Re: Dwayne P. Thompson's editorial

Posted by Rich on February 19, 2000 at 03:39:37:

In Reply to: Dwayne P. Thompson's editorial posted by Don on February 14, 2000 at 05:15:01:

: Dwayne:
: Russell Means, one of the main dudes in AIM, says that he (a Lakota) is not "Native American"; rather that he is "American Indian", so I took him at his word when I used the latter phrase.
: If the people in the valley were, in fact, part of only the most recent wave of conquerers, does that justify the white wave and its behavior? In other words, did the Indians, therefore, deserve what happened to them?
: Why on earth would you defend the actions of the U.S. Army, and then claim to be aboriginal?
: Please also do the following. Don't drink before you post something for other people to read; and, check out my original thesis (dated 6/27/99). My argument was against this battle being included with the Alamo, Gettysburg, and Lexington, as "against all odds". Custer did not HAVE to fight, he decided to because that was what he WANTED. Therefore, this battle was not "against all odds".

: Thank You.

No one HAS to fight. A stand was NOT necessary at the Alamo ... in fact, there were those, Sam Houston included, who strongly advised against one. Certainly, those brave men at Lexington didn't HAVE to oppose the British elite forces there , on that Green, at that time ... they CHOSE to. At Gettysburg, General Longstreet advised against Pickett's Charge, in favor of a flanking movement.

The fact is, once engaged, the choice factor disappears ... then, it is life or death ... against all odds. Without a doubt, in my opinion, that was what Custer's force was faced with shortly after 4PM on Sunday, June 25, 1876.

One could look at Little Bighorn as an "against all odds" type thing from the Indian perspective, as well.

Follow Ups:

• Re: Dwayne P. Thompson's editorial analisis numerico 14:53:46 6/13/2001 (0)

Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: : Dwayne:
: :      Russell Means, one of the main dudes in AIM, says that he (a Lakota) is not "Native American"; rather that he is "American Indian", so I took him at his word when I used the latter phrase.
: :      If the people in the valley were, in fact, part of only the most recent wave of conquerers, does that justify the white wave and its behavior?  In other words, did the Indians, therefore, deserve what happened to them?
: :      Why on earth would you defend the actions of the U.S. Army, and then claim to be aboriginal?
: :      Please also do the following.  Don't drink before you post something for other people to read; and, check out my original thesis (dated 6/27/99).  My argument was against this battle being included with the Alamo, Gettysburg, and Lexington, as "against all odds".  Custer did not HAVE to fight, he decided to because that was what he WANTED.  Therefore, this battle was not "against all odds".

: : Thank You.

: No one HAS to fight. A stand was NOT necessary at the Alamo ... in fact, there were those, Sam Houston included, who strongly advised against one. Certainly, those brave men at Lexington didn't HAVE to oppose the British elite forces there , on that Green, at that time ... they CHOSE to. At Gettysburg, General Longstreet advised against Pickett's Charge, in favor of a flanking movement.

: The fact is, once engaged, the choice factor disappears ... then, it is life or death ... against all odds. Without a doubt, in my opinion, that was what Custer's force was faced with shortly after 4PM on Sunday, June 25, 1876.

: One could look at Little Bighorn as an "against all odds" type thing from the Indian perspective, as well.


Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: