U.S. Should Face up to 'Shameful Past' With Tribal Nations, VP Harris Says

Make up your mind, either history matters and the truth about it should be taught, or it should all be erased. Stop dancing around and make up your mind. You can't just do what you've been doing -- advocate history being taught when you think it suits your agenda and then demand it be forgotten when the truth offends your political sensibilities.

My psychic powers tell me you are already typing something about how it is okay for you to do just that because you saw a leftist do it once.

 

What I find amazingly hypocritical is that this is the vice president of the current day most powerful empire on earth, who can only stay that way by exploiting most of the rest of the world, saying this about people of another time doing something similar, as she lives in even more extreme comfort than they ever did.

The hypocrisy is deafening.

 

Agreed.

 

Lucky me, I missed this gem of a post from you. You claimed “Very few civilians were killed”. Feel free to cite and support that claim. I already supported my claim that you can pinpoint to John Brown as being the first act to begin the tensions escalating. Feel free to cite your claim that slavery was the primary issue. The ad hominem attack about lost causer is cute- it speaks to your deflecting and leaps of inference.

It was more than cutting off supplies- it was a scorched Earth/annihilation to destroy the will to fight. That is what I said you now you take that as your own claim, even with the “very few civilians killed”. You are all over the place.

it is not propaganda, but a wealth of knowledge on the Civil War using an objective brain.

looking forward to another multi-quote of my post from you.

 

I think Lincoln was in an untenable position.

https://americandigest.org/mt-archives/american_studies/abraham_lincolns_letter_t.php

 

Agreed. Especially with her ancestors owning slaves in the Caribbean.

 

There were ~3,000 total casualties, and the vast majority of those were soldiers, including Sherman's own.

Your claim was it was the first aggression. This is false. And the fact that you apparently weren't aware of the preceding violence in Kansas is disturbing.

Would you like me to start with the Declarations of Causes of Secession, the Cornerstone Speech, the Crittenden Compromise, the statements of the Secession Commissioners, or contemporary newspaper articles?

I'm not sure how you didn't already know this, but that is WHY you cut off supplies. To remove their capacity and willingness to fight. Your claims of mass civilian annihilation are complete nonsense.

It's propaganda. According to the primary sources from the South regarding their motivations for seceding, they mostly seceded over slavery.

You sound awfully offended that someone would address arguments point by point. Weird.

 

Tsk tsk. No links to support anything you say while you deflect and distort.
Here you go:


Midnight Rising
John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War

take it up with the author. You sound so objective and logical, lol.

 

The Ameriphobes aren’t going to like this.

 

If Kamala actually believed her own propaganda, she would be pushing to end US exploitation of poor countries around the planet today. But she needs to virtue signal in comfort.

 

Sherman had many friends in the South from his time there before the war, and until the March to the Sea (and through South Carolina) he was the northern general spoken of most kindly in the southern press.
But there's no doubt he hated the southern cause. There's also no doubt he had a limited view of who should vote and be free to voice opinions, both North and South.
Likewise, it was well known that the Union troops bore special animus toward South Carolina and its people because of their perceived role in starting the war.
As far as I'm concerned the South started the war and got what they deserved. Sherman put it best.
“War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want.”
― William Tecumseh Sherman

 

He was spoken kindly in the press before his March to the Sea. After that, the South made efforts to not name any city/streets “Sherman”. The USMA produced good and bad military leaders on both sides and I cannot imagine fighting against someone I fought along side with in the Mexican War.

No doubt he was successful in his quest to destroy the Southern morale and their will to fight. Because of this success, he was in charge of dealing with the Indians in the West, which ties directly back to the audience the VP spoke too.

 

Did I say Europeans weren’t violent? Hehe. Of course they were. But Native Americans were no better. They were just way behind on the technology spectrum. If you’re curious where we’d be without the evil white man, simple look to South America or Africa. 3rd world.

 

Your sense of geography leaves much to be desired. Your cited article is about the Aztecs, of Mexico. This was not the practice of tribes in the area of the present-day United States.

 

I didn't call the "white man" evil. I was pointing to your hypocrisy in painting North Amerindians as, "savages," as compared to Europeans. So yes, your implication WAS that Europeans were more, "civilized," and less violent. In fact, there is no evidence that these natives ever slaughtered their neighbors in any way resembling the religious wars (of the Protestant Schism/Reformation) in Medieval Europe.

 

Maybe part of the problem is because they didn’t use paper or document their history like the evil white man did? And it’s not opinion that Europeans were more advanced and civilized. Yes. Keep believing native Americans are the only civilization on earth that didn’t war with neighboring factions. They only scalped and gutted the white man. /eyeroll

 

Hey libs, I wasn’t around for slavery or taking Indian land, but I’m being blamed for it because I’m a white American citizen. So when people who still own slaves and take land, and I’m talking about Muslims and Latinos, when they come here and become democrat voters, I mean citizens, are they just as guilty as I am?

 

I guess misrepresenting others' quotes is just your way of managing, when you have a differing view. I never said that Amerindians were a totally pacific people. I was contesting your portraying them as more savage, and less civilized, than Europeans, which is utterly untrue. FYI, being civilized has to do with behavior, not technological advancement.

Speaking of technology, that is quite a hard rap you are trying to lay on paper, and writing: that a side effect of having these is, necessarily, more war and violence, which excuses it, in races which possess them.

 

We have and still are facing up to our shameful past with our First Nations. Time and beyond time the American Indian was also acknowledged






I doubt Trump intervened to change these statistics



Across the globe displaced First Nation people suffer the same issues of chronic disease and poverty

Time and beyond time that was addressed

 

Did you get an inherent advantage because you were not born on a native reservation? Yes? Then stop complaining

 

She's just pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

I said we should work for a better future. I didn't suggest ignoring anything. Go read it again.

 

Lol…when JFK was asked about America’s treatment of native Americans, he called it a national disgrace.
Truth is often inconvenient, ain’t it?

 

Are you willing to give up your inherent advantage because some one says they are deprived?

 

No one has to live on a reservation. And there is no inherent advantage to being white unless you’re implying that whites are inherently superior at birth? Are you a racist? Think so.

When you hear/read that studying, having a mother and father, saving money, working hard or being responsible are WHITE attributes, kinda hard not to believe that race hustlers are much worse than those they’re pointing fingers at.

Jist more excuses trying to punish people NOW for what happened a life time ago or even centuries.