The Soviet Union had declared war on the Japan. The Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo was invaded, and battle lines had been pushed all the way up to the shores of the island nation.

Did the demonstration of atomic weapons prevent a possible occupied red Tokyo?

(Not sure if this breaks the 20 year rule, I'm more interested in the DDR's/ Germany society under the DDR's attitude towards immigrants) The vast majority of PEGIDA (the german group against what they see as the Islamization of the west) are in east Germany. I have seen people make the argument that it is due to the DDR policies. How true is this?

So basically I was wondering: What benefits did medieval Kings have for themselves only that we now as average modern men can enjoy?

Thank you very much in advance!

I've read multiple sources, but they seem to go from over-playing it to ignoring it completely; could someone give me a balanced and accurate view of how important France was in securing victory?

I know that back then was about four bigger kingdoms (Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony and Württemberg) but I always ask myself why did Austria stayed out of the Unification, they had the same language and as far as I know, almost the same culture of the others, then I thought it was maybe a politic question?

We often associate empires like Rome and Sparta with the color Red or Macedon with purple. Did these nations have a single color that represented them in battle or politics? And if they did what were the ones that they used?

I've heard seemingly conflicting things about this. I've heard some say that it was back-breaking labor 6.5 days a week, every day, year-'round, with supposedly negative health consequences. On the other hand, I've heard others talk about peasants have a large number of off-days for festivals, religious holidays, feasts, pretty much all Sundays, and so on, and not having to work full time in the winter.

So, were peasants working themselves to a premature death,

In doing some generalized research for a story, I came across the mention of the term 'blue blood' in reference to those of royal bloodlines. I've heard the term before, but never gave it much thought until now, when the thought clashed with the knowledge that purple is known to be highly recognized in history as the royal color. Was the term blue blood given at a time when blue, not purple, was the primary or most common color for royals? And if not, why do we not refer to a royal as being a purple blood?

I guess I'm mostly thinking about England during WWI. It doesn't seem to be very inline with their other causes of universal suffragism.

I notice in many period dramas, films and television programs, that actors will say "cannot" rather than "can't" or "do not" etc. For instance, the recent remake of True Grit, the series Mr Norrell & Jonathan Strange, and so on.

As I understand it from studying other topics in the history of medieval Europe, capitalism, or what was to become capitalism, had its origins in the growth of towns, in particular the towns of Northern Italy, and was a well developed system long before the industrial revolution in the North of Europe. I'm looking for recommendations for a good, reasonably academic history of the origins and development of capitalism that could build on, supplement and correct the wrong parts of what little I already know. Any ideas?

Thanks so much!

Sorry about the missing "and" in the first sentence & the missing "was" in the second sentence.

Did London get bombed by the Germans again after the end of the Blitzkreig?