Did the Native Americans deserved to be Conquered?

Your 2 options are to limited. It was inevitable that they would eventually have either been mixed in with the new or they would have fought and lost to the advanced weaponry and shear numbers. There was no European genocide of the natives.

 

The poll is not that well pondered ...

A conquest is a merit of the conquer ... it doesn't mind if the conquered populations deserved to be conquered or not.

Following this curious path of thought we could wonder if Christianity "deserved" to be conquered in large part by Islam between VII and XV century CE ... and this would sound at least odd.

So, the occupation [it was an occupation, not a proper conquest] of the lands of America was a merit of the Europeans first of all ... and a failure of the Natives who weren't able to stop us.

 

Indeed. My grandmother couldn't get away from her tribe fast enough; the morning of her birthday she left, with 85 cents in her pocket, and never looked back. She had absolutely nothing good to say about them or any other native American tribe. She always said they're getting far better than they deserved. I don't personally agree with that, but that's how she felt about them. Never talked about her sisters or parents or any other relatives.

 

The United States routinely ignores the "Laws of Nations" as they would be considered today, and has done so in the past. One famous example is the Gulf War. Another is the use of Agent Oragne in Vietnam. Another is the Vietnam War, itself. There are more. These things are carried out by many Presidents. Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Nixon... You either not being honest or you never chose to look past your political bias when laying the blame for things.

 

It's obvious you never read the "Law of Nations."

It's a good read, it used to be required reading at one time for all law students. There was a time before there were activist judges sitting on the bench, you would see a copy of Vattel's "Law of Nations" sitting on the bench.

When I took a course in college back in 72 on the Constitution, we were required to purchase the Law of Nations. Ouch ! over a hundred bucks back then. That was a weeks wages !!!

The Law of Nations can be read on the internet today, I already provided a link. But five years ago it wasn't on the internet, you had to fork out $200 for it.

The Law of Nations has entire chapter just on waging war.

 

Doesn't matter what the law says, when the US can clearly disregard it whenever it wishes...

 

They were all for living in peace but US Govt. broke treaty after treaty. They had no honor. Our forefathers were completely dishonorable men, as a whole. Oh, there were a few who didn't want genocide but not enough to stem the savage tide of hubristic imperialism.

 

Yeah, poverty and its close cousin, drug addiction. Plus the BIA is a completely corrupt organization.

 

But why? Why do they segregate themselves and refuse to join the society which surrounds them?

- - - Updated - - -

America is bad and evil, blah blah blah.....

 

Thanks for that info. I wasn't aware it was now online.

 

Let's see if this old link still works ...

Yes, it does ...

http://www.tolatsga.org/hur.html

... and more at the link. They weren't hapless, happy lil hobbits, just sitting around their campfires smoking pot and pondering environmentalism and having deep, profound, and wise thoughts all day.

 

That's exactly what happened in 1830 when President Jackson authorized the Indian Removal Act of 1830. A complete violation of the "Law of Nations."

Even SCOTUS Chief Justice Marshal ruled on the side of the Indians using Vattel's "Law of Nations."

http://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/trail-of-tears

As we have seen in the past, a few Presidents (Jackson, FDR, etc.) and today (Obama) have ignored the intent of the Constitution and or either rejected "Natural Law" (aka Vattel's "Law of Nations") or never read Vattel's.
To understand the American Constitution, one has to have read Vattel's "Law of Nations."

 

It's still worth purchasing the book for quick reference. The $200 leather bound issue looks good in any home library.

When the "Law of Nations" came online, the cost of the printed book became affordable. The paperback "Law of Nations" are really cheap.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Law-Nations-Emer-Vattel/dp/0865974519

http://www.lawmart.com/pubs/vattel.htm

 

Well, not "like" a ghetto. They are "ghettos" by pretty much any definition.

I don't know much about this, could you give me more information? I'd be very interested to know to what degree they've been assimilated and what the poverty rate is for them.

 

Should Europe shared their technology with Native America?
Does Native American tribe understand what is genocide? Many stronger tribes have been wiping out smaller tribes before the arrival of Europeans do those smaller tribes deserve to be wiped out?

 

We gotta define 'over-farm'. Try over-farming when you're doing it 100% by hand without assured water. Also, they migrated WITH the buffalo or deer.

 

I wonder just how many posters here have ever bothered to do one single bit of research on American Indians. How many know the beliefs and customs of any of the tribes? How many know where they lived and what they "claimed" to be their territory? What do you know about inter-tribal warfare? Or which were agrarian, nomadic, or neither?

Can a single one of you recognize any of these?

 

Nah, they just went to war killing each other over the resources that were there.

 

Sorry, but you sound jealous.

 

Yes they did deserve to be conquered, there is no place for weakness in this world. Its called evolution, the stronger and more adaptable survive and conquer.

 

Good post. This is what we are doing with the Palestinian Terrorists i.e conquering them into defeat and submission to a greater good, Israel.

 

They moved their farms because soil wears out quickly using their farming methods. Hunting was largely for winter food supplies and clothing, shelter hides, etc.

 

No, the Native Americans didn't deserve to be conquered. Africans didn't deserve to be enslaved. Poor Whites didn't deserve to be "indentured servants" (another term for slave).

 

TRANSLATION: "the ones who possess gun powder and superior weapons survive and conquer"

 

Not a fan of nature huh?