The U.S. should seriously consider giving back the lands it took illegally

[Wernazuma III]

At first, America should give back Diego Garcia to the country which actually possess it although they don't care (UK, maybe it's actually under NATO-cover, in reality the USA hold it). Secondly, the UK should finally allow the natives to return to their homes from where they were expelled in the 70s for geostrategic reasons, because the US needed an army base there. This is a shame!

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Zylka
I tend to agree, as previously hinted:

Quote:

...personally attribute the growth of that inadequate framework initially to environmental factors of the region.

Looks as though Mr FunBoi has time only to hurl the tired and easy "racism" bit, yet not specify why?

Calling Amerindians a group of murderers and inbreeders sure count as racist insults in my view.

[St Leo]

Only Stalinists want to turn back history. There is no way we can undo the past; trying will only create more past for us to undo.

We just have to be as rational and liberal as we can now and forgive those who came before us.

There may not be such a thing as right of conquest, but the opposite of conquest is conquest and things claimed through it centuries ago cannot easily be given back.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
At first, America should give back Diego Garcia to the country which actually possess it although they don't care (UK, maybe it's actually under NATO-cover, in reality the USA hold it).

Oh no. You got those as part payment for WW2 Lend Lease. There's no way the UK taxpayers are footing the bill for maintaining those bases.

Originally posted by Wernazuma III

Secondly, the UK should finally allow the natives to return to their homes from where they were expelled in the 70s for geostrategic reasons, because the US needed an army base there. This is a shame!

About the same time US gives back Guantanimo Bay, I would think.

Which citizens are you talking about? Bit vague.

[Japher]

Hmmm, as I recall we were British when we began stealing this country, and the we bought most of the rest, or beat it out of the Mexicans...

This thread is silly. First America is told that we don't know enough about that status in the middle east so we should stay out. Not were being told that we have no right to be in the middle east because we are just like them!!! What!?

Since when did war=stealing? Arguing the fundamental reasons of and for war is worthless... It will happen anyway.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Dissident
don't ya ever feel guilty about all the people the U.S. trampled over to create that great nation?

If the U.S. is ever going to dictate to nations like Iraq that they can't attacks other nations like Kuwait, they need to look at their own history of land aquisition through warfare. The U.S. has no moral high ground here.

So I do believe the time has come to return the lands of the United States back to its rightful owners.

Hey Jimmy Carter was nice enough to give back the Panama canal, he took the first step.

Who's with me?

I'm not with you, nor do I feel guilty. If we're going to enforce laws and mores retroactively, we need to go after that bastard Ghengis and those sniveling Mongols.


I can hear Bush now: "KAAAAAHHHHHNNNNNN!!!!!!"

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, we stole it good and fair

[MrFun]

While I sympathize with the various Amerindian tribes, I do not feel guilty.
I can acknowledge that something historically done was unjust, without personally feeling guilty about it, since I was never involved.

And I suppose if one takes a mental trip to la-la land of utopian vision, you can say we need to return the lands stolen, but that is not pratically possible.

The best we can do is give them their own sovreignty where they currently live, and IF there is some land that is still possible to return, we should do that as well.

[JohnT]

"The best we can do is give them their own sovreignty where they currently live, and IF there is some land that is still possible to return, we should do that as well."

Essentially, keep them as poor, benighted museum pieces for Mighty Whitey? Isn't that what we're already doing?

[SlowwHand]

Dissident, sometimes you amaze me.
Who, in the World, is where they started?
Let's just start over.
Let's just play a giant game of musical chairs, huh?
Those left standing are out.

What would be the difference then ?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Berzerker
When it's proven that Indians were the first people and not invaders who killed the first people.

Even if they did take it from someone else, a claim which is yet unproven, they had it for ten thousand years. Certainly a long enough time for the sins of the fathers to wash off the children.

[SlowwHand]

Oh, I see. Statute of Limitations is in effect.
Dumbasses.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by JohnT
"The best we can do is give them their own sovreignty where they currently live, and IF there is some land that is still possible to return, we should do that as well."

Essentially, keep them as poor, benighted museum pieces for Mighty Whitey? Isn't that what we're already doing?

With improvement to the system, smart ass.

[Oerdin]

The US is totally wrong! We should be acting like China and supporting access of evil members, like PDRK, instead of knocking them off.

[SlowwHand]

Come on. Be realistic.
The American Indians were filthy beasts in loin cloths, and that's the ONLY reasons you find them attractive.
Not because of their culture.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Oh, I see. Statute of Limitations is in effect.
Dumbasses.

Do you want to give Texas back to the Mexicans? If not then I suggest you shut the hell up.

Yes, I do believe in a statutue of limitations on the theft of land. I stand greatly to benefit by invalidating the former claims of the American Indians to a great part of the US. I'm willing to negotiate on this or that peice of land which was egregiously taken (where the treaties were broken by the US), but over all, this place is ours, and we ain't given it back.

In other words, I'm being more honest about our right to appropriate the land than Berserker. It's ours because we took it, not because the former occupiers had an invalid claim to begin with.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Come on. Be realistic.
The American Indians were filthy beasts in loin cloths, and that's the ONLY reasons you find them attractive.
Not because of their culture.

Not all Amerinds were Texan, you know. In most of the country, they wore shirts and slacks and dresses, especially in the winter. What I find surprising is why you Texans don't strip down to your skivies in High Summer.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by gunkulator

... By comparison, Mesopotamia had wheat, oats, barley and rice with pack/food animals like cattle, pigs, goats, sheep and horses.
...

Yeah, pork is the favorite food over there, right? I read a scientific article suggesting that pork was banned by the monotheistic religions because the forests in middle east vanished due to a climate change in 4000 BC or so. Hogs prefere to live in forestland and thus, the middle east could not support their people by pork herding.

[Chemical Ollie]

I kinda like this thread. It invites to both serious posting and spamming.

Hey, the US should give up some land! Give the Marshal Islands to me!!!

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Not all Amerinds were Texan, you know. In most of the country, they wore shirts and slacks and dresses, especially in the winter. What I find surprising is why you Texans don't strip down to your skivies in High Summer.

A couple of points:

A) If you're making some kind of pig farm comment, then no; most Texans were not into pig farming. Cattle and sheep.

B) You make a brash assumption in your surprise of Texas summers.
The fact of the matter is, I run buckass naked through the streets on occasion.

[Boris Godunov]

While it is true that NA culture isn't nearly as rosy as many try to depict it prior to European arrival, Zylka's portrayal is equally as fallacious, making broad generalizations that simply aren't true. I'd encourage you, Z, to read up on the Mississippi Mound culture, the achievements of the Iroqouis nation and several of the South West native cultures that rose and fell over the course of the centuries. The Mound culture, in particular, was quite advanced, as in Cahokia, there were 20,000 people living in a 5-square mile area in 1000 CE. This was a city.

Yes, the NAs often fought bloody wars amongst each other, which wouldn't differentiate them much from the Europeans, who did the same thing.

As to the question, as trollish as it is, my answer is that, what's done is done and the implications of "returning" such land are staggeringly bad. The bottom line is what will benefit most people, and handing over everything and uprooting the nearly 300 million here is, simply, impossible.

Now, were I alive back when Europeans were actually uprooting natives forcefully, I like to think I would be advocating a less aggressive solution to the clash of cultures.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
The fact of the matter is, I run buckass naked through the streets on occasion.

Just having the image of this text seared on my corneas means I must now be excused to go rip my eyeballs out of my head with my bare hands.

[SlowwHand]

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Cruddy
Oh no. You got those as part payment for WW2 Lend Lease. There's no way the UK taxpayers are footing the bill for maintaining those bases.

Well, "you" might not be the correct term as I'm Austrian and the only colony Austria ever held in the Indian Ocean were the Andamans or Nicobars for a few years in the 17th century.

Which citizens are you talking about? Bit vague.

Diego García had a certain - not too big - native population until the 1970s but they were expelled from their homes - without having done anything wrong, just because the base was built there - to the Maledives. I guess, some administrator just thought: "Half naked men and half naked men on islands, what's the difference where they live..."
From time to time, some try to get back by boat, but of course the US military doesn't let them return.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand


A couple of points:

A) If you're making some kind of pig farm comment, then no; most Texans were not into pig farming. Cattle and sheep.

B) You make a brash assumption in your surprise of Texas summers.
The fact of the matter is, I run buckass naked through the streets on occasion.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Come on. Be realistic.
The American Indians were filthy beasts in loin cloths, and that's the ONLY reasons you find them attractive.
Not because of their culture.

That was suppose to be a secret between you and me and our third playmate!

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
I don´t think that the US should give those Lands back it took illegally.

It would be too much of the country, if you consider the Land they took from the american natives.

But the american tribes should be properly remiunerated for the lands they were forced to give up.
There are AFAIK some cases, Indian Tribes against the USA where such a remuneration is demanded. They should be decided in Favor of the Tribes.

That's why there are casinos on indian reservations.



ACK!

[SlowwHand]

Don't forget the Bingo Halls.
Lor-DY! The Bingo Halls.

[Tuberski]

Ther are usually fireworks stands as well. Plus, cheap cigarettes.

ACK!

[Japher]

If they want it they can take it, oh wait they can't! and neither can you... mwahahahaaha.... Or they can buy it back, which it seems like they are working on doing... They have really pissed Nevada off