Quote:
Yeesh! These crackers sound like a bunch of assholes! I wonder why the hell my great grandmother felt the desire to knock boots with one. I mean, what the hell was she thinking having kids with such fascists who wanted to drown out her heritage!?


Using hyperbole to make a point only works when your not the one generalizing.

 Quote:
While I'm at it, fuck whitey for bringing Africans into America just so they can be oppressed. It would have been much better if those damn Caucasians left their culture alone and allowed those black people to live much better lives where they were born!



You don't know that. That's utter arrogance. What if Bill Gates or Madonna took your children using that same line of reasoning?

 Quote:
You can't invade land that didn't have any owners. Native Americans had no concept of ownership and no moral perceptions; raiding and seizing was all they cared about. With little progression in their lives, they were not only an impediment to American advancement, but also their own. Without any philosophy and/or ambition, their culture was stagnating and savage. Their tribal mentalities perpetuated friction between most of their sects.



That's an exceptionally unscrupulous argument. Essentially your just advocating being a bully. Taking advantage of those just cause they don't have a piece of paper saying they own the land. Possession is 9/10 the law. They were there first.

And you make it sound like they were so inferior. They weren't, they were peaceful by many accounts. Valueing life before possession, caring about the earth around them, trying to achieve spiritual harmony as opposed to superfical wealth. That makes alot more sense to me then shallow, callous, narrow-minded guys like you.

 Quote:
There may have been growing pains and cultural differences, but in the end, Native Americans assimilated with the more advanced culture offering various ways to live healthier. As a result, their (and my) further existence was insured through the actions of the settlers.


Assimilated? What the fuck do you and WB think this is fucking Star Trek? Have you no concept of pain? Are you completely dissassociated from reality that you'd write of years of war as "growing pains".

 Quote:
In the end, it was to the benefit of both the Indians and the Americans to co-mingle through the absorption of Native Americans.


No thanks to guys like you who would have let the weaker rot and then pick through there bones.

 Quote:
Aside from using Nazis as your (fallacious) example,


It's not fallacious. It's same arrogant mentality.

 Quote:
do you actually have any practical problems with the idea of "civilizing" another more primitive culture? Certain tribes in Brazil still contract "Kuru" all the time because they refuse to stop eating the brains of their dead. If nearby settlers had decided to interact with them and basically told them that they should cease one of their most enduring traditions, would you feel that a form of oppression? Lets assume those settlers actually forced them to stop what they were doing and then showed them how to live more healthily and, in turn, survive as an intellectual culture. This act of "Nazism" would not only keep people from further contracting Kuru, but also allow the people and their bloodline to live on.



I have a problem with people thinking they're so superior they have the right to decide what's best for people who are less "civilized". Did it ever occur to you that there not uncivilized there just diffrent? That maybe people aren't meant to be exactly the same? Who's to say what is civilized and where people should be in terms of society? You? A perfidious scumbag dressed in ethical clothing? Rather let Achmadidajad run shit.

 Quote:
Question: Do you honestly think that-that was the first thing on the minds of the settlers when they met the Indians? Lets assume the Native Americans were actually progressive and still developing rather than just prolonging their uncivilized and (many times) violent lives. Lets say they sought improvement instead of stagnating; as a result, they traded and learned from the settlers as they did with the Dutch in smaller doses. If they were more industrious and less centered on the idea of retaining a savage lifestyle, do you really think there would have been so much friction between the two cultures?


The only thing stagnating is your sophistry. Maybe if the settlers/England weren't so set on there own agenda a more amiable outcome could have been reached.

 Quote:
The difference here is that the Europeans weren't impeding anyone else's development--Nor were they fighting simply for the sake of stealing and seizing as the Indians did. The Europeans fought for industrial and philosophical developments whereas the Indians were just cannibalizing themselves(in both contexts of the word) for the sake of prolonging their existence instead of actually making an effort of insuring further survival.


Do you realize what your saying? Europe fought for power. And whenever someone wants power over another they impede that persons progress.

 Quote:


Quote:
Crusades,


A war fought over territory and cultural survival. It held more meaning than Native American tribal dominance.



What are you talking about? It was fought to spread Christianity. Although I don't know why I'm surprised you'd rationalize it. It's the same truculent bullying you seem to respect.