yet another Roman ruse to buy time while gaining power and invade...
A similar case happened again and again throughout the history of diplomacy
You get the idea
[X] Can not cancel non-aggression pact (This feature is disabled in the game option)
I have a suggestion:-
What if Prussia & Austria joined Crimean War? (possibly making the war go global)
Now I want to know what would happen if the entente cordial never was made
You missed the treaty between Portugal and England.
Hey possible History. Another great video! Do you know if it is possible to find a full text of the Ewiger Landsfrieden anywhere? I would love to give it a read
Very interesting
Nice
What if the Visagoths became a Sassanid protectorate/client state ?
The words "perpetual peace" just scream duplicity of the Persian Shahanshah Kosro.
What about the Helsinki accords those worked for a while until 🇷🇺
1:50 Assyria! Woo!
7:56
As an Ukrainian, I strongly ask you to not show Crimea as a part of Russia. Doing so you legitimate the military occupation.
If your point was about "de-facto" control, why wouldn't you paint all of occupied Ukrainian territory under Russian military? I mean, it has the same status as Crimea:
1. Captured by force
2. A part of Russia according to their laws
3. Had a fake referendum
4. Isn't recognised by the rest of the world (except for freak countries, such as Syria or North Korea).
Thank you♥️
what's a fric country?
@@obamajoker7166 a country allied with anyone besides america
You’re never getting crimea back
@@nikolai7218, time will tell
Nah it right fully belongs to the golden horde 💪
Question, wasn’t the Battle of Kadesh the battle that had the largest chariots involved?
I like that you don't count the French Republic as the same as the Kingdom of France.
Far too many forget how different countries become under different regimes.
Why did you use the aramean flag for the hittites?
What about portugal and britain?
No offense, but, why didn't you include anything outside of the European sphere? I'm no historian, but it is quite surprising that there were no perpetual peace treaties between other powers in other continents. Still an excellent video!
There technically were wars opposing the partitions of Poland, notably, Kosciuszko Uprising, when Kosciuszko and his rebels rebeled against Russia and Prussia during second Partition. The conflict begun with Kosciuszko committing coup d'etate and declaring himself leader of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. As such, if recognising Kosciuszko's goverment as proper Polish Lithuanian government, it could be argued that the treaty was broken. Also, even if not accounting for that, all Partition were done by military crossing the borders and proclaiming the annexation. It was still invasion, Polish government simply didn't fight back. So, I would argued it still broke the treaty.
Hi
I have a idea from somewhere. What if William Afton was elected president of the United States?
The Entente Cordiale does not really count in my book, but only because it became a perpetual alliance.
didnt the treaty that ended the War of 1812 say that USA and Britain would have eternal friendship? they havent fought since
I thought maurice and khosrow II signed a perpetual peace that ended in 602 during the byzantine sassanian war that destroyed both empires?
Regarding Poland... I'd say the treaty worked. War happens when politics broke down and the war was avoided. Violence was done to the state and people of Poland, but the polish people still exist.
Only because they exist ist does not mean that it has worked.
It*
Giving the policy of cultural Russification imposed by the Russian Empire on Poland after the Partitions, which was a consious attmept of the Tsars at marginalizing, persecuting and ideally elliminating Polish language, culture, identity and the Catholic faith, the fact that Polish People still exist is not a result of a successful Treaty of Perpetual Peace. Rather it's the result of Polish ressistance and result of the failure of Russian anti-Polish policies enforced after they broke the Treaty (there actually was a Polish-Russian war in 1792).
@@Radonatorr yeah, it's impossible to know how things would have gone if Poland refused to go down without a fight. The partition of Poland is what happens when the leaders of the country have no interest in protecting their own people. Petty lords who would rather work for themselves. The same sort of things we see today. Leaders need to be accountable
@@BiggestCorvid That's quite simplistic point of view. The corruption among the szlachta nobility, breakdown of the political system and long decline of the state were for sure main reasons for the fall of PLC. But the last king of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Stanisław II August, did actively try to improve the situation in the country in the aftermath of the 1st Partition. He worked hard to reform and strenghten the state. He was the main brain behind the Commission of National Education, the first such institution in the world as well as the Constitution of the 3rd May which was the first constitution in Europe and second one in the world. There were quite a few notable leaders in the Polish political, cultural and military sectors that supported his attempts. And exactly the fact that there were people in Poland trying with success to make things better was a threat to Russia, Prussia and Austria which made them invade and conduct the remaining 2 Partitions. The official reason why Russians invaded Poland in 1792 was to abolish the new Polish constitution and political system. So paradoxically the reason for Poland's death was Poland's attempts to reform and save itself.
I want to learn more about these mysterious sea-raiders
No one knows about them lol
Thank you
Yo this is absolutely silly but what if Napoleon was American, prussian, british or Russian either one really it would be interesting to see how his approach to war would be with these different circumstances
Damn, so sign ab eternal peace deal with France, it has a really high success rate
What if Islamic Renaissance/ golden age continued??
9:52 why don’t you do this anymore?💀💀
Congress of Vienna?????
What if queen Victoria was alive in ww1? Would she had prevented WW1?
Humanity: Okay, with this we shall have peace.
Also Humanity: Let’s throw down
Scotland and England did go to war even after the two kingdoms had been dynastically united by the Stuarts, during the English civil war.
Idea: What if by some miracle, the Byzantine under Heraclius manage to beat back the Muslim invasion ?
What if Sweden won the great northern War.
Isnt every peace treaty a perpetual peace treaty? If it had a deadline, we'd a call it a truce or a ceasefire
what if the greek plan worked
Within 13,600 views!
What if Elagabalus was able to convert the whole Roman empire to his cult
A
There was a treaty of perpetual peace between Henry VIII and Francis I of France that failed.
Within 9 hours!
12:21
Sovereign Kosovo
Turkish north cyprus
Russian Crimea
At least we cant see Israel / Palestine lol
Does NATO count?
If Byzantium won against the ottomans and/or seljuks
Hey just fyi its switZerland
No Ottoman Polish?
👍
United States - United Kingdom (You missed it)
1812?
@@johnpyefinch3454 yep
Ummm... I hate to spoil your enthusiasm about the russo-polish treaty but what about the polish-russian war of 1792?
Yes, but how do I build my modern right wing world view around these selective events?
no cultural war points to be earned here sadly :(
What if the Von Habsburgs were Protestant?
Possible History
How will you think the vietnam war would have play out it the U.S was communists?
would the U.S still join the war but helping north vietnam instead?
if so will the war last just 1 year or will it lasted 10 year like in our timeline?
would The British and the French support south vietnam in this scenario and possibly even send they troop to south vietnam?