Folks may be interested in knowing about this new book of essays on American Anglo-Catholicism in the 1930s and 1940s: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1688797742
they are from latin america, mostly the carribeans, puerto rico, mexico and some being from cuba and the dominican republic, venezula, as i found some that were from such places on gedmatch, but one is also from spain, who shares the same exact small dna segment (8-9cm) with our distant cousin who is fully pueto rican, do you think we could share a spanish or hispanic ancestor? is this even accurate? they seem too be on the same dna segments as my fathers sicilian side, but none of them share any of my italian/siclian cousins nor the ones who have half of those dna segments where the hispanic cuzzos are as well. its very interesting. most of my ancestors have been in the united states from the 1600s too the 1700s around most of the area that was the british colonies, about 60% of my ancestors on both my parents sides, but my mother does not match with these people.
https://preview.redd.it/shzj8j8b3k681.png?width=418&format=png&auto=webp&s=be672b9b70e5dec3317aee0eb9b6a037977f8007
https://preview.redd.it/bemuya6w2k681.png?width=1284&format=png&auto=webp&s=e7f44b70faa21908f2304f5c65d78c87fb33160b
https://preview.redd.it/2j3dyd6w2k681.png?width=1286&format=png&auto=webp&s=c3526d5b2ea6e8b850976e65b59352253fefaa61
https://preview.redd.it/ykx5496w2k681.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b3fd302b31fda5fcb6b911a448966cfda5c331b
https://preview.redd.it/v1llod6w2k681.png?width=628&format=png&auto=webp&s=c553cea59a1cdb36f2eabdb9491a16d2d4c35109
https://preview.redd.it/amu7wd6w2k681.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=3e726d1bb75d2bf5abb297ef7a6e7c005506d760
In my semi-informed opinion, it seems like the "cult" or "myth" of the rifleman has an outsized importance in the Anglo-American military tradition, both in military traditions and in actual equipment and doctrinal design
In terms of myths, one of the most enduring images of the American military during the Revolutionary War is of the lone rifleman and sharpshooter. One of the British myths and stories coming out of World War 1 is of the BEF's fast and accurate rifle fire tricking German formations into thinking they were under machine gun fire. One of the USMC's core traditions is that "every marine is a rifleman", emphasizing (in theory) small arms accuracy even among rear-echelon formations
And these traditions and myths seem to have been borne out in how weapons and formations were designed. The Anglo-American squad in WW2 was still primarily a rifle-based force, unable to throw out as much fire as their German or Soviet counterparts who were built around crew served MGs and sub-machine guns. The early American Cold War infantry squad was still built around automatic riflemen rather than crew-served weapons. The later Cold War British squad did the same thing (and both of these practices were later abandoned in favor of purpose-built squad automatic weapons). The position of squad-level Designated Marksman seems to largely be limited to Anglo-American style armies (with exceptions). And even today, as far as I understand the USMC is once again planning to ditch the squad-level automatic weapon in favor of a designated automatic rifleman
Am I correct in that this cult/myth exists, and has a significant effect on British and American style military forces? Or are these practices more widespread, and I just don't know about them because I mostly read stuff in English about English-speaking military forces
I recently read that a defence lawyer in Spain has no role to investigate the circumstances of the case; how, therefore, can he/she act to protect the rights of a client accused of a criminal offence?
I am making a fictional (duh) future history timeline. It is set 500 years in the future, and one of the political entities there is an Anglo-American union, where the core Anglosphere countries (U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) are united together to form one bloc with a government to represent them. It is sort of like a federation, cuz the member countries are independent and such, more like a confederation in function. The British Monarch here only functions as a Judge of Last Resort, only having the power of veto but not initiative.
However, I'm having a hard time finding or coming up with an apt name for this "thing". I could call it the Anglosphere but that seems to me as a less official name for it. The world in this future organizes themselves into Civilization-States, so that's some background on it. Any ideas?
The companies entered into an agreement to explore the potential for developing the rail option. Aurizon Holdings Ltd has partnered with Anglo American Plc to investigate the viability of developing hydrogen... READ More
https://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/hydrogen-powered-trains-aurizon/8550503/
As a brit i've always been confused with some americans identifying as Anglo-Saxon.. How exactly are they Anglo Saxon? considering Anglo Saxons are not really a racial group at all in the UK
how can one claim 'anglo saxon' heritage?
British people are mix of all their invaders
Celtic, roman, Germanic, Viking, Norman
it seems odd that they would focus on this singular group of Germanic settlers
Some people were racist calling them FrAfrica and things like this. Alot of right wing people used it as an opportunity to promote their ideas of too much immigration etc . Did this happen in France too?
