I assume this had something to do with the width between the wheels? Why?

I was doing a bit of reading about the United States internment of Japanses Americans during the second world war and after reading more recent apologies from the US government it got me thinking, did any of the allied forces voice any opposition at the time?

Just curious as I often hear about black history month etc... As a West-European I wondered if we also imported slaves and used them, as there is no mediatization around that subject here.

Going to school in Florida the most classical education I ever got was reading Bulfinch's Mythology in 9th grade. World history (same year) was bare-bones, with about two days on the Greeks and Romans and only a handful of individual people named.

Reading older books it seems like it was important for Westerners to know a lot about Romans and Rome, and know a lot about the religion and language. When did that change? Who said that classics weren't important anymore?

For example, why were attempts not made to bomb railways into the camps, or the gas chambers themselves when the Allies learned of the atrocities being committed throughout the war?

I'm just starting to watch Deadwood, and I'm really enjoying it. I'd be interested to hear informed opinions about the realism of the show.

During the period of slavery in the republic (1786 - 1864), what was life like for the black man in the North US? We hear all the time about beatings, whippings, and terrible conditions for the slaves in the South...but I don't actually know how black men were treated north of the mason-dixon during this period. How did they fit into society? What jobs did they typically perform? Were they still the targets of racism?

Any info is appreciated.

I'm really enjoying the show, but I'd love to hear some qualified opinions about it. I'm interested in specific details about the events and characters, and also the general atmosphere and culture of post-WWI England.

I was recently thinking - where does the concept of north/east/south/west come from? Wikipedia says the compass turned up around 1300ish, but as far as I understand maps were north-orientated before this, and names of places also referred to their latitudinal location. Just wondering if anyone knows anything about this. North=cold, south=warm makes sense I suppose, but is that the only explanation?

I know that the Royal Navy used dive bombers successfully against naval targets, and that the U.S. Navy used Dauntlesses and other bombers in scouting roles during the Battle of the Atlantic. I've also read about the A-36 (the ground-attack version of the P-51 Mustang), which seems to have done good work in limited service.

Is there a reason why the USAAF and the RAF didn't use more dive-bombing planes in Europe, particularly during the ground war in Western Europe? It seems as though those planes would be useful for precision bombing of tunnels, bridges, rail lines, and such.

It seems as though dive-bombing was fairly useful against land targets in the Pacific, although I realize that the mix of planes available there was driven substantially more by the U.S. Navy than the mix of planes available in Western Europe. Or is there a storied history of RAF/USAAF dive bombers that I just don't know about?

Thanks in advance!

The majority believe it is 2015. When did we all come to the mutual understanding of what year it was?

We hear a lot about how European diseases such as smallpox devastated the Natives in America and contributed to European settlers coming to dominate the continent.

Does anyone know if Australian Aborigines and other remote populations were affected in a similar way and did this also contribute to foreign settlers dominating the area?

When most Americans talk about the revolution the easy go to answer to why it took place was the unfair taxation without representation. However most history buffs know that it was more the enlightenment era ideals that fueled the revolution, taxes gave them (founding fathers and the colonists) a issue to rally behind. My question is, take away enlightenment assume the colonists were o.k. with no being represented in parliament were the taxes reasonable? Could the common man of the time live comfortably with these taxes by modern standards? Either way you answer, what would be the modern day equivalent to living under these taxes? Time frame my be anytime leading up to Lexington and Concord.

Sure they are impressive now but were they not small and common when planted in the 17 and 1800s?

You don't really see the Three Sisters cultivation system in widespread use today, and I'm curious about why.

My intuition would be that it would make planting and harvesting more labor intensive, and less suitable for automation and the like. Effectively, compared to growing the plants in separate fields, the triculture system would probably give higher yield per acre, but have lower yield per man-hour of labor.

However, that doesn't seem to fit very well with the environments in which these systems developed. Eurasian monoculture systems were often used in environments of high population density, with relatively scarce land and abundant, cheap peasant labor, while the parts of the Americas that the Three Sisters system developed in often had relatively abundant lands and scarce labor.

Now, Eurasia just plain didn't have beans, maize, or squash, nor did the the Americas have, say, wheat, lentils, or cabbage, so this isn't to ask "why weren't the Ancient Romans circa 100 BC using the Three Sisters system?" However, once the Columbian exchange happens, given the relatively dense population of Eurasia and scarce land, it seems like if some labor-intensive, land-economizing agricultural technique made sense on Rio Grande's banks, they made more sense in the Po River valley. While Italy adopted American crops (including beans, maize, and squash) piecemeal, though, they didn't, as far as I know, use the Three Sisters system.

So, what were the biggest disadvantages of the system? (Is it actually the opposite of my intuition -- labor saving, but land-intensive?)

I'm also really interested in the conflicting accounts of the effect that the blockade had on Germany after the Armistice (with starvation, with how much the Allies allowed food and in what fashion).

Thank you!

I'm doing a research paper on the Third Crusade and how it was a success overall despite the loss of Jerusalem to Saladin. While studying, I found lots of references to the English decline of feudalism specifically due to the Third Crusade but cannot seem to find anything more indepth. Most notable among the scnt sources are references to "salt and silks encouraging people to open up merchant routes to the Orient..." and some how this translates to the end of tenant farmers in England and eventually Europe as a whole? Can anyone expand on this or point me towards the appropriate source material? Thanks reddit

I just made the comment: "Hitler is rolling over in his grave" earlier today and it made me wonder if Hitler actually has a grave. I know his body was burned outside of the Fuhrerbunker, but was he formally buried anywhere else? Is there a plaque where his body was burned? Anything?