DV....

Maybe you hear the criticism of those other countries in the countries themselves, just like you hear criticsm of the U.S. here.

And we've certainly heard enough criticism about the recent genocide in Iraq, Rawanda, and the Serbian-Croatian business.

We've also had a fair amount of mention and criticism here of Hitler and Nazi Germany, and Stalin who killed who knows how many of his own people..

Even William the Conqueror and the Crusades have gotten a mention or two.

I guess Atilla the Hun and Ghengis Khan are too far back for anyone to care anymore.

I think maybe what you're objecting to is the sarcasm expressed in the criticsm of what we did to the native Americans.

My point is, I think criticizing America for being invaded territory is pretty useless. The world is invaded territory.

I was aiming at how I always hear the criticism of America regarding that (invasion) more then any other country today. I don't hear anyone else criticizing a country's present day image for distant past invasions.

What's your point? [/b][/quote]We've treated the American Indians like shit

What's your point? [/b][/quote]We've treated the American Indians like shit [/b][/quote]Of course, we're the only ones who've done this, right? The American way my ass. :rolleyes:

I am not saying we haven't treated the Indians like shit, but it's not the American way because, guess what, we're not alone!

Let's not pretend like the Native Americans of the 16th-19th century were merely sitting around smoking the peace pipe in perfect harmony with one another. Tribes were constantly at war with one another, and frequently invaded another tribe while pushing them out of their homeland. It's not as if these people would have never experienced war if colonists hadn't showed up.

My alma mater is the University of North Dakota, whose nickname is the Fighting Sioux. Today, there is a Sioux tribe in North Dakota, but that was not always the name they went by. The term "Sioux" was one of the first racial slurs ever used in the Americas. The other local tribes hated the Sioux because they were fierce invaders and warriors who excelled at what they did, which was attack and conquer competing tribes, annexing their lands in the process. As a result, the other tribes gave them a less than charming name, "Sioux".

So by saying we're not alone, is that a way of justification? During the civil rights movement, everybody treated the blacks like shit. Just because it was the popular thing to do, doesn't mean it was right. Well, same with the indians.

I know, the Americans aren't the only people who have done this, but we're supposed to set an example. So we can be looked upon as the big brother internationally, which provides an excuse to blow our spending overseas.

So by saying we're not alone, is that a way of justification? During the civil rights movement, everybody treated the blacks like shit. Just because it was the popular thing to do, doesn't mean it was right. Well, same with the indians.

I know, the Americans aren't the only people who have done this, but we're supposed to set an example. So we can be looked upon as the big brother internationally, which provides an excuse to blow our spending overseas. [/b][/quote]Where did I say that justifies it? It doesn't. But, like DV, I'm tired of the U.S. being the only ones criticized for it.

We're the role models of the world to you so that automatically justifies your criticism as the "American way?" Give me a fucking break.

Let's face it, evil is the human way.

I must have missed that line in the Constitution... :p

Once again, I'm left to defend myself against a large number of posters. I didn't know that admitting the indians were mistreated by the white folk during our expansion would spark up so much controversy.

This will be my last post in this thread:

Okay, you didn't justify it, but why do you feel the need to defend it? Just say, "ok, indians were treated like shit", and move on. It happens everyday to many people, and you can read about it in the news. It wasn't America's proudest moment, but it shouldn't be one that's overlooked. I didn't expect my single comment to ignite an argument.

We're the role models of the world in the eyes of this administration, and (we're supposed to be) to other countries to whom we're giving aid. Why do you think we've adopted the role as world police? It's not a role I'm too fond of. Regardless, I'm not the only one who thinks this country is "the role model of the world".

Evil is the human way, that's true. It's been proven throughout the history of civilization. End of subject, now chill the fuck out!

Whoa, so this administration’s view of our country as role models means we're tainted because of the past?

The Indians were treated like shit. It was a terrible chapter in this nation's history, and so was slavery. BUT we aren't the only ones who did that terrible stuff, so it is not just the American way, that's all I'm saying.

Well holy shit, if you think you are right, you shouldn't worry about how many people you are against!

No, it's that it just gets tiring when you have to respond to a whole crew of people and it's just you. :rolleyes:

Feeling that you're right doesn't help.

That said, allow me to help you out here, Tony, with this comment:

First of all, when someone criticizes American policy - past or present - it's not really much of an argument to say that "Well, other countries did/do it also."

Second of all, a vast majority of the members here are Americans, so it's natural that we will be considerably more interested and prone to comment on the past, present, and future actions of our own country, at times to the virtual exclusion of others.

Moreover, the U.S. is the most powerful and "highest profile" country in the world with the greatest, or potentially greatest, influence on world events, so it's quite understandable that even our non-American members are very concerned with the present and future actions of our country and interested in those of the past.

This is essentially what I'm objecting to. Your initial comment about how the United States "acquired" its territory was basically one that was sarcastic about "the American Way," and yet, your facts weren't necessarily correct, as we have pointed out. Your indictment of "the American Way" in such a fashion is infuriating to many because, if you realize it, the American way is also to intervene in genocide (WWII), give more money than any other nation in foreign aid, and to offer unlimited opportunities to those who come to this country.

*Humor break* Technically, Tennessee never rejoined the Union after The War of Northern Aggression, so there are only 49 states.

Okay, now let the flame wars continue.

"The War of Northern Aggression"???

:p

Pssht, like we care about Tennessee anyways :p