During World War II, how important was North Africa?
I would certainly agree with you that the "balance" is often missing on the documentaries and to be quite honest I have not seen an American or British version that quite addresses the "balance" you are seeking (though I can appreciate your desire to learn on your own accord). That said, I question whether you would find any any balance from say a Russian version either. There certainly was much tragedy poured upon the Chinese nation from 1931 - 1945 and I would agree they should have at minimum one dedicated episode to that specific realm of occupation and war. In the end I believe the companies that make these documentaries are dedicated to the quality product but also have to strike a balance on Nielsen Ratings (to some degree). As much as I dislike having to speak to the "advertising revenue" I think it has to be considered on some level. Alot of good responders provided information on North Africa above me for you to come to your own conclusion by taking a piece from each and forming your own solved puzzle. I will merely add that North Africa was an important consideration in terms of what PM Churchill dubbed "the Axis Underbelly". After Dunkirk it was paramount that some success be gained. As you know the North African campaigns would allow for the Allies to proceed to Italy via Sicily and Operation Husky. Both FDR and Churchill were quite aware of the fact that by the time "HUSKY" would begin Stalin was confronted with 118 Wermacht and SS Divisions on his various fronts (Group A, B, and C). The goal with North Africa was to move to Italy and at least attempt to relieve Stalin by forcing the WW I Corporal to move divisions from his east to the south against the Brit's and Yanks. Hope this helps to some degree and have a great day! Gerry D.
What is neo-colonialism? Does this history help as well to explain the accumulation of foreign debt which has?
What is neo-colonialism? Does this history help as well to explain the accumulation of foreign debt which has plagued Latin America from the time of its independence until the current day? Does it help explain the popularity of today's leftist leaders in Latin America, such as Chavez in Venezuela & Morales in Bolivia?
Why do Christians always use these 3 excuses whenever an unpopular bible verse is questioned?
1) Mistranslation 2) Misinterpretation 3) Out of context Let's explore these three excuses.. 1) Mistranslation - Popular examples include feminists who do not want to believe what 1 Corinthians 14:34 has to say. They usually choose to re-translate it to fit what they want to believe. Same goes for homosexual Christians who re-translate all those homophobic verses until it's ok for them to be gay. Then there's the mention of Unicorns and Behemoths. - Now if the bible was divinely inspired, why wasn't the translation divinely inspired? Didn't god care that some people would misunderstand his eternal word? 2) Misinterpretations - Examples include the earlier feminist and homosexual Christians. If they're too lazy to look up other possible, more likeable translations, they simply interpret it to fit what they'd like to hear. This is also a useful excuse for making up for the batshit insane claims of Genesis. - Why did god decide to make his message to humanity so cryptic and open to hundreds of interpretations? Is this all a game to him to see who can solve his little puzzle? If his message is so important, why not just give it to us straight? I'm expecting a reply of "you need the holy spirit to understand what the bible really means" - and I suppose your denomination has that holy spirit and everyone else is wrong? There are 38 000 denominations, all interpreting the same book differently. Are you saying 37 999 denominations are too stupid or too unholy to understand what god wanted to say? 3) Out of context - Perfect example: Psalms 137:9. There are tons of others but I'm too lazy too look for them. This one will do tho. - The most annoying thing about this excuse is they always just spit out "context" and leave it at that as that's how far their little memorized defense-line takes them. Please, if you insist on using this one, provide the "right context" to "properly understand the verse". So explain to me in what possible context is it advised to smash babies against rocks? So why do you keep using these same old excuses?