Did the USA,commit GENOCIDE When they slotted <{ 9_million people }> as they took the land.?

Question

The USA took from the years of 1900 to 1990 to stop there
act of slottering 9 million, but it only took hitler 5 years to preform
his GENOCID OF '6 MILLION.

Stephen Donoho stephen_donoho@hotmail
Thank you.

Answer 1

we like to think of it as ethnic cleansing here in the states,. it just sounds so much better don't you think?

Answer 2

Do you mean 1800-1890?

The United States wasn't taking any land in the 20th century (1901-2000); it only "expanded" by granting statehood to pre-existing territories.

Assuming you are talking about the 19th century, then no, I don't think it was the same. For one thing, it was not nearly the concerted effort you make it out to be. In some places, yes, there was an effort to kill off or drive out the natives, but the British were far more guilty of this in the days prior to the American Revolution.

Secondly, a lot of the death was accidental - for instance the number of Algonquins who died of measles, mumps, etc.; diseases that don't generally kill Europeans because they have/had a pre-existing immunity to them.

Third, a lot of the death was due to ordinary warfare, not concentrated effort to eliminate a people group -- even if the net result was the same it's not "genocide". If you are going to expand the definition of geneocide in this way, then the Huns were guilty of genocide in central Europe, the Saxons were guilty of genocide against the Celts, and likewise the Celts against the Picts and everyone else who lived in Britain before them, etc., etc. ad nauseum.

Answer 3

Are you sure the genocid and slottering did not last from 1899 to 1989?

Answer 4

I think the word you are looking for is slaughtered, but yes, I would say the U.S. has committed genocide. I'm not sure what you are referencing when you say the U.S. killed 9 million people, but I think you are referring to when they killed all the Native Americans which I do consider genocide. The Trail of Tears is I believe what that was called, unfortunately, President Andrew Jackson was in office and implemented this atrocity.

Answer 5

a million. particular! 2. Making connection with question a million - Yep! 3. Did as rapidly as - did now no longer very final - properly-often happening music replaced into Moo River. enjoyed the exterior (like me), yet insisted on crashing there (i like to have a roof, or tent pitched, over me). 4. No particular stereotype - i'm unique (now no longer applying any huge head stuff - actual am), actual as you're! 5. All rocks are ineffective (alongside with, i think of Punk Rock), diverse than my domestic dog Rock. 6. How abojut Datco(?). 7. Led Zeppelin. 8. ought to you be aggravated, if I shoved a tortoise in yours? (actual kidding) 9. I actual asked it - 8! 11. Yep - Is there any particular reason, as to why 10 has long long previous lacking sequentially? 12. i think of that "one", isn't the only lonely be wide awake! 10. solid, how's yours? you're arranged to think of of that 10 might choose to stay in line and not bounce approximately. 11. no longer between the above - have you ever a quick memory span (?) - i think of of that 11 already exists! 12. are you waiting to assert that decrease back (?) - i think of of that i've got have been given considered 12 in the previous too! 13. No i do now no longer, so i'm hoping that it replaced into now no longer something offensive! - a million:00pm. 14. Australia. 15. No, yet as quickly as I do see a less costly, I ask, "Why?" sixteen. I particularly have not have been given any connection with youtube. 17. in no way! 18. actual in asking, WHY the poultry replaced into thrown around the line and not allowed to circulate it, alive or spiritually! 19. Axolotls? Having by using no ability provided socks, or shoes for them, i'm now no longer rather particular. 20. via responding, "i think of, that's one up on the Saints!" 21. female Gaga - some have suggested that she is burnt out - do now no longer agree; that should characterize that at it sluggish contained interior the previous, her music have been heat - now no longer so! 22. No. 23. confident. i'm consistently encountering words which, in accordance to it, do now no longer exist. 24. i'm curious approximately stay and allow stay! 25. It replaced into diverse! i'm now no longer!!!

Answer 6

Yahoo won't let me post my comple answer, so please go to the link below for much of it.

Well, it wasn't ONLY the "USA" - the Spaniards, French and British (among others) also had a hand in it:
"While epidemic disease was by far the leading cause of the population decline of the American indigenous peoples after 1492, there were other contributing factors, all of them related to European contact and colonization. One of these factors was warfare. According to demographer Russell Thornton, although many lives were lost in wars over the centuries, and war sometimes contributed to the near extinction of certain tribes, warfare and death by other violent means was a comparatively minor cause of overall native population decline.[13]

The genocide debate
A controversial question relating to the population history of American indigenous peoples is whether or not the natives of the Americas were the victims of genocide. After the Nazi-perpetrated Holocaust during World War II, genocide was defined (in part) as a crime "committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such."

Historian David Stannard is of the opinion that the indigenous peoples of America (including Hawaii[17]) were the victims of a "Euro-American genocidal war."[18] While conceding that the majority of the indigenous peoples fell victim to the ravages of European disease, he estimates that almost 100 million died in what he calls the American Holocaust.[19] Stannard's perspective has been joined by Kirkpatrick Sale, Ben Kiernan, Lenore A. Stiffarm, and Phil Lane, Jr., among others; the perspective has been further refined by Ward Churchill, who has said that "it was precisely malice, not nature, that did the deed."[20] -- the Europeans chose to spread diseases.

Stannard's claim of 100 million deaths has been disputed because he does not cite any demographic data to support this number, and because he makes no distinction between death from violence and death from disease. Noble David Cook considers books such as Stannard's—a number of which were released around the year 1992 to coincide with the 500th anniversary of the Columbus voyage—to be an unproductive return to Black Legend-type explanations for depopulation. In response to Stannard's figure, political scientist R. J. Rummel has instead estimated that over the centuries of European colonization about 2 million to 15 million American indigenous people were the victims of what he calls democide. "Even if these figures are remotely true," writes Rummel, "then this still make this subjugation of the Americas one of the bloodier, centuries long, democides in world history."[21]

While no mainstream historian denies that death and suffering were unjustly inflicted by a number of Europeans upon a great many American natives, many argue that genocide, which is a crime of intent, was not the intent of European colonization. Historian Stafford Poole wrote: "There are other terms to describe what happened in the Western Hemisphere, but genocide is not one of them. It is a good propaganda term in an age where slogans and shouting have replaced reflection and learning, but to use it in this context is to cheapen both the word itself and the appalling experiences of the Jews and Armenians, to mention but two of the major victims of this century."[22]

Therefore, most mainstream scholars tend not to use the term "genocide" to describe the overall depopulation of American natives. However, a number of historians, rather than seeing the whole history of European colonization as one long act of genocide, do cite specific wars and campaigns which were arguably genocidal in intent and effect. Usually included among these are the Pequot War and campaigns waged against tribes in California starting in the 1850s.[23]


In any case, it's a very long and very shameful chapter in the history of the USA and, unfortunately, what was done to the Native Americans has also been done to many other indigenous peoples all over the world.

Might may not make right, but it certainly has a major influence on who gets the land.

Answer 7

Who were we killing? I know we killed the native Americans, but that was over the course of several hundred years...That's the only genocide I can think of that Americans have committed...

Answer 8

If you want people to take you seriously, you need to learn to spell and punctuate. This question sounds like it was written by a crackpot.

Answer 9

Exactly what "slotter" was going on?

Answer 10

You hate America.