The 1890 Incident at Wounded Knee Was No "Massacre"

[DakotaKai_fan20]

I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

And if that was the case, I would be a full blooded Native American.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Who were the previous occupants 40,000 years ago?


So what? Were they bothering you?


RUBBISH. There were millions of buffalo. The Indians only took what they needed and used all of the buffalo, they did not slaughter thousands at a time and leave all the meat rotting while only taking the hides.


Again, it was their land. It was the USG who wanted the treaties, not the Indians. Indians don't use treaties.


Mention it all you want. Doesn't have any bearing on this conversation.


I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

You have no idea how the Plains Indians hunted Buffalo. My great-grandmother was a Comanche, and she described how they hunted. They would drive whole herds of Buffalo off cliffs or into ravines, take the choice cuts of meat and sinew and other things they used and leave tens of tons of meat to rot or be eaten by scavengers. The bows the Plains Indians used were not powerful enough to kill something as large and thick-skinned as a Buffalo.

 

[boevans]

The embedded armed warriors were akin to Gaza's Hamas today.

 

[toobfreak]

You have no idea how the Plains Indians hunted Buffalo.

I think I do. I have studied endless hours of documentaries on the Indian compiled by hundreds of people. You knew one Indian.

They would drive whole herds of Buffalo off cliffs or into ravines, take the choice cuts of meat and sinew and other things

Right. This was common practice, but only as much as they needed, and they took the meat and other stuff they needed. White man only wanted the hide. And the Indian did not hunt buffalo to extinction, white men did.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Who were the previous occupants 40,000 years ago?

So what? Were they bothering you?

RUBBISH. There were millions of buffalo. The Indians only took what they needed and used all of the buffalo, they did not slaughter thousands at a time and leave all the meat rotting while only taking the hides.

Again, it was their land. It was the USG who wanted the treaties, not the Indians. Indians don't use treaties.

Mention it all you want. Doesn't have any bearing on this conversation.

I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

These are typical of the arguments one gets from leftists when it comes to the American Indians. No one is talking about "40,000 years ago." We're talking about the period just before and during the U.S. expansion into the West. And, yes, the Indians did kill a huge portion of the buffalo population, as historian T. J. Stiles discusses in his Pulitzer Prize-winning book Custer's Trials. Whites killed more, but the Indians killed a large number.

You talk about "whitewashing" one's history, liberals and many Native American authors are quite willing to ignore or minimize the brutal and savage conduct of many tribes, both before and after they came into contact with American civilians and soldiers. Again, the way the Sioux and the Cheyenne, along with the Cherokee and the Apache, treated other tribes makes the U.S. Government's treatment of the Indians look excessively tolerant and mild in comparison.

The same radical leftists who want to tear down statues of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson have to problem with statues of such murderous chiefs as Sitting Bill and Crazy Horse. Go talk to historically aware Crow and Arikara Indians about those two "leaders."

Don't like slavery? Well, several Indian tribes, including the Cherokee and the Sioux and the Seminoles, practiced forms of slavery and also slave trading.

If liberals are truly serious about giving just the Sioux "their" land back, as defined by the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, here is the land area we would have turn over to Sioux control:

Half the state of Nebraska
Half the state of South Dakota
One-fourth of the state of North Dakota
One-sixth of the state of Colorado
One-third of the state of Wyoming
One-seventh of the state of Montana

Really? Really?

As a good example of what it was like to try to reach reasonable deals with the Sioux, to this day, the Sioux have not accepted the enormous monetary settlement awarded to them in 1980 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Thanks to compounding interest, that settlement now totals over $1.3 billion. The Sioux could have this money next week if they accepted the settlement, but they still refuse to accept it and still insist they want "their" land back.

 

[Deadstick]

Oh so you support the genocide of my ancestors? The seventh Calvary herded them like buffalo and killed the innocents. I suggest giving this song a listen from their point of view.

You recognize that massacre but for some strange reason not the Gaza genocide.