I'm watching World War 2 week by week and am appalled by the number of times the French and the British made false promises to Finland knowing full well they either were not going to do so or pretend to by diverting most troops to Swedens Ore industry instead of Finland.

Just a general summary or an in-depth one is what I'm looking for. Very interested in his life as well as Bjorn Ironside, Ubbe and Floki

like seriously suppose I'm Livy and I've just finished my History of Rome, What do I do? ...I can't send it of to a publisher so they can run off a few thousand on their not yet invented printing press.

[deleted]

Over 20,000,000 U.S. gallons of this and similar agents were dropped in Vietnam to cause deforestation, targeting the resistance food supply and concealment. The Agent Orange has caused, in the most conservative estimate, over 400,000 deaths and 3 million suffering from illnesses or birth deformities due to its toxic composition. Although the alleged intent of the operation wasn't to cause this, it was well known at the time what the consequences would be. Dr. James R. Clary, which worked directly for the Chemical Weapons Branch, says:

When we initiated the herbicide program in the 1960s, we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxin contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the military formulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the civilian version due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However, because the material was to be used on the enemy, none of us were overly concerned.

So considering all this and looking at the likes of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Protocol, is there some reason why the use of this chemical agent wasn't considered a war crime?

[deleted]

Sorry I’m advance if this isn’t the correct place to put this or if I have broken any rules, but what the hell was going on with all the alliances and enemies in ww1? I’ll show all the ones I have problems understanding. V will signify enemies and X will signify allies.

Austria x Germany

It’s my understanding that Prussia, the biggest factor in the forming of Germany, and Austria had never been truly close allies. Prussia and Austria were previously rivals, so what caused this shift.

Austria x Ottomans

This one confuses me the most. I thought Austria’s whole thing was being the defender of Europe from the Turks. What caused the sudden shift in attitude.

Bulgaria x Ottomans

The Bulgarians were a young state, freshly liberated from the ottomans, it is strange to me that they would fight on the same side of their oppressors.

Russia V Bulgaria

On the flip side, it’s my understanding that Bulgaria was freed as a result of the Russo-Turkish war, it feels like a betrayal to immediately fight against the Russians.

Russia X France(and France x basically everyone)

How did France go from being the literal satan of Europe to buddies with Russia?

Russia x Serbia I believe i understand the Russian idea of panslavism, but why wouldn’t the same policy apply to Bulgaria. Why was Russia so protective of Serbia but not Bulgaria.

Again, sorry if this isn’t correct in anyway

So the company creative assembly just announced an expansion to their game on the three kingdoms period that will focus on the period of the 8 princes in China. I know little about this period but the expansion has gotten some backlash from Chinese fans. Why is this period controversial? Hopefully this doesn't break the 20 year time limit.

I'm researching for a screenplay, and trying to grasp what the Infante's villa/castle/mansion/whatever looked like.

- Where exactly was this residence located?

- And while planning the details of a voyage, was he surrounded by a court of advisers?

​

I found a sample of an essay by Portuguese Historian James H. Guill titled, "Vila do Infante (Prince-Town), the First School of Oceanography in the Modern Era: An Essay."

Guill states that the second "siege of Ceuta in 1418 focussed Henry's attention on the lack of knowledge that the Portuguese had of the Mediterranean and African coasts of Morocco and of the state of development of the interior... Henry retired to Lagos on the Algarve coast, where he placed his ships under the command of Lancelot de Pessanha, the hereditary Admiral of Portugal. Henry, recognizing the dearth of oceanographic information available to the Portuguese, initiated construction of a school and fort at Sagres, a jutting craggy peninsula a few miles west of the excellent harbor at Lagos."

- Does this mean that Henry did not reside in the Algarve until AFTER 1418?

- Also, I'm aware that the existence of a Sagres "school" is disputed. But I've seen pictures of the fort. To what extent, if any, did Henry spend time there, as opposed to Lagos?

​

Guill goes on to mention that, "On the opposite Peninsula, called Terçanabal, [Henry] built a town which he called Vila do Infante (prince-Town). Concurrently, he began to gather trained seamen, astronomers, cartographers, shipbuilders, navigation instruments, and instrument makers."

- What does he mean by "opposite Peninsula," and is Vila do Infante a separate place from Lagos or Sagres?

​

I'm further confused by a Wikipedia entry, which states that the land which is now Sagres wasn't donated to Henry until October 27th, 1443.

- So was Henry operating solely out of Lagos between 1418 and 1443?

- I know that Gil Eanes set out to round Cape Bojador in 1433. Was the fort built yet at that point? And how big of a hub was Lagos at this time?

​

Thanks in advance for taking a look at this. This is my first time posting a question, so I hope it's succinct enough. To sum it up: Where did Prince Henry reside and conduct business in 1433?

From an American perspective we don't really learn much about this from schools. All we do end up learning is that after the Reich fell we had 2 different Germany's getting influenced by the west or Russia. The actual perspective from the Germans is very much unexplained but I find it hard to believe that people in East and West Germany were just fine with the new influence and forgot all the propaganda being fed to them by the Third Reich. Considering how nationalistic Germany was and that people generally tend to dislike foreign powers occupying their country I feel that there definitely was resistance present.

I have often seen articles refer to different drug epidemics. Do they correspond with increased consumption of those substances? And did they ever end, or are they technically still ongoing and become part of the equilibrium of social norms?

Help! :( Today I started reading a book on the biggest wars and battles of the Middle Ages but I really couldn’t follow what was going on because they talked about Empires and Kings I have to clue about. Im looking for some history books to explain to me what the fuck was going on BEFORE the crusades and DURING the crusades ( like Bizantines, Arabs going to Africa(?) )

They talked about Charles the V too ... :[

I really like when books talk about the people and their like personal things (personality and life ) more than just facts like dates and war strategies.

A bunch of people online have stated the shift existed long before Nixon's southern strategy; however, my APUSH teacher taught us that Nixon's dog whistle politics was the main reason the switch happened.

Did they generally endorse the Nazis and Mussolini and oppose US involvement in WWII, or did they not see a similarity between their causes?

I noticed that military naval vessels have a trend in getting progressively larger throughout history, until technological developments post WW2 cause them to get much smaller again.

I'm assuming the reason for the slowly progressing size was a desire to consistently fit larger weapons/more armour/larger engines onto a vessel. Based on that, what have been the limiting factors that have stopped nations from building massive ships earlier in history?

As an example, the Mikasa which fought in the Russo-Japanese war is significantly smaller then the Nagato developed later. What was the limiting factor that stopped the Japanese (or any other nation) from building a Nagato sized Mikasa at an earlier time?

I was recently learning about the North African theater of WWII (specifically Operation Compass) and how less than 40,000 British took over 130,000 Italian prisoners, mostly over the course of a single month, while advancing hundreds of miles through the desert. What were the logistical challenges of dealing with such a large number of prisoners while trying to continue such a rapid military advance against a still numerically superior force?

​

As a follow-up, how did this compare to other instances in WWII where disproportionately massive numbers of prisoners were taken by the Western Allies (I'm assuming the challenges of supporting these prisoners in North Africa would be much different than in Western Europe, and that the challenges and solutions would have varied from situation to situation).