I am currently watching Deutschland 83 and the East German intelligence corps seem to have quite a lot of freedom in conducting espionage, but at the same time appear to ultimately take orders from Moscow. Was there a formal system or hierarchy of Communist spy agencies? P.S. As a side note, this is a fantastic subreddit and love what you do here, apologies if this has been asked previously.

I just learnt how Japan's self isolations was broken when the United states sent them an ultimatum, but before Japan forbade any foreigner entering and Japanese leaving, how could they communicate? This has always confused me in history, such as Spain and the Aztecs, Mongol hordes and Europe etc.

I have heard that the United States had secretly planned to drop the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to force Japan's surrender before the Russians could invade the Japanese mainland and control territory there. After VE day, the conferences at Yalta and Potsdam had resulted in the division of Germany between Western and Soviet control, and the writing was on the wall for the Cold War and Iron Curtain. The United States understood this, but still maintained their alliance with the Soviets on the Japanese front. The Soviets successfully invaded and liberated Manchuria and much of Korea (and subsequently held significant claims of influence there as they did in eastern Europe/Germany). It was clear that tensions were rising between Western and Communist forces in Europe, and the United States did not want to risk a divided Japan similar to what was happening in Germany, and needed to maintain a hold on the Pacific front against Communist expansion. Japan had incredible value in this sense, as it was still quite capable of being a regional power after the war. So, as a result, the United States dropped the bombs, effectively forcing Japanese surrender just weeks before a Soviet invasion of the mainland was to occur.

So my question is: is there any truth to this? And what sources can indicate this?

[deleted]

So as far as I understand, America came in with boats armed heavily and forced Japan to trade with them. Was it actually fair trade, or was it blackmail? I would find it surprising if America forced trade and then gave the Japanese a fair deal. Also, did Japan have the ability to refuse an offer during haggling, or would that count as not trading?

I haven't been able to find a single article on it. How did it happen, what happend to people's money?

I'm watching a documentary about Stalin and I've noticed that he has his left hand at his heart inside his jacket, like Napoleon had.

I think Napoleon had a disease that causes him to do it, but why did Stalin do it?

Stalin was 160cm so maybe he identified with him in some way...

Edit: It might be as simple as to keep it warm... His other hand is in his pocket. Not sure if there is only one pocket in his jacket for a hand

In other words, how far into the war did governments/the press start to recognize the war as some kind of sequel or 'recurrence' of the original Great War? Was the concept first mentioned in English?

Did they really all feel they had to die in battle? How would this apply to a Poet or Lawspeaker? Was this religious doctrine something that made them condemn anyone who failed to die in battle, or was it perhaps more comparable to certain provisions in the Bible that no-one pays attention to?

I often see U.S. History broken up into two parts: pre- and post-Reconstruction (1887). Sometimes the American Revolution, or the second World War, are used as additional "dividing lines". I'm curious, is British national history similarly divided into parts? What are the events/periods that are seen as dividing lines? Why?

Was it a case that native politicians, and anti-colonial violence was getting more successful by their own merit; or was it that the coloniser could no longer afford to hold on to its empire and was forced to decolonise?

EDIT: OKAY, why are GOVERNMENTS referred to by their capitals, and when did this practice start?

Reading about the him, I caught a few references to his apparent "invincibility," seemingly escaping unscathed from a number of deadly situations. I couldn't find any information on whether he was ever actually wounded in battle. Is there any solid information on this?

(Note: this question is a direct copy of one I asked a year ago, but which was never voted on or answered by anyone. Is that OK, mods?)

I'm thinking of groups like the German military and security forces who I imagine were strongly anti-Communist, as well as most normal German folk especially with the propaganda, destruction and rape that occurred. How quickly did East Germany fully embrace Communism and its goals? Was this a way of furthering themselves from Nazism and the war? EDIT: I don't mean to say the whole country embraced Communism - I think the extensive Stasi network is proof that most citizens were skeptical of the system. But how far did Communist ideology seep into the populace, and why such a loyal security force for the GDR, to the point of walling off East Berlin?

Can you be 100% sure of the events and stories in a history textbook ?

I am just wondering if the common man liked them or not.

Edit; the first version.