Quote:
Originally posted by quzah
So it's fine to lump "all the indians" together, as a mass, and let them have their infighting, and that's OK, but it's not OK if someone else wants to go fight with them too?
|
Correct. It's nobody's business what they do to each other.
Quote:
See the absurdity in your logic here? If Whitey had used bows and arrows, then would it have been OK for them to fight too? Was it the guns that made it wrong? Superior firepower? Your logic makes no sense.
|
Say what? Who cares about
HOW they killed off the Natives. The fact that they
did and
WHY they fought them and tried to kill them off was wrong.
The Trail Of Tears ring a bell?
Hollywood has left the impression that the great Indian wars came in the Old West during the late 1800's, a period that many think of simplistically as the "cowboy and Indian" days. But in fact that was a "mopping up" effort. By that time the Indians were nearly finished, their subjugation complete, their numbers decimated. The killing, enslavement, and land theft had begun with the arrival of the Europeans. But it may have reached its nadir when it became federal policy under President (Andrew) Jackson.
Kenneth C. Davis, from his book
Don't Know Much About History
See also:
A Brief History of the Cherokee Nation
It wasn't all about just "fighting". History tells us that Europeans had a habit of "fighting" the Native cultures of many lands that they invaded. Try "attempting to eliminate" by intimidation, slavery, internment camps, and the outright murder of native people all over the world.
You may feel that my logic is "absurd", but history doesn't lie.