|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 15, 2019 1:18:36 GMT
If they had ever stopped fighting among themselves, us white skins might have had to get back in the boats and sail east...
They did, for the most part, stop fighting amongst themselves. Crazy Horse led members of various Indian tribes against Custer. Tribes who normally did not get along. Problem for the Injuns was we had better weapons. And far more men. We could come at them in endless waves. Even if they held on for a century fighting us, look at us now - we have 320 million people right now. They ain't beating that number. I meant more at the beginning. The Iroquois could have wiped out all the Puritans and the Dutch without breaking a sweat. But the fought among the six Nations. By the Plains Wars, they were doomed.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 12:45:58 GMT
He was probably a better field commander than George Washington (the Father of Our Country lost a shitload of battles).
Nah, now here's a history lesson for you: The greatest field commander in American history was not a white man who wore a snappy uniform. It was Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce injuns. He (with limited troops - only 200 - and limited arms) fought battles (in retreat) against the might of the US Army. Chief Joseph repeatedly fended off (and often times defeated) General Howard and his infantry and cavalry troops for more than 1,000 miles. The might of the US Army against a small band of retreating Indians and Chief Joseph out-foxed and out-fought them for a thousand miles. Joseph finally got beat just shy of the Canadian border. And that only happened because of the suffering women and children in Joseph's tribe. He had to surrender....and deliver an iconic speech. "I will fight no more forever." I'm sure you've heard of Joseph. Far greater than Mad Anthony. That guy Mad Ant has team named after him and, yes, Joseph and his people do, too...but disgustingly it's called the Redskins. What respect we give to our first peoples. Great book on the Nez Perce War called Thunder in the Mountains. I highly recommend it.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 13:24:23 GMT
If they had ever stopped fighting among themselves, us white skins might have had to get back in the boats and sail east...
They did, for the most part, stop fighting amongst themselves. Crazy Horse led members of various Indian tribes against Custer. Tribes who normally did not get along. Problem for the Injuns was we had better weapons. And far more men. We could come at them in endless waves. Even if they held on for a century fighting us, look at us now - we have 320 million people right now. They ain't beating that number. It wasn't so much fighting among themselves as refusing to unite for the common cause. The native population had their own political problems. The real problem for the natives was that most of their population was wiped out by disease brought by early explorers. If that hadn't happened, it's hard to imagine Europeans getting a foothold in North America and expanding as quickly as they did. It had very little to do with technological superiority. Also, you can't have a discussion about great Native leaders without mention of Tecumseh. He was so successful that his confederacy fell apart after his death, that's how important he was as a leader. A few of these battles go a different way, particularly during international conflicts here on the continent, where European politics and interests are at play, and we could be looking at a map that features native held lands (and I'm not talking about reservations) today. But we are where we are as a nation. We have vanquished the American Indian and turned them into mythological figures to be used for our leisure, naming automobiles and sports teams after them as a true sign of respect. We use names like Redskins and logos such as Chief Wahoo, because what are they going to do about it? Other minorities seem to have a voice while American Indians are continually discriminated against by our society because...reasons? Because there aren't enough of them left to make a boycott effective? Someone will have to get back to me on that.
|
|
|
Post by marco26 on Oct 15, 2019 13:48:56 GMT
...Europeans getting a foothold in North America and expanding as quickly as they did. It had very little to do with technological superiority. You sure about that? Here's a list of weaponry used in the Indian Wars for each side. Which would you want? Baker rifle Charleville musket Gatling Gun Hotchkiss gun Peabody action Springfield Model 1873 unlimited ammunition Bow and arrows Spear Tomahawk found rifles -- limited ammunition
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 14:30:22 GMT
...Europeans getting a foothold in North America and expanding as quickly as they did. It had very little to do with technological superiority. You sure about that? Here's a list of weaponry used in the Indian Wars for each side. Which would you want? Baker rifle Charleville musket Gatling Gun Hotchkiss gun Peabody action Springfield Model 1873 unlimited ammunition Bow and arrows Spear Tomahawk found rifles -- limited ammunition That weaponry was from much later, I'm talking the early days. They didn't get off the Mayflower with a Gatling Gun. And the Natives had access to more than 'found rifles.' From the earliest fur traders the natives were trading for weaponry, and they were certainly armed by opposing European powers when they took part in political conflicts. If the Natives could've defended the coastline from incursion at the beginning-- and I mean the 16th and early 17th centuries, before people were coming in droves-- who knows how things play out? Moving forward in time, if even a few battles go differently during the Seven Years War, the American Revolutionary War, the War of 1812; there could still be Native held lands in the Americas. You also have to consider the amount of times the Americans used deception and murder to trick Native leaders and peoples into surrendering themselves or their land as opposed to using military force. Or the amount of times they straight up massacred non-combatants (such as Wounded Knee) to force the Native warriors' hands. By the time of the Nez Perce War, you're right, the tide had turned and there was no going back. Natives were never going to be able to hold out against those circumstances. But in the early days of settlement, or even the early days of the United States, there was still a chance to hold onto Native territory. And ultimately it wasn't European technology that decided the future of the Americas so much as it was European disease, greed and ruthlessness.
|
|
|
Post by marco26 on Oct 15, 2019 15:58:54 GMT
That weaponry was from much later, I'm talking the early days. By the time of the Nez Perce War, you're right, the tide had turned and there was no going back. We were talking about the war on the Nez Perce. We were talking about that time frame...and then you bring up Mayflower times. OK, let's go there. Had the Injuns slaughtered Jamestown, Plymouth and any early settlers and trappers and explorers...you really think things would have been any different? The Indians of Central America and South America waged war against the early explorers and settlers down there...they still ended up conquered. Come on, man, you are talking primitive culture going up against advanced powers. Nations that built empires all over the globe. The mighty three-mast vessels against dugout canoes.
|
|
|
Post by nutsberryfarm 🏜 on Oct 15, 2019 16:04:25 GMT
...Europeans getting a foothold in North America and expanding as quickly as they did. It had very little to do with technological superiority. You sure about that? Here's a list of weaponry used in the Indian Wars for each side. Which would you want? Baker rifle Charleville musket Gatling Gun Hotchkiss gun Peabody action Springfield Model 1873 unlimited ammunition Bow and arrows Spear Tomahawk found rifles -- limited ammunition all i'd need would be a spear.
|
|
|
Post by nutsberryfarm 🏜 on Oct 15, 2019 16:07:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 16:37:18 GMT
That weaponry was from much later, I'm talking the early days. By the time of the Nez Perce War, you're right, the tide had turned and there was no going back. We were talking about the war on the Nez Perce. We were talking about that time frame...and then you bring up Mayflower times. OK, let's go there. Had the Injuns slaughtered Jamestown, Plymouth and any early settlers and trappers and explorers...you really think things would have been any different? The Indians of Central America and South America waged war against the early explorers and settlers down there...they still ended up conquered. Come on, man, you are talking primitive culture going up against advanced powers. Nations that built empires all over the globe. The mighty three-mast vessels against dugout canoes. I brought up the earliest days of European exploration on the continent right off the bat, it's not like I moved the goalposts. To answer your question, things could've been very different. As I pointed out in my initial post, disease (brought by previous European expeditions to the region) had ravaged the Incan Empire and it was embroiled in a Civil War when the conquistadors took it by force. Cortes conquered the Aztecs with help from enemy tribes. Neither of these were a case of Europeans simply showing up with guns blazing and calling it a day. And in both cases, the Spanish Empire had immediate reward for conquering those empires. There wasn't any real wealth to be had on the eastern North American coast. If colonies kept disappearing like Roanoke had (or worse, if the Natives were openly hostile and able to defend their lands at full strength as opposed to losing incredible numbers to disease), the interest in settling these lands would surely be greatly diminished in Europe. They couldn't hold off the tide forever, but perhaps history plays out differently. Even something as simple as who colonized the lands and when could have a huge impact on how they coexisted with native tribes. We'll never know. I'm guessing the Natives wouldn't try their hand at naval warfare against ships of the line, they'd defend the coastland using guerilla warfare. But this is all theoretical. I never said Native American tribes would definitely be able to ward off everything the European powers could throw at them in the coming centuries. I'm saying there's a chance history plays out differently with some Native held territories in the modern age, if the Natives had enough manpower to make it more profitable for the European powers to bargain with them instead of slowly rolling over them to the point of almost total eradication over the course of a few hundred years.
|
|
|
Post by marco26 on Oct 15, 2019 16:57:06 GMT
.. If colonies kept disappearing like Roanoke had (or worse, if the Natives were openly hostile and able to defend their lands at full strength as opposed to losing incredible numbers to disease), the interest in settling these lands would surely be greatly diminished in Europe. Oh, come on, you think Spain, England, Belgium, Germany, France, Dutch, Portuguese would back off because they got their noses bloodied a bit? These were Empires. From Africa to Asia to the Americas....the empires got bloodied and simply went in with more force. Numbers and technology were obviously on the colonial powers side. Plus they had one other thing: an insatiable desire to conquer. The Injuns never had a chance. Nor did the Zulus, the Chinese, the Incas, India, the Caribbean islands, the continent of Africa....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 17:11:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 17:14:13 GMT
Did anyone else notice that the A's went to a lighter green this year? I like it! Also, very excited to see the Padres return to their classic yellow and brown next season.
It's funny how obsessed the MLB is with red. Count the teams with red and think about how few teams have green and yellow. The next expansion team should have green jerseys.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Oct 15, 2019 17:15:29 GMT
Did anyone else notice that the A's went to a lighter green this year? I like it! Also, very excited to see the Padres return to their classic yellow and brown next season. It's funny how obsessed the MLB is with red. Count the teams with red and think about how few teams have green and yellow. The next expansion team should have green jerseys. BRILLIANT!
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Oct 15, 2019 17:20:34 GMT
Did anyone else notice that the A's went to a lighter green this year? I like it! Also, very excited to see the Padres return to their classic yellow and brown next season. It's funny how obsessed the MLB is with red. Count the teams with red and think about how few teams have green and yellow. The next expansion team should have green jerseys. BRILLIANT! the NFL did something similar, when they suggested the Ravens become only the second team to wear purple
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 17:25:18 GMT
.. If colonies kept disappearing like Roanoke had (or worse, if the Natives were openly hostile and able to defend their lands at full strength as opposed to losing incredible numbers to disease), the interest in settling these lands would surely be greatly diminished in Europe. Oh, come on, you think Spain, England, Belgium, Germany, France, Dutch, Portuguese would back off because they got their noses bloodied a bit? These were Empires. From Africa to Asia to the Americas....the empires got bloodied and simply went in with more force. Numbers and technology were obviously on the colonial powers side. Plus they had one other thing: an insatiable desire to conquer. The Injuns never had a chance. Nor did the Zulus, the Chinese, the Incas, India, the Caribbean islands, the continent of Africa.... I feel like you don't understand the point I'm making. There is no world I can imagine where the Native Americans completely halt European expansion into North America. I can however imagine a world where a few things happen differently, leading to Native held territory in modern day North America. You listed some examples that prove my point. South Africa, India, Hong Kong, the Caribbean; are those places populated almost exclusively by people of European descent today? Then of course you'd probably have a North America filled with third world countries due to exploitation and meddling of the colonizing powers with the local power structure for centuries, but at least you'd still have a Native population with at worst a hopeful future. But again, we'll never know. So to reiterate, I agree the Native Americans could not have held off the European powers forever; but they would've had a better fighting chance to control their own destiny if they hadn't been wiped out by disease-- not simply because the Europeans had better weapons. This was the argument I made in my initial post on the topic.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 15, 2019 17:44:41 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 17:50:33 GMT
Oh, come on, you think Spain, England, Belgium, Germany, France, Dutch, Portuguese would back off because they got their noses bloodied a bit? These were Empires. From Africa to Asia to the Americas....the empires got bloodied and simply went in with more force. Numbers and technology were obviously on the colonial powers side. Plus they had one other thing: an insatiable desire to conquer. The Injuns never had a chance. Nor did the Zulus, the Chinese, the Incas, India, the Caribbean islands, the continent of Africa.... I feel like you don't understand the point I'm making. There is no world I can imagine where the Native Americans completely halt European expansion into North America. I can however a world where a few things happen differently, leading to Native held territory in modern day North America. You listed some examples that prove my point. South Africa, India, Hong Kong, the Caribbean; are those places populated almost exclusively by people of European descent today? Then of course you'd probably have a North America filled with third world countries due to exploitation and meddling of the colonizing powers with the local power structure for centuries, but at least you'd still have a Native population with at worst a hopeful future. But again, we'll never know. So to reiterate, I agree the Native Americans could not have held off the European powers forever; but they would've had a better fighting chance to control their own destiny if they hadn't been wiped out by disease-- not simply because the Europeans had better weapons. This was the argument I made in my initial post on the topic. Also the Spanish Conquistadors were able to absolutely destroy Central and South American civilization with shockingly few numbers. The disease epidemics were the real death blow. Those places were devastated and reeling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 17:53:15 GMT
I have to go back in this thread and find out how Cardinals Jerseys morphed into a conversation on small pox and genocide.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 15, 2019 17:58:47 GMT
I have to go back in this thread and find out how Cardinals Jerseys morphed into a conversation on small pox and genocide. It's the internet, what else do you need to know?
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Oct 15, 2019 18:11:30 GMT
You know Gunsmoke did a great episode in the black and white days about Chief Joseph. It was handled with the truth and dignity, very well done.
Or maybe that episode was about the Cardinals jerseys, I forget.
|
|