The army fought for the independence of the country under the command of Atatürk, if I'm not mistaken there was no idea of a republic and republic was not a fashion at the time in the country. When the new government declared the republic what kind of reaction came from the army and did somebody in the military want to coup the government to preserve the old structure?

Title. Alot of people actually believe in this, many documentaries cover this but IMO it's just for entertainment purposes. If it is actually true why wouldn't the CIA hunt them down ? Considering Argentina was at war with the Reich why would they go there ? Why not Spain that was friendly towards them ?

Given how effective a shield is at providing defence in hand to hand combat, was there ever instances of soldiers using them when they inevitable went face to face with the enemy?

If you look at the crop before it’s addictive or harmful affects where an issue, where is there a while organization dedicated to its regulation but there’s no bureau of açaí tomatoes and figs

I have tried to get his Pow records from the Government of Canada without any luck. Is there anywhere I can access to get his military records or any further information?

Some of my closest friends are Koreans, and I have always taken information about Japanese from Koreans with a grain of salt and vice versa. Many of my Korean friends have claimed that at some point in the history of Japan, rape was either legally or socially permissible or even encouraged at some point in Japanese history, and that even the Emperor at that time did not care about any punishment for rapists and encouraged rape.

This seems absolutely ridiculous, but I kid you not that they claimed that a woman could simply go to the barn/outhouse and men would come and rape them and they had to simply take it without any sort of retribution from either the law or society. I thought they were talking about ancient times or something, but it was something like within the past 300 years (forgot exactly which era or Emperor it was at the time). They also claimed that it was suggested for women to wear the kimono, because it is a garment that's front is easy to open and rape women. One of them even claimed that the kimono was invented for the sole purpose that it is easier to rape women in.

It sounded ridiculous to me, but my Korean friends as well as their acquaintances were treating it like common knowledge. Due to some reasons, I have extremely strong views against rape (more so than the average sane person, I guess), so it was an uncomfortable topic to discuss and research, but I really ended up with nothing substantial about it from the internet. But since it's bugging me right now, I thought I'd ask here.

Gavrilo Princip, the man who actually killed Ferdinand, died while WWI was still ongoing. But many lived for decades afterward. Vaso Čubrilović lived until 1990. Cvjetko Popović lived until 1984. Did any of them ever say "Maybe we went too far" or something like that?

I remember seeing a series of Victorian-era illustrations about what they thought the future might look like. There was a picture of children with early diving suits playing croquet underwater, a whale with an ornate trolley attached, and a flying battleship held up by a balloon, among others. In the 50s there came Raypunk art, full of visualizations of atomic energy being used in every day life. My question is, is there any evidence our ancient predecessors did the same?

The source was possibly biased, but they quoted Britannica, suggesting there was indeed no technological progress in the Middle ages, apart from stirrups. I do not have a Britannica subscription, so I can not confirm this.

So, as a general question, has there been a turn away from brightening up the "dark ages" into darkening them back?

And on a related note, what contemporary (past decade) historians would you recommend reading on Medieval technology?

(also pardon bad grammar in the main title, it's pretty late)

I’d like to learn more about places like Yunnan and Guizhou in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. I’d be interested in any book recommendations on the region’s history, especially the ethnic minorities in that area and Yunnan’s contacts with Southeast Asia. I’d also be interested in any books about the KMT troops from Yunnan who fled to Burma after the Chinese Civil War.

I'm vaguely aware that most infantry in the medieval period were peasant levies (if this isn't true, of course, let me know as well.) But how exactly would a medieval lord recruit peasants to fight in a war that might not affect them directly? Was recruitment for war ever a cause of unrest among the peasantry?

My first post here, I hope I've asked this question clear enough. I've read about several attempts made by the Byzantine Palaiologans to persuade western nations to help them against the Ottomans. State visits with gifts were meant to get support, and this was usually aimed at either Venice, Genoa, or the pope. Were western countries, or Europe in that case, the only hope for the emperors to escape downfall? Which countries or people could have helped them out? Did they try to request support from the Mamluks or other Islamic countries, or was that out of the question?

Often when someone says that phones are disrupting our lives negatively, some respond that the same thing was said about books. Is that true? Did people ever discourage others from reading?

To be quite honest....this question is just a general excuse to ask about the Gokturks in general. They play such a massive part of history but it seems like it is under reported?

Compared to Atilla the Hun and Gengis Kahn it feels like Bumen and Istami should be right up there with the greatest steppe conquerors of all time. Even the Xiongnu seem to get more attention.

There seems to be a lot of focus on the Ottomans and Seljuk Turks but not much regarding the original founding Gokturks, is there a reason for this? My assumption is that the sources are lacking quite a bit and that is why.

I've also heard that the Persians and Chinese did not view the Turks as Barbarians as they did all other nomads. Is this true? And if so why did were they considered different?

I'm also curious on the timeline of how they conquered the Western Steppe....there doesn't seem to be much on the battles or how it exactly happened.

Why didn't the allies intervene in Spain after the Nazis were defeated?

How was Francoist Spain, which only came to be because of Germany and Italy in the first place, able to sustain itself, presumably have trade and diplomatic relations with other counties in Europe, after the world had, almost unilaterally, decided how dangerous fascism was?

And was Franco "tolerated" by the West in order to prevent the spread of communism on the Iberian peninsula?

Did he try to distance himself from other fascist regimes in order to appear more "moderate"? I hear he is often considered a "semi-fascist", did that play into it as well?

EDIT: Thank you guys for the awards as well as the many fantastic answers!