Before leaving Sealion's plausibility, I would like to mention that much of history is ASB before it happens:
How can a group of Greek cities that have never agreed on anything resist the Persian empire?
How could anyone knowing the diameter of the Earth from Eratosthenes and the distance to China from Marco Polo be daft enough to try to sail directly from Spain to China and expect not to run out of drinking water?
But Cortes, how many to one do you expect that Aztecs outnumber you?
Do you really believe that a gang of colonists can defeat the World's greatest power and then form a stable republic?
Do you expect that the famous French army will send its most mobile reserves to The Netherlands, fail to dig defences at Sedan over more than six months, not notice that 7/10s of the German armour is moving through the Ardennes for three days (helped by the Belgian troops withdrawing out of their way) and then not send all available reserves to attack the bridgeheads over the Meuse before they are reinforced?
Do you expect that Mussolini would leave a third of his merchant ships outside the Mediterranean when he declares war and would then attack Greece instead of concentrating on the British?
Do you believe that Stalin will be paranoid enough to kill most of his own officers and will then refuse to believe intelligence reports that the Germans may attack?
Stanley Hornbeck, the Head of the State Department's Asia Desk, was offering bets that the Japanese would do nothing in late November 1941.
Do you think the President Nixon will have his words taped and not have then wiped?
While I agree in theory, I think most of your examples need some work.
The Greeks could, as the phrase goes, hang together or hang separately. Even so, some of them fought on the Persian side. The naval side of the wars was quite important, and an early example of the decisive effects of seapower on land warfare.
Columbus didn't believe the measurements. Several of (Isabella's?) advisers did, and urged her not to fund the expedition on that basis. She, like Columbus, didn't understand the math (politicians being notably bad at that in just about all time periods), and didn't care about things she didn't understand (also a common trait of politicians).
If you're referring to the (1st) American Revolution, then the colonists didn't defeat the British, except locally. The French drove off the British fleet at a key point in the war, and diverted large numbers of British troops earmarked for America.
This would be the famous French army that mutinied in WWI? That lost the Franco-Prussian War? Who's only recent victories had been against the equivalent of third-world countries? The French army was indeed LOOKED UPON AT THE TIME as powerful, but any realistic examination after the fact reveals that they had a reputation they couldn't match.
Mussolini was a moron. Such people rising to power is hardly unheard of. The results tend to rather bad for their countries.