2006-09-29 00:39:55 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Hell yeah..they killed the crap out of Indians..for everyone saying they massacred each others is crazy....America did most of the killing and look at history...American military gave out blankets with diseases on purpose to the Indian's to help speed the killing process along...come on people..its our history..we should know more. The information in the link is provided from Cornell college. We were a massacring machine back in the day!
2006-09-29 01:24:24 · answer #1 · answered by mazz 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I would think not. They did however bring virus and diseases that the locals had no immunity to. Most of the massacres that I have heard of were Native Americans attacking Europeans(mostly for justifiable reasons in their minds and their culture) There was retaliation for these massacres that were devastating to the Native American population. The far greater number of massacres by Europeans were in Central and South America and in the Caribbean.
2006-09-29 01:03:35 · answer #2 · answered by Clamdigger 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes and no.
the indians were massacring each other quite well without european help (look up the huron/iroquois war, or the history of the aztecs, incas, etc)
In the US territories there were comparatively very few indians
A lot of the "massacres" is due to the introduction of new illnesses (eg. the pox virus).
In comparison, the mongol invasions were far, far bloodier, and the destruction caused by islamic expansion far greater.
And it is all ancient history
2006-09-29 00:53:30 · answer #3 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No that is not true. Many nationalities fought in the Indian wars here in America. Not just Europeans.
2006-09-29 16:53:13 · answer #4 · answered by Norskeyenta 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorta, now don't forget the "Red Indians" were not one group, they fought and massacred each other. the Shawnee and Cherokee were not buds, they hated each other. The Europeans were not one group either..the Spanish and french and English were all fighting for and eventually each other for this "new world", the English won most of eastern US, the French the Midwest (we bought it back) and Canada, and the Spanish won Florida,(we took it back- er, then they took it back), so the Europeans DID contribute to this massacre (along with the diseases we brought), but this New world was chaos, we just brought some order to it.
2006-09-29 00:48:40 · answer #5 · answered by BigScotter 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
The massacres went both ways. I think immigrating Europeans killed 70% of the Indian population by introducing new germs.
2006-09-29 00:47:53 · answer #6 · answered by hawkthree 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah, funny how we forget about that red stain on our history. And then there was the importing of Africans for misuse and abuse. Isn't it amazing how the Europeans were so refined and genteel and the Indians were "heathens" because they lived what was a better, cleaner more spiritual life. As did the Africans...we should be ashamed. And yet in 2006 with all the knowledge we have we still find one group of people bound and determined to force their beliefs and laws onto another....Look at Israel and their treatment of the Palstinians....Bosnia...now Iraq will we never learn?
2006-09-29 00:51:51 · answer #7 · answered by Barbiq 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
it is so unfaithful. i don't understand the place you get your information from, yet i understand that a great style of Europeans desire to return right here, and prefer it right here whilst they do. of course, there are some Europeans whom dislike u.s., and it rather is rather comprehensible. the conventional of nutrition right it rather is disgusting - hormones in each and everything (which make you fat), George Bush is horrid - and each American complains approximately him, so why shouldn't they? additionally there's a distinction in life. Europe is surely extra valuable settled then any Asian countries are (different than according to probability Japan). the television declares American happenings on ecu televisions. So for this reason, each and every ecu is often occurring with what is going on - in specific circumstances even quicker than us individuals. (I even have evidence, my grandmother lives in Hungary). and you realize? What makes u.s. extra valuable than any ecu united states of america? i don't think it rather is something. in fact, the recent disintegration of life form and lifestyle right here, to not point out the ineffective politicians we've make me prefer to circulate to Europe when I get my BA. thank you for analyzing!
2016-10-15 08:19:24 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes from most points of view. Although if the indians won they still would be paying way too much for health care because of Mexicans sneaking into their country.
2006-09-29 00:49:23 · answer #9 · answered by Nojunk N 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is not true. Please brush up on your history. Land, etc., etc., was mostly purchased or bartered for.
Out of four years of high school one should not take 1 chapter out of their history book to explain a whole "era", if I can call it that. Take the time to become knowledgeable on the WHOLE thing.
2006-09-29 01:19:18 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋