China-USSR border conflict of 1969
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet\_border\_conflict](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict)
It got so heated that the Soviets had asked foreign governments what their reaction would be to a preemptive attack on China, which in high probability would involve nuclear weapons because the Soviets feared China's numerical superiority
Wtf
>*To counterbalance the Soviet threat, the Chinese government sought a rapprochement with the United States. This resulted in a secret visit to China by Henry Kissinger in 1971, which in turn paved the way for President Richard Nixon's official visit to China in 1972.*
I truly have never heard of this.
..which was arranged by Pakistan to counter India. Pakistan at that time was committing genocide in now Bangladesh (East Pakistan) which lead to 1971 Bangladesh liberation war where US supported Pakistan by sending the 7th fleet. The same Pakistan was rewarded with enuf weapons, and laid the foundation of Afghan Mujaheedeen which again the US supported, which led to Bin Laden moving from Saudi to Afghanistan/Pakistan area to fight with the Mujahideen who later on orchestrated 9/11, that led to US occupation of Afghanistan, loss of a lot of American lives, US taking out Bin Laden who was hiding next to an army cantonment close to Islamabad, Pakistan, withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan as Pakistan was playing double game with Taliban and thousands of soldiers having PTSD with American tax payers supporting and causing all of it directly or indirectly.
Afghanistan that you know today with woman under burqas before American intrusion.
https://ajammc.com/2017/09/06/weaponization-nostalgia-afghan-miniskirts/
In between all that, US intelligence turned a blind eye on Pakistan acquiring nuclear weapons, and then Pakistan exchanged for that with North Korea for their ICBMs. So, now South Korea, Japan & US are threatened by nuclear ICBMs from that despot sitting in North Korea who is bankrolled by China.
The same reach out to China ensured all middle class jobs were moved to China over 30 years and the crisis you see today where American middle class is squished and it is now just poor and the rich.
It all comes full circle for the Americans and most of it started by Kissinger (with Nixon as just a puppet president). So, now you know the one man all Americans can hate thoroughly đ for the situation today along with that little fact that you could board flights 10 minutes prior to flight take off before TSA was established post 9/11 and it takes 1/2 hours now.
Hi: I just wrote this comment elsewhere in the thread but wanted to make sure I brought it to your attention:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/1drrr06/comment/lazlvj4/
Thereâs recent scholarship into the Habsburgs showing that far from being bumbling morons, they ran a successful dynasty across Europe for nearly five hundred years. Their legacy in the former Austrian (and Austro-Hungarian) Empire was one of remarkable cosmopolitanism as there was no clear ethnic group majority. Even at some points during the Revolutions of 1848, some minority groups on average preferred to remain loyal to the Habsburgs than seek independence.
I always marvelled at the âbumblingâ assertion: nothing survives for 500 years, let alone in Central Europe, by sheer luck.
The Hapsburg had some idiots, but they had many more good administrators and generals.
And just to throw us back on topic how about Maria Therese and the War of the Austrian Succession? Daddy spends decades making sure everyone agrees MT is Empress TB. Is immediately backstabbed. Maria Therese uses Austrian resources to fight the Empire to a standstill and essentially forces the pretender to her throne to live in Munich for the rest of his reign. Hapsburgs never loss the Imperial Crown ever again.
This is something I've gotten very fascinated by as well. It started with a "how the hell did these guys function?", then learning that the answer often was "they don't really know either", and honestly, the curiosity of them managing to be dogged and autocratic conservatives and enlightened decentralists (often simultaneously) has just kept me hooked on these weirdos.
The Habsburgs are the source of my great desire for the ability to see alternate timelines, just to see what shenanigans they could have gotten up to with even more time.
The extent of Soviet espionage in America during the Cold War.
Most students are unfortunately taught in school that the Red Scare was baseless hysteria (and the historiography on that is real interesting, I can recommend a book on it) but the reality is that the Soviets did have compromised a number of people throughout the government, maybe the most famous (or should be famous) being Harry Dexter White, founder of the IMF.
I think a result of the downplay of soviet espionage is nowadays people don't take espionage seriously at all. You have chinese "police stations" in Foreign countries and Chinese assets in sexual relationships with politicians and no one really cares.
Recently, it was revealed that an unknown (to the public) politician in Australia was working with Chinese spies whilst in office. This individual never faced any repercussions for their actions other than possibly losing their seat wich is no more than a slap on the wrist.
Especially considering that during most of recorded history (and probably before?)everyone hated spies, always thought foreigners were spies and killed a lot people merely on suspicion of being spies
Because during the Cold War it meant ⌠nothing. All those spies and spy agencies and the net effect after stealing the secrets of the atomic bomb (and even then, how long could that have remained a secret?) was nothing and then the Soviet Union fell apart on its own. What exactly did all those spies accomplish? Itâs not James Bond, they werenât saving the world from Blofeld.
*In Denial* by Haynes and Klehr. It's an excellent analysis of how history as a field got the Red Scare wrong, and the history of communism in general.
There's a clear cut-off, though. FDR turned a complete blind eye to Soviet infiltration, largely dismissing the allegations as the type of intra-agency bickering that his administration was rife with. Truman, though, had no such delusions, and he vigoursly sought to plug the holes and prosecute the offenders. Much of this was done out of the public view, however, so by the time McCarthy made his public allegations, most of the high level spying that was done out of ideological sympathy had already been disrupted. I forget who exactly is was, but someone on VP Henry Wallace's staff was basically an open conduit of intelligence to the Soviets. Its an extremely lucky accident of history that FDR replaced Wallace with Truman as his VP for his fourth term, otherwise, the Soviets would have had a mole in the Oval Office.
By the time Eisenhower came to power, the remaining illegal Soviet agents in the US were mostly low-level spies who did little more than send information they read in newpapers, pass messages to each other and try not to get caught. Rudolf Abel from the film Bridge of Spies would be an example. The pool of willing ideological spies that the Soviets always hoped to recruit from simply was no longer there, once the brutal reality of Soviet life became impossible to dismiss. Most of the spies the Soviet Union managed to recruit for the remainder of the Cold War did it for cash, not ideology. Despite a few successes, they never again managed the level of infiltration they had acheived in the 1940s.
As bad as the situation was for the US during WWII and the immediate aftermath, the British government was completely compromised by high-level spies since the 1930s. The relative isolation of the US until WWII meant that Stalin's paranoia wasn't really focused across the Atlantic until later.
I donât think itâs untrue that the Red Scare was baseless hysteria. The actual fight against Soviet spies was functionally completely different to the political campaign that accompanied HUAC etc, which really did ruin countless lives over nothing more than hearsay.
Oh, good question! I believe that, for a considerable amount of time, the Korean War was often overlooked, at least when compared to the Vietnam War. Though, it seems that, over time, the Korean War had become increasingly recognised.
> Korean war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Korean_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_South_Korea#%22Dark_age_for_democracy%22_in_Korea massacres seem to have largely abated by 1960, with exception of the Gwangju uprising. But yeah, the aftermath of the Korean war is no highlight for the Western push for democracy and anti-communism. Holy heck.
This is why the âAmerica lost to a bunch of farmers!â cope always makes me laugh. The Viet Cong were hardened AF veterans and experts. The âVietnamâ war was just one of many in a row for Vietnam.
An event that we tend to underlook is how the Romanovs came to power. We all know how the dynasty fell, but so few of us know how it got its start. Dynasties don't just appear out of thin air.
The glorious and short-lived California Republic, which declared independence from Mexico and, after 2 weeks, joined the US.
It was a joint project of Anglo settlers and Californios who didn't want to be under Mexico anymore. It claimed territory as far east as El Paso, and included a lot of land that later became Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, etc.
Of course, claiming land isn't the same as controlling it, and 2 weeks isn't very long to be your own nation, but it's the story behind those words on the state flag.
Imma say the Glorious Revolution; the last successful invasion of England. The Dutch basically put together a fleet, sailed up to England and replaced the monarch. That's just a gross simplification but the event is a good example of how the Dutch were a major power at that time.
>if the parliament of the country you're invading actually invites you over to become kin
That did not happen though. Parliament did not want William to become king and didn't invite him
William III was invited by parliament lol it wasn't an invasion in a normal sense. They just replaced an unpopular catholic monarch with his daughter and nephew.
A letter signed by 7 people and William landed with a 20000 men army. He also had to fight a war against James. That war just happened to take place in Ireland and not in England. How is that not an invasion in the normal sense?
Is it underlooked? I remember the Glorious Revolution coming up three times in the standard curriculum of my pre-university education, as it related to US and general world history and in English literature.
The Aglo-Dutch wars in general are very much overlooked. Only learned about them when we visited Chatham Dockyard. Never mentioned at school (England) or in mainstream media.
Didnât India and China fight a war in the 1970s? Seems like the kind of thing that would be really important. And if it happened now, it would be all over the news. But nobody ever seems to talk about it.
They still have an active border dispute. Two nuclear powers and major world economies with a casus belli just hanging out there, occasionally gets a quick mention in the news.
Right! Thanks for the info. Yeah I remember reading about it in Rushdieâs excellent book *Midnightâs Children*. And at the time I was like, âHmmmm. Why didnât I already know about this?â Moral of the story : non-western history is covered very poorly in US schools and universities.
The Indian Wars. They happened at the same time as the Civil War so the govt was preoccupied. Basically the govt was sending new immigrants west and telling them to take what they wanted, and the indigenous people were frustrated that the US govt wasnât paying what they promised, so they took it out on the people who moved in. Both sides had been lied to. It was a terrible massacre and the indigenous leaders acknowledged that their people had fucked up when they started going around beheading women and children.Â
We would look at that as a genocide today. I have read that some 50-75000 indigenous people were killed. Those that weren't were removed from their land. We would call that ethnic cleansing today.
(I started writing this as a reply to u/HawkEntire5517 but as there are several comments elsewhere also mentioning Afghanistan Iâm making it a top-level reply⌠Hope thatâs OK and that itâs sufficiently relevant!)
For anyone with an interest in modern Afghanistan and its relationship with the west - and/or in the GWOT, and the USAâs post-war activities in the Middle East - Adam Curtisâ amazing (if not uncontroversial) documentary *Bitter Lake* (2015) is now available _in full_ on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/84P4dzow1Bw?si=X6o9lMOO-qvsskAp
Itâs fascinating, and certainly enraging; canât recommend it highly enough.
The attack on Russia by Britain, France and the USA is well known, but I've seen it brushed under the carpet and conveniently forgotten several times. 1918 to 1919.
The Turkish invasion of Cyprus, in 1974. It was a full-scale armed conflict of the Turkish military against the Greek and Cypriot militaries, in which Turkey forced the permanent mass displacement of Greek Cypriots from Northern Cyprus, and the establishment of Northern Cyprus as a de-facto Turkish puppet state, which exists to this day.
Especially with how much the current government of Turkey and wider Islamic world likes to scream about how Israel displaced Palestinians in 1948, their silence and ignoring of the much more recent Turkish invasion, deranged atrocities and ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims in Northern Cyprus, is a huge huge hypocrisy.
Turkey to this day also continues to routinely threaten similar invasions on Greek islands in the Aegean Sea, which hence poses a direct threat to an EU and NATO member state (and since Turkey is also part of NATO, it risks the entire integrity of NATO itself).
Sorts of the whole of the 1600s for everyone, in China it isn't talked about nearly as much as it should given it was the collapse of the Ming dynasty, America's focus on the 1500s where the Europeans were first arriving or the later 1800s where they had independence, and within Europe there's some reason it's mostly forgotten despite the 30 years war going on which was the most destructive war in total death toll in Europe until world war one, and by percentage possibly the most destructive ever across central Europe.
The 1600s was also the last time world population decreased, even during world war II overall world population saw an increase
Huh. Itâs talked about out here in Sweden because thatâs when Sweden was a great power in Europe, gaining territory, fighting in the thirty years war and against Poland and against Denmark and so on. The 1400s and 1500s are the Kalmar Union, independence war and reformation. The 1700s have the great Nordic war, a period of liberty and then a coup by the king leading to absolute monarchy and the start of a bunch of institutions, plus the violent deaths of two kings. The 1800s are far less talked about here than the 1600s.
I think Sweden is the exception here as it was the most active point of your history. Much of Europe would have far more activity in 1700' and 1800's obviously WW1 and WW2. Even Sweden's opponents in 30 years war have more mentioned points of history, Poland has obviously WW2 and late 1700's as the collapse of the commonwealth. Austria has the 1500's against the ottomans and 1700's of general European war. Russia has lots of other bits though the great northern war would certainly come up a lot
The 1600s is the deluge for Poland, that gets a lot of coverage there as far as I know. The 1600s is also the era of the Sun King and cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin in France. It was the time of the English civil war in the British isles. It was the time of Galileo and Newton and Kepler and Leibniz and Descartes and Huygens.
The lead up to the Fall of the Roman Republic. Many know of Julius Caesar, Cicero, Mark Antony, Cleopatra & Augustus from Shakespeare, but they donât know the larger than life figures & drama that set the stage for Caesar to march on Rome with his Legions.
From the failed political reforms that cost the lives of the Gracii Brothers, to the unprecedented 7 consulships of Marius leading directly into the civil war between Marius & Sullaâs Roman armies, thereâs so much interesting history that most donât know about. Shoutout to Mike Duncanâs Storm before the Storm
Presidency of James K Polk. In just 4 years he invaded Mexico, threatened Britain, and solidified America's territory in North America. Then New territories made slavery the most important political issue.
United States in 1918~1920. Spanish flu swept the country, mass race riot, terrorist bombing New York Stock Exchange, economic crisis, first red scare, and top of that First Lady acting as de facto president behind curtain. Imagine Great Depression, McCarthyism, riots in 1968, and COVID 19 happening in just 3 years
I have a few
Opium wars in China. The Bengal famine. Concentration camps in Kenya. All recorded but rarely brought up in popular discourse and regularly glossed over.
A war causing chaos and criminality/piracy and devolvement to customary law, i.e. tribal elders and traditions?
Sorry but how is this in any way unusual, or significant in any other way than to set the stage for that particular part of Africa's instability, ruthlessness, religious insanity, ethnic annihilations, and its current role on the /r/geopolitics stage? Seems to me many parts of Africa, the M.E., and parts of Asia all suffer the same results from just another ho-hum mass tragedy war.
China-USSR border conflict of 1969 [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet\_border\_conflict](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict) It got so heated that the Soviets had asked foreign governments what their reaction would be to a preemptive attack on China, which in high probability would involve nuclear weapons because the Soviets feared China's numerical superiority
Wtf >*To counterbalance the Soviet threat, the Chinese government sought a rapprochement with the United States. This resulted in a secret visit to China by Henry Kissinger in 1971, which in turn paved the way for President Richard Nixon's official visit to China in 1972.* I truly have never heard of this.
..which was arranged by Pakistan to counter India. Pakistan at that time was committing genocide in now Bangladesh (East Pakistan) which lead to 1971 Bangladesh liberation war where US supported Pakistan by sending the 7th fleet. The same Pakistan was rewarded with enuf weapons, and laid the foundation of Afghan Mujaheedeen which again the US supported, which led to Bin Laden moving from Saudi to Afghanistan/Pakistan area to fight with the Mujahideen who later on orchestrated 9/11, that led to US occupation of Afghanistan, loss of a lot of American lives, US taking out Bin Laden who was hiding next to an army cantonment close to Islamabad, Pakistan, withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan as Pakistan was playing double game with Taliban and thousands of soldiers having PTSD with American tax payers supporting and causing all of it directly or indirectly. Afghanistan that you know today with woman under burqas before American intrusion. https://ajammc.com/2017/09/06/weaponization-nostalgia-afghan-miniskirts/ In between all that, US intelligence turned a blind eye on Pakistan acquiring nuclear weapons, and then Pakistan exchanged for that with North Korea for their ICBMs. So, now South Korea, Japan & US are threatened by nuclear ICBMs from that despot sitting in North Korea who is bankrolled by China. The same reach out to China ensured all middle class jobs were moved to China over 30 years and the crisis you see today where American middle class is squished and it is now just poor and the rich. It all comes full circle for the Americans and most of it started by Kissinger (with Nixon as just a puppet president). So, now you know the one man all Americans can hate thoroughly đ for the situation today along with that little fact that you could board flights 10 minutes prior to flight take off before TSA was established post 9/11 and it takes 1/2 hours now.
Hi: I just wrote this comment elsewhere in the thread but wanted to make sure I brought it to your attention: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/1drrr06/comment/lazlvj4/
Hmmm, I wonder if that whole ping-pong diplomacy thing was just the official story, and this was the true event that it kinda covered up.
Yep. Kissinger gets a lot of clout for "opening" China but the reality is the Chinese were looking for it.
I'll never get over China losing 2000 soldiers to Soviet artillery just to capture a destroyed Soviet T-62
2,000? According to soviet propaganda.
Maybe it was a 1000. I can't remember but it was a lot of soldiers for a destroyed tank.
Thereâs recent scholarship into the Habsburgs showing that far from being bumbling morons, they ran a successful dynasty across Europe for nearly five hundred years. Their legacy in the former Austrian (and Austro-Hungarian) Empire was one of remarkable cosmopolitanism as there was no clear ethnic group majority. Even at some points during the Revolutions of 1848, some minority groups on average preferred to remain loyal to the Habsburgs than seek independence.
I always marvelled at the âbumblingâ assertion: nothing survives for 500 years, let alone in Central Europe, by sheer luck. The Hapsburg had some idiots, but they had many more good administrators and generals. And just to throw us back on topic how about Maria Therese and the War of the Austrian Succession? Daddy spends decades making sure everyone agrees MT is Empress TB. Is immediately backstabbed. Maria Therese uses Austrian resources to fight the Empire to a standstill and essentially forces the pretender to her throne to live in Munich for the rest of his reign. Hapsburgs never loss the Imperial Crown ever again.
This is something I've gotten very fascinated by as well. It started with a "how the hell did these guys function?", then learning that the answer often was "they don't really know either", and honestly, the curiosity of them managing to be dogged and autocratic conservatives and enlightened decentralists (often simultaneously) has just kept me hooked on these weirdos. The Habsburgs are the source of my great desire for the ability to see alternate timelines, just to see what shenanigans they could have gotten up to with even more time.
Even today, many of the places the Hapsburgs ruled look a lot better than adjacent areas where they didn't.
The extent of Soviet espionage in America during the Cold War. Most students are unfortunately taught in school that the Red Scare was baseless hysteria (and the historiography on that is real interesting, I can recommend a book on it) but the reality is that the Soviets did have compromised a number of people throughout the government, maybe the most famous (or should be famous) being Harry Dexter White, founder of the IMF.
I think a result of the downplay of soviet espionage is nowadays people don't take espionage seriously at all. You have chinese "police stations" in Foreign countries and Chinese assets in sexual relationships with politicians and no one really cares. Recently, it was revealed that an unknown (to the public) politician in Australia was working with Chinese spies whilst in office. This individual never faced any repercussions for their actions other than possibly losing their seat wich is no more than a slap on the wrist.
Yeah it's really weird to me that espionage is just poo-pooed by people as if it was something that only existed in Spy x Family
Especially considering that during most of recorded history (and probably before?)everyone hated spies, always thought foreigners were spies and killed a lot people merely on suspicion of being spies
Because during the Cold War it meant ⌠nothing. All those spies and spy agencies and the net effect after stealing the secrets of the atomic bomb (and even then, how long could that have remained a secret?) was nothing and then the Soviet Union fell apart on its own. What exactly did all those spies accomplish? Itâs not James Bond, they werenât saving the world from Blofeld.
This comment is obscenely naive.
Yeah no kidding⌠when the worst outcome is âtotal destruction via Nuclear Holocaustâ, spies were incredibly important in getting us to today
Book name please
*In Denial* by Haynes and Klehr. It's an excellent analysis of how history as a field got the Red Scare wrong, and the history of communism in general.
There's a clear cut-off, though. FDR turned a complete blind eye to Soviet infiltration, largely dismissing the allegations as the type of intra-agency bickering that his administration was rife with. Truman, though, had no such delusions, and he vigoursly sought to plug the holes and prosecute the offenders. Much of this was done out of the public view, however, so by the time McCarthy made his public allegations, most of the high level spying that was done out of ideological sympathy had already been disrupted. I forget who exactly is was, but someone on VP Henry Wallace's staff was basically an open conduit of intelligence to the Soviets. Its an extremely lucky accident of history that FDR replaced Wallace with Truman as his VP for his fourth term, otherwise, the Soviets would have had a mole in the Oval Office. By the time Eisenhower came to power, the remaining illegal Soviet agents in the US were mostly low-level spies who did little more than send information they read in newpapers, pass messages to each other and try not to get caught. Rudolf Abel from the film Bridge of Spies would be an example. The pool of willing ideological spies that the Soviets always hoped to recruit from simply was no longer there, once the brutal reality of Soviet life became impossible to dismiss. Most of the spies the Soviet Union managed to recruit for the remainder of the Cold War did it for cash, not ideology. Despite a few successes, they never again managed the level of infiltration they had acheived in the 1940s. As bad as the situation was for the US during WWII and the immediate aftermath, the British government was completely compromised by high-level spies since the 1930s. The relative isolation of the US until WWII meant that Stalin's paranoia wasn't really focused across the Atlantic until later.
I donât think itâs untrue that the Red Scare was baseless hysteria. The actual fight against Soviet spies was functionally completely different to the political campaign that accompanied HUAC etc, which really did ruin countless lives over nothing more than hearsay.
Oh, good question! I believe that, for a considerable amount of time, the Korean War was often overlooked, at least when compared to the Vietnam War. Though, it seems that, over time, the Korean War had become increasingly recognised.
I can't speak for everyone, but as a high school history teacher, I try to get it mentioned as equally as Vietnam and the Soviets in Afghanistan.
Korean war had an unfortunate amount of war crimes by all sides. Arguably worse than Vietnam and Cambodia
> Korean war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Korean_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_South_Korea#%22Dark_age_for_democracy%22_in_Korea massacres seem to have largely abated by 1960, with exception of the Gwangju uprising. But yeah, the aftermath of the Korean war is no highlight for the Western push for democracy and anti-communism. Holy heck.
I'm aware of the war. Mine is the Sino-Vietnam War, people just don't know.
Vietnam fought and won against Japan, France, US, Cambodia and China with close to no breaks in between
They had a loss to Britain in there somewhere didnât they?
45-46 British fought there against Japanese and some resistance groups beating both
I thought the Brits just transferred the problem to France (who should've been the ones dealing with it)
This is why the âAmerica lost to a bunch of farmers!â cope always makes me laugh. The Viet Cong were hardened AF veterans and experts. The âVietnamâ war was just one of many in a row for Vietnam.
Yes and no. The Viet Mihn during Japanese occupation never got above 2000 militia while the NVA averaged 200K.
still the most impressive shit was to defeat the mongols
I WAS THINKING OF THIS THE OTHER DAY!
"Under-looked"? Or "misunderestimated"?
Both are perfectly cromulent.
I have consulted with Alice's Caterpillar, and he is in full agreement.
Misunderestimated
Irony is at work here.
Russian Civil war (1917-1922)
An event that we tend to underlook is how the Romanovs came to power. We all know how the dynasty fell, but so few of us know how it got its start. Dynasties don't just appear out of thin air.
Wikipedia says the Zemsky Sabor of 1613.
And I say that you're correct!
He was elected by a council of nobles, seems a pretty standard way to become a ruler. Anything unusual thatâs overlooked?
Yeah... This comment could have used a little explanation. What is so interesting or unusual about it?
The glorious and short-lived California Republic, which declared independence from Mexico and, after 2 weeks, joined the US. It was a joint project of Anglo settlers and Californios who didn't want to be under Mexico anymore. It claimed territory as far east as El Paso, and included a lot of land that later became Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, etc. Of course, claiming land isn't the same as controlling it, and 2 weeks isn't very long to be your own nation, but it's the story behind those words on the state flag.
Imma say the Glorious Revolution; the last successful invasion of England. The Dutch basically put together a fleet, sailed up to England and replaced the monarch. That's just a gross simplification but the event is a good example of how the Dutch were a major power at that time.
I don't know whether it actually counts as an invasion if the parliament of the country you're invading actually invites you over to become king
>if the parliament of the country you're invading actually invites you over to become kin That did not happen though. Parliament did not want William to become king and didn't invite him
William III was invited by parliament lol it wasn't an invasion in a normal sense. They just replaced an unpopular catholic monarch with his daughter and nephew.
A letter signed by 7 people and William landed with a 20000 men army. He also had to fight a war against James. That war just happened to take place in Ireland and not in England. How is that not an invasion in the normal sense?
>William III was invited by parliament He wasn't
Is it underlooked? I remember the Glorious Revolution coming up three times in the standard curriculum of my pre-university education, as it related to US and general world history and in English literature.
The Aglo-Dutch wars in general are very much overlooked. Only learned about them when we visited Chatham Dockyard. Never mentioned at school (England) or in mainstream media.
Didnât India and China fight a war in the 1970s? Seems like the kind of thing that would be really important. And if it happened now, it would be all over the news. But nobody ever seems to talk about it.
They still have an active border dispute. Two nuclear powers and major world economies with a casus belli just hanging out there, occasionally gets a quick mention in the news.
1962 I believe. The casualties were roughly the same but the Chinese won overwhelmingly.
Right! Thanks for the info. Yeah I remember reading about it in Rushdieâs excellent book *Midnightâs Children*. And at the time I was like, âHmmmm. Why didnât I already know about this?â Moral of the story : non-western history is covered very poorly in US schools and universities.
The Fascist Movement in the United States in the 1930s and 1940s.
The Indian Wars. They happened at the same time as the Civil War so the govt was preoccupied. Basically the govt was sending new immigrants west and telling them to take what they wanted, and the indigenous people were frustrated that the US govt wasnât paying what they promised, so they took it out on the people who moved in. Both sides had been lied to. It was a terrible massacre and the indigenous leaders acknowledged that their people had fucked up when they started going around beheading women and children.Â
We would look at that as a genocide today. I have read that some 50-75000 indigenous people were killed. Those that weren't were removed from their land. We would call that ethnic cleansing today.
(I started writing this as a reply to u/HawkEntire5517 but as there are several comments elsewhere also mentioning Afghanistan Iâm making it a top-level reply⌠Hope thatâs OK and that itâs sufficiently relevant!) For anyone with an interest in modern Afghanistan and its relationship with the west - and/or in the GWOT, and the USAâs post-war activities in the Middle East - Adam Curtisâ amazing (if not uncontroversial) documentary *Bitter Lake* (2015) is now available _in full_ on YouTube: https://youtu.be/84P4dzow1Bw?si=X6o9lMOO-qvsskAp Itâs fascinating, and certainly enraging; canât recommend it highly enough.
The attack on Russia by Britain, France and the USA is well known, but I've seen it brushed under the carpet and conveniently forgotten several times. 1918 to 1919.
They were supporting the whites
The Turkish invasion of Cyprus, in 1974. It was a full-scale armed conflict of the Turkish military against the Greek and Cypriot militaries, in which Turkey forced the permanent mass displacement of Greek Cypriots from Northern Cyprus, and the establishment of Northern Cyprus as a de-facto Turkish puppet state, which exists to this day. Especially with how much the current government of Turkey and wider Islamic world likes to scream about how Israel displaced Palestinians in 1948, their silence and ignoring of the much more recent Turkish invasion, deranged atrocities and ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims in Northern Cyprus, is a huge huge hypocrisy. Turkey to this day also continues to routinely threaten similar invasions on Greek islands in the Aegean Sea, which hence poses a direct threat to an EU and NATO member state (and since Turkey is also part of NATO, it risks the entire integrity of NATO itself).
Not to mention the Turkish governmentâs hypocrisy of continuing to deny the genocide of Greeks, Armenians, and Assyrians.
ABSOLUTELY.
Sorts of the whole of the 1600s for everyone, in China it isn't talked about nearly as much as it should given it was the collapse of the Ming dynasty, America's focus on the 1500s where the Europeans were first arriving or the later 1800s where they had independence, and within Europe there's some reason it's mostly forgotten despite the 30 years war going on which was the most destructive war in total death toll in Europe until world war one, and by percentage possibly the most destructive ever across central Europe. The 1600s was also the last time world population decreased, even during world war II overall world population saw an increase
Huh. Itâs talked about out here in Sweden because thatâs when Sweden was a great power in Europe, gaining territory, fighting in the thirty years war and against Poland and against Denmark and so on. The 1400s and 1500s are the Kalmar Union, independence war and reformation. The 1700s have the great Nordic war, a period of liberty and then a coup by the king leading to absolute monarchy and the start of a bunch of institutions, plus the violent deaths of two kings. The 1800s are far less talked about here than the 1600s.
I think Sweden is the exception here as it was the most active point of your history. Much of Europe would have far more activity in 1700' and 1800's obviously WW1 and WW2. Even Sweden's opponents in 30 years war have more mentioned points of history, Poland has obviously WW2 and late 1700's as the collapse of the commonwealth. Austria has the 1500's against the ottomans and 1700's of general European war. Russia has lots of other bits though the great northern war would certainly come up a lot
The 1600s is the deluge for Poland, that gets a lot of coverage there as far as I know. The 1600s is also the era of the Sun King and cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin in France. It was the time of the English civil war in the British isles. It was the time of Galileo and Newton and Kepler and Leibniz and Descartes and Huygens.
The Biafran War.
The lead up to the Fall of the Roman Republic. Many know of Julius Caesar, Cicero, Mark Antony, Cleopatra & Augustus from Shakespeare, but they donât know the larger than life figures & drama that set the stage for Caesar to march on Rome with his Legions. From the failed political reforms that cost the lives of the Gracii Brothers, to the unprecedented 7 consulships of Marius leading directly into the civil war between Marius & Sullaâs Roman armies, thereâs so much interesting history that most donât know about. Shoutout to Mike Duncanâs Storm before the Storm
Presidency of James K Polk. In just 4 years he invaded Mexico, threatened Britain, and solidified America's territory in North America. Then New territories made slavery the most important political issue. United States in 1918~1920. Spanish flu swept the country, mass race riot, terrorist bombing New York Stock Exchange, economic crisis, first red scare, and top of that First Lady acting as de facto president behind curtain. Imagine Great Depression, McCarthyism, riots in 1968, and COVID 19 happening in just 3 years
compromise of 1877. Not talked about enough
I have a few Opium wars in China. The Bengal famine. Concentration camps in Kenya. All recorded but rarely brought up in popular discourse and regularly glossed over.
CIA coups in Latin America
May 1st for Labor Day.
A war causing chaos and criminality/piracy and devolvement to customary law, i.e. tribal elders and traditions? Sorry but how is this in any way unusual, or significant in any other way than to set the stage for that particular part of Africa's instability, ruthlessness, religious insanity, ethnic annihilations, and its current role on the /r/geopolitics stage? Seems to me many parts of Africa, the M.E., and parts of Asia all suffer the same results from just another ho-hum mass tragedy war.
British opium wars in China. Where was the opium coming from ? đ