This among one of the worse alt hist takes or even history takes in general reminds me a lot of Jonh green joke WW1 would not have happens has the mongols kept control of Russia yeah it's correct but it answers nothing
Because as I will mention later yeah the war would have occured had they not reconquered those territories but even if we ignore the territory that territory Manuel wanted made sense it ignores war was going still likely going to occur
Putting aside the matter of Géza II, if Manuel doesn't aid the pretenders and doesn't take over the previously mentioned lands, then Stephen III simply doesn't have any real reason to fight him. Ofcourse, some conflict could still erupt in Serbia that could potentially get the Hungarians involved, but that's not garantueed. Not to mention, a quick war over Serbia would still very likely be much less demanding in terms of finances, manpower and time, compared to what went down IOTL. All of those things could potentially get better utilised elsewhere.
This isn't entirely true I mean yes during bela rule peace but bela soon began to expand to the Balkans first taking Bosnia and then split to say tensions didn't exist when bela was taking over the byzantine sphere of influence
Bosnia as Byzantine sphere of influence? They could barely keep Serbia Proper in their sphere, Bosnia was far too removed for any real concern or tension to develop over its conquest.
To go back to spend his energy elsewhere I think this criticism of Manuel makes no sense for even let's say he never annexed Hungarian territory and conquered the Turks earlier why do people assume the empire survives?
It doesn't 100% garantuees its survival, but it greatly increases its chances. The Hungarian matters by themselves don't really matter that much, but if more of Anatolia is reclaimed, then that gives that much more buffer in front of the empire's other lands and core areas. Not to mention it also weakens the remaining external threat, which gives more wiggle room to survive and deal with internal problems.
the events that brought down the regency of Maria of Antioch and rise of Andronikos I had little to with Anatolia or Hungary.
That's not entirely correct. After the death of Manuel, the Hungarians and the Seljuqs attacked Byzantium from two sides almost simultaneously. The defeats and losses suffered from these attacks greatly contributed to the unpopularity an shaky position of the regency. In a scenario inwhich Hungary is not hostile and the Turks are not strong enough to really challenge Byzantine positions in Anatolia, then Andronikus can't really capitalise on the discontent aimed against the regency as much as he IOTL did. His rebellion (if it occurs) could quite easily come to a premature end.
This among one of the worse alt hist takes or even history takes in general reminds me a lot of Jonh green joke WW1 would not have happens has the mongols kept control of Russia yeah it's correct but it answers nothing
Except what I was talking about were events that had a direct and consequent cause and effect relation to each other, while your analogy uses events that are centuries removed from each other. Don't be hostile.