It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Americans committed the worst genocide in world history

page: 12
67
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   


As an American I am not happy to write this. But I do because it is the truth.
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 

I believe you are just fine with writing this:



There were 50 million Natives living in what is now US territory. We decimated them.

Yet, from the very WIKI Link that you use as your "source" comes this.



The population figure for Indigenous peoples in the Americas before the 1492 voyage of Christopher Columbus has proven difficult to establish.
Most scholars writing at the end of the 19th century estimated the pre-Columbian population at about 10 million; by the end of the 20th century the scholarly consensus had shifted to about 50 million,


Problem is, these people were not living in "what is now U.S. territory, as you, not your source, claim.
As an American, you would understand that the term "The Americas" does not pertain to "what is now U.S. territory", but rather North America, Canada included, Mexico, Central America (including 15 million in the Aztec Empire and six million in the Inca Empire) states your source.

South America and all the Islands, East and West, fall into that category as well.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure you knew all that before posting such deliberately misleading info.
If not, then you're welcome.




posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   
The whole of history is littered with such, it really is nothing new. The worst part is that what you mentioned was not the worst genocide, in the ancient world tribes wiped each other off to man woman and child, some of those tribes are a favorite pastime they did it every spring and summer which eventually even turned into a sort of religion for people today, some of those religions are still worshiped today.

Genghis Khan and many others did a number all over Europe and Asia, and the list goes ever on, even right into this very age and day. In fact for all you know and while your arguing for a past no matter how justified, it could be happening right this very minute to a people you never heard of in a place you never heard of, half a words away. Humanity is merely just another animal on this planet in many respects no matter what people think, ultimately its just that upright walking talking hairless ape species, and it is not exempt from the laws of nature, or animals, or even minerals.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   
All this quibbling over—how many this one killed or that one murdered, or no. . . . Stalin killed 60 million, Mao…80 million.
Does it matter? The point is these barbaric deeds of one human group over another are the pit of evil and folly that we all should be eternally horrified about.
If not then your heart is out of whack. Then follow your head at least until you can see and feel.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   
140 million + unborn, tens of millions of bison. rivers were red with RED blood



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mangust69
140 million + unborn, tens of millions of bison. rivers were red with RED blood


140 million??

I would really love to see the source for that number.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Azdraik
 
google , all america -100 years



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azdraik
140 million??

I would really love to see the source for that number.


Here you go, Seems legit
edit on 2-8-2013 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Azdraik
140 million??

I would really love to see the source for that number.


Here you go, Seems legit
edit on 2-8-2013 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)





totally!



Why settles for "facty" when you can have "truthy"?



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   
I don't get the point of this thread. I doubt people are unaware or "zombies" to this portion of history. You claim it was mass genocide by America, when the wiki link you provided actually contradicts your own post.

The population of African and Eurasian peoples in the Americas grew steadily, while the number of the indigenous people plummeted. Eurasian diseases such as smallpox, influenza, bubonic plague and pneumonic plagues devastated the Native Americans who did not have immunity. Conflict and outright warfare with Western European newcomers and other American tribes reduced populations and disrupted traditional society. The extent and causes of the decline have long been a subject of academic debate, along with its characterization as a genocide.[2]


Using an estimate of approximately 30 million people in 1492 (including 15 million in the Aztec Empire and six million in the Inca Empire), the lowest estimates give a death toll due from disease of an astonishing 80% by the end of the 17th century (eight million people in 1650)

Also as several have stated, it was the Spaniards and Europeans who initially came to the Americas and caused such death and destruction of a populace. Most of this happened in central/southern America, along with the southwest region of the current USA.

History isn't forgotten, nor does it need to remain a daily topic of discussion. History CANNOT be changed, it can only be learned from. Real truthful history that is, not a belief that the US decimated populations of native Americans. That work was already done when this country was being founded.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Willtell
 


The only thing we can do about it now, is make sure it never happens again. And we fail at it again and again. We allow our government to send us to the desert to kill even today(This is not just americans, canadians as well, and most of the "western world").

When we will say enough is enough? Well I already have personally. I have one great uncle that perished in a "residential school" when he was 10 years old. Was he beaten to death, starved to death? To this day, we do not know, and our family never got to bury him. I can only assume he ended up in one of those mass graves. All we know for sure, is that he went off to "school", and never came home.

When I was younger and didn't understand much, I tried to get people to talk about it . A lot of my family has been #ed up by those schools. The last person that might be able to answer the questions, my grandmother, her body is shutting down slowly, and there is no #ing way I am going to bring that crap up now. We are trying to make her last days some happy days.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I'm not sure where your numbers come from. I'm headed to bed and too tired to bother getting the accurate numbers on Natives and who killed who between the French, British, Spanish (among others) and later, last but not least, the Americans themselves after independence. However, the estimates on the others is factually wrong by a wide margin.

Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Primary Megadeaths of the Twentieth Century

Stalin is good for 20 Million by himself. Mao is solid for 40 million with some estimates running as high as 60 million for just China during his rule and Cultural Revolution. Hitler is estimated close to 6 million in the camps alone.

Running between the 3 though, it's at least 66 million people murdered....since that figure isn't counting combat related deaths in the war (the 66 million).

Nothing very honorable about what Americans of the 19th and prior century did to the Natives. Nothing Honorable at all. Although comparisons just don't quite fit, as the Natives gave as much as they got, if not in sheer numbers. They fought like hell and they fought well for their right to live.

Mao, Stalin and Hitler murdered in a near assembly line fashion in some examples and systematically in all three cases. Just warm bodies to convert into cold ones.


Of course, you can not bother. And numbers from the 20th century are pointless as the deaths being talked about here, if you cared to notice, where before the 20th century.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
We did commit one of the worst genocides in history.

I think it's hard to pin point a number due to disease and not all of that disease was intentional and we don't know what country was responsible for what. Having said that, we horrifically rounded up, forced to relocate or just killed all kinds of innocent civilians, women and children. We were horrible.

Nobody says that you need to feel guilty. Just accept the fact that, even though we are one of the greatest nations on earth, we have blood on our hands in the past and present. We're not the innocent, land of the free that's portrayed in our history books.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by amazing
 


Absolutely.

The problem with this thread though, is it was designed for only one thing. Bashing America.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by KnowledgeSeeker81
 


Oh, what the Spanish did.....

....the natives of the lower East Coast were terrified of the Spanish mastiff's. The Spaniards were seeking gold, and communicated this poorly with the natives. Oftentimes the natives thought they meant copper. Nonetheless, as a method of terror the Conquistadors would have the mastiff's attack and disembowel indian leaders.

Ruthless, vile men.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Exactly!

I'm just surprised that no one has tried to put this all on Obama yet



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Another day, another "Bash Americans because it looks cool" thread.

This is getting old...

First of all, ALL governments kill. And they rake in bodies by the millions.



Secondly, your numbers are way off, as someone has already proven.

And third, the past is the past.

There's nothing we can do about lives past gone, but as we look at history, we know what NOT to do. And, OP, if you have such a problem with the foundation of America, embrace, and if you feel the need, change the current America.

Hate to break it to you, but I'm not gonna feel guilty for something my great-greatt ancestors did.

Its the same with everyone playing the violin for African Americans. It was decades and decades ago... there's not more slavery now, for African Americans, Native Americans, or otherwise... unless you count our government enslaving the citizens, but that's a different type of enslavement.

Its not all the "white man's" fault.

Please stop making threads like this.

I know its fashionable to hate something, but America's had enough bashing.

How about some healing?


edit on 2-8-2013 by XxNightAngelusxX because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:42 PM
link   
If we really want to be truthful here it wasn't any nation or group that committed the worst genocide in history.

I have some issue with the source as well but there are a great many people that swear by it. Literally.

Remember The Flood.www.biblegateway.com...

No matter how you cut it that is pretty impressive whipping out everyone save a handful of people and to top it off drive every species on the planet to the brink of extinction. I know the animals didn’t eat each other on the boat but it must have been a free for all when they got off.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   
This is hate bait.
I admit Its horrible, its severely unmoral what happened. I'm glad I did not live during that despicable point in time. Not many alive now would deny that. While its important to learn from our mistakes there is no reason to keep picking at it.

Indians are still being shafted. You should use your passion to get behind them now, instead of talking smack about what happened 100 years ago.

Your process is unproductive.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


Of course, you can not bother. And numbers from the 20th century are pointless as the deaths being talked about here, if you cared to notice, where before the 20th century.


You might consider reading a bit more of a thread before replying like that. You'd find I had changed my mind and did put some time into it after all. In point of fact, I deleted an entire post I was set to send out of sheer 'screw it' frustration but still came back after that to add supported info in what I referred to and this thread started with talking about.

Now, about the 20th Century? I didn't bring that up. I didn't mention Mao, Stalin and Hitler. The OP did in the top post of this thread. My reply was to him and to that reference. Personally....I thought the comparisons a little cheesy and said as much ..but I didn't set the outlines of the thread. The OP did. I just chose to reply and take part in the discussion...as we all did here.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 12:01 AM
link   
I'm a total outsider to the debate, and I don't want to dispute major figures, or the gravity of what happened in the Americas.

I've just heard before that there is a white legend and a black legend, for example with the Spanish conquest, but apart from disease, warfare and slaughter isn't it also possible that a large amount of Native Americans were simply mixed by inter-marriage, and hence the conquest was more cultural than genetic?

For example, would somebody who is called a 'Mestizo" in Latin America perhaps be considered "native" in the North?
Is there a fixed definition?

Then I also wonder about native collusion in the conquests.
Apparently Native American tribes saw themselves as nations, and those who conquered others weren't always very popular.
Could Cortez or Pizarro have conquered the Aztecs and Incas without their royal native mistresses, or their massive native armies?

In the Seven-Year Wars, why did the major tribes split into global politics between the French and the British?
United they could have virtually kicked the invaders back into the sea.

What about the native scouts, who helped to hunt down other tribes in the 19th century, or sometimes even their own?
It is even depicted in film, for example Westerns where the Crow or Pawnee scouts help to fight the Lakota.

In Amazonia today the Shuar tribe may be invading the lands of the Huourani.
Is it right for foreigners to get involved?

If it's as simple as to say the Europeans invaded America and wiped everybody out, then why doesn't history reflect that simplicity?

Perhaps the real genocide started after the conquest, with simply counting people out of the native identity, sterilization, cultural genocide (simply wiping out languages or spirituality as identity, for example) and a kind of enforced soul-destroying poverty.

But referring to the initial wars, it seems divide and conquer was the key.
However, it also seems that major differences already existed, and certain factions (possibly several millions) of the natives were quite keen to work with the conquerors.

Whether white Anglo-Saxons really won genetically long-term might yet change - Latin Americans may become an equal majority to whites in the US within two decades, and apparently many of them have a strong Amerindian gene-pool.
edit on 3-8-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join