More specifically, things like how were warriors selected for a particular war party? How were supplies handled? Obviously Maori war parties were much smaller than European or Asian armies, moving over smaller distances, but they were still people, who needed food, water, and shelter.

Was it everyone residing in America who wanted to become an American? How did they deal with non-Brits living in America?

In the modern way we say the word, not in any other context

If it helps I'm looking for any of these

1. While in office
2. Out of office
3. Before they were in office

I know the Tarascans and Aztecs had a war in 1480-ish, and the Aztecs got beat pretty hard, so clearly they were capable of keeping their independence, even against serious powers like the triple alliance. 40 years later, though, were they still just as scary? What part did they play in the war against the Aztecs? Did they side with the Tlaxcalans/Spanish/etc., or?

As a non-American, my knowledge of the American presidents throughout history is limited at best, and it must be said that it has been influenced by modern popular opinions of past presidents. I know a bit about the "big" ones (Washington, Franklin, Lincoln, FDR), but even that is probably inaccurate and overly generalised. I understand you have to be pretty exceptional and charismatic to become the president of the U.S, by there seems to be a lot of hype and almost "cults of personality" around more than a few.

My question is aimed to find out how many American presidents actually live up to their great reputations? How many really did do amazing things for the United States (or even the world), be it socially, culturally, economically, or by any other standard? Are there any that have a great reputation or public image that they don't really deserve or that is blow out of realistic proportion? Are there any presidents that did an excellent job but "flew under the radar", and thus don't have the reputation for greatness or achievement that maybe they should?

I'm not looking to offend anyone with this question, and I'm not looking for any hyperbolic, over-patriotic answers either. I'm just trying to sort out fact from the modern populist jingoism that seems to be all to common in the media and on the internet these days (at least when I try to research this topic). I'm looking for some informed, objective opinions from people with the education and knowledge to know about this topic to help point an outsider in the right direction. Thanks.

are they starting to uncensor some of the information? do u think its best they keep things this way?

I'm looking for images of the United States' founding fathers with out the powered wigs on, and I can't seem to find any. Links would be awesome. Thank you

Before I get a bunch of people yelling at me that witches aren't real and whatnot, I am not talking about the broom riding crooked nosed witches that actually have powers. I am talking about people who believed that they could conjure spirits and whatnot for magical purposes. I figure these people had to have actually existed at some point because the myth would have had to have started somewhere and there are people today who attempt magic or believe they have magic powers.

My main question is about the sorts of rituals and such that one of these people would have performed, if people would have known that they were doing these things, and what their intended effects were. I am thinking about writing a story with magic in it and I like to base my fiction on stuff people actually believed was true. I haven't been able to find much about this on my own since every time I look I just find hippie stuff about how to perform magic, or dubious sources at best.

I know wooden ships put on copper plates to avoid this issue, was that needed with steel ships? Or could plants just not grow on them?

Good evening.

There are a few things I'd like to say first. My English concerning essay-writing is very rusty at most. It's not my mother tongue and I haven't practiced it for close to two years now. I will still try to keep it simple and understandable. Secondly I was very worried about the phrasing of my question because it sounds like I am seeking legitimacy for Germany starting a World War. That is totally not the point. The whole point of this post is trying to get a more sound background without any untruths. Lastly the important things are in bold letters. The rest is the obligatory story of leading to the question.

Let me start off by saying that I recently was obsessed with the history behind World War 2. During christmas holidays I got to talk to my grandmother some more and she is the last relative that actually was part of the World War, even though just a teenager. Her husband was both in Norway and at the eastern front. He got really sick in the war - from what my grandmother tells me - and he never really recovered and died in the late 70s. I feel really sad about not being able to see any of my grandfathers which both served during the war and that makes me even more curious about what the background of it all actually was.

I watched a lot of documentations about the German point of view and listened to some interviews with civil population and soldiers.

One of the most recent videos was showing three German soldiers in their late 80s or early 90s probably that got confronted by a Polish woman about the war at some kind of museum. I don't know the presetting, however one of the men said that she should be thankful, because "we saved Europe from a Russian invasion". Now this really got me thinking if there was any truth in it or if it was just him trying to justify the whole war.

There were several comments saying that there is even evidence in literature stating that Russia started to armament and would have rolled over whole Europe within a few years after 1939 if Germany didn't interrupt them by invading theirselves.

Now my question: Is there any real evidence like statistical evidence of armament production, interviews with Russian officers or something that could support this statement or is it a empty phrase?

Thank you to everybody contributing with their answers and helping me get some more insights into this :)

Cheers

Edit: So I have 2 deleted comments and 1 shadowbanned person in my thread. Unlucky me :)

I tried asking a few months back but didn't get any answers.

How much material support did the NVA and Viet Cong receive from the Soviet Union and China? What type of equipment and weaponry was supplied and to what extent?