How were the american indians subjugated?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Pekka
The problem is, they started scalping white women.

Don't take your history from westerns, dude.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SKILORD
I merely disagreed with the accusation that the Spanish had intentionally spread this disease through the use of smallpox-infected blankets.

That was the Brits.

[SKILORD]

That's what I said che.

[Pekka]

che, What you fail to see is, that you have read the history book provided by your school officials. Now, let's look at who the most powerful people are in that area.. let's see, the descendants of no else than Scalping Warrior.

I've got my sources and they're the real thing man.

[Dis]

All I know is white man did not spread blankets full of disease in my region.

The Indians were the aggressors, Sava. They did unprovoked attacks on settlers crossing south of Las Vegas, and even on the Old Spanish Trail. Army outposts were established to get the Indian population under control.

Yes Sava, I don't need to check my head. Attacks on civilians are attacks on civilians. And in my region they were unprovoked. The land was not taken illegally (except by the Spanish maybe)

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by jdd2007
We were the aggressors 99 of 100 times.

Actually Eurocoms did 85% of the work, Spanish mostly.

We did the last 15%, dumbass Andrew Jackson gets my blame for starting the nonsense even though Washington's administration sent expeditions into Ohio to subdue the tribes that were there. Actually the tribes there whooped American azz until the fort system was developed. That's why in the midwest there are all those cities that start with "Ft."

Also another thing to mention is that often times Indian tribes were doing the same thing to each other that whitey was doing to them. Whitey just had better equipment and alot more momentum behind him.


And even then there are cases where it wasn't all that black and white. There were Spanish settlers in the Southwest that teamed up with particular Indian tribes in a common society to defend themselves against other hostile tribes in the area.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Verto
Are you sure the Spanish are innocent of that act?

When the Spanish first reached the Inca Empire, they found that a smallpox epidemic had already been raging there- brought along the trade routes from Inca tributary states on the Caribbean coast, and travelling with the Incan army.

Smallpox epidemics (amongst others, such as measles) account for the relative ease of the conquest of the Aztec Empire, that and the fact that the Spanish could count on 'native' allies. I believe it was an African slave who had the notoriety of passing on smallpox first in the New World.

http://strategypage.com/articles/smallpox/3.asp

Elizabeth I of England suffered a smallpox attack, as did Charles XII of Sweden. One French suitor for Elizabeth's hand in marriage died of smallpox, and Seville's population was reduced by half due to an epidemic.

[Dis]

Re: Re: How were the american indians subjugated?

Originally posted by Kidicious


I can't help but see the similarities between Americans and the terrorists, even the Americans living today, especially with idiots who believe this stupid crap.

you lefties keep dreaming that terrorists are freedom fighters. maybe someday it will happen.

They don't really care about their cause. It's just an excuse to use their hatred to kill people.

Why do people continue to see Terrorists as good people?

[Guardian]

Originally posted by Dissident

But I can't help but see some similarities of the actions of the american indians and modern day terrorists. Both saw/see western civilization as an affront to their culture and well being. And both have attacked common civilians to try to achieve objectives. And I'm thinking perhaps there is a solution to our current problems here.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, this is right up there with saying Hitler was right. You know, Jews have been known to cause some problems too from time to time. Too bad the Holocaust wasn't successful, eh?

Originally posted by Dissident
Attacks on civilians are attacks on civilians.

Yes, and the white man did it far more often and on a much larger scale than the Indians did.

[molly bloom]

Re: Re: Re: How were the american indians subjugated?

Originally posted by Dissident

you lefties keep dreaming that terrorists are freedom fighters. maybe someday it will happen.

They don't really care about their cause. It's just an excuse to use their hatred to kill people.

Why do people continue to see Terrorists as good people?

You mean like the Nicaraguan Contras?

http://www.businessweek.com/1997/25/b353254.htm

Do you consider Ronald Reagan to have been a lefty?


I think people who use terror to achieve political ends are terrorists- as a member of the Irish Garda Police Association put it:

" The view of my association is that people who contravene the criminal code are only criminals and no cause can justify them being other than that."

European Union of Police Federations Conference, Koln Spetember 19th 1979

[Dis]

Originally posted by Guardian



Well, as far as I'm concerned, this is right up there with saying Hitler was right. You know, Jews have been known to cause some problems too from time to time. Too bad the Holocaust wasn't successful, eh?




Yes, and the white man did it far more often and on a much larger scale than the Indians did.

yep, the white mans would be considered terrorists too, if they weren't represented by a national goverment.

All I'm saying is we need to eradicate every single terrorist. I don't care how they do it. Leave the families. There is no need to eradicate them.

[Guardian]

Re: Re: Re: How were the american indians subjugated?

Originally posted by Dissident

Why do people continue to see Terrorists as good people?

I'm not saying terrorists are good people, I'm just saying it's not going to solve anything if we all get busy trying to wipe each other out, which - it seems to me - is in effect what you are proposing.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by Dissident
yep, the white mans would be considered terrorists too, if they weren't represented by a national goverment.

Oh, so it's OK to attack civillians if you're supported by a government?
I'm sure Bush & Co will find that one interesting. It sort of screws up their entire argument about state-sponsored terrorism, doesn't it?

All I'm saying is we need to eradicate every single terrorist. I don't care how they do it. Leave the families. There is no need to eradicate them.

Do you think those families are going to sit idly by and watch you eradicate their next of kin? I think you might be in for a little surprise or two...

[East Street Trader]

The proposition that North American indian attacks on incoming settlers were unprovoked is daft.

The indigenous North Americans were nomadic hunter gatherers. They depended upon the territories they occupied for their livelihoods. The invading settlers took no account of that whatsoever. They roamed and settled wherever they chose without so much as a by your leave; destroyed the buffalo herds for their skins; establishing ranches, farms, mines and towns all over the place.

For foreignors to invade your land and claim it as their own has been considered provocative from the beginning of time.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by PeteH
On epoint I would like to make explicit though, is I think the fundamental comparison in your post of Indians to terrorists, while I understand many of the similarities, due to the connotations seems a bit off.

The settlers were the ones who relied on terror in their operations. Scalping and mutilation of the dead were introduced by the english, who had previously used it against the Irish. The behavior of John Mason and company at the 'Pequot Massacre' so horrified the natives who had otherwise supported them in looking to battle the Pequots that they simply left the battlefield in horror, the burning of the village and slaughter of women and children while sleeping being so far from what they woudl ever consider as 'warfare'

How's that black and white world working out for you? As you like black and white so much perhaps you should do a little reading, you know from various sources and all. Then you might want to rethink your generalization above. You'd think no one knew how to fart before the evil white man taught him how.