- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If all the Native Americans had united, could they have stopped the White Man?
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:00 am to LuckyTiger
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:00 am to LuckyTiger
quote:
Pizzarro
Read "The Last Days of the Incas". Pretty interesting read, about how 167 Spaniards took over the entire Inca empire with a combination of luck, cunning, timing and pure brutality. Mostly luck.
0
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:01 am to The Third Leg
quote:
Indians laughed at euro trash and their muzzle loaders.
But they didn't laugh long...
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:02 am to Need4Speed
I don't believe they could have held control of the entire country but they could've held a large portion of it. Look at the Seminole Tribe in Florida. They resisted even the U.S. Government. Had they banded together with other tribes to create a stronghold, I doubt it would've been worth it to overthrow them.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:07 am to FloridaMike
quote:
Had they banded together with other tribes to create a stronghold,
You mean casinos?
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:10 am to fr33manator
quote:
But they didn't laugh long...
That's because disease fleeced the population and the fight became possible.
It had nothing to do with guns and our civilization; it was simply opportunistic, and it still barely succeeded. White Europeans were ill prepared to be here, and their early struggles should tell you just how impossible a war with a fully charged native population would have been.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
"won't say "never", but it probably would have been a generation or 2 later from where we did colonize the new world"
this is basically where I come down. Eventually, European advantages and plague would have carried the day, but what I think is instructive is how critical Indians were in the fight against Indians. Europeans excelled at becoming allies with some Indians as needed to take down others (as with the Aztecs). Plus, without the cooperation of Indians, many European settlements likely fail (some failed anyway) due to starvation. A united Indian opposition would have been extremely problematic and may have even prompted some Euros to give up.
this is basically where I come down. Eventually, European advantages and plague would have carried the day, but what I think is instructive is how critical Indians were in the fight against Indians. Europeans excelled at becoming allies with some Indians as needed to take down others (as with the Aztecs). Plus, without the cooperation of Indians, many European settlements likely fail (some failed anyway) due to starvation. A united Indian opposition would have been extremely problematic and may have even prompted some Euros to give up.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:12 am to The Third Leg
And in what scenario wouldn't disease be a factor?
Superior tech (not just guns. Think about everything logistic in the voyage) wins in the long run.
Superior tech (not just guns. Think about everything logistic in the voyage) wins in the long run.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:14 am to 19
quote:
Longterm, no, they didnt have a prayer vs the invaders, but no need to criticize. What was done to them by white men is beyond disgraceful.
By todays standards. Not by the standards of the time.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:19 am to fr33manator
Your first line is a good point, but I didn't want to go there. It's pretty obvious to me that we brought them the plague, but that borders on conspiracy talk with the way history texts are written.
In the long, long run, I would agree that it could have been taken. But if the estimates of eighty to a hundred million Natives are accurate, and I think they are, it would have been a bloodbath of untold proportion.
quote:
"[The treatment of the] hapless race of native Americans, which we are exterminating with such merciless and perfidious cruelty, [is] among the heinous sins of this nation, for which I believe God will one day bring [it] to judgment." -- John Quincy Adams
In the long, long run, I would agree that it could have been taken. But if the estimates of eighty to a hundred million Natives are accurate, and I think they are, it would have been a bloodbath of untold proportion.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:20 am to SirWinston
quote:
By todays standards
Not a dig, but really, read up some more about Native American history and Manifest Destiny. You will see things much more clearly. Don't just rely on what you were taught in school - search for the truth.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:22 am to The Third Leg
quote:
White Europeans were ill prepared to be here, and their early struggles should tell you just how impossible a war with a fully charged native population would have been.
Doesn't matter. Won the country. Had sex. Drive an SUV.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:26 am to The Third Leg
quote:
But if the estimates of eighty to a hundred million Natives are accurate, and I think they are, it would have been a bloodbath of untold proportion.
And when in the history of mankind have tens of millions of people from different backgrounds that hated each other grouped together to fight off an invader?
And no. Starship Troopers doesn't count
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:28 am to fr33manator
quote:
And when in the history of mankind have tens of millions of people from different backgrounds that hated each other grouped together to fight off an invader?
Thats why the OP posed this hypothetical question.
I think its pretty clear that it would have taken much longer for the Europeans to conquer them but eventually it would have been done by someone.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:30 am to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
Thats why the OP posed this hypothetical question.
But unless it happens in a vacuum past performance counts.
And social mores at the time count
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:30 am to Need4Speed
once the Scots figured out they would trade beaver furs for rum, it was game over. Europeans LOVED them some felt hats, almost as much as the natives LOVED them some watered down shitty rum.
This post was edited on 10/10/14 at 10:32 am
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:31 am to fr33manator
quote:
And when in the history of mankind have tens of millions of people from different backgrounds that hated each other grouped together to fight off an invader?
SEC--SEC--SEC--SEC--SEC--SEC
This post was edited on 10/10/14 at 10:33 am
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:37 am to fr33manator
quote:
And when in the history of mankind have tens of millions of people from different backgrounds that hated each other grouped together to fight off an invader?
World War II
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:39 am to fr33manator
quote:
Superior tech (not just guns. Think about everything logistic in the voyage) wins in the long run.
The answer is simple. Industrial Revolution never reached the Native Americans. No chance to win.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:54 am to mikelbr
"Industrial Revolution never reached the Native Americans."
this doesn't make any sense. The Idustrial Revolution did not hit Europe for hudreds of years, either.
this doesn't make any sense. The Idustrial Revolution did not hit Europe for hudreds of years, either.
Posted on 10/10/14 at 10:57 am to jchamil
quote:
World War II
Could have said WW1 as well and still been wrong.
Invaders doesn't really count when you've been in a state of constant warfare since forever
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News