I keep hearing how we stole mexican land. If they are talking about the mexican-american war then there stupid. It took place over a hundred years ago. It was a short war with not alot of casualties. We did offer the mexicans a fair amount of money. Do you think other countries cry about land they lost in wars that took place over hundred uyears ago. Then mexicans say how proud they are for defeating the french or spanish or whatever, you couldn't beat good-old USA. And its not like you dont have enough land. Get over it. mexicans are just coming here and infestating the land we won in the war.
2007-01-26 11:53:22 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
I will show you both points of view.
- The United States used dirty fighting to force Mexico to sell their land for a miserable amount considering all the resources found on these lands. If your country was split into little parts, I am sure you would fight to restore what you knew as the USA. Mexicans are doing exactly the same thing.
- If Mexicans really want to get that land back, then they should return us Guatemalans all South of their country. Quintana Roo, Chiapas, and part of Yucatan belonged to us before they stole it in a political way.
Take your pick.
2007-01-26 11:59:31 · answer #1 · answered by Siervocal 1 · 5⤊ 4⤋
It was a real strong arming the US did to Mexico. in fact, it acknowledged by a couple of US Presidents... Ulysses S Grant witnessing 1st hand. Read up on the real unbiased history and find out.
Mexicans infesting the land... ignorance! Hell... they were here 1st! What should the Natives to the US think about the Anglo/American who stolen their land?
What I'm saying is: one should look at the whole picture with regards other Races/Ethnicity's before typing nonsense.
BTW - There was too much land for Mexico to govern meaning: SW US and at that time most Mexicans live to the South. So it was hard for Mexico to hold on to all that land.
2007-01-29 14:23:44 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, they did steal land. Yes, money was force at gun point. Mexico did not want to sell. With Americans troops in Mexico City force the signing of Guadalupe Hildalgo Treaty, Mexico had to give California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas was supposed be annex and never part of th USA. The Treaty stated that Mexicans that owned land in those terrorities will become Americans Citizens and keep their Lands. Troops force families off the land. USA never lived to their part of the Treaty, so the land was stolen. So lies are lies no matter how you want to justify it. Then again Mexican-Americans reacquiring thru expensive ligitations and purchases, Americans stole land again thru illegal deportation of Mexicans-Americans Citizens during the depression hiding behind Racists Laws.
2007-01-26 16:07:09 · answer #3 · answered by art_raiders 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It was alot more than 15 million.
It was 15 million for the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
In addition to that the USA agreed to let Mexico off the hook for 3.25 million dollars that Mexico owed USA citizens.
Then there was the Gadsden Purchase which was another 10 million.
And of course after that Texas was still an issue and we battled again.
Since then Mexico repeatedly incurs debts to the USA and the USA repeatedly absolves the debts in hopes that Mexico will get their act together.
2007-01-26 12:56:16 · answer #4 · answered by sociald 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only option you have if you don't like what happened is to convince Mexico to declare war on the US and take their land back. Have fun doing so I don't think that is a can of worms that they wish to open. Either that or just get over it and accept that it happened. I am sure that if you took a vote in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California to either go back to Mexican states or stay in the US you would be finding yourself being laughed at to say the least.
2007-01-26 12:11:57 · answer #5 · answered by Karen 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I agree. We fought a war over this subject in 1842 and we won.
Santa Anna was defeated at San Jacinto. The Mexican indigents who promote the whole idea which you mention are the dredges of Mexican society who have come here because they can not survive in their own country, and want to have an excuse to be here illegally.
2007-01-26 12:05:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The Mexican authorities continually reported that if u.s. annexed the self sufficient usa of Texas, it ought to galvanize a conflict between Mexico and u.s.. In 1845, in an contract between the authorities of Texas and u.s., Texas gave up its independence and grew to grow to be a state interior u.s.. Tensions soared between the U.S. and Mexico. President Polk despatched a militia into the disputed territory between the Rio Grande and the Neuches (sp) River. The Mexican military attacked and captured a stress of U.S. dragoons and the Mexican legislature declared conflict adverse to u.s.. U.S. victories at Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma cleared the disputed area of Mexican forces. what's thrilling is that the Mexican military became significantly more desirable than u.s. military and had a lot more desirable strive against journey in combatting inner rebellions. practically each and every of the militia experts of Europe concept u.s. must be overwhelmed badly. very few people believed that the U.S. ought to have the victory that they did. even as customary Winfield Scott took his military into the interior of Mexico interior the Mexico city marketing campaign, no a lot less an authority customary than field Marshall Wellington anticipated the U.S. stress must be swallowed up and destroyed. even as Mexico chosen the conflict selection, they positioned plenty in chance. even as they were badly overwhelmed, with their military pushed from the field and their capital city occupied, they lost various of territory hence. both Mexico and u.s. were aggressive on the start of the conflict and the Mexicans were very constructive that they could win. The historic record confirms that the Mexican authorities declared conflict first! each and every area would properly be blamed for no longer attempting to settle the dispute peacefully and diplomatically. the tremendous, undesirable, conflict-mongering us of a clarification is a few thing prevalent positioned out through the dislike u.s. Firsters and it isn't supported through the historic record.
2016-10-16 03:56:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well it was over 100 years ago and we did pay for it. They may be reffering to how the war was started. The United States pretty much provoked the Mexicans to attack us to start it and continue on with "Manifest Destiny". We had soldiers cross into Mexico and say that they were on American soil.
On a side note - I'm against illegal immigration.
2007-01-26 12:04:11 · answer #8 · answered by Squawkers 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
i agree with buffy's answer, if we do want to get into history, white people did come and take land away from the native indians, white people wanted to get away from the monarchy of the queen so they came and settled here in the U.S. , but i am pretty sure that white people don't want to be told to go back to europe. soon they will find someone else to pick on anyway...what race is next? anyone want to take a guess?
2007-01-26 18:19:45 · answer #9 · answered by trevino_2 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
youve never heard of slavery,they still use it for political gain,it wasnt me.....but we did steal Texas(with the help of Mexicans)at that time they wanted to be thier own country,whites and hispanics,we didnt steal any of the other states,the Mexican Govt,couldnt pay a loan to Us.At the end of times of Spanish rule,California residents were looking to france and Britain to fund them as a colony but there were no takers
2007-01-26 12:01:50 · answer #10 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋