I was reading about NATO in the cold war, specifically about Frances role. Although they forced NATO troops out of France in the 1960's, Wikipedia claims that there was a plan to fully reintergrate the NATO and French forces called the Lemnitzer-Ailleret Agreements. What were these?

I have a small question about Napoleonic era battlefield tactics. I am aware of the common tactics of the time, i.e tightly packed lines of men firing in volleys. But I was just thinking, could you produce the same amount of damage with a loose formation of staggered men (more like tactics of today), but with the benefits of not offering a huge target. I am also aware of the technology of the time and the accuracy of flintlock muskets, but to me it makes sense because you are firing at a line of men so you would do the same amount of damage.

My second question is.... Did any militaries of the time use this tactic, and what was the result?

In classes we've covered Europe (obviously), the America's, Africa, and Asian countries like china and Russia, but why not India?

Did they not play a significant role in history? Will I learn about it in college more? (I'm a senior in highschool).

Edit: thanks all for the solid answers.

17th and 18th European war and war tactics interest me greatly. However, I'm not able to understand when the idea of line battles really began. Was the musket line the product of the musket itself, or a hold over from older pre-gunpowder tactics? Thanks!

I'm just curious if anyone can comment on the culture or actions of the French defense industry and military after WW2. After the trauma of the first world war they erected the Maginot line, did they have any other plans after the second world war? Can you help me understand what common attitudes towards the military were like among the populace at this time? Were they more in favor of the military and military spending after suffering so much?

Thanks!

Posted on askhistory and got sent here for a better response.

When was the first time in human history where a collection of people actively chose that a certain person or other group of people were strictly better than them, but not based on physical dexterity or hunting capabilities, like an alpha male.

I hope I've made my question clear. I attempted to search, but Reddit kept crashing. Thanks in advance!

I was watching 'The Tudors' on Netflix and a recurring statement is "The people clamour to be free from the clergy". There are also still burnings of heretics. When Henry breaks away it seems like he's the first power in Europe to even consider it (even though its all to get Anne Boelyn). How big a deal is this historically? Is this the first action that led to the concept that people are free to believe what they want?

I am working on a presentation on the factions of the Roman Judean war such as Eleazar of the Zealots and the Idumeneans, anyone got any helpful info?

Edit: i mean WW2

Morning, the biblical book of Acts reports that when Paul visited Athens he found an altar with the inscription "To an unknown God" I read there was an altar found with the inscription "whether this altar is sacred to a god or a goddess, I restored it". Is anything else known about "unknown god" worship in the first century Roman empire? thanks

Let's discuss extreme Wealth in ancient times. Did titans of industry exist? Could people build a trading empire or accumulation of independent wealth of their own - that didn't make them clergy, or royalty? We're there people of bill gates, Rockefeller, William Randolph Hearst-level wealth that weren't already kings or noble class?