Well if you consider the systematic extermination of several million Native American men, women and children (a majority of which were non-combatants) a mistake then I suppose you can consider this a mark of error. Then again I wouldn't exactly use the word mistake to decribe the Native American holocaust, spilling coffee on your pants is a mistake, killing millions of people and leaving the remainder to live on inhospitable land is a downright abomination and mark of shame. However a negative manger dog I am not, as Americans we need to recognize mistakes made in the past to proceed forward so as to not make the same mistakes again. En-masse, who we are now is not who we used to be. We as Americans can admit mistakes, yet still be proud, this is the dichotomy of being American which makes us progressive.
2007-01-26 07:45:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by wackywallwalker 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
1
2016-11-06 17:03:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Obviously after creating the greatest country in the world. Giving freedom and peace to most of its citizens,and saving the world from a few crazy leaders, what we did wrong was we did not usher in UTOPIA for everyone. Perhaps we should withhold our dollar bills which every nation wants. Maybe that would make you manger dogs feel better. Always negative that's what you are.
2007-01-26 08:12:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by swamp elf 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
While it is colorful to use the term Manifest Destiny in a derogatory meaning relative to the United States and its focus on the American Indian. Further, it is often used in a retrospective manner with today’s ethics being applied to past times. Neither usage is correct or meaningful.
It is myopic to use this term as a “White” attribute to achieve the goals of genocide, self-righteousness, selfishness, conceitedness, rape, pillaging, destruction, and is an example of political spin To extend such opinions into asserting the killing of millions of native American men, women, and children, is building false statements from whole cloth.
Manifest Destiny is a phrase that expressed the belief that the United States (as with many other cultures) had a mission to expand, spreading its form of democracy and freedom. Advocates of Manifest Destiny believed that expansion was not only good, but that it was obvious ("manifest") and certain ("destiny"). It was originally a political catch phrase or slogan used by Democrats in the 1845 -1855 period (and rejected by Whigs and Republicans). In the mid 20th century "Manifest Destiny" became a standard term used by historians, often as a synonym for the territorial expansion of the United States across North America towards the Pacific Ocean.
The phrase "Manifest Destiny" was first used primarily by Jackson Democrats after 1845 to promote the annexation of much of what is now the Western United States (the Oregon Territory, the Texas Annexation, and the Mexican Cession). The term was partly revived in the 1890s, this time with Republican supporters, as a theoretical justification for U.S. expansion outside of North America. The term fell out of usage by U.S. policy makers early in the 20th century, but some commentators believe that aspects of Manifest Destiny, particularly the belief in an American "mission" to promote and defend democracy throughout the world, continued to have an influence on American political ideology.
The Indian Wars comprised a series of smaller wars. American Indians were (and remain) diverse peoples with their own histories; throughout the wars, they were not a single people any more than Europeans were. Living in societies organized in a variety of ways, American Indians usually made decisions about war and peace at the local level, though they sometimes fought as part of formal alliances, such as the Iroquois Confederation, or in temporary confederacies inspired by leaders such as Tecumseh.
The wars, which ranged from colonial times to the Wounded Knee massacre and "closing" of the American frontier in 1890, generally resulted in the conquest of American Indians and their assimilation or forced relocation to Indian reservations. Citing figures from an 1894 estimate by the United States Census Bureau, one scholar (Thornton, American Indian Holocaust, pages 48-49) has calculated that the more than 40 wars from 1775 to 1890 reportedly claimed the lives of some 45,000 Indians and 19,000 whites. This rough estimate includes women and children on both sides, since noncombatants were often killed in frontier "massacres."
While today many view such acts as wrong, such attitudes are not realistic descriptions of cultural ethics of the times. This applies to North American Indians in their dealings with one another just as much as it does with the predominately transplanted European culture to North America.
2007-01-26 08:41:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Randy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the war of 1812 - the us was not a world power at that time and when 10 000 of wellingtons battle hardened troops came in 1814 fresh from the napoleonic war the yankees ran at platsburg and admiral cochrane torched washingon
2007-01-26 07:55:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The same mistakes that have been made by the 'project for a new american century' (pnac)
Everyone assumes that because they are white, they are right.
(And I'm white)
2007-01-26 07:47:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by superfunkmasta 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
genocide.
self-righteousness.
selfishness.
conceitedness.
rape.
pillaging.
destruction.
and basically the inherent falsehoods behind the concept that any god wants us to kill millions of people for the sake of ownership.
2007-01-26 07:51:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Magdalene 3
·
0⤊
1⤋