• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

whites are the real immigrants, are they not?

-Demosthenes- said:

Ya you kind of left out the parts about how it didn't work:



Or the fact that it was the Indians that were attacking the white people not the other way around. The people at the fort were only trying to defend themselves.

Or rather broken treaties constitute broken treaties, which in of themselves would be considered extremely negative by many people.

Yes yes because the evil whitemen were the only ones to break the treaties right? And because we all know that the Native Americans were innocent bystanders who never hurt a fly living peacefully with one another in bounty that is before the arrival of the evil Europeans.



I was only talking about North of Mexico. If you want to speak for the whole continent then you have to include the Mestizos that being the case the populations today for peoples of indiginious ancestry are way way higher than before the arrival of the Europeans.

Maybe not, but the slavery and/or demanding tribute of another group of people for the soul purpose of profit combined with uncontrolled killing of natives without punishment was bad enough. The absence of full-scale genocide is a small concession.

Uncontrolled killing? Prove it. Demanding tribute? What tribute? Indian slaves? What indian slaves? Prove it.
 
BodiSatva said:
What is with the incoherent ramblings? You do this in every post, not that you show the ability or insight to display intelligence to this point...but, "hysterical argument"?

And I will contunie to do it as as long as you keep on displaying you intellegence by throwing steam irons in my face as an argument. Calm down, lady.
BodiSatva said:
If I throw something in your face, I may have to start screaming? Why? Because you know how to "calm down hysterics"?

No, you missunderstood me - that was that I may have to make you start screaming with pleasure... my dear
lady's hysterics are quite easy to turn into a scream of pleasure.
 
I understood you completely...it was obvious what you were saying the first time...that I would be screaming because you were good at calming down hysterics. Do you know why this was obvious? It is because this is what you said...you said it and it was obvious, at least to me. Perhaps you confuse yourself and think that we are as confused as you?

Don't try to throw things in my face, lady, you (BodiSatva) may have to start screaming out loud that things don't fly. I (you) know a few good ways to calm down hysterics.

What is humorous, again for the second time...
Is how does making a person scream for any reason promote calming them down?
What you are trying to say contradicts what you are saying, that is all.
This is something that children eventually learn...to say what they mean, don't worry, you will get it...maybe. Girls like you just don't get it Justone...all overrun with emotion...it clouds your judgment.
 
BodiSatva said:
I understood you completely...it was obvious what you were saying the first time...that I would be screaming because you were good at calming down hysterics.
Is how does making a person scream for any reason promote calming them down?
.
Lady, this reason is not any reason, it is called orgasm - you will be happy and calm the next minute.. - the best way to calm down hysterics... ask any doctor...

(may be my mistake - should I use the word squeal or scream still works?)
 
Lady, I get it...it is obvious as I said. Who cares what happens the next minute, what matters is what you said you could do now. I get it Lady Justone! Besides...I am already calm

What you are not getting is that you said you can CALM DOWN my hysterics by making me SCREAM. GET IT?

If I am SCREAMING then I am NOT CALM!!!

Please tell me you can understand this finally...please God..Oh God OH GOD OH GOD
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE !!!!!

AaahhhHHH.....
 
Last edited:

it is a very colorful hysterics... Reasoning cannot help... just try not to hurt yourself
 
It is called...once again...SARCASM.
Reasoning can't help because you can't seem to reason.
I guess we are done here then bro.
 
BodiSatva said:
It is called...once again...SARCASM.
Reasoning can't help because you can't seem to reason.
I guess we are done here then bro.
In a certain way hystercs and sarcasm are a way of reasoning. We have spend a good ammount of time trying to put one another down as a person with no relation to the topic, - which should make both us the same kind of jerks, –congrads, bro.. Fortunately, this morning, I have signed a couple of good contracts (at last!)which should keep me busy from being a jerk for a while… I hope you will not miss me too much.
 
But I will miss you Justone.
Whom am I to banter with if not you?
Jenny? Larry? :shock:

Good luck with the new work.
 
TOT said:
Ya you kind of left out the parts about how it didn't work:

A number of scholars are on both sides of the argument, maybe it happened maybe it didn't.


No one said that the Europeans were evil or the Indians were all innocent, don't insult us by sidestepping the subject with sarcasm, like we won't notice. The evilness/innocence of any party involved is completely irrelevant when assessing who broke what treaty.


Cool, there's more now. But there's more people everywhere, and most other races didn't have to pass a bottle neck population number as low as 5 million. And again we are ignoring the fact that you don't have to kill people to screw them over. Forcing them into slavery, to pay tribute, or off of land all fall under the classification "screwing people over."

TOT said:
Uncontrolled killing? Prove it. Demanding tribute? What tribute? Indian slaves? What indian slaves? Prove it.

I'm sure your high school offers some sort of history class, it would be beneficial to your overall scholarship, I assure you.

Slavery:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas
The first indigenous group encountered by Columbus were the 250,000 Arawaks of Hispaniola. They were enslaved. The culture was extinct before 1650, and only 500 survived by the year 1550, though the bloodlines continued through the modern populace.


Indian slavery was also practiced by the English in the Carolinas who sold Native American captives into slavery on the English plantations in the Caribbean.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Americas


Tribute:
http://www.eaglerocktradingpost.com/columbusday.htm

Here's a picture of indians paying tribute to the French:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Indians_paying_tribute_to_French_in_Flordia.jpg

You can find more if you want, and as for the killing, I think that it's rather obvious. If you want to find some primary sources, go ahead. I'd suggest reading a standard text book on the subject.
 


So your saying there were no incidents of Indian massacre?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…