Did tribes like the Cumans or Pecheneg every ally with non-nomadic cultures to better resist the Mongols?

I was reading about World War II and the thing I didn't get was that no one seemed to be bothered by the bombings. I know that the bombing stopped the war and Japan surrendered and everything but do correct me if I'm wrong, but it almost seemed like an excuse to try just test the bombs and also some racism. I know that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor but the numbers of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are staggering. 100,000s of people killed and effects of the nuclear explosion for generations. I don't get it. Every other case of terrible history gets overblown but this. Please do correct me if I'm wrong but why does every site I go to act fascinated by it and not utterly disgusted. It's is almost as if this wouldn't be the case if they thought of them as people. And I'm not trying to hate or anything. I just wanted to know if there is an actual reason or I'm just exaggerating things. Why is this so?

Um wow. A lot of you are a bunch of nitpicking jerks. Would the question really of been that different had I included the word "PERCEIVED". If you don't have anything to contribute get out of this thread and r/askhistorians.

We all know the story too well. Some poor guy sees a summer blockbuster and thinks it's a 120 minute history lesson.

What movies, well-known or otherwise, would you recommend for being of high cinematic merit while remaining historically accurate?

This sub is a true reddit gem, and I wouldn't trust another with this kind of task. Cheers.

Specifically from the later Roman periods including the invasion of Britain.

How much of an impact would foraging be able to provide? If you have 1000 men to feed, would having units gather roots and berries and such make much of a difference? Obviously an army would need grains and animals with them before going far, but i have a hard time picturing someone saying "Great! A fruit tree! We're saved!"

I am about 3/4 through the Oxford History of the US (the Civil War era) as part of my project to read the complete series, and McPherson has thus far thoroughly pointed out McClellan's blatant refusal to decimate the Army of Northern Virginia when he had the opportunity (and orders from the President). Included are McClellan's letters to his wife, as well as to other people, and it almost seems as though he hoped to wait out the war by fighting as little as possible and then allowing the South to remain an independent country.

Honestly, he seems like a traitor.

Looking for some background information for a novel I'm putting together. I've found plenty of fictional information but Ancient Rome is my "Hazy" area and I would love some clarification.

The more details the better. Thank you!

Was ethnicity ever a source of tension before European colonialism?

I know that medieval islamic societies were much more 'enlightened', educated and open minded than they are in modern times. I am curious as to how this was reflected in their treatment of women.

It's certainly a common literary trope by the mid-20th century that pleading insanity at trial is an easy way to avoid punishment for a serious crime: the idea seems to be you will be sentenced to a mental institution and then released swiftly once "cured". That's certainly not how legal insanity works these days, but is there a historical precedent for someone successfully and outrageously gaming the system in a infamous case that led to its ubiquitous literary use, or is its prevalence simply a literary device feeding on itself?

For context this is the poem I am referring to:

Oda Nobunaga pounded the rice

Hideyoshi baked the cake

and Tokugawa ate it.

Was the poem intended to be critical of Tokugawa reaping the fruit of the efforts of the other two or was it supposed to be a very concise Tl;DR of the Sengoku era?

I read that USSR was boycotting UN due to Communist China not being recognized and they were blindsided by the outbreak of the Korean War. Kim Il-sung asked Stalin's permission to launch offensive and was most likely sharing their plan with USSR. How could USSR be unaware that a UNSC vote was being taken on UN's intervention in Korea? When the vote was cast without them, did they protest? Did USSR intentionally let UN and thus US get involved in Korean war?

Why and how did they end up with those numbers? Why 20 and not 25 like the coins?

Most Americans here are probably familiar with the idea of city mottos: "Welcome to Xville, the capital of Y!" Of course there are many variants, from the brilliant to, well, Albuquerque's ("It's a Trip"). I know other cities across the world have nicknames (The City of Lights, etc.), but does the idea of an official town slogan originate in America?

I am an Indian and the Indian stance on Russia and the former Soviet Union has always been a friendly one.

Thus when I started getting exposed to American media and American films,television shows and books I found it understandable that USSR was shown in,shall we say not a very popular light but strangely Socialism is shown as an evil. I found that quite odd.

Historians of reddit,Explain to me was Soviet Union actually that evil or is this,for the lack of better phrase, 'An American Propaganda'?