Argentina undoubtedly committed an act of aggression, and probably would have backed down immediately if faced with the prospect of a NATO alliance against it.

I watched a documentary on Netflx by the name of 'The God Who Wasn't There' and they made some really interesting points in it. The documentary claimed that Jesus is just an amalgamation of several pagan Gods and his key life events are shared by 18 previous Gods (born in a manger, to a virgin, wise men came to see him, feast day of the 25th December etc.). They also showed a bible verse where St. Peter himself said that Jesus was just an idea rather and a person who actually existed. Finally they made the point that Jesus died somewhere around 33AD but we don't hear anything about him from a single source for over a hundred (possibly 2?) years later.

I figured you guys are the best people to ask as logic pretty much always prevails here over simple belief.

Thanks in advance

Searching yielded only a few results, so I thought I would bring this question up again. Any suggestions on comprehensive books on The Armenian Genocide? I'll admit, I am very ignorant on the subject...

Sorry, but I know nothing about the history of Buddhism or the history of South Asia generally. Is it well-established that the Buddha was a real person? If so, is it true that he more or less established Buddhism from nothing, or was there a natural evolution preceding the emergence of Buddhism?

What do we know about the religious traditions that may have influenced him?

Trying to do a bit of contextual research for my history class. Currently covering post war GB.

There are obvious differences between style 30-50 years ago and today, and even earlier this year, in america.

Despite that, we only ever see the same, very uniform roman fashion in most media for seemingly the entire history of the empire.

Secondary question: Were there popular brand names in the empire? Not only for clothing, either. How big did business in the empire get? Was most wine, pottery, fabric, etc made locally or were there larger business entities that existed throughout the empire?

I've heard that as one of the major reasons for delaying the US' entry into WWII. What were their reasons? Was there any dissent among larger business?

How were the languages learned by those who did not speak them natively?

Russia has always been very aggressively expansionistic, and has never been afraid of conquest for the sake of acquiring new territory and riches. Conquest and aggressive expansion has been one of the largest and most enduring hallmarks of Russia's history. And yet, despite settling all the way to Siberia, conquering all of central asia, subjugating Finland, and making most if not all East european countries its satellite states - Russia to my knowledge never tried to push its way into China. Why?

I imagine during the 1700's and 1800's there would have been a massive technological gap between the Russian and Chinese armies, due to China refusing to modernize its military up to standards for a good while. On top of this, China was also very, very rich. So why, then, didn't Russia exploit this? Here the Russians had a very (militarily) weak neighboring country swimming in hordes of wealth, and the Russians simply...left them alone? Or am I missing something?

Most people think Richard III yet Henry Tudor surely would of gained from those murders also. With the rivalry of so many great families at the time I am sure this debate is wide open.

I've been taught that the assassination of Tiberius Gracchus was a turning point in Roman political culture. I understand that his reforms were aiming to address the land grab by patricians who would buy up land that soldiers were unable to maintain and forced to sell. Besides my stated question, I'm also curious as to how exactly Roman patricians were able to acquire land, leaving veterans destitute or homeless, without significant discontent from the lower classes?

Finally, what impact did these two developments have on the Republic itself? How important were they to its eventual decline and the rise of the Empire?

I was just reading Hevia's The Imperial Security State, and when he discusses the Great Game, it becomes clear that British imperialists were indeed very much concerned with Russian expansionism. Given that Great Britian was similarly a highly aggressive expanding power in Asia at this time, did similar anxieties exist in Moscow? To what degree was Russian expansionism aimed at countering Great Britian or other Western powers?