Both protests were anti-government in nature held by civilian populations of the states/countries that were controlled entirely that the single party. The ROC was also in the UN during the 228 Incident, and the PRC was then in the UN during the Tiananmen square massacre.

But why is the attention between the two events so disproportionate?

I know he cared about the French people, but it may have been more because they were 'his'. I ask the question because I was told he actually fought against the French to defend his home on Corsica, is this correct?

If so, another question: why would the French allow him to join their army after he fought AGAINST them? Doesn't that seem kind of stupid?

It seems as though today, for “serious” applications (e.g., seatbelts, industry, military), webbing is preferred, and leather straps dominate only in areas where aesthetics are more important (e.g., civilian belts). It also seems like before maybe the late 19th century, leather was pretty much exclusively the material used for straps, irrespective of how demanding a role the straps were expected to play or the budget for the project. (Are there earlier uses for fabric webbing that I missed?)

Modern straps are often made of materials unavailable in the past (e.g., synthetic polymers like nylon), but it seems, from my reading, that the leading edge of displacement of leather by webbing occurred before the availability of synthetic polymers, with cotton or flax webbing.

Was flat webbing -- even natural fiber webbing -- a new technology in the late 19th century or so? Was there some weaving pattern that was uniquely strong that didn’t exist until then? Or some new buckling system that webbing straps more useful?

I guess what I’m wondering is why webbing started being used in the late 19th century or so, rather than either later (e.g., in the 1930s or so with new materials like nylon creating alternatives to traditional cotton/flax) or earlier (e.g. Roman fabricae making armor with webbing straps rather than leather).

One of my former NCO's spent part of his younger days in a medical detachment somewhere along the Iron Curtain. I believe he said it was near or in the Fulda gap, but it's been years since I talked to him, so I can't say for sure. He regaled me with an anecdote of how they frequently drilled for the Cold War going hot, and that he had been informed by his superiors that their life expectancy if "Ivan" decided to roll across the Fulda gap was about 15 minutes, after which point, he and his comrades would likely have been killed by conventional or nuclear weapons.

I did a little searching on the matter, and seems he was not the only one to have heard this. I've seen estimates range from 6 seconds to 24 minutes, although the shorter estimates were probably for front-line combat units, as opposed to his Medical combat service support role.

So my question is, how did analysts at the time arrive at this conclusion? Or was it simply a case of barracks anecdote that spread like wildfire? Was wholesale destruction (IE entire divisions being wiped out) really the most likely outcome of any escalation, or was this only a worst case scenario?

I'm trying to get a picture of the value of money during the Qing Dynasty, and the figures I'm getting aren't quite adding up.

The wikipedia article for the Silver Tael says a thousand copper Wen coins equals a silver tael, and the Five Punishments article says that a thousand copper Wen coins equals a guan. However, it then goes on to say that a day's wages for a construction laborer in Zhili/Hebei would be .72 Wen, which it says is equal to .6 oz of silver. The way I added it up, .6 oz silver would be about 833 days wages.

so is it 1.3 oz Silver=1 Tael=1 Guan=1000 Wen=1666.67 Day's Wages

or .6 oz Silver=.72 Wen=One Day's Wages?

I'm curious as to what songs and genre of songs were the most popular for listening in Germany between 1933 and the government's end times. I could imagine artists such as Tchaikovsky were banned, along with American jazz music, and so on. This same curiousity extends to films, literature and other arts - I'm aware the nazis burned Erich Maria Remarque's All Quiet on the Western Front for it's anti-war messages, and I can imagine many films were banned while others were heavily promoted - but what were they?

Another question, is there any proof of humans and neanderthals coexisting in the same communities?

Well, as the title says. I've always had an affinity for ancient warfare and their military formations so i'm asking here. Google can't seem to provide me an answer or maybe i don't phrase it enough.

I'm looking for a book or reference that provides detailed information about military formations in the classical world. How would a general deploy his troops and where would he put them, for example.

My Roman history professor showed us an outline of Roman formation on how Scipio defeated Hannibal at the battle of Zama or Cannae (i think) but she is no longer working at the university (sad).

It doesn't matter what society you guys had studied nor read.

I love my orthodox confession and I'm glad I was baptized into it. All the crazy stuff our saints did and how our predecessors kept orthodoxy alive despite slowly being destroyed by catholic crusaders, islam and communism.

But god damn do I feel jealous on the art of our catholic brethren. Their religious art has always evolved and it is beautiful. Meanwhile our art has always stayed the same, in the byzantine style. It is heavily loaded in symbols but not as emotion provoking compared to catholic art. Why is that? Is it because orthodox art is an object of cult while catholic art is an object of art? Or is it because eastern Europe was always torn by war so it never got to evolve? Or is there something else. I tried researching this but nothing came up. Hopefully someone can help.

What was the threat to thier identity? Why folktales? I'm also under the understanding that the Grimm brothers did some heavy editing to the stories. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?

It has been stated in various books and research pages that the Black Death of Europe was a result of the migratory tendencies of contagiousness in Central Asia. Furthermore, it has also been stated that there is no immunization available, still, for the Yersina Pestis. So why hasn't the pandemic ever occurred again after the 18th century? For instance, the last instance of Black Death in London was in 1666.

Many of the spices native to India can be grown in other locations, given similar geographic conditions. Granted, some countries like Norway or England may not have had suitable conditions, but surely SOME European powers should have been able to cultivate them, given the chance. Why was no serious attempt ever made?

Even though Egypt is still an important player, it seems it has become a second tier power in the Middle East after Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran or Israel, while in times of Nasser, Egypt seemed to be the indisputable leader of the Arab world. How did Egypt lose this position? Why hasn't its cooperation with the West and Israel granted it higher influence and wealth?

I know that there was a significant pan-Slavic presence in the Russian ministry at the time, but how did this play out when it comes to the Balkans?

Was there some message he was trying to convey by naming him Victory-Peace? Is Siegfried an attested alternate name for Sigurd that I've just never heard of? Was it the librettist's doing?

Was this practice (the wake-up call) not invented until after the advent of the telephone? If not, who came up with it, and how did it become widespread?

I'm reading a general history book on 18th century Europe, and it mentions the closure of the River Scheldt in passing.

Why would Dutch want to do that? Was the motivation economic or military?

How was the closure actually enforced?

And did it leave bitter feelings between the Dutch and the Belgians?