1911 Forums : 1911Talk banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Some how I missed where Senator obama was speaking this weekend to a crowd of mostly Indians (I dare you to use the term Native American to a member of AIM). One of the sound clips was how horrible it is that Washington ignores them. Sigh, I realize he's a city slicker and shouldn't hold him accountable for not understanding history but when Washington has paid attention to the Nations it wasn't good for them.

I could go into the Trail of Tears, the Indian Schools, the pox infested blankets, or even the more modern incident where the Feds armed Tribal President wilson's goon squad on Pine Ridge with M-16's to suppress the growing AIM movement in the early 1970s (that's the full-auto). But it is clear there is one incident that should be discussed and if I were at speech I would have been more than a little worried.

The number one incident that those that hate this country point to as proof we are a horrible people is the Massacre at Wounded Knee. I've read quite a bit on the event because of this and I wanted to know how it could happen.

There are somethings that need to be known about the lead up to the event. The Ghost Dance Religion was a threat to settlers because it called for the return of the Ancestors so the whites would be removed. It wouldn't have taken much for some warriors to become impatient and start raiding again.

The government's response was to send in the Seventh Calvary to disarm the populace. Now, I've read some historians that wrote about how wrong it was to have the Seventh ride in because of the Little Bighorn, very interesting but stupid. Gressy Grass took place 17 years earlier any of the command that would have survived would have been long gone. The country was divided into military districts so the Seventh was the detachment that should have responded.

Like I said, I've read several accounts of what occurred. The event that touched the event off was a trooper was trying to take a rifle from an Indian that was deaf. There are several liberal accounts that say he wouldn't give up the rifle because he didn't understand what was going on. It is more likely he 1. didn't see why he should give up his rifle 2. would have more likely said something like you can have my rifle when you pry it from my dead cold hands. I may be extrapolate a little but I know the culture. The one thing ALL accounts agree with is no one knows where the first shot came from. This tells me that no one really knows who shot first and it's likely that in the struggle to take the rifle there was a negligent discharge of the firearm.

I've heard from several cops when you're partner shoots you shoot. I know that this sounds bad, but gun battles happen you hesitate you die and there is a good chance of not knowing what the partner is seeing so this happens right or wrong.

Just a recap how this happened: Some politician was mad that there was religious people that were clinging to their guns and didn't want any support from Washington DC. It is a good thing we have evolved as a society and we do not have any politicians that think this way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
the Gov't doesn't need reason..... we here in CA. can no longer hunt with lead bullets, because two condors (birds who nature said should be extinct) showed signs of lead in their systems -this was not their cause of death. I prefer to hunt with traditional flintlock muzzle loaders.... I can no longer do this , as I need pure lead to not ruin my barrel. BEWARE of your Gov't. Read the Federalist papers. Our Founding Fathers knew of what the spoke/wrote. The Second amendment doesn't refer to hunting. It refers to the citizens being able to defend themselves against a tyranical gov't. hardtack
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,556 Posts
Off topic...but this country would have been far better off if the Indians had kicked our white a$$es.

They (the Indians) respected the land, understood that population was dictated by food supply, didn't know how to lie, they didn't waste anything...the list goes on and on...if I had been alive back then...I would have been fighting FOR THEM.

I do have a strong dose of Cherokee blood in me...it doesn't show on the outside, but it does on the inside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Off topic...but this country would have been far better off if the Indians had kicked our white a$$es.

They (the Indians) respected the land, understood that population was dictated by food supply, didn't know how to lie, they didn't waste anything...the list goes on and on...if I had been alive back then...I would have been fighting FOR THEM.

I do have a strong dose of Cherokee blood in me...it doesn't show on the outside, but it does on the inside.
I can think of only a handful of battles the US actually won in the field. As far as lying, reading some of the treaty discussions the Lakota and Cheyane could spin their ownership of land on par with james carville. There are facts that are glossed over about the Indian Wars because the US is 'evil.':hairpull: I try to take a balanced approach history, our ancestors absolutely did some totally horrindous (sorry learned to spell in public school.) but the Sioux Uprising of 1862 overshadows Wounded Knee. (700+ versus 200 let alone the brutality of the 1862 raids)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,556 Posts
My history is pretty "rusty"...but I do envy the way of life the Indians led.

You're right about the battles though....the only reason the whites won is because they just kept coming...there were too many of them. Its ironic....that same thing is going to be our undoing...there are just too many of us.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,072 Posts
You are forgetting the part about the indians being vastly outgunned. Regardless of what the movies say about the only battle where they were not greatly outgunned was wounded knee and that was with the white man's weapons. The cavalry's horses could also hold up much better than the indian's horses, grain versus grass fed, no matter what the movies say. The indians were great, fierce, fighters but it was more than being outmanned.

It's unrealistic for any of us to say who's side we would have been on if we lived back then. It's easy to say we would be on the side of the indians now, but things and the way of thinking is different back then. One side of my family has been traced back to a cherokee plantation owner in south carolina so it's hard to say where I would have been, but people think much different now than they used to. My great grandmother's family moved to arkansas from the carolinas, she looked pure indian and denied it till the day she died. There was only a few people that say they ever admitted it, but even so the family can be traced as so. Times were different and people thought differently. The point is people that were indian did not even admit to being indian for years and years, the sentiment was just that bad.

The indians way of life was not all rosy either. All tribes cannot be tossed under one blanket statement, but there were all kinds of wars going on between tribes and bands even. They killed each other off, took slaves, etc. So there are doubts to what tribes would have survived each other. Not to mention the fact that if it was not english speaking colonists it would have been french speaking ones or spanish speaking ones (like wiped out the indians down south).

Don't get me wrong, I think it's horrible what has been done to the indians. In additon to the cherokee on my mothers side I have either choctaw or cherokee on my fathers side , we grew up in the choctaw nation, and I hate the way the tribes were treated. I do know though that the tribes did not live together in 3 part harmony, they were killing each other off, taking slaves, etc. also. The moral of the story? All people are screwed up in one way or another.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top