23 Jul 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindshttp://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/34_41_114_fn.jpeg
The Americans didn't know anything about germ warfare back in those days. Blame the small pox on God if you want; but the Americans didn't have anything to do with that. And the Americans did incorprate the Indians that were willing into there society. But like I said before, many of them were not very cooperative.
A letter from Amherst to Bouquet, dated 16 July 1763
You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by dogs could take effect.
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadAmherst and Bouquet were British, not American.
http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/34_41_114_fn.jpeg
A letter from Amherst to Bouquet, dated 16 July 1763You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by dogs could take effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Bouquet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffery_Amherst
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by stellspalfieWell, it was the British that did most of what you are talking about before we fought for independence against British tyranny.
are you really trying to justify the taking of american native land with 'we needed to expand' and 'we set aside some land', really???? are you mental???? 'needed' what exactly was the 'need' other than greed?
when china runs out of space and they 'need' some more land, im sure you wont mind when they expand into america, as long as they set a bit o ...[text shortened]... genous people to be killed by american settlers.
you really are a myopic edjit.
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsOne of the reasons the elite of the colonies revolted against the British elite is because they had agreed a pact with the native americans not to allow expansion westwards past the Appalachian mountains.
Aborigines to us Americans are those half naked people that live in Australia.
We still have what we call Indians or Native Americans. They have land that was set aside for them to live on and they still own that land today. However, most of them are a part of our regular society today.
When we got independence from British tyranny we gradually need ...[text shortened]... ing and massacring our peace loving settlers, our government was forced to take drastic actions.
Of course if they did not agree to live on reservations you slaughtered their women and children like so many vermin. As a Brit I am dripping in the blood of indigenous peoples around the world, as an American so are you. The difference is that I can admit it, whereas your view of yourselves is such a charade that you have to live in perpetual denial lest the facade collapses around you.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsplease, im happy to be corrected here as im no historian but didnt the british empire only stretch to the east coast of america?? i thought there were only about 14 or so states belonging to britain? we were gone by the end of the 1700's. so what happened in the 1800's? who's to blame for all the slaughter and land grabbing in the 1800's???
Well, it was the British that did most of what you are talking about before we fought for independence against British tyranny.
is their any coincidence that a nation built on greed should all end up as tubby little consumer-bots? 😉
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by stellspalfieYou can read something about the American Revelutionary War here:
please, im happy to be corrected here as im no historian but didnt the british empire only stretch to the east coast of america?? i thought there were only about 14 or so states belonging to britain? we were gone by the end of the 1700's. so what happened in the 1800's? who's to blame for all the slaughter and land grabbing in the 1800's???
is the ...[text shortened]... coincidence that a nation built on greed should all end up as tubby little consumer-bots? 😉
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War
The native American Indians were not landowners at that time. They did not have a society that believed in land ownership. But they became upset because we were interferring with their hunting for food. We tried to negotiate treaties with them, but due to misunderstanding many of those treaties broke down. We still make treaties with the Indians today. You can read something about it here:
http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0700/frameset_reset.html?http://www.nebraskastudies.org/0700/stories/0701_0141.html
That might not be the best source, but it was the first thing that come up on my search on google.
23 Jul 12
1 edit
Originally posted by kevcvs57I admit that there were many of the British, who became Americans that were not very nice people. But there were many that came over for religious freedom and to escape British tyranny.
One of the reasons the elite of the colonies revolted against the British elite is because they had agreed a pact with the native americans not to allow expansion westwards past the Appalachian mountains.
Of course if they did not agree to live on reservations you slaughtered their women and children like so many vermin. As a Brit I am dripping in the b ...[text shortened]... s such a charade that you have to live in perpetual denial lest the facade collapses around you.
23 Jul 12
3 edits
Originally posted by kevcvs57Yep. That's why Mexicans and Mayans and such look like south Asians e.g. Indians.
I thought the first indigenous people migrated from the north across the Bering straight during the ice age and were Asiatic in origin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:*Spreading_homo_sapiens.svg
(remove *)
http://athousandyoung.blogspot.com/2010/12/history-and-prehistory-of-everything.html
They're known as "paleoamericans" in anthropology.
Every wave of people came across the Bering Strait and drove older populations south. Mexicans were driven from the American Southwest into what became the Mexican Empire when other people (possibly Apache or related) showed up and began to pick on them.
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsNo they went there because they were not allowed to persecute non Puritans in England. You actually have no idea who you are do you.
I admit that there were many of the British, who became Americans that were not very nice people. But there were many that came over for religious freedom and to escape British tyranny.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsim baffled by your innocent take on the nice lovable american settlers, you make them sound like a bunch of hippies that just wanted to get on with everybody. i suppose all the slavery was just a misunderstanding and i guess you were just trying to invite the mexicans over for dinner when all the fighting broke out.
You can read something about the American Revelutionary War here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War
The native American Indians were not landowners at that time. They did not have a society that believed in land ownership. But they became upset because we were interferring with their hunting for food. We tried to negotiate treati ...[text shortened]... at might not be the best source, but it was the first thing that come up on my search on google.
are you really, honestly saying you dont think americans in the late 1700's and most of the 1800's were not responsible for the killing and stealing of land? do you really think it was okay to take the land because the indians didnt believe in land ownership?
are you some sort of super patriot that is unable to accept your country may have and still does some pretty bad things?
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSo it goes like this:
Well, it was the British that did most of what you are talking about before we fought for independence against British tyranny.
1. British wipe out Native Americans and steal all their land.
2. 'Americans' (where did they come from again, I am getting confused here), kicked out the British and stole their land (that they stole off the Natives).
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by menace71no, but i actually said what i said in support of allowing citizens to keep their guns! the criminal is going to get it regardless of laws.
True but that should not negate good citizens rights to own guns. Felons lose their license to drive for DUI but some of em still get in a car to drive after that. Should we take away cars so that law abiding citizens can't drive or own cars ?
Manny
outlaw guns and the gun trade will flourish in the black market. the same way it has happened with the outlaw of dangerous drugs (the non-state sponsored ones).
23 Jul 12
Originally posted by RJHindsthe persecution of the natives lasted well into circa 1890. are you saying the british were involved up until then? that's ~114 years after the declaration of independence.
I admit that there were many of the British, who became Americans that were not very nice people. But there were many that came over for religious freedom and to escape British tyranny.