What If? ROB lets you sic a terminator on a historic figure of your choice

[Bassoe]

ROB shows up and offers to send a Cyberdyne Systems Series 800 Terminator after a historic figure of your choice. You can choose whether it'll be programmed to kill or bodyguard its target and the year and location it'll arrive in and it'll speak the local language (although inevitably with an austrian accent).

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Woodrow Wilson just before he starts writing his nostalgic B.S. as related to the Confederacy

 

[Culsu]

Kill Wilhelm II.

 

[Buba]

Kill - Karl Marx
Protect - Przemysł, King of Poland

 

[Winston Bush]

Kill-Lenin in 1920 for shits and giggles.

 

[Hlaalu Agent]

William the Bastard. Fair England will then never be subjected to the Norman yoke.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

Bodyguard, myself, when I turn 18.

I mean it is a futuristic sci-fi robot with lots of advanced capabilities. Lots to be gained from controlling that.

Killing people who had a major impact on history just throws everything into disarray in massively unpredictable ways. Like what happens if you assassinate Hitler, and if so at what time? Europe was ripe for another war but Hitler wasn't some figurehead.

Or what happens to China if Mao is killed before he gets going? Russia if Lenin doesn't survive his train ride back home? Or Stalin getting a lead injection at, say, the height of WW2? I mean offing Stalin at a critical moment so that the Eastern Front of WW2 becomes even more of a quagmire for both sides could easily end up derailing the Cold War.

Or go back to WW1? What happens if a certain Arch Duke isn't killed?

Hmm, assassinating Oliver Cromwell at the right time could cause its own interesting butterflies.

And this is without getting into the BIG changes. I mean without Muhammed there is no Islam, which would have a huge impact on history. Or what if Paul the Apostle died before his pilgrimage of teaching Christianity?

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Hm... I'd have a terminator bodyguard either King Louis XVI or Nicholas II of Russia, or kill FDR or Lincoln before either got elected.

Bodyguarding Nicholas II prevents the complete communist takeover of Russia (best case scenario the communists are crushed, worst case Russia splits into two), saving hundreds of millions of people from being killed by communism. Cold War is averted (if Russia splits into two then the communist bloc won't be anywhere near as powerful as OTL's Soviet Union, minimizing their influence). Russia and the Allies will more closely coordinate against the Nazis, bringing a quicker end to WW2 and a more peaceful post-war period. Overall a happier timeline.

Bodyguarding King Louis XVI gives France a better chance of not becoming a crazy totalitarian empire and saves tens of millions of people. Also diminishes the chance of communism happening which can have huge butterfly effects.

Killing FDR before he gets elected means that FDR doesn't get a chance to provoke a war with Japan over greed. However, by this point Japan has still been pretty much taken over by a cabal of war cultists and they're going to cause a lot of headache in the Far East, so an earlier change in the timeline may be necessary.

Killing Lincoln before he gets elected means that there is hope for a President to be elected who will resolve the national crisis more peacefully. If he does what the British did and promises to buy out the South's slaves so that Southern landholders don't just straight up lose their wealth and get a chance to transition to other sources of income, then the Civil War will be averted. Granted, there will be a few "yes really" racist shitbags who will want to retain their slaves, but I'd imagine that the vast majority of the slave holders would rather accept a fat sack of cash rather than try to wage war, and without the support of that majority, the minority of racist shitbags will have little choice but to go along with it as well. With no Civil War, the US is unlikely to become an Imperialistic Empire and start going into a conquest spree like they did in OTL. The US won't vassalize Japan and teach it Imperialism, saving a lot of headache later on.

So for me it's between killing Lincoln or bodyguarding Nicholas.

Killing people who had a major impact on history just throws everything into disarray in massively unpredictable ways. Like what happens if you assassinate Hitler, and if so at what time? Europe was ripe for another war but Hitler wasn't some figurehead.

Hitler was a problem yes but he was a symptom of a great problem, one that could have been avoided if WW1 had not happened and Germany wasn't wrecked. Bodyguarding the Archduke could possibly prevent disaster, but there is a good chance everyone would be fighting each other anyway because everyone was allied with each other, and it just takes one incident for everyone to be suddenly at war with each other.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

Hitler was a problem yes but he was a symptom of a great problem, one that could have been avoided if WW1 had not happened and Germany wasn't wrecked. Bodyguarding the Archduke could possibly prevent disaster, but there is a good chance everyone would be fighting each other anyway because everyone was allied with each other, and it just takes one incident for everyone to be suddenly at war with each other.

Except that all assumes that the wars and deaths in question aren't actually a net benefit for humanity.

And in the case of Hitler, the circumstances that allowed his rise to power were largely independent of his control but his success is in large part down to his own charisma and ability. Remove Hitler at the right time and you very likely do prevent (or at least drastically alter) WW2 and everything associated with it.

Without WW2, the European empires survive (especially the British Empire), there is no Warsaw pact and the USSR remains much less influential, the entire US economic and political system is altered fairly drastically, and technology is changed substantially.

WW1 in many respects only makes that all worse. I mean if WW1 is prevented at that time, it is still liable to happen sometime before 1940. Too many factors contributing to a major European war.

 

[History Learner]

Assassinate Nicholas Trist in late 1847, thereby ensuring the annexation of Mexico by the United States in 1848. Probably derails the chain of events leading to the Civil War and creates an interesting nation going forward, with a radically different culture and progression tract. Protect is harder to pick, although I would say Archduke Franz Ferdinand is a strong contender. There would be no World War I but rather a serious of regional conflicts and revolts, creating a radically different history to what we know; it is not going to be all sunshine and rainbows here.

 

[DarthOne]

Kill Wilhelm II.

And why does Kaiser Wilhelm II deserve killing? Please don’t tell me you believe the whole ‘he caused WW1’ nonsense.

 

[Captain X]

I wonder if killing Marx before he could publish his manifesto really would prevent the rise of communism.

 

[aguy1013]

Bodyguard, myself, when I turn 18.

I mean it is a futuristic sci-fi robot with lots of advanced capabilities. Lots to be gained from controlling that.

Killing people who had a major impact on history just throws everything into disarray in massively unpredictable ways. Like what happens if you assassinate Hitler, and if so at what time? Europe was ripe for another war but Hitler wasn't some figurehead.

Or what happens to China if Mao is killed before he gets going? Russia if Lenin doesn't survive his train ride back home? Or Stalin getting a lead injection at, say, the height of WW2? I mean offing Stalin at a critical moment so that the Eastern Front of WW2 becomes even more of a quagmire for both sides could easily end up derailing the Cold War.

Or go back to WW1? What happens if a certain Arch Duke isn't killed?

Hmm, assassinating Oliver Cromwell at the right time could cause its own interesting butterflies.

And this is without getting into the BIG changes. I mean without Muhammed there is no Islam, which would have a huge impact on history. Or what if Paul the Apostle died before his pilgrimage of teaching Christianity?

nice idea and if the bot has an attractive skin suit you can have a lot fun and stuff, plus you will have a buddy with you all the time and i agree killing people or saving people will cause too much butterflies that you might poof oneself to non-existence

 

[Buba]

I wonder if killing Marx before he could publish his manifesto really would prevent the rise of communism.

It is true that somebody else could put together some sort of leftard mumbo-jumbo which would gain a cult following and the implementing of which will lead to poverty and corruption at best and genocide at worst.
But there are a lot of maybe's in the above ...

And why does Kaiser Wilhelm II deserve killing? Please don’t tell me you believe the whole ‘he caused WW1’ nonsense.

Hear, hear!

Bodyguard, myself, when I turn 18.

Very good idea!
But you should "hire" it as a bodyguard from the crib!

 

[ATP]

And why does Kaiser Wilhelm II deserve killing? Please don’t tell me you believe the whole ‘he caused WW1’ nonsense.

He also caused WW1.France,Russia and England were as much quilty,so killing one person in Germany would stop nothing.
You must kill leaders and most of generals in all 4 countries.
But killing Marx... Proudhone have smarter ideas,if Marx do not opposed him maybe we would have something like socialists without genocide.Economy would still be fucked,but less people would die.

 

[Culsu]

Willi was simply a man way out of his depth for his position. Someone else most likely wouldn't have thrown the kitchen sink at Britain with the unnecessary HSF rivalry, and would have had the sense and backbone to stand up to Moltke. He's far from being the sole reason for WW1, but by and large he's responsible for Germany's trajectory leading up to it.

 

[DarthOne]

Willi was simply a man way out of his depth for his position. Someone else most likely wouldn't have thrown the kitchen sink at Britain with the unnecessary HSF rivalry, and would have had the sense and backbone to stand up to Moltke. He's far from being the sole reason for WW1, but by and large he's responsible for Germany's trajectory leading up to it.

Oh please. The English would have started a rivalry with the Germans one way or another. Imperial Germany was a rising power in the region and the British didn’t want their carefully balanced apple cart of power to get jostled.

 

[Buba]

The Anglo-German naval rivalry was overblown by the RN to get more funding.

 

[ATP]

Oh please. The English would have started a rivalry with the Germans one way or another. Imperial Germany was a rising power in the region and the British didn’t want their carefully balanced apple cart of power to get jostled.

Well,no rising power was Russia after they reformed economy.That is why Wall Street send Trocky&thugs there - to destroy competition.
Germans saw it,too - so they wonted war before 1916,becouse after that Russia would be too strong.

But if germans do not provoke England with naval built,they would let both sides bleed each other,not join France.

 

[DarthOne]

Well,no rising power was Russia after they reformed economy.That is why Wall Street send Trocky&thugs there - to destroy competition.
Germans saw it,too - so they wonted war before 1916,becouse after that Russia would be too strong.

But if germans do not provoke England with naval built,they would let both sides bleed each other,not join France.

Even in Russia's case, it would have taken a least a decade, instead of decades as we saw with OTL thanks to Communist stupidity and the Russian Civil War.

As for Britain staying out of the war, there's a fair chance they would have if Germany hadn't violated Belgium's neutrality*. The British public didn't have the will or interest without a provocation to stir them up. They were far more preoccupied with Ireland- which could easily have created all sorts of butterflies if that doesn't get handled well and creates the Troubles several Decades early.

At the very least, Germany would have had a year or two without a British blockade strangling their economy. Not to mention their fleets would not have been couped up in harbour and would have been free to operate against the French at sea. Italy likewise wouldn't have backed out of the Central Powers with England on the sidelines.

*Belgium's neutrality was a complete and utter joke, as she had stores of British war material and allowed French troops into her borders four days before Germany mobilized.