Christianity ruins families.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm talking about Hawaii as a new territory in 1890s, you idiot; not when they voted to become the fiftieth state in mid-twentieth century. What happened in 1890s was U.S. Marines forced the Hawaiian monarchy to "accept" U.S. annexation as a territory. The fact that they gained independence only decades later is beside the point

It does matter, because you are arguing that the Hawaiian monarchy represented the people of Hawaii better than representative democracy.

What were the nineteenth century wars and conflicts between Native Americans and U.S. settlers and military forces about?

Native americans killing settlers, and then the US Army stepping in to protect them.

What about Stand Watie, Mr. Fun? Native Americans aren't a monolith.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben should shut up about subjects he doesn't know anything about.

Does that map list Apache/Comanche conflicts?

How about Apache vs Mexico or Comanche vs. Mexico?

Or was it just USA vs the world?

[MrFun]

It does matter, because you are arguing that the Hawaiian monarchy represented the people of Hawaii better than representative democracy.

Native americans killing settlers, and then the US Army stepping in to protect them.

What about Stand Watie, Mr. Fun? Native Americans aren't a monolith.

1) I'm not arguing that the Hawaiian monarchy was representative of all native Hawaiins. Again, you are either so dense that you did not understand my point, or you are deliberately distoriting my point.

2) I'm not arguing that Native Americans were/are a monolithic group. I'm well aware of the diversity of Native Americans from what I have learned over the years. Once again, you're either hopelessly dense or a compulsive liar.

And the fact that you think Native Americans did not act in self defense and that the conflicts were purely about U.S. military coming to help protect non-violent, hapless settlers is laughable. And no, I'm not saying that white settlers never suffered atrocities from Native Americans - that's not my point here.

[MrFun]

Follow gribbler's wiki link to the California conflicts in nineteenth century, BK - there's information there about the atrocities that white settlers committed against the native inhabitants of California.

[Wezil]

Ben should shut up about subjects he doesn't know anything about.

But what would that leave for him to talk about?

[giblets]

Native Americans try to stop the settlers who are relentlessly encroaching on their lands, US soldiers come in to kill the Native Americans, Ben blames the Native Americans. Priceless.

Up next: Ben blames rape victims for tempting men.

[MrFun]

Native Americans try to stop the settlers who are relentlessly encroaching on their lands, US soldiers come in to kill the Native Americans, Ben blames the Native Americans. Priceless.

Up next: Ben blames rape victims for tempting men.

Or, how about this.


Person buys a newly built home in suburbs. He owns it for several years and then sells it to another person.

Second person is now owner of the home. Thieves break into his house, and violently attack the owner. Thus in the Beniverse, the crime was committed against the first owner, not the current owner of the house.

[rah]

Native Americans try to stop the settlers who are relentlessly encroaching on their lands, US soldiers come in to kill the Native Americans, Ben blames the Native Americans. Priceless.

Up next: Ben blames rape victims for tempting men.

No he'll probably argue that since the Indians where more nomadic that the settlers weren't encroaching, they were settling lands that the Indians weren't currently using.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm not arguing that the Hawaiian monarchy was representative of all native Hawaiins.

Yes, you are arguing that the Hawaiian monarchy was in fact representative of native Hawaiians. I find it rather amusing that you are having to defend Kamahamaha in order to paint the US as the bad guys.

I guess Native Hawaiians voted for their King too.

2) I'm not arguing that Native Americans were/are a monolithic group. I'm well aware of the diversity of Native Americans from what I have learned over the years. Once again, you're either hopelessly dense or a compulsive liar.

Then you have to acknowledge that wars between native tribes played a significant role. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying that the Americans were perfect. I am saying that they weren't the bad guys you make them out to be. You can't reduce history of the west to the Americans as the great Satan and everyone else as a-ok.

And the fact that you think Native Americans did not act in self defense and that the conflicts were purely about U.S. military coming to help protect non-violent, hapless settlers is laughable.

I don't think they did act in self defense in most cases. Most of these were precipitated by attacks on settlers prior to the intervention of the US Army. The last, and the biggest of all of these was touched up by such an attack.

And no, I'm not saying that white settlers never suffered atrocities from Native Americans - that's not my point here.

Thank you. It's not just a one way thing. Many of these conflicts were in fact precipitated by Native Americans.

[Ben Kenobi]

Follow gribbler's wiki link to the California conflicts in nineteenth century, BK - there's information there about the atrocities that white settlers committed against the native inhabitants of California

Why does everyone assume that because I argue it wasn't this black or white, that I'm unaware of these.

[Ben Kenobi]

No he'll probably argue that since the Indians where more nomadic that the settlers weren't encroaching, they were settling lands that the Indians weren't currently using.

So if you were one of these settlers, you'd consider it self-defense to get slaughtered? I sure wouldn't.

[giblets]

Here's what happened in most of the US, and a lot of the americas: Native Americans were living in their ancestral lands when newcomers, backed by superior military power, uprooted them, killing many of them and relocating the rest to wastelands. If that's not conquest then conquest doesn't exist. It's sick that Ben puts so much effort into arguing semantics in order to whitewash the despicable actions done for temporal gain by people who called themselves Christians.

[rah]

If I settled on someone else's land, I would expect to have it challenged.

[Ben Kenobi]

Person buys a newly built home in suburbs. He owns it for several years and then sells it to another person.

Second person is now owner of the home. Thieves break into his house, and violently attack the owner. Thus in the Beniverse, the crime was committed against the first owner, not the current owner of the house.

I'd argue against this, except this is some strange tangent that has nothing to do with the point I was making.

[rah]

That's never stopped you in the past.