More specifically why hasn't supersonic flight made a comeback in today's world?

I'm interested in exactly how the camps operated differently from each other. Also were people separated based on age/health/capability or was it purely based on religion and ethnicity or perhaps geographical proximity? Additionally why did the Nazis have extermination camps at all? It seems like working people to death is strictly more beneficial for them?

Hi!

Lately, i've been getting pretty interested in reading about Indian History so I was looking for a book which briefly covers all of the main periods so I know where to start looking more in depth.

I know it's a tall ask but it would be perfect if the book also had maps in it.

Thanks!

In a typical classroom in the U.S. nothing happened east of the Euphrates river until the 18th century.

I am curious, how much are children taught about the ancient near east in China, and other more distant early civilizations? I was curious about China in particular, but if you are an educator in a different Asian country, I would be very curious to hear your perspective based on your own country.

Is there sort of an inverse bias where "Western" history is overlooked until the modern era?

I get the white because it got dirty easily and could only be worn once, but black? And why not other combinations, like purple was very expensive too.

It seems like there are certain oddly specific firearm calibers that keep getting used. 7.62mm. 76.2mm, 12.7mm, 20mm, 40, 37, 57, 25. All with widely different properties and ballistics, but it seems like the calibers are constantly revisited and oddly specific. There are certainly exceptions, like German guns in 7.92, 88mm, 128mm, but there seem to be more that follow the rule than don't.

First a disclaimer: yes I know that the Hundred Years War was not one war that lasted for a hundred years. I know that it was actually a series of individual wars between the English and French nobility over English possessions in France.

My question is why did conflict over English held land in medieval France drag out for as long as it did? What were the factors that prevented a quick and rapid resolution to the conflicts?

The same way many unskilled workers are anti-immigration today, as they feel immigrants are taking their jobs.

I had heard that it was a major factor in the heated history between the two countries.

I was looking into a particular case where a Neutral Dutch ship was stopped and searched by the Royal Navy in the Caribbean, this was due to the Dutch engaging in trade with the American rebels (1777). In what kind of legal framework would this fit, how did the English justify such inspections?

When reading about or discussing Vietnam I commonly hear that the armed forces were almost non functioning by the end of the war, with soldiers deliberately avoiding combat and the infamous practice of fragging. To what extent are these stories true, and if they are, to what extent were they a byproduct of an at least partially conscripted army?

WWII question, I know that Stalin (especially at Tehran) wanted the allies to open up a second front against the Germans to ease pressure on the USSR, my question is why didn't the Germans ask the Japanese to open up a second front in Siberia, especially with the huge soviet counteroffensives in 1943 and 1944 the Germans were getting overrun pretty badly. And if the Germans did ask the Japanese to open up a second front, why didn't they?

I was watching the Hammer Horror version of Dracula with a friend and noticed that the whole story seemed to happen within range of an easy day trip. It's not a documentary or pretending to historical accuracy, but it got me wondering about the actual state of infrastructure in the region everyone's favorite blood-sucking count is most associated with. Could a nineteenth century gentleman of means get his baggage to a train with reasonable ease and be off for an easy trip to Vienna or Constantinople? Might he direct his agents in London by telegraph from reasonably near home?

Or does he have to wait until the twentieth century for all that?

I know people have been fashioning clothing since the beginning of time, but before we got really good at it, did humans just have rougher skin that could handle more vegetation contact, etc?

We often hear of kings and queens having "mistresses" (or whatever the male equivalent is) and it never seems to be treated as a scandalous thing in history books as well as in films and literature. Was it just a fact of life that monarchs were allowed or even expected to have extramarital affairs?