9/11 Pentagon Video finally released...

First, I owe Ghandi an apology for the last line of my previous post.  I let me passions get the better of me, something that I often warn others not to do.  My personal insult was inexcusable and I retract it.  A better comment might have been that he is not doing justice to his moniker.

Tony: The Native Americans were not initially threatened by the pilgrims.  Indeed, they made efforts to "reach out" in peace, and for the first few decades, in both the Virginia and Massachusetts colonies, the pilgrims and Native Americans lived side by side in peace.

It was only when "manifest destiny" reared its ugly head - when our population grew, needed more room, and we felt an "entitlement" to the rest of the continent, the Native Americans be damned - that hostilities broke out.  And while some tribes were more violence- and war-prone than others, even during this period, many tribes continued to try to live in peace with us.  It was during this period, of course, that the many ultimately phony treaties were signed with various tribes, promising them that they would be able to remain landed and stable.  Yet as our population grew, manifest destiny unfolded, and the West was conquered (no better word), all those treaties were broken, and we slaughtered millions upon millions of Native Americans.

MtS:

5,000,000-30,000,000 is the estimated number of slaves that died in transit or shortly thereafter.  This number can be found in dozens of articles and books.

"Dwelling on the past is just deconstructive?"  Tell that to the Native Americans!  I repeat my hypothetical question: "We" have now "owned" the whole of "America" for about 300 years.  What would you do if a bunch of superior-powered people simply came over and decided to kill all of us so they could have the land?  Would you "play nice?"

Peace.

Mts:

Thanks for the above; I actually did not remember Ghandi's earlier statement.

Ghandi:

I don't have to "hate" the U.S., or even consider it "evil."  I do believe it to be very misguided - often harmfully so - in many ways.  And it has been that way almost since the beginning.

Yes, I know that Britain, France and others were colonialist/imperialist long before we were.  But even setting aside that I don't live in Britain or France - I live in the U.S. - does their colonialism/imperialism justify ours?  Are you suggesting that the U.S. could not have become a strong nation without undertaking the same kind of colonial and imperial forays that other countries did?

Keep in mind that we are still the "new kid on the block"; every other culture in the world - even all the Western ones - are hundreds, even thousands of years older than we are.  Yet instead of learning manners, etiquette, tact, diplomacy and other highly valuable tools in the geopolitik, we came out of the starting gate like a bratty child, not "playing nice" in the sandbox (which others had been playing in for centuries before we got there...), and basically displaying a deep arrogance, righteousness and entitlement that had never been seen before on the world stage vis-a-vis the age of our republic vs. how we comported ourselves internationally.

That is how we ultimately became the world's only "hyper-power" - and we still don't get it: we use brawn instead of brain, muscle instead of tact, arrogance instead of humility, military might instead of diplomacy, and basically "laud it" over anyone who does not see things "our" way, whether it be economically, politically, or any other way.  We show little or no respect for anyone, and pay only lip service to many of the ideals we claim make us "better" than others.

If I focus on America’s “evils,” it is because, historically, it has done more “evil” than “good” – though many of those “evils” are subtle rather than overt.  (If you do not see and understand that re the U.S.’s place in the global geopolitik, then it would take far too long for me to explain here.)  Yes, we have done good as well: the Marshall Plan is a very good example, as is some of the (often late, but better late than never…) responses to crises around the globe, and the financial aid we provide to many countries.  But I do not believe in “my country, right or wrong,” because, historically, it has done the “wrong” thing far more often than it has done the “right” thing – sometimes (and perhaps often) even when it had a chance to do the right thing.

As for “making the Indians sound blameless,” I did nothing of the sort.  I provided the facts of history: for the first few decades, the settlers in the Jamestown and Plymouth areas lived side by side in peace with the Native Americans.  It was only when our population grew, we needed more room, and “manifest destiny” took over that we basically said “we are entitled to anything and everything we want, including the land - the Native Americans be damned.”  And the Native Americans responded in both ways: some tribes continued to try to live peaceably with the “white man” – including signing and believing in hundreds, perhaps thousands, of treaties, all of which were broken - while others took up arms and engaged us in order to keep what had been theirs for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years – just as we would do if someone even more powerful than we are were to come and try to take “our “land.”

Peace.