Alternate History Thread(CLOSED)

[Exalted Inquellian State]

Guys, the weebs passed us!

[Rojava Free State]

What if in an alternate reality, Black Sabbath never formed?

[Celritannia]

What if in an alternate reality, Black Sabbath never formed?

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH, HERETIC!

[Rojava Free State]

What if in an alternate reality, Black Sabbath never formed?

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH, HERETIC!

No stoner rock. In this universe, people often say "it feels like we're missing something" when they smoke weed.

[Exalted Inquellian State]

EVERYONE, THE WEEBS HAVE US OUTNUMBERED! WE ONLY HAVE ONE CHOICE! ALL THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR ALL THE OTHER PROPOSALS! VOTE FOR ALEXANDER IF YOU WANT A SANE DISCUSSION!!!

[Exalted Inquellian State]

Alright, since nothings happening, I guess I'll propose a TL.

What if the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed in December 1917?

[MGTOWia]

What if this thread was never made?

What if we could stop asking, "What if?".

Think about it.

[Giovenith]

Guys, the weebs passed us!

EVERYONE, THE WEEBS HAVE US OUTNUMBERED! WE ONLY HAVE ONE CHOICE! ALL THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR ALL THE OTHER PROPOSALS! VOTE FOR ALEXANDER IF YOU WANT A SANE DISCUSSION!!!

Chill out, please. You can advocate for a choice without the borderline spam and baiting.

[Exalted Inquellian State]

Guys, the weebs passed us!

EVERYONE, THE WEEBS HAVE US OUTNUMBERED! WE ONLY HAVE ONE CHOICE! ALL THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR ALL THE OTHER PROPOSALS! VOTE FOR ALEXANDER IF YOU WANT A SANE DISCUSSION!!!

Chill out, please. You can advocate for a choice without the borderline spam and baiting.

Alright, deal. No more spam.

[Auslus]

Well, not many people are discussing the original topic brought up by OP. Here's my view of what would happen. In the prelude to the War of the Spanish Succession, the whole aim of the British was to avoid the coming war. The premise of the war over the Spanish throne was really a matter of Bourbon-Habsburg rivalry. The Treaty of London (which sought to settle the matter of the Spanish throne through diplomatic means) meant giving part of Spain's European possessions to France, which the Habsburgs would not tolerate. As a result, the treaty was basically null, and when Charles II died, Louis XIV had a choice: to follow the Treaty of London, or follow Charles' will, which would result in a Bourbon (Philip of Anjou) promoted to the Spanish throne. Either way, the Habsburg would go to war with France. The English/British really only come in with the way Louis XIV prepared for war. When the French put their own troops in the Spanish Netherlands, the British felt that the French were threatening their trade. So really, the British vs. French part of the war was only about trade, and maybe a little bit about securing Protestant succession to the English throne. So what would happen is the British and their allies completely won the war? Well, I don't suppose the British would have done much. They pretty much won a total victory of France. The British won domination of the seas and control of maritime trade. In alternate history, they would have won Queen Anne's War, taking French colonies in North America. They would also likely take control of part of the barrier fortresses in the Spanish Netherlands to protect trade in the area. However, the second part of the question really changes history. If Britain's allies (the Dutch and Austria/HRE) dominated the war, then Europe would see a new rivalry, much larger: a once more combined Spain and Holy Roman Empire like that of Charles V. And here we have an issue. The Habsburgs and the Austrians wanted a Habsburg on the throne of an undivided Spain. The Dutch and the British were fighting against the French so neither a Habsburg nor a Bourbon could rule an undivided Spain. So regarding the original question, I shall assume each party gets their primary motive: Britain consolidates its trade, the Dutch strengthen their southern border and trade with the Spanish Empire, and the Habsburgs get one of their own on the Spanish throne. What happens next? Likely another war right after. The Habsburgs will immediately want to unite the HRE, Austria, and Spain. The British and Dutch will clearly try to prevent this from happening. The Habsburg victory will also allow them to consolidate their power in the HRE, and might allow them to reverse the effects of the Peace of Westphalia. A weakened France was nothing to gain, but everything to lose. The revolution of 1789 will probably happen earlier as the weakness of the Bourbon monarchy is exposed quicker, and France's loss of control over trade sends the control further down the economic drain. European politics will likely be dominated by an Anglo-Dutch alliance vs. a new continental empire.

[Imperial Majapahit]

Oh my, this might probably be an NSG thread I never knew I needed. I've loved reading alternate history scenarios online or on GooTube (AlternateHistoryHub and similar channels). I've also tried making my own scenarios, but I never really take them too seriously.

This nation, in fact, is entirely set on an alternate timeline (like so many others here on NS) where Majapahit did not collapse in the 16th century like it did in OTL. I've done just a fraction of its overall history, which you can check out on my history factbook, but I haven't gotten around to finishing it yet. Maybe someday.

[Exalted Inquellian State]

Well, not many people are discussing the original topic brought up by OP. Here's my view of what would happen. In the prelude to the War of the Spanish Succession, the whole aim of the British was to avoid the coming war. The premise of the war over the Spanish throne was really a matter of Bourbon-Habsburg rivalry. The Treaty of London (which sought to settle the matter of the Spanish throne through diplomatic means) meant giving part of Spain's European possessions to France, which the Habsburgs would not tolerate. As a result, the treaty was basically null, and when Charles II died, Louis XIV had a choice: to follow the Treaty of London, or follow Charles' will, which would result in a Bourbon (Philip of Anjou) promoted to the Spanish throne. Either way, the Habsburg would go to war with France. The English/British really only come in with the way Louis XIV prepared for war. When the French put their own troops in the Spanish Netherlands, the British felt that the French were threatening their trade. So really, the British vs. French part of the war was only about trade, and maybe a little bit about securing Protestant succession to the English throne. So what would happen is the British and their allies completely won the war? Well, I don't suppose the British would have done much. They pretty much won a total victory of France. The British won domination of the seas and control of maritime trade. In alternate history, they would have won Queen Anne's War, taking French colonies in North America. They would also likely take control of part of the barrier fortresses in the Spanish Netherlands to protect trade in the area. However, the second part of the question really changes history. If Britain's allies (the Dutch and Austria/HRE) dominated the war, then Europe would see a new rivalry, much larger: a once more combined Spain and Holy Roman Empire like that of Charles V. And here we have an issue. The Habsburgs and the Austrians wanted a Habsburg on the throne of an undivided Spain. The Dutch and the British were fighting against the French so neither a Habsburg nor a Bourbon could rule an undivided Spain. So regarding the original question, I shall assume each party gets their primary motive: Britain consolidates its trade, the Dutch strengthen their southern border and trade with the Spanish Empire, and the Habsburgs get one of their own on the Spanish throne. What happens next? Likely another war right after. The Habsburgs will immediately want to unite the HRE, Austria, and Spain. The British and Dutch will clearly try to prevent this from happening. The Habsburg victory will also allow them to consolidate their power in the HRE, and might allow them to reverse the effects of the Peace of Westphalia. A weakened France was nothing to gain, but everything to lose. The revolution of 1789 will probably happen earlier as the weakness of the Bourbon monarchy is exposed quicker, and France's loss of control over trade sends the control further down the economic drain. European politics will likely be dominated by an Anglo-Dutch alliance vs. a new continental empire.

Thank you for responding. I believe this actually comes very close to what would happen(though to be honest I expected the Spanish colonies to be carved up.) Anyway, so the French revolution happens and overthrows the aging Louis XIV. Does France become a republic or a semi-constitutional monarchy? Also, how would the Anglo-Dutch alliance and the HRE react?

To be honest, this sounds like a 19th century cold war. An alliance wins the war, but then starts arguing after the pace.

[Kargintina the Third]

What if FDR was killed during the assassination attempt in 1933?

[Auslus]

Well, not many people are discussing the original topic brought up by OP. Here's my view of what would happen. In the prelude to the War of the Spanish Succession, the whole aim of the British was to avoid the coming war. The premise of the war over the Spanish throne was really a matter of Bourbon-Habsburg rivalry. The Treaty of London (which sought to settle the matter of the Spanish throne through diplomatic means) meant giving part of Spain's European possessions to France, which the Habsburgs would not tolerate. As a result, the treaty was basically null, and when Charles II died, Louis XIV had a choice: to follow the Treaty of London, or follow Charles' will, which would result in a Bourbon (Philip of Anjou) promoted to the Spanish throne. Either way, the Habsburg would go to war with France. The English/British really only come in with the way Louis XIV prepared for war. When the French put their own troops in the Spanish Netherlands, the British felt that the French were threatening their trade. So really, the British vs. French part of the war was only about trade, and maybe a little bit about securing Protestant succession to the English throne. So what would happen is the British and their allies completely won the war? Well, I don't suppose the British would have done much. They pretty much won a total victory of France. The British won domination of the seas and control of maritime trade. In alternate history, they would have won Queen Anne's War, taking French colonies in North America. They would also likely take control of part of the barrier fortresses in the Spanish Netherlands to protect trade in the area. However, the second part of the question really changes history. If Britain's allies (the Dutch and Austria/HRE) dominated the war, then Europe would see a new rivalry, much larger: a once more combined Spain and Holy Roman Empire like that of Charles V. And here we have an issue. The Habsburgs and the Austrians wanted a Habsburg on the throne of an undivided Spain. The Dutch and the British were fighting against the French so neither a Habsburg nor a Bourbon could rule an undivided Spain. So regarding the original question, I shall assume each party gets their primary motive: Britain consolidates its trade, the Dutch strengthen their southern border and trade with the Spanish Empire, and the Habsburgs get one of their own on the Spanish throne. What happens next? Likely another war right after. The Habsburgs will immediately want to unite the HRE, Austria, and Spain. The British and Dutch will clearly try to prevent this from happening. The Habsburg victory will also allow them to consolidate their power in the HRE, and might allow them to reverse the effects of the Peace of Westphalia. A weakened France was nothing to gain, but everything to lose. The revolution of 1789 will probably happen earlier as the weakness of the Bourbon monarchy is exposed quicker, and France's loss of control over trade sends the control further down the economic drain. European politics will likely be dominated by an Anglo-Dutch alliance vs. a new continental empire.

Thank you for responding. I believe this actually comes very close to what would happen(though to be honest I expected the Spanish colonies to be carved up.) Anyway, so the French revolution happens and overthrows the aging Louis XIV. Does France become a republic or a semi-constitutional monarchy? Also, how would the Anglo-Dutch alliance and the HRE react?

To be honest, this sounds like a 19th century cold war. An alliance wins the war, but then starts arguing after the pace.

What France becomes is honestly quite hard to determine. But since this is earlier in the 18th century, I assume it would either be a constitutional monarchy or a new royal family. There are two issues: one, the Bourbons will be deposed quicker than in our reality, which means that there will be less Enlightenment philosophers to make their impact on the new government. The second is that the new France is a very weak state, as it is surrounded by two age-old enemies. Because of this weakness, and the preference of philosophers towards enlightened absolutism, I believe the new France would actually be an absolute monarch with a different royal family. I feel like France's weakness and less enlightenment influence would make a republic and possibly even a constitutional monarchy simply unacceptable in the new political climate. The new political reality, while being a rivalry between the Anglo-Dutch and HRE, actually has all eyes on France. What France does determines the outcome of the Anglo-Dutch-HRE wars. When the new France is formed, the two things could happen. The HRE and the Anglo-Dutch could attempt to divide the nation between themselves, or they could try to use it as the other's weakness. The HRE will probably try to use its continental domination to steal land from the new French monarchy. However, the Anglo-Dutch will likely recognize that France is needed as an important ally to end HRE continental domination. So I predict that right after the new France government is formed, the Anglo-Dutch will help protect the new France from HRE aggression. However, France would not go as far as to weaken the HRE too much, knowing that if she does, it expels her opportunity to restore her former glory and ability to compete with the British. So as for western Europe, the new climate is a war between the Anglo-Dutch and the HRE, with each side lobbying for French support. The armies of a combined Franco-Anglo-Dutch alliance can challenge the HRE, while the navy of a combined Franco-HRE alliance can challenge the Anglo-Dutch navy. However, in being such a potent tool, France can craft for herself a situation in which she becomes the equal of both the HRE and the Anglo-Dutch, as neither side is willing to harm her, but neither side is willing their help their traditional enemy either. So Western Europe is essentially in a cold war, locked in stalemate. The outcome of this war depends on how France and the HRE act. I've already discussed how France might be able to benefit from the cold war if she plays her hand correctly. However, the HRE can also decide the course of the war, based on their actions in central/eastern Europe and the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch have a financial and political edge over the unstable HRE. The Ottomans will likely join the Anglo-Dutch against their old foe, allowing the Anglo-Dutch and Ottomans to trade through the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch can also use subterfuge to weaken the Empire from within. If the Emperor can reestablish his control over the German states, consolidate his power over the Ottomans, and defeat a Russia allied with the Anglo-Dutch, then the HRE will have total domination over central/eastern Europe, and he can begin his assault on western Europe. However, he could be stopped if France joins the Anglo-Dutch. So really, it's hard to discern who will win. Russia and the Ottomans will likely ally with the Anglo-Dutch. The Holy Roman Emperor must consolidate his control both in the empire and out of it. And France has an opportunity to create a Bismarckian situation in which against all odds, she comes out on top through effective foreign policy and deception.

[Farnhamia]

What if FDR was killed during the assassination attempt in 1933?

Then John Nance Garner of Texas, the Vice-president Elect would have been sworn in as president on March 4th. I doubt he would have enacted the same policies as Roosevelt. He was not universally admired, being described by one person as "a labor-baiting, poker-playing, whiskey-drinking, evil old man".

[Exalted Inquellian State]

What if FDR was killed during the assassination attempt in 1933?

I guess John Nance Graner would become president. He would have been more cautious with the new deal, and would have avoided the deficit spending, which could've either slightly improved the US economy or made it slightly worse. He would've been more restrictive on strikes, and would've objected to running three terms. His own presidency wouldn't have changed much, but the fact he wouldn't do three terms would. Eisenhower was a very popular president, and likely would've won a third term. Since he was a general, it's possible the Bay of Pigs invasion would've succeeded (Happy Florida Shores?). He would've pushed a lot for desegregation, but would've been anti-homosexual. The foreign policy would be very interventionist and he would've had great interest in Space(he founded NASA and made plans to nuke the moon(the last part I got from a video called "Something Ugly About very president In U.S. History)). He would've likely been succeeded by a conservative republican, likely William Miller.

[Auslus]

What if FDR was killed during the assassination attempt in 1933?

I guess John Nance Graner would become president. He would have been more cautious with the new deal, and would have avoided the deficit spending, which could've either slightly improved the US economy or made it slightly worse. He would've been more restrictive on strikes, and would've objected to running three terms. His own presidency wouldn't have changed much, but the fact he wouldn't do three terms would. Eisenhower was a very popular president, and likely would've won a third term. Since he was a general, it's possible the Bay of Pigs invasion would've succeeded (Happy Florida Shores?). He would've pushed a lot for desegregation, but would've been anti-homosexual. The foreign policy would be very interventionist and he would've had great interest in Space(he founded NASA and made plans to nuke the moon(the last part I got from a video called "Something Ugly About very president In U.S. History)). He would've likely been succeeded by a conservative republican, likely William Miller.

What do you think about America's involvement in WW2? I don't know much about John Nance Graner, but do you think his policies would cause the Japanese to not strike Pearl Harbor and cause America to not enter WW2?

[Rojava Free State]

What if people didn't act like fucking dipshits at Woodstock 99?

[Exalted Inquellian State]

What France becomes is honestly quite hard to determine. But since this is earlier in the 18th century, I assume it would either be a constitutional monarchy or a new royal family. There are two issues: one, the Bourbons will be deposed quicker than in our reality, which means that there will be less Enlightenment philosophers to make their impact on the new government. The second is that the new France is a very weak state, as it is surrounded by two age-old enemies. Because of this weakness, and the preference of philosophers towards enlightened absolutism, I believe the new France would actually be an absolute monarch with a different royal family. I feel like France's weakness and less enlightenment influence would make a republic and possibly even a constitutional monarchy simply unacceptable in the new political climate. The new political reality, while being a rivalry between the Anglo-Dutch and HRE, actually has all eyes on France. What France does determines the outcome of the Anglo-Dutch-HRE wars. When the new France is formed, the two things could happen. The HRE and the Anglo-Dutch could attempt to divide the nation between themselves, or they could try to use it as the other's weakness. The HRE will probably try to use its continental domination to steal land from the new French monarchy. However, the Anglo-Dutch will likely recognize that France is needed as an important ally to end HRE continental domination. So I predict that right after the new France government is formed, the Anglo-Dutch will help protect the new France from HRE aggression. However, France would not go as far as to weaken the HRE too much, knowing that if she does, it expels her opportunity to restore her former glory and ability to compete with the British. So as for western Europe, the new climate is a war between the Anglo-Dutch and the HRE, with each side lobbying for French support. The armies of a combined Franco-Anglo-Dutch alliance can challenge the HRE, while the navy of a combined Franco-HRE alliance can challenge the Anglo-Dutch navy. However, in being such a potent tool, France can craft for herself a situation in which she becomes the equal of both the HRE and the Anglo-Dutch, as neither side is willing to harm her, but neither side is willing their help their traditional enemy either. So Western Europe is essentially in a cold war, locked in stalemate. The outcome of this war depends on how France and the HRE act. I've already discussed how France might be able to benefit from the cold war if she plays her hand correctly. However, the HRE can also decide the course of the war, based on their actions in central/eastern Europe and the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch have a financial and political edge over the unstable HRE. The Ottomans will likely join the Anglo-Dutch against their old foe, allowing the Anglo-Dutch and Ottomans to trade through the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch can also use subterfuge to weaken the Empire from within. If the Emperor can reestablish his control over the German states, consolidate his power over the Ottomans, and defeat a Russia allied with the Anglo-Dutch, then the HRE will have total domination over central/eastern Europe, and he can begin his assault on western Europe. However, he could be stopped if France joins the Anglo-Dutch. So really, it's hard to discern who will win. Russia and the Ottomans will likely ally with the Anglo-Dutch. The Holy Roman Emperor must consolidate his control both in the empire and out of it. And France has an opportunity to create a Bismarckian situation in which against all odds, she comes out on top through effective foreign policy and deception.

Interesting. I think the HRE would be extremely benefited from the American Markets, so this cold war would likely last until about when the Seven Years war would happen. Also, i think at the beginning when France would get a new dynasty (probably some general) it would have a very weak parliament, but over the centuries it would grow in power to about the situation in Imperial Germany. Regarding the hRE, it would also be very close to Rome, so I can the Holy Roman Emperor convincing *cough**cough*Bribery*cough**Cough* the pope to give up his lands and crown him Western Roman Emperor.

Also, what would happen to the German States between 1707 and 176? Would they remain more or less there or be slowly mediated into the Habsburg Monarchy?

[Atheris]

I guess John Nance Graner would become president. He would have been more cautious with the new deal, and would have avoided the deficit spending, which could've either slightly improved the US economy or made it slightly worse. He would've been more restrictive on strikes, and would've objected to running three terms. His own presidency wouldn't have changed much, but the fact he wouldn't do three terms would. Eisenhower was a very popular president, and likely would've won a third term. Since he was a general, it's possible the Bay of Pigs invasion would've succeeded (Happy Florida Shores?). He would've pushed a lot for desegregation, but would've been anti-homosexual. The foreign policy would be very interventionist and he would've had great interest in Space(he founded NASA and made plans to nuke the moon(the last part I got from a video called "Something Ugly About very president In U.S. History)). He would've likely been succeeded by a conservative republican, likely William Miller.

What do you think about America's involvement in WW2? I don't know much about John Nance Graner, but do you think his policies would cause the Japanese to not strike Pearl Harbor and cause America to not enter WW2?

Not EIS, but I'll answer this:

No.

Japan striking Pearl Harbor was an inevitability. Japan looked to expand their interests in the Pacific, and the United States was a direct obstacle to achieving that goal. No matter who's president, Japan will still strike Pearl Harbor.

[Exalted Inquellian State]

What do you think about America's involvement in WW2? I don't know much about John Nance Graner, but do you think his policies would cause the Japanese to not strike Pearl Harbor and cause America to not enter WW2?

Not EIS, but I'll answer this:

No.

Japan striking Pearl Harbor was an inevitability. Japan looked to expand their interests in the Pacific, and the United States was a direct obstacle to achieving that goal. No matter who's president, Japan will still strike Pearl Harbor.

You're probably right. The only way Pearl Harbor wouldn't happen is if America willingly gave it's pacific Islands to Japan.

Edit: Actually, he wouldn't even be President. The attack happened in December, but he would stop being president in March, the old inaguration date.

Also, since we're on the topic of giving Hawaii to Japan, I think it would be nice for historical roleplay writers if we discussed the plausibility of our roleplays.

[Auslus]

What France becomes is honestly quite hard to determine. But since this is earlier in the 18th century, I assume it would either be a constitutional monarchy or a new royal family. There are two issues: one, the Bourbons will be deposed quicker than in our reality, which means that there will be less Enlightenment philosophers to make their impact on the new government. The second is that the new France is a very weak state, as it is surrounded by two age-old enemies. Because of this weakness, and the preference of philosophers towards enlightened absolutism, I believe the new France would actually be an absolute monarch with a different royal family. I feel like France's weakness and less enlightenment influence would make a republic and possibly even a constitutional monarchy simply unacceptable in the new political climate. The new political reality, while being a rivalry between the Anglo-Dutch and HRE, actually has all eyes on France. What France does determines the outcome of the Anglo-Dutch-HRE wars. When the new France is formed, the two things could happen. The HRE and the Anglo-Dutch could attempt to divide the nation between themselves, or they could try to use it as the other's weakness. The HRE will probably try to use its continental domination to steal land from the new French monarchy. However, the Anglo-Dutch will likely recognize that France is needed as an important ally to end HRE continental domination. So I predict that right after the new France government is formed, the Anglo-Dutch will help protect the new France from HRE aggression. However, France would not go as far as to weaken the HRE too much, knowing that if she does, it expels her opportunity to restore her former glory and ability to compete with the British. So as for western Europe, the new climate is a war between the Anglo-Dutch and the HRE, with each side lobbying for French support. The armies of a combined Franco-Anglo-Dutch alliance can challenge the HRE, while the navy of a combined Franco-HRE alliance can challenge the Anglo-Dutch navy. However, in being such a potent tool, France can craft for herself a situation in which she becomes the equal of both the HRE and the Anglo-Dutch, as neither side is willing to harm her, but neither side is willing their help their traditional enemy either. So Western Europe is essentially in a cold war, locked in stalemate. The outcome of this war depends on how France and the HRE act. I've already discussed how France might be able to benefit from the cold war if she plays her hand correctly. However, the HRE can also decide the course of the war, based on their actions in central/eastern Europe and the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch have a financial and political edge over the unstable HRE. The Ottomans will likely join the Anglo-Dutch against their old foe, allowing the Anglo-Dutch and Ottomans to trade through the Mediterranean. The Anglo-Dutch can also use subterfuge to weaken the Empire from within. If the Emperor can reestablish his control over the German states, consolidate his power over the Ottomans, and defeat a Russia allied with the Anglo-Dutch, then the HRE will have total domination over central/eastern Europe, and he can begin his assault on western Europe. However, he could be stopped if France joins the Anglo-Dutch. So really, it's hard to discern who will win. Russia and the Ottomans will likely ally with the Anglo-Dutch. The Holy Roman Emperor must consolidate his control both in the empire and out of it. And France has an opportunity to create a Bismarckian situation in which against all odds, she comes out on top through effective foreign policy and deception.

Interesting. I think the HRE would be extremely benefited from the American Markets, so this cold war would likely last until about when the Seven Years war would happen. Also, i think at the beginning when France would get a new dynasty (probably some general) it would have a very weak parliament, but over the centuries it would grow in power to about the situation in Imperial Germany. Regarding the hRE, it would also be very close to Rome, so I can the Holy Roman Emperor convincing *cough**cough*Bribery*cough**Cough* the pope to give up his lands and crown him Western Roman Emperor.

Also, what would happen to the German States between 1707 and 176? Would they remain more or less there or be slowly mediated into the Habsburg Monarchy?

I forgot to mention that the HRE's imperial markets in the Americas would likely be taken over by the Anglo-Dutch. By the 18th century, Spanish naval power had faded, and was superseded by British dominance in the seas. So either their colonies would be taken over by the British and Dutch, or the goods being transported by them would be stolen. I don't know if France's parliament would get stronger. Their situation just seems to require an absolute king. The HRE would most definitely control Italy and be known as the worldly sovereign of Catholicism. I don't know if the German states would seek independence or not. The Habsburg victory in this version of the Spanish Succession would definitely reinvigorate the Holy Roman Emperor, and many German states would likely swear fealty to the stronger, "reborn" empire. However, other German states would likely rebel, as the construction of a strong empire requires reversing the Treaty of Westphalia, and unless the emperor finds a way to settle the Catholic and Protestant divide peacefully, he would face a civil war. Saxony, Prussia, Bohemia, and Bavaria would be particularly troublesome states to deal with.

Edit: Actually, it's probably too late for the emperor to bring the bigger German states into imperial control. Rather, he would have to get them to swear fealty to him. Prussia, Austria, Saxony, Bohemia, Bavaria, and the other big German states would likely still run as independent states, united only by loyalty to the king of the Germans. So while the HRE and the Anglo-Dutch fight a cold war, the HRE will have its own cold war with Austria and Prussia competing for German domination.

[Rojava Free State]

What if Imperial Japan didn't bomb Pearl Harbor?

[Harmonic Empire]

What if Imperial Japan didn't bomb Pearl Harbor?

America still invade but bit later

[Exalted Inquellian State]

What if Imperial Japan didn't bomb Pearl Harbor?

If it didn't for some reason, I believe they had enough oil to last them 18 months in 1941. That means they could've been undisturbed by America in conqering China. They would have to make peace with the British, however. In the end, we would have a three way cold war between America, the USSR, and Japan.

Wait a minute... OH GOD PLEASE MODERATORS DON'T SHUT US DOWN!