English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

As Israel has within Palestine ? We displaced "genocidally" millions of Indigenous peoples to populate North America.. if they came in with the UN and said give us Rhode Island..would that be acceptable ? Or would America ( the US ) fight the UN and the Natives with all our might ?... tell me how the two situations differs ?

please no frothing or name calling.. be heard intellegently.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3581.htm

2006-07-29 07:29:23 · 11 answers · asked by hardartsystems 3 in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

We did not accept defeat! The land you are living on was stolen from mine and any other Native Americans ancestors. The US Government used WMD's against us. They gave tribes blankets infested with small pox. They slaughtered woman and children. Destroyed our way of life. we had to go the the Reservations before we were all wiped out! The reservations were always the worst land around. You white people wanted the best for yourself! Ever heard of the Black Hills. How about Wounded Knee, the Trail of Tears. And casinos on the reservations are only allowed if the state government says yes. There are no Native American casinos in Montana. So I feel for the Palestinians, their land is being stolen and genocide being committed against them.

2006-07-29 07:54:58 · answer #1 · answered by ggarsk 3 · 1 1

No, no other NATION is "allowed" to ever be set up INSIDE the U.S. EVER.

Indian Nations are an exception. Being Native Americans and tribes, with Chiefs equal to normal "Kings" or "Princes" of European Nobility. Any daughter of a Chief would be considered a Princess. However, these days almost all Chiefs are elected and can be a man or a woman, they are mostly democratic socieities and very modern. However, they still lag behind, simply because they have never been treated fairly or equally.

As far as Israel goes, she got her country fairly and by INTERNATIONAL LAW. If anyone had a problem with this it could have been decided different more than 40 to 50 years ago by the United Nations Governing Body in a Dispute, it never was put to one, so apparently, no one gave a d*mn enough.

hmmmmm.

2006-07-29 14:48:04 · answer #2 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 0 0

I think that at this point that is a poor comparison as the Native Americans have already gotten their revenge. Their reservations, which are in effect, a different state now have gambling. Outside of the government and they are making tons of money!!!! I do understand your question but it still doesn't apply. There were no Palestinians until the PLO army( which was a bunch of Arabs no Arab country wanted) decided that they were going to eliminate the Jewish people in the Middle East. They are the same as Hitler. The chosen people have always been entitled to the land that is now Israel and if the so called Palestinian people had invested as much time in their country as they have in hatred, they might really have a peaceful and healthy existence.

2006-07-29 14:43:03 · answer #3 · answered by olderandwiser 4 · 0 0

Indians and America resolved this issue years ago. The wars to clear the West of Indian lands settled the matter. The Indian Nations accepted the defeat and now live at Peace with US. They could give up that peace but they would again lose the war needed to enforce the Indian view of things.

The US does allow Indians to reclaim tribal lands, that is where the Casinos are located, even if local government objects. There are ways Indians can address all kinds of claims rather than declaring independence. People choose differnt ways to achieve their goals. But the weaker you are the fewe choices you have.

2006-07-29 14:42:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anthony M 6 · 0 0

In my opinion- they don't differ. Native Americans were literally robbed, cheated, lied to, and left hanging out to die on the worst land in our country. Their tribes are sovereign territory, and perhaps the descendants of these beleaguerd people will take back some of their heritage and property via Casinos. "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is an excellent reference material, and tells in vivid detail the actions used against these Native Americans.

2006-07-29 14:43:13 · answer #5 · answered by joye b 2 · 0 0

wrong ********_shot.

Each state is not subject to the Fed Govt. The Fed are of a different jurisdiction. Each state have the right to not follow federal mandates.

Each state has it's own soveriegn rule. The Fed Govt was actually created by the soveriegn states to keep them within constitutional boundaries when each state passes laws - like hiring a manager to oversee things.

2006-07-29 14:40:01 · answer #6 · answered by Jerry H 5 · 0 0

they already have these areas which are reservations which are governed by the tribe and policed by the tribal police. the do however fall under the federal authority of the bureau of indian affairs. israel has palistinians in they're country. at the end of ww2 the jewish people needed a home land and this area was promised them in the torah, also the old testement.

2006-07-29 14:45:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Here in San Diego County, the American Indian tribes such as the Barona and Sycuan tribes do have their own government and police force. However, just like states, they are subject to the Federal Government.

2006-07-29 14:35:13 · answer #8 · answered by Sick Puppy 7 · 0 0

We do have our own land here in the u.s. and why would we all want to live in rhode island anyway? Just being indian doesn't make us all like each other. We have our own traditions and could not live with all the different nations peacefully.

2006-07-29 14:47:14 · answer #9 · answered by Stand 4 somthing Please! 6 · 0 0

With the explosive building of their casino,s the argument for Native American Dignity, or Pride has lost all meaning to me

2006-07-29 14:43:59 · answer #10 · answered by tough as hell 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers