.

Obviously many countries were involved in world war 2 (hence the name "World War", but is there one country that we can sort of point our finger to and say that had it not been for them, the Allies would not have won?

What exactly was the process of their respective militaries integration? Were there any difficulties with the integration of the two militaries?

Unlike the other cults which were dependent on oral tradition or clumsy, expensive-to-house, and relatively user-unfriendly scrolls, Christianity is closely associated with "the book". Unlike an amorphous collection of scrolls or parchments a bound book has much less ambiguity about what is included and what is not in a particular gospel.

Did Christianity benefit from the same forces that MS Windows enjoyed as being at the ground floor of a rapidly growing technology?

I imagine this derives from the different formation of race-relations in those nations. Is it correct? Or is it a consequence of language and semantics?

I've searched in this subreddit with no success.

Why have people marched in armies and stuff? Is there any special reason to march instead of walk or run? Or is it just because it looks better?

I'm wondering at what time we started calling it a World War. What do other nations call this war? (I'm an American)

I was having a conversation with a friend about healthcare reform. He says that he wishes reforms meant the total dismantling of the health insurance industry. It got me to thinking. Is there any precedence for this in democratic societies or are these type of actions considered strictly totalitarian?

Edit: I realize what a radical notion it is. But I'm still curious to if its ever been done.

Are there reasons why an invasion of Switzerland didn't occur? In looking at Axis Occupied territory maps, it seems almost odd to have a sole country in the middle of Europe still exist. I would think the same thing of Spain, but from what I understand Franco leaned towards the Axis powers, which probably kept them at bay from invading his country.

Its quite common in China and India today. But was there ever a time where Europe or America valued sons over daughters to such a degree?

I'm reposting this because I somehow managed to delete the original instead of saving it

I've been trying to do some research on the Varangian Guard, particularly during their earlier years during the reign of Basil the Bulgar-slayer. If I may ask a few questions:

1. What was their command structure like? I understand the akolouthos was the overall commander of the Guard, but I've also found reference to captains - was there a rank of promotion? And were there other stations in the Guard? I imagine some sort of interpreter might be necessary, for example.

2. Where would they have lived, and what would they have eaten?

3. How much interaction would the average Varangian have with the Emperor? Officially they were bodyguards, of course, but it seems odd to me that 6,000 people would be put in personal contact with the emperor.

Thanks!

Are there any documents such as unedited transcripts of debates, letters or publications from the time that describe the process without reference to the Federalist Papers. What I'm looking for is an understanding that would enable someone to say upon reading the Federalist Papers for the first time, "so this is the propaganda they decided to throw together to sell the damn thing." How would an outside well informed observer or fly on wall as it were regard the Federalist Papers from a disinterested perspective? Maybe some book that surveys the range of interpretations or divergence of opinion among modern historians with respect to the debates would be interesting.

I know this is an extreme oversimplification, considering the many complex facets (weather, air-power, artillery, leadership, strategy..) but how significant was the T-34 also from the Germans perspective?