Well there are lot of problems with what you write.
Firstly the Greek empire of Alexander and the successor states as described in Daniel fit the legs best. Daniel only indirectly mentions Rome at all.
A better interpretation would make the Medes the arms and the Persians the body.
Another problem is that historically the Medes were conquered by the Persians and then the Persians conquered Babylon. SO Isaiah's prophecy failed and Daniel is incorrect on history that Daniel supposely witnessed.
And here we reach th biggest problem with Daniel as prophecy. The mainstream view of Biblical scholarship is that Daniel was written during the reign of Antiocus Epiphanes and so the accurate "prophecies" were written AFTER the events.
There is more, but that will do for now.