Who was in the wrong here?

What if Cartaginians won the punic wars and it was rome that was destroyed instead of Carthage ?

>history
>what if
sage

If they won the first? Hard to say. Phyrrus scared the italics hard. They might just have remained confederated even without roman leadership.
If they won the second? Greeks and gauls double team the peninsula.
If they won the third? Fucking impossible, why bother.

whats wrong
im not used to this board, are "what ifs" not allowed here?

This map sounds like bullshit to me. A few town here and there does not mean control of the maghreb cost.

>not allowed
More like not tolerated.
It's not against the rules, but most people don't like it, because it's almost invariably made up of extremely unrealistic and contrived scenarios.
You'd have better luck on Veeky Forums than here.

they had a superior fleet
they could've easily won dont you think ?
is this bait

>they had a superior fleet
Fucking when?
The first time it took the romans, utter landlubbers that they were, just a few seasons before starting to completely rek the carthaginian fleet.
The second time Hannibal went through the Alps specifically because the roman fleet was considered (and proven to be through numerous attempts to reinforce H by sea) absolutely impossible to breach through.
The third time was just carnage. The war was fought exclusively in Africa and the extent of naval conflict was the carthaginians sending a few fire ships against the roman fleet in Lake Tunis (with admittedly devastating results, but hardly a proof of naval superiority).

Don't mind him, alternate history is great. If we assume that the Carthaginians won the first war, then they would have probably enforced free trade access to all of italy and war reaprations in form of money,material and slaves. Syracuse would still pay a high blood toll for the war and is going to have a part of those war reparations and get Greek land from Rome in southern Italy, most likely access to the Thyrrhenian Sea and all of the Ionian coast, to a line about 50km northwest of Tarentum. The Cartheginians wouldn't have interest in that territory and most likely wouldn't Annex something at all, maybe the Island Group around Elba, so the Romans are pinned and an attack wiould be easier spottable from that base. They and Syracuse will have interst to create some Greek buffer states, most likely Syracusian vassals or friendly minded City states, only suitable for trade and needing protection, along the coast into the mainland, probably until Neapolis. The Romans wouldn't be allowed to Station their legions to near to them and had to Keep peace for at least 5 years. The Romans would be very bitter about this and want revenge, the Carthaginianswill seek to expand trade capabilities and influence, in the Gaulish lands, Celtoitalian and Iberian and Celtoiberian lands, Hamilkar Barka, Hannibals father, had historically invaded it and he and later Hannibal would likely conquer most of Spain, except the Aquitanian lands. They would vassalise Massalia and conquer the southern Gaulish coast and try to ally Italian Gauls and take part in their politics, tribes friendly towards Carthage will be aided and culturally and economically develop way faster than the other tribes, which will be conquered by them, until we have a centralised state, very friendly towards Carthage with which it will have no disputes. Syracuse would become rich through extensive trade with Carthage, they will try to take their Chance and conquer the weakened Macedonians and other Greeks.

The Romans were extremely fortunate in that a Carthagean warship ran aground and the Romans were able to reverse engineer the design.This let them close the gap in naval power almost at once, which froze out the only advantage Carthage had. If that ship had not run aground, or if some brilliant Roman hadn't thought to reverse engineer it, the first war could have ended very differently with Carthage taking full control of Sicily.