Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about this:
No more monuments dealing with wars of any kind. Civil, WW2, Indian, Revolutionary...none.
Monuments to Presidents of US are OK, unless they are impeached, then banned. CSA presidents don't count...has to be legit.
Personally I'm happy with public art that is non-controversial. Water fountains with no depictions of indivduals, no inscriptions. Just something pretty and pleasing and relaxing.
This is such a crock of BS. They certain were migrants, but when they came to this continent over the land bridge of the Baring Strait, there were no one here on the N American continent. When the US expanded west during the 1800's there were certainly nations already established out west that the US defeated. So the US certainly were victorious invaders. Get your facts straight.
Native Americans came to the Americas from another place. They were not Natives of the Americas.
Different tribes/nations of "Native Americans" came and conquered and displaced and enslaved tribes of "Native Americans" who had arrived earlier.
Why do these later-arriving "Native Americans" have a legitimate right to the land they stole from earlier-arriving "Native Americans"?
Why do any of them have a more legitimate right to the Americans than even later-arriving Europeans?
See my questions above.
I already answered your question, we see defending your land or your property as a god given right, so what the Natives is was mostly justified because they were defending themselves from the Europeans. That is why we can justify WW2, if the Germans are planning on taking us over then we should attack them. We also see stopping communism at all costs as just and humane and that is why it is okay to invade communist countries just for being communist. We do not see slavery which is what the Civil War was mostly about, as a just position so we do not recognize the perpetrators of that war. We do not see Nazism as just that is why we never put the leaders of Nasi Germany in a good light unless talking about tactics during warfare. Same with communism.
Honestly your post is beyond appalling. Shouldn't you be at the Daily Stormer? I mean, come on. White Europeans committed genocide on the Native Americans who preceded them. The native Americans were robbed of their land.
What does the race of the Europeans have to do with anything? There is more to the story than what the European settlers did. The land didn't belong to anyone so no it wasn't robbed from anyone. There were no immigration laws back then. You conviently left out the atrocities committed by the Amerindians also. They weren't just the innocents in all of this. They weren't natives they migrated over the Bering Strait. First does not make one a native.
Should we destroy the statues of Sitting Bull, the Crazy Horse Memorial? Because they fought wars against our soldiers and murdered innocent women and children.
Explain to me the difference.
All this was AFTER the puritans brought their lies, disease and religion to this country.
It's not an invasion when there were no immigration laws and the inhabitants were also immigrants. There were no established "nations" either without immigration laws. Get your facts straight.
Their were established nations when we took over the U.S. The Iroquois confederacy in every single way was an established nation and their are even rumours that we took some of the ideas of our constitution from the Iroquois. The Cherokee were considered a civilized tribe. Their were large Native American cities and permanent settlements and their were boundaries. Would you consider the Roman Empire not a nation because they had hinterlands instead of exact boundaries everywhere.
Honestly, I think we should devote our energies - after we are done tearing down these dumb confederate monuments - towards - wait for it - REPARATIONS. We don't need to worry about other statues/memorials.
As a white person, I think it's something we owe to the descendants of slaves, and its time has come. It's something I am going to advocate for going forward.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70
Liberals are also enamored of the Vietcong and North Vietnam which murdered American soldiers, tortured American POWs and kept American POWs after the war to be worked to death in their labor camps yet liberals like Jane Fonda took pleasure in supporting them.
I wouldn't be surprised if deep down some on the left support ISIS and North Korea.
Should we destroy the statues of Sitting Bull, the Crazy Horse Memorial? Because they fought wars against our soldiers and murdered innocent women and children.
Explain to me the difference.
The Indians were here first. The Europeans came here and killed them; they only fought back. I think we should send the Europeans back to Europe. You don't know your history.
Liberals are also enamored of the Vietcong and North Vietnam which murdered American soldiers, tortured American POWs and kept American POWs after the war to be worked to death in their labor camps yet liberals like Jane Fonda took pleasure in supporting them.
I wouldn't be surprised if deep down some on the left support ISIS and North Korea.
I think you would be Bigly wrong that any of the left support N. Korea or Isis.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.