The mentality of Primitive man

[IceMan30]

Guess what ?
Eugenics is a sped up process of natural selection.
So it is a real science.
How about that ?

So come on.... come up with a better summary as to why the Indians sat around throwing a party, instead of marching eastward.

While breeding humans like breeding dogs or cattle is, indeed, a science, is it moral? Again, I don't know if you are a Christian or even religious, but looking at our fellow human beings as simply being mobile, self-replicating meat computers is a purely atheistic view of what it means to be an intelligent being.

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

 

[Ringel05]

One thing that nobody cares to talk about very much, is the mentality, and what understanding that the American Indians had of the Battle of the Little Big Horn, and of their entire conflict with the western world.

This is an anecdotal, but educated guess, based on what make sense.

The Indians didn't understand the west at all.
They didn't understand that by winning one battle, that did NOT mean they won the war.

They THOUGHT that when they defeated Custer's badly understaffed and overpacked, and under armed force, the 7th Cavalry...
That they won the war.

They did not understand that in order to take on a western force, you have move in the direction of their lines, and eventually hit them at home.
Because they didn't understand how the west operates.
They didn't understand that we had a media, didn't understand that the western soldiers had to go through military training,,
Didn't understand that one battle isn't the entire war (in the western world).... didn't understand that we were going come back with a better force.

They thought they won the entire war... because that one battle looked like victory (to them).
So they thought it was over.

Well No...
In the west you have to conquer.. NOT simply defeat a small force, piecemeal.
You have take control of the enemy's cities and infrastructure and factories, AND kill their military personnel as well.

They also had no concept that we can replace our weapons... whereas the ONLY things that THEY could replace was their bow and arrow.
The Indians didn't understand that they can't replace their guns because it came from us.


They also didn't understand the dynamics of western warfare, they didn't know that land was not the only means of warfare in the west.. that in the west, the seas are also a battlefield.
And that eventually the skies, and UNDER the sea would be as well.


And so they sat around complacent and throwing a party.... until of course its lights out.

I don't know if you are a Christian or not, but one of my favorite Biblical quotes is Matthew 16:26 -

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?"

Many cultures has spiritual beliefs which include an afterlife. Native American culture believed this too. They believed in living an honorable life and that "counting coup" was "the epitome of a type of warfare that pitted the skill and daring of one man against another" since, as believers in an afterlife, they believed their mortal conduct affected their eternal life in the hereafter. With that in mind, they may have seen the battle of the Little Big Horn as "counting coup" against the Great White Father in Washington DC. Winning the battle but losing the war was preferable to losing the battle and losing the war.

Encyclopedia of the Great Plains | COUNTING COUP
Counting coup, or striking an enemy, was the highest honor earned by warriors participating in the intertribal wars of the Great Plains. Native peoples recognized precise systems of graduated war honors, and usually the greatest exploit was counting coup. Key to a man's success in Plains combat was demonstrating his own courage by proving superiority over his opponent and, in a competitive sense, over his own comrades. Killing was part of war, but showing courage in the process was more important for individual status. This was best accomplished by risking one's life in charging the enemy on foot or horseback to get close enough to touch or strike him with the hand, a weapon, or a "coupstick."

Humiliating the enemy also played a part in this fighting, as illustrated by an account from the Jesuit missionary Father Pierre-Jean De Smet. In De Smet's 1848 visit to the Oglala Lakotas, the Oglala leader Red Fish related to the priest how his men had just suffered a disgraceful defeat at the hands of the Crows. The Crows killed ten Oglalas, then chased the others for a distance. The Crows then were content merely to repeatedly count coup on their enemies with clubs and sticks, thus demonstrating to the Oglalas that they were not worth the ammunition needed to kill them.

Counting coup carried over into the battles against American troops. For example, the Northern Cheyenne warrior Wooden Leg related how, as a young man at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, he and his friend Little Bird chased a soldier across the river, counting coup on him with their whips and grabbing his carbine. They did not kill him, said Wooden Leg, because after counting coup it did not seem particularly brave, and besides, it would waste bullets. Counting coup, then, was the epitome of a type of warfare that pitted the skill and daring of one man against another.

By the mid 1870s the plains Indians already knew they were fighting a loosing battle, their primary goals were to try and preserve their way of live and protect their villages. Custer was sent out to force the tribes onto reservations, the typical tactic was to send a small force to draw the warriors out of the villages leaving them undefended the main body would then attack the village destroying it and massacring every man, woman and child leaving the warriors with nothing to come back to. The Battle of the Little Bighorn was the result of Custer's use of this tactic backfiring on him along with the overwhelming odds he was up against, the Indians in that incident were doing nothing more than defending their homes and families from what they knew would be death and destruction by the hands of the soldiers. Their message was basically leave us in peace or we'll fight.

 

[Ringel05]

Guess what ?
Eugenics is a sped up process of natural selection.
So it is a real science.
How about that ?

So come on.... come up with a better summary as to why the Indians sat around throwing a party, instead of marching eastward.

While breeding humans like breeding dogs or cattle is, indeed, a science, is it moral? Again, I don't know if you are a Christian or even religious, but looking at our fellow human beings as simply being mobile, self-replicating meat computers is a purely atheistic view of what it means to be an intelligent being.

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

 

[IceMan30]

Guess what ?
Eugenics is a sped up process of natural selection.
So it is a real science.
How about that ?

So come on.... come up with a better summary as to why the Indians sat around throwing a party, instead of marching eastward.

While breeding humans like breeding dogs or cattle is, indeed, a science, is it moral? Again, I don't know if you are a Christian or even religious, but looking at our fellow human beings as simply being mobile, self-replicating meat computers is a purely atheistic view of what it means to be an intelligent being.

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

 

[Ringel05]

Guess what ?
Eugenics is a sped up process of natural selection.
So it is a real science.
How about that ?

So come on.... come up with a better summary as to why the Indians sat around throwing a party, instead of marching eastward.

While breeding humans like breeding dogs or cattle is, indeed, a science, is it moral? Again, I don't know if you are a Christian or even religious, but looking at our fellow human beings as simply being mobile, self-replicating meat computers is a purely atheistic view of what it means to be an intelligent being.

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

 

[IceMan30]

While breeding humans like breeding dogs or cattle is, indeed, a science, is it moral? Again, I don't know if you are a Christian or even religious, but looking at our fellow human beings as simply being mobile, self-replicating meat computers is a purely atheistic view of what it means to be an intelligent being.

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

 

[yiostheoy]

One thing that nobody cares to talk about very much, is the mentality, and what understanding that the American Indians had of the Battle of the Little Big Horn, and of their entire conflict with the western world.

This is an anecdotal, but educated guess, based on what make sense.

The Indians didn't understand the west at all.
They didn't understand that by winning one battle, that did NOT mean they won the war.

They THOUGHT that when they defeated Custer's badly understaffed and overpacked, and under armed force, the 7th Cavalry...
That they won the war.

They did not understand that in order to take on a western force, you have move in the direction of their lines, and eventually hit them at home.
Because they didn't understand how the west operates.
They didn't understand that we had a media, didn't understand that the western soldiers had to go through military training,,
Didn't understand that one battle isn't the entire war (in the western world).... didn't understand that we were going come back with a better force.

They thought they won the entire war... because that one battle looked like victory (to them).
So they thought it was over.

Well No...
In the west you have to conquer.. NOT simply defeat a small force, piecemeal.
You have take control of the enemy's cities and infrastructure and factories, AND kill their military personnel as well.

They also had no concept that we can replace our weapons... whereas the ONLY things that THEY could replace was their bow and arrow.
The Indians didn't understand that they can't replace their guns because it came from us.


They also didn't understand the dynamics of western warfare, they didn't know that land was not the only means of warfare in the west.. that in the west, the seas are also a battlefield.
And that eventually the skies, and UNDER the sea would be as well.


And so they sat around complacent and throwing a party.... until of course its lights out.

Well none of the Native Americans had the benefit of a West Point education either.

They were good hunters though.

And they lived within the environmental constraints of the land in perfect harmony with Nature.

They had their own liberal philosophy.

And after they got the horse from the Spanish they became very prosperous and were able to follow the buffalo herds like the Mongolians followed reindeer.

But the young USA was addicted to free land therefore the American presidents order them exterminated by the US Cavalry. And essentially it was those extermination orders that were their demise.

Hindsight being 20-20, what the Natives should have done is evacuate the Easter USA and take over the intermountain states of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, and Utah and grab all of it before the Whites could.

But hindsight is 20-20.

Don't criticize the Native Americans until you have gone a mile in their moccasins.

 

[Ringel05]

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Considering the medical advancements gained from his chamber of immoral horrors I don't see why you would have a problem with it........

 

[yiostheoy]

You answered the actual part of the question he avoided; viability.

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Not sure how you 2 got off topic.

Mengele's orders from Adolf was to figure out if sterilization was feasible for the Jews.

Ultimately they decided it was too expensive and that gassing was more economical.

 

[Ringel05]

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Not sure how you 2 got off topic.

Mengele's orders from Adolf was to figure out if sterilization was feasible for the Jews.

Ultimately they decided it was too expensive and that gassing was more economical.

He brought up scientific morality or lack thereof.

 

[yiostheoy]

since you know so much, how about you come up with a better summary of why the Indians would sit around complacent after a battle against the west ?

The unintended consequences of winning a battle while losing a war is the same for the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.

What they should have done was burn Hawaii to the ground and then invade California.

But instead they thought their god had favored them.

Same problem with the Native Americans -- they thought their war was now over and that their god had favored them.

Religious fanatics in any society are a plague.

 

[Fenton Lum]

It reminds me of the OP........

since you know so much, how about you come up with a better summary of why the Indians would sit around complacent after a battle against the west ?

How about you actually study history and then re-ask that question..... Oh that's right, you wouldn't re-ask that question, you'd actually know better.

Here this should help........

books on the plains indian wars - Google Search

I have information.
I don't need to sit here and fucking study.
The information is all over the place.
As is the ability the think and summarize information, do you have the simple HUMAN ability ?

So like I said...

Come up with a better summary or shut the fuck up.

Sure ya do, and I bet you even think Eugenics is a real (viable) science don'tcha........

Guess what ?
Eugenics is a sped up process of natural selection.
So it is a real science.
How about that ?

So come on.... come up with a better summary as to why the Indians sat around throwing a party, instead of marching eastward.

Guess they stupidly took the americans at their word and foolishly expected the exceptional nation of law to live up to its over 500 treaty agreements which we're still sodomizing.

 

[IceMan30]

Science doesn't have a morality component.

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Not sure how you 2 got off topic.

Mengele's orders from Adolf was to figure out if sterilization was feasible for the Jews.

Ultimately they decided it was too expensive and that gassing was more economical.

Well the answer to that is yes and he knew that full well, and did Hitler.
That's science.

The law says that he doesn't nor does anybody else EXCEPT FOR THE SUBJECT has the right to do that.

 

[Fenton Lum]

since you know so much, how about you come up with a better summary of why the Indians would sit around complacent after a battle against the west ?

The unintended consequences of winning a battle while losing a war is the same for the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.

What they should have done was burn Hawaii to the ground and then invade California.

But instead they thought their god had favored them.

Same problem with the Native Americans -- they thought their war was now over and that their god had favored them.

Religious fanatics in any society are a plague.

The Manifest Destiny fanatics certainly were.

 

[yiostheoy]

Maybe not yours but for reputable scientists it does.

No reputable scientist uses the social construct of morality to achieve knowledge, which would limit, or affect his results.

If that's the case why don't you apply for the Mengele School of Medicine..........

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Not sure how you 2 got off topic.

Mengele's orders from Adolf was to figure out if sterilization was feasible for the Jews.

Ultimately they decided it was too expensive and that gassing was more economical.

He brought up scientific morality or lack thereof.

The Nazi final solution for the Jews was industrial but not scientific.

There was very little science involved in the extermination of the Jews.

Cheaper and more abundant Zyklon B was an industrial issue.

For Native Americans it was guns and germs.

 

[yiostheoy]

All of you boyz need to do some study about anti Semitism in Europe in 1900 through 1945.

This is social science not physical science.

I have interviewed various people in Europe who were anti Semitic and their views are quite astonishing.

As there was no Jewish propaganda in Europe like there is in the USA and UK you get a completely different view point when you ask the Europeans about it.

 

[yiostheoy]

It was the American presidents by popular demand who gave the orders to the US Cavalry to exterminate the Native Americans with guns and bullets.

Smallpox finished the job. Smallpox was an act of God.

 

[Divine Wind]

Because Doctor Mengele was not a doctor... he was qualified as a doctor, maybe.
But he practiced NO medicine.

His entire operation from beginning to end was UNSCIENTIFIC, and was designed to Harass, Bully, Oppress, and to Torture and cause pain.

Not to get ANY knowledge whatsoever that he didn't already have just by being more than 4 years old.

The ONLY thing he did, other than that, was to come up with ways to mass-execute people.
Which again isn't a very hard thing to do given the opportunity is provided.

Sorry, dude, but Mengele was both a medical doctor and practiced his horrors with scientific methodology. Obviously he violated the Hippocratic Oath and morality in his research.

Josef Mengele, Angel of Death

Josef Mengele

Do you think the doctors who were part of the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment were doctors? Moral? Violated their Hippocratic Oath?

Tuskegee Study - Timeline - CDC - NCHHSTP
In 1932, the Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute, began a study to record the natural history of syphilis in hopes of justifying treatment programs for blacks. It was called the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male."

The study initially involved 600 black men – 399 with syphilis, 201 who did not have the disease. The study was conducted without the benefit of patients' informed consent. Researchers told the men they were being treated for "bad blood," a local term used to describe several ailments, including syphilis, anemia, and fatigue. In truth, they did not receive the proper treatment needed to cure their illness. In exchange for taking part in the study, the men received free medical exams, free meals, and burial insurance. Although originally projected to last 6 months, the study actually went on for 40 years.

 

[Divine Wind]

...As there was no Jewish propaganda in Europe like there is in the USA and UK you get a completely different view point when you ask the Europeans about it.

What do the Euros say?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

So you're a ditzy blonde?

Did you go to college by any chance ?
or are you stuck in the idealistic dream world where history books are not written by the government, AND the winner of the wars ?

History was one of my minors.......

well then come on then and shut the fuck up, and come up with a better understanding than the one I have about why the Indians did not march east towards New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Washington D.C. after the Battle of the Little Big Horn.
bitch.

Obviously you have no clue as to the cause and effect of the battle, what the intent was by both the Federal government and the tribes involved. Besides, it's much more fun making light of your ignorance.

The Intent of both sides was the exact same, to win the war.
And US Army was the western force that stays and moves forward until it does exactly that.

The primitive people that the Native Americans were, thought they already did achieve their mission to win the war, not understanding that what they won was a battle in a war they can't win.
And that's why they didn't march eastward... because they thought it was over and that they won.

Period.

And Until you come up with better, that's where this stands.

You display you are STUNNINGLY STUPID AND INCREDIBLY IGNORANT coming to those baseless and ludicrous conclusions, Pud Pounder!

Anyone who disdains actual history as recorded in print as you do is bound to remain ignorant and stupid!