|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 8:22:52 GMT -6
A trooper at the LBH scalped an Indian. Shouldn't that be condemned?
Many soldiers were Indian grave robbers, stealing artifacts from the dead. Shouldn't that be condemned?
Both races behaved inhumanely to the other . . . but you seem to think the Indians had a monoply on it.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 8:48:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by conz on May 19, 2009 9:52:31 GMT -6
Yes, there was plenty of suffering by all the tribes.
Yes...I think it is only fair to take them tribe by tribe, as I want to differentiate between militia and Soldiers.
I think it is certainly true that some tribes were more violent than others, and some were more easily assimilated into American culture than others.
There are good reasons certain members of the Apache, Cheyenne, and Sioux tribes were called the "wild bands." It was relative to the majority of their people.
True, and we can try to differentiate this far down. I do believe, however, that by our moral standards, MOST Warriors, and many women, committed war crimes, while only a very small percentage of American civilians, militia, or Soldiers committed war crimes.
But I acknowledge that out of every group, you'll find examples of this behavior. With Native society, though, it is the norm, and a cultural value...that's the real problem right there.
'Cause the Warriors did it on purpose, and their society encouraged it. White people did it by exception, and the vast majority of whites considered it despicable and abhorent. Can't say the same for the Natives...that's why.
And so the akcita's job was to do WHAT?! And how did Crazy Horse demand the arms and ponies from an entire clan of his tribe, when they tried to desert him (they did sneak away later)?
I understand what you mean, and it is true compared to our strict society, but I wouldn't carry that "no leader, no rules" thing too far. Leaders led by persuasion and intimidation in the tribes, just like any primitive culture. We were like that once...about 3,000 years ago for my German ancestors, perhaps 5,000 years ago for our Greek/Roman/Jewish heritage.
Well, I think that this is NOT all that matters. I also respect their skills, but I also see and lament their shortcomings. So did their own people, and their own families.
Yes...I condemn it. There is no cause for that, and I'd have that Soldier in irons for doing it, were I his commander. Officers did not encourage that in the Army.
No...the dead don't need them, and hostiles have no claim on historical artifacts. But often in such cases, the officers collected these things if they were interesting and sent them East to a museum or university. Lots of such artifacts are still there today.
Okay...not any monopoly, to be sure. We can still be inhumane today, even with our stricter standards and enforcements. I'll decry all of our barbarism too, if you'll decry the Native barbarism.
No...I found him thoroughly disgusting. The Army one day will be rounding up his people out of their militia lairs like any other insurgents.
As with protecting the Native Americans against local whites, the Army may play the role of protecting Latino immigrants from violent vigilante militia groups. We're used to that.
Clair
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 10:49:19 GMT -6
<No...the dead don't need them, and hostiles have no claim on historical artifacts. But often in such cases, the officers collected these things if they were interesting and sent them East to a museum or university. Lots of such artifacts are still there today>
Well then, I'll be digging up people's graves and seeing what historical items I can sell to a museum. Maybe some bones would sell, better yet I could go on Antique Roadshow. I hear collectors pay big money for Indian artifacts and since there's no record of where they come from (dug up from graves, stolen, captured in war) no one will be the wiser.
Of all the things you stated that's the most disturbing. It's OK to rob the dead!
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 10:52:08 GMT -6
<I'll decry all of our barbarism too, if you'll decry the Native barbarism>
Hold on . . . the Whites were suppose to be the "civilized" ones. The ones who didn't act like the Indians. Who didn't fall back to their barbaric nature.
While Indians committed acts we considered barbaric I believe the Whites were more barbaric because they should have known better.
As for Dr. Pierce and his ugly rhetoric . . . we agree on that.
|
|
|
Post by conz on May 19, 2009 11:23:48 GMT -6
Crzhrs...
LOL...isn't that called archeology?! How dead does the person have to be before it isn't "grave robbing?"
|
|
|
Post by conz on May 19, 2009 11:29:41 GMT -6
<I'll decry all of our barbarism too, if you'll decry the Native barbarism> Hold on . . . the Whites were suppose to be the "civilized" ones. The ones who didn't act like the Indians. Who didn't fall back to their barbaric nature. While Indians committed acts we considered barbaric I believe the Whites were more barbaric because they should have known better. Yes, that is the argument for the traditional double standard. And I buy this if we are talking about improving civilized behavior, and aren't trying to use Native culture as something to admire. Now there are lots of elements of Native culture, and people, TO admire. And there are lots of elements to despise, as well. We need to work on the low points of our own Western culture, and make it better. We already did this for the Natives, against their will. But it was still the right thing to do. We could have done it better, to be sure. I guess the way I look at it, overall, is that as bad as Western society can be, it is still a vast improvement of civilization over Native culture, overall, and since they could never live together, it was right for the latter to make way for the newer. The only way they could figure out how to do this, of course, was the proverbial "hard way." And that gets us back to where the Army comes riding in. This has been a nice review of the cultural and moral perspectives regarding the Army's activities on the Plains from 1850-1880. Clair
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 12:19:43 GMT -6
Re: Archeology:
If someone dug up one of your relatives from a century ago in the name of archeology would you protest?
There has to be a line where archeology ends and grave robbing begins.
Indian artifacts bring huge sums of money and the desecration of burial and/or villages sites for profit is now outlawed under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Indian remains and artifacts are finding their way back to their descendants and construction sites where remains/villages are found are now either moved or halted until the proper authorities and Indians are consulted.
|
|
|
Post by conz on May 19, 2009 14:27:04 GMT -6
Re: Archeology: If someone dug up one of your relatives from a century ago in the name of archeology would you protest? I would think we would not want to disturb graves until at least the third generation removed had been deceased. Some may think you shouldn't until that entire society is deceased. <g> I don't know...haven't thought much about grave desecration. We have laws against that in Kentucky, even though the tribes that we dig up here no longer exist, most of them. But I do think all such digs, should we do them, belong to the people and a museum for study, not for private collectors. Yeah...I'm not sure where to draw that line. Not really my expertise. I'm much more about the living, and its effect on them. As it should be, and grave descecration is and should be a crime, but I don't think we can call it a "war crime." Not really about war. More just about simple human respect and historical knowledge. Clair
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on May 19, 2009 14:50:33 GMT -6
And so the akcita's job was to do WHAT?! And how did Crazy Horse demand the arms and ponies from an entire clan of his tribe, when they tried to desert him (they did sneak away later)? and what did the us army do to their deserters over the centuries? ;D (they fed 2 of them to the arikara at LBH ) you the army guy use every possible argument to spit on the image of SB or CH even as for once they did as they should in your bloody army ways. CH learned quick that time was over for counting coups and every group doing his own thing if a stand was to be held against the treacherous peacemakers with their medals and gifts. by the way if all loafers and sneaky peacechiefs of combined siouan tribes would have been forced to enlist with CH Indian territory today would be a little ..bigger, is my opinion. about 2 states I guess.
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on May 19, 2009 14:57:39 GMT -6
crzhrs & conz,
On this day of all days as we mourn biggordie's death, will you two please have some respect and cut out your puerile argument, at least until tomorrow, as a mark of respect to a man who refrained from such nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on May 19, 2009 15:37:32 GMT -6
Everyone:
Forgive my juvenile behavior.
I will end the puerile conduct now and in the future.
Crzhrs
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on May 19, 2009 16:54:40 GMT -6
same for me. I'm greatly sorry to learn about this.
|
|
|
Post by markland on May 19, 2009 20:59:37 GMT -6
crzhrs & conz, On this day of all days as we mourn biggordie's death, will you two please have some respect and cut out your puerile argument, at least until tomorrow, as a mark of respect to a man who refrained from such nonsense. Hunk, thank you for saying it nicer than I was about to. Now, if you will excuse me, I have some crying to finish. Billy
|
|
|
Post by markland on May 19, 2009 22:03:01 GMT -6
Red Cloud and Sitting Bull were opposites in this. Only one can be right, and one must be right. Choose who is to be most praised and emulated...the peacekeeper or the baby killer?Clair :oare you the same guy as that 7th uscavalryman on youtube with his despisable videos and comments? In a way I always thought you were the same guy, 100% same opinion of revisionism and army first opinion except that he is always calling people liar who don't agree whilst you're polite. can you please cite your source for the baby killing by SB? (and the ones that tell the opposite) While I want to call a moratorium on account of Gordie, Wolfie, I can hook you up with David, who also sees the Indian Wars in shades of pure black and white. Diane, any chance we can let David back on here with his own sandbox to argue with Wolfie? Billy
|
|