New answers tagged

0

In addition to the excellent answers above, a further source for answers to this question is Tom Segev: One Palestine, Complete, Abacus 2001. The British Cabinet, and the Foreign Minister, Balfour, may have been persuaded of the wisdom of supporting a Jewish homeland in Palestine, but the Treasury, who were supposed to finance it, and the Colonial Office, ...


0

The British Empire contained more Muslim subjects than even the Ottoman Empire at its height. In particular, the Muslims of India were bitterly opposed to Zionist immigration. The Indian National Congress supported the 'Khilafat', and later the anti-Zionist position which was also held by King Saud as well as the Egyptian Khedive and the two Hashemite ...


-1

Not sure if this is the correct forum to ask this, but I'm currently reading 'Exodus' by Leon Uris, and I'm curious as to why the British were so reluctant in letting Jewish people in Palestine. It wasn't just the British, the Americans weren't keen about Jewish immigration either despite the threat that Hitler then posed to the Jews in Europe (perhaps ...


0

Never Tank and armored vehicles were main difference between WW2 and WW1, and major technological breakthrough that make us think about WW1 as static and WW2 as mobile war(fare). This was recognized during WW2 itself, and there was a large focus on destroying or disabling enemy armored formations. Aircraft, as another technical novelty, was considered as an ...


4

The 'Tank Busters'. From 'Myth of the Tankbuster' (HistoryNet) [T]he RAF was the first air force to field a dedicated anti-tank airplane, the Hawker Hurricane Mark IID, armed with two Vickers S 40mm cannons firing tungsten-tipped rounds. First in action at Bir Hakim in June 1942, No. 6 Squadron’s pilots quickly discovered one of the key ...


0

I remember to have read in Ernst Jüngers "In Stahlgewittern", the English translation is called Storm of Steel, that Jünger felt, that the churned up soil near the front lines dampened the effect of artillery shells. Furthermore, he also wrote, that the Germans felt quite safe in their bunkers. So, to add another point, although admittedly poorly sourced: ...


0

There were tests before the war and before some offensives of WW1. But there was two points with the battle of the Somme: First artillery shellings were aimed mostly at the first trenches of the global defense system of the Germans, which was built in depth (in depth as military significance, which is far from the front line, not under the ground. Those ...


3

The process would probably take some time, but how much depends on where the soldier was serving, and the circumstances of his death. Victoria Cross recommendations in the 20th century have been investigated rather carefully, which takes time. The family are likely to be notified first that their son has been killed in action. That might be by post or ...


4

Your first question is why did the British maintain such large forces Iraq and Persia in 1942 to 1943. In addition to the answers you gave in your question, there was at least one more reason. As Wikipedia reports: "As [the Indian 14th Army's] soon to be promoted commander Major-General William Slim wrote: 'We could move we could fight and we had begun ...


1

There were (at least) two reasons. The first was that there was no "provocation" from China in 1898. The British took Hong Kong Island in 1842 after the Opium War, and Kowloon in 1860 after the Arrow War, which is sometimes referred to as the Second Opium War. There was no war (with China) in connection with the acquisition of the New Territories. Given ...


0

Calcutta was very close to Ghazipur City (in present day Bihar). Ghazipur has an excellent climate for growing poppy and also had the Ganga River nearby which provided an optimum amount of water for its cultivation. The website of Ghazipur City says- .In 1764 AD Britishers won Buxar and Ghazipur which was therafter ruled by East India Company . Company ...


Top 50 recent answers are included