February 26, 200818 yr Author You need to do a little history checking. They were killing one another and taking land from one another looooooooog before we came along. :sssh: In fact, that sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of man. Who wrote that history?
February 26, 200818 yr Author Although this is getting off the main topic, the US and European policies towards Native Americans could be considered genocide. http://www.lcsc.edu/elmartin/historybehindthenews/Spring%202005/Delema.htm Genocide doesn't always mean an extermination. I could be a forced removal. That is true. We should start a new topic I guess. But that is good point.
February 26, 200818 yr Author :lol: When you want to talk seriously, let me know. No tell me who wrote the history that we study. The WASP's did. That is why it looks like we did nothing wrong. I am talking seriously to you but it seems you can't answer the questions straight so you just blow it off.
February 26, 200818 yr No tell me who wrote the history that we study. The WASP's did. That is why it looks like we did nothing wrong. I am talking seriously to you but it seems you can't answer the questions straight so you just blow it off. When you start in with the WASP garbage, what can you expect? Why don't you ask actual Indians, different tribes fought continuously. Many were sworn enemies until the bitter end.
February 26, 200818 yr :lol: When you want to talk seriously, let me know. History is written by the winners. While Native Americans were fighting amongst themselves, to say that the policies towards them by the Europeans and later the Americans were in any way justified is folly. What happened to them would be considered genocide in today's terms. We're going WAY off topic so back to this 2nd Amendment discussion. Once again the 2nd Amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. At the time everyone was required to have a musket for national defense. It was a hold-over from English common law from the Middle Ages. At the time the government (the state or colony) would inspect each man's home to insure that they had the required musket, issue the ammo, and require the gun owner to muster in the village green for drill. Many times the government would have to issue the guns. That sounds like a pretty tightly controlled gun policy. But, I obviously am barking up an empty tree here since no liberal wants people to have guns.
February 26, 200818 yr Author When you start in with the WASP garbage, what can you expect? Why don't you ask actual Indians, different tribes fought continuously. Many were sworn enemies until the bitter end. But what we did to them is major genocide. But like said before we are off topic so on to the 2nd amendment.
February 26, 200818 yr You need to do a little history checking. They were killing one another and taking land from one another looooooooog before we came along. :sssh: In fact, that sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of man. This is the same argument for slavery. They (tribes) did it so why not us? How can you see these other countries do terrible things but we have to justify the "atrocities" that our nation has done. It is our history. It was wrong then, it's wrong now.
February 26, 200818 yr Author This is the same argument for slavery. They (tribes) did it so why not us? How can you see these other countries do terrible things but we have to justify the "atrocities" that our nation has done. It is our history. It was wrong then, it's wrong now. Well said. :laugh:
February 26, 200818 yr This is the same argument for slavery. They (tribes) did it so why not us? How can you see these other countries do terrible things but we have to justify the "atrocities" that our nation has done. It is our history. It was wrong then, it's wrong now. :thumb:
February 26, 200818 yr For the posts about the Indians, I'm pretty sure our government was responsible for their treatment, not armed citizens.
February 26, 200818 yr Author For the posts about the Indians, I'm pretty sure our government was responsible for their treatment, not armed citizens. You have to remember in the time we are talking about there was little government and people were able to go and take land if another "American Citizen" did not have claim to it. So yes the did have much to do with it.
February 26, 200818 yr Genocide Convention 1948 The definitional article included in the 1948 convention stipulates: Article II In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. The critical element is the presence of an "intent to destroy", which can be either "in whole or in part", groups defined in terms of nationality, ethnicity, race or religion.
February 26, 200818 yr See there is a smart person. We only wanted to take there land that is a good one for you. Because you know if someone came and kicked you off your land, you wouldnt be a little angry.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.