Should Mexico return Northern Mexico to the United States?? (England, years, country)

[509]

The tribes signed treaties with the United States ceding their lands to the United States.

The Apaches fought the Spanish and Mexican governments for over 250 years and even though they signed treaties with Mexico I cannot find that they ever ceded their lands to Mexico.

I lived in Canada in the early 1970's. I asked about the native people's and was assured by Canadians that they were all happy to be Canadians. Questions about their native people's land was that there was no need for reservations in Canada. The land belonged to all "Canadians" now.

I guess, that worked if you were a "white" Canadian, but after I left Canada the native people asserted their claims and now have First Nation status in Canada.

That is why I ask the question about the Apaches in Mexico.

Did they formally relinquish their claims to their lands in Mexico?? I realize Mexico barely functions under a rule of law concept. Under international law I suspect the Apaches and others could press their claims for lands in Mexico.

I understand that the war with the Apaches for 250 years is not something that most Mexicans want to bring up again, but it was a very important part of the history of what became part of the American SouthWest.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by 509

Did they formally relinquish their claims to their lands in Mexico?? I realize Mexico barely functions under a rule of law concept. Under international law I suspect the Apaches and others could press their claims for lands in Mexico.

Once again you are ignoring a simple fact. International matters must be handled by federal authorities. No international government or "law" recognizes the Apaches as a federal government. Apaches are a constituent of the US government and any claims must be pressed by the US government. So if the Apaches felt they were wronged in history they must have the US government press their claims for them.

[Packard fan]

IMHO I'd just leave it alone since Mexico AND all of the Indian groups lost the wars. Too all of this happened over 150 years ago. The Apache and so are US citizens and I'm sure The Indians living in Mexico are "Mexican" citizens too.

[Doctacity]

While we're at it, let's give Mexico all of our stolen lands (California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and more) and the Native American lands too! Then we can cram 300 million people into the eastern 13 states. But wait! Why don't we return those stolen colonies too and all go to the U.K?!

380 million people living on one Eastern European island! Isn't that a brilliant idea?

[Packard fan]

Originally Posted by Doctacity

While we're at it, let's give Mexico all of our stolen lands (California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and more) and the Native American lands too! Then we can cram 300 million people into the eastern 13 states. But wait! Why don't we return those stolen colonies too and all go to the U.K?!

380 million people living on one Eastern European island! Isn't that a brilliant idea?

Oh hell: IF we're gonna play this all the way out, maybe we ALL need to go BACK to Africa. LOL!

Tho I think the people living in Africa in 2013 would be pissed off big time.

[Burning Madolf]

This thread makes me laugh because every time I see it highlighted I want to yell CHARGE!

[teddyearp]

Hmm, a very intersting thread.

But I thought after we (The United States) conquered and won the Mexican-American war in the 1840's we then went further and purchased those parts of the Southwest from Mexico; we didn't steal it by any means.

Subscribed.

[9162]

Originally Posted by teddyearp

Hmm, a very intersting thread.

But I thought after we (The United States) conquered and won the Mexican-American war in the 1840's we then went further and purchased those parts of the Southwest from Mexico; we didn't steal it by any means.

Subscribed.

Correct, this was the Gadsden purchase. The U.S. could have just taken whatever they wanted, but decided as a courtesy to pay for it. It would have been interesting though if the border of Arizona was extended to the Gulf of Baja California, rather than tapering it northward to Yuma, allowing AZ to have a coastline, and perhaps also purchasing Baja California, allowing that region to be known as a state, as either "lower" California, or Southern California.

[PoppySead]

Originally Posted by 9162

Correct, this was the Gadsden purchase. The U.S. could have just taken whatever they wanted, but decided as a courtesy to pay for it. It would have been interesting though if the border of Arizona was extended to the Gulf of Baja California, rather than tapering it northward to Yuma, allowing AZ to have a coastline, and perhaps also purchasing Baja California, allowing that region to be known as a state, as either "lower" California, or Southern California.

I would love to have that part of Mexico! Of course right now my family can have a nice Baja vaca for $500.00. You can guess that wouldn't be possible if the U.S. owned it. Besides, I think the Cartel would come with it now, and who wants to take care of that mess. It's hard enough bordering those cities over run, much less having to clean them up.

[jambo101]

I've always been under the impression that a large area of northern Mexico ultimately became part of America.
Heres a chronology of events.

Territorial evolution of Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia