We all know about the famous Christmas truce of WW1, an unofficial ceasefire. But during the war truces were not unique to the Christmas period, and reflected a growing mood of "live and let live", where infantry in close proximity would stop overtly aggressive behaviour, and often engage in small-scale fraternisation, engaging in conversation or bartering for cigarettes.
Had this ever occured in other wars? At this scale?
Occasionally medical truces in WW2. Hurtgen Forest, pic related.
>>547812
>We all know about the famous Christmas truce of WW1
the funny thing is... what "we all know" is outright wrong
the idea that thousands of soldiers engaged in jolly christmasy happy affairs and played tons of football or whatever is yet another of those sappy antiwar sentiments that ww1 seems to spawn
>>547887
Why issue anti-fraternisation orders then?
How realistic was the chances of Operation Sea Lion /HIS/ ? This has often been a vain of discussion amongst my friends and I. I think it could have happened but that Germany still would have lost. What about you fellow /HIS/torians
>>547716
>How realistic was the chances of Operation Sea Lion
chances of it happening?
Plausible if the German High Command throws teddy out the pram
chances of succeeding?
Non-existent
>>547716
>How realistic was the chances of Operation Sea Lion /HIS/ ?
Not at all.
>I think it could have happened but that Germany still would have lost.
The odds are pretty much 0 percent of it succeeding in anything but extremely bizarre and far-ranging alterations from the historical timeline.
If you're talking about a 1940 invasion with the war starting in September 39 more or less like history, it's not going to work. Germany doesn't have the airpower to completely control the channel, the ability to stop the Royal Navy from fucking things up if they did, the landing craft to ship enough troops over to survive a British counterattack, or the experience in naval landings to make something like this work.
When the Normandy landings happened in 1944, the beaches were hit with the equivalent of about 5 divisions. Germany didn't have a tenth of that fleet. And the British weren't helpless either. You hear a lot of people focusing on how hard it was to get across, but even if they somehow did, the British aren't going to roll over and die.
http://www.britishmilitaryhistory.co.uk/webeasycms/hold/uploads/bmh_document_pdf/40.09_Order_of_Battle_UK.pdf
What are the Germans going to do when 2 armored divisions roll down on them on the beaches?
>>547716
There is a reason why Britain was invaded during the 17th-20th centuries, and the Germans managed to find all of them.
Were coalitions a thing in Medieval Europe?
Yes
t. EU4
>>547615
Yes. Look at any major medieval warfare and it'll rarely be just one country against another.
Even something as insular as the Wars of the Roses saw the involvement of France, Burgundy answer Scotland.
>>547615
Brief coalitions sure, nothing on the scale of 19th and 20th century alliances though.
what can you guys tell me about the Crimean war? I'm very interested in the subject and would like to learn more
>>547511
Britain and France betrayed Christendom
>>547543
how? by working with mudslimes?
what can you guys tell me about the battles in this war?
Hello /his/ can anyone please recommend a good book about the holy roman empire and the ottomans? I'm about to buy a book called Osman's dream but im not quiet convinced. And im practically lost on what book to read regarding the HRE. thanks
>>547076
Osman's Dream is a top-tier book, probably one of the best on the Ottomans written in English.
As a primer you could not do better.
>>547086
thanks anon. I'll buy it right away then
Im starting to read Joaquim Whaley's book, Germany and the Hole Roman Empire. Has pretty good rating and comments. But its pretty expensive, If I can't get anything less expensive I might have to buy that one
what did he mean by this?
>>547025
Squats and Horsemeat
Horses are the übermenschen of the animal world.
>>547025
Didn't happen
Stop perpetuating this meme
Which is more moral?
A minority suffering grevous pain and misfortune for a slight benifit to the majority?
Or the majority being slightly worse off for the extreme benefit to the minority?
>inb4 define morality
Use your own definition
>>546988
>morality
Am I in the majority or in the minority?
>>546988
majority being slightly worse
/thread
minority suffering grievous pain
Was it sociopathy?
It'd be psychopathy, but that's really just a meme phrase and it isn't real.
Fun is just a buzzword
No, socialism
Israel recently declassified some more documents relating to the Six Day War.
Pic related is part of a list of operations made during the Six Day War. More will be posted.
Also, Israeli history thread I guess.
>>546784
Pic related shows battle plans for attacking Egyptian forces in Gaza and the Sinai
>>546794
Pic related is an airbase at El Arish, the only airbase not bombed by the Israelis during the war as they planned on capturing it and using it for themselves.
How come Orthodox is the Christian denomination that gets the least hate?
>>546196
catholics and protestants are too busy shitting on each other
>>546196
Because Orthodoxy is theologically consistent and don't touch the kids.
>>546196
Unlike Protestantism, it didn't spark decades of bloody religious conflict in Europe.
Unlike Catholicism, it didn't take it upon itself to carve out a temporal theocratic state in Europe and generally meddle in politics
William T. Shermans strikes me as so overwhelmingly based.
>based
your post is so "overwhelmingly" reddit
also prepare to piss off some dixiefags who will liekly cry about warcrimes
>>546154
>your post is so "overwhelmingly" reddit
I doubt you could even define what you mean by that.
Name a reason for liking Sherman other than him burning down the south. He wasn't even a great general and never faced an army larger than his. He couldn't catch Johnston's army so he burned down every city in sight, that is not tactical genius.
Cruel leaders and their/families crimes/actions
No hitler or Stalin they are well known post something different
Pic related he and his son
>>546130
>Pic related he and his son
Why not both his sons?
Most people do not appreciate the kind of shit that Muslim dictators have to deal with.They're all sitting on a local version of ISIS.
/QTDDTOTT/ Ask your questions here.
I'll start.
>the aztecs had no metallurgy
>the spanish plundered aztec gold
Can anyone explain this? Were there just boxes of unrefined gold sitting around in Tenochtitlan? Or if gold was cast by Aztecs into various things, then why didn't the Aztecs discover copper or tin or iron?
From Wikipedia:
"Indigenous Americans have been using native metals from ancient times, with recent finds of gold artifacts in the Andean region dated to 2155–1936 BCE.[1] and North American copper finds dated to approximately 5000 BCE.[2] The metal would have been found in nature without need for smelting techniques and shaped into the desired form using heat and cold hammering techniques without chemically altering it by alloying it. To date "no one has found evidence that points to the use of melting, smelting and casting in prehistoric eastern North America."[3] In South America the case is quite different. Indigenous South Americans had full metallurgy with smelting and various metals being purposely alloyed"
>>545338
>the aztecs had no metallurgy
This isn't true at all though.
Also the image you posted is Inca not Aztec. Gold was always more associated with Peruvians than Mesoamericans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_Mesoamerica
>The emergence of metallurgy in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica occurred relatively late in the region's history, with distinctive works of metal apparent in West Mexico by roughly AD 800, and perhaps as early as AD 600.
>Metallurgical techniques likely diffused northward from regions in Central or South America via maritime trade routes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_copper_work_in_Mexico
>>545338
> Pre-Colombians knew the wheel and π but did not make use of it mechanically (only toys)
> except for the mayas, there was no written script only knots, but these so-called quipus could have the same complexity as written system
Japan is literally the Germany of Asia.
They used to have a weak goverment and many daymios fighting each other, but have finally united and created a great power, just as Holy Roman Empire. They focused on rapid industrialization and militarization, just as Kaiserreich. Japan started a long period of successful wars, creating a giant but short-lasting empire, same as III Reich. They were finally defeated and transformed into a democracy, ending with military domination and concentrating on economy and soft power, just as Germany after WW2. Finally, they are now a rich country, but their economy is not developing anymore.
>>545324
THe only exception is that when a German is confronted with the war crimes of ww2, they go "Yeah, we know, we're sorry" whereas a japanese goes "TENNOHEIKO BANZAI!" and blows himself up
>>545332
war crimes are a social construct
>>545332
ching chong please, it's war
I believe there is a massive conspiracy which seeks to paint the past as being exactly the same as modern day OR that life in the past was worse than life is today.
Life was objectively better in the past for everyone in the past except the elites.
This is all a result of capitalism. People are coerced into believing their lives are better today because they live in airconditioned houses and have internet and TV. You are being forced to work harder, longer hours today not to support your family and yourself but maintain an upward trajectory for those who already own all the wealth. With robotics taking over, people will not be able to live easier lives, instead they will have to work harder in order to match the output of machines.
Benefits of living in the past:
>You didn't have to go to school, you could start work at a young age and be paid for it
>There were less expectations on you, the human condition was accepted and you weren't expected to act like a rich person in order to be accepted socially
>Women knew their place, they did not hold power over men, they did not influence who was in power and they did not have authority to misuse
>Food was cheaper, better quality and more easily attainable, you could sustain yourself with a small garden patch and a few animals
>People had real communities where they interacted with their neighbours and had social events which brought everyone together
>Religion was very much at the forefront of the culture, resulting in people having something in common to believe in and connect with other people with as opposed to todays consumerism which is treated as a religious experience
>People were more in tune with nature, living agrarian lives they were not disconnected from the food they eat and the animals they slaughtered
>People were thankful for the simple things in life, rain that came to bring a good crop, people today are neither thankful nor grateful for anything they are constantly demanding more
Take the nostalgia goggles off, kid.
More benefits:
>Your work days were shorter and you didn't work as hard as the average person does today
>There were less laws and restrictions in place enabling you to live a more free life
>If you so wanted you could move into a forest and live there for free, no one owned the land and there is ample game and vegetation to live off
>>545212
Enjoy getting shot with an arrow for moving out of your clan territory.