Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
How about being explicit?
There are many Indian tribes who were peaceful to the Westerners, and used tactics that reflected terrorist attacks to their other tribes.
There were tribes who only used ruthless tactics against warriors, while others purposefully went against civilian targets first.
First you have to define what tribe you're talking about, and then a timetable.
Otherwise it would be as if I ask you if all Muslims are terrorists. Which the answer is of course, no. Many of them, however, are. Therefore the question is bunk.
|
Please, don't be disingenuous.
The United States (and Canada and Peru and Bolivia and Brazil) all took over lands that "belonged" to someone else. After tens of millions of Indians were killed by war, disease and slavery many of the remaining fought back strongly. They were not part of an "army" in the sense we know it, and they adopted tactics that today we might describe as terrorist in that settlers and their familes were killed, scalped, tortured. Even today, South American indian tribes have adopted guerilla and terror tactics fighting against various governments and various corporations.
Were/are they terrorists for trying to resist the white man and get their land back using such means? If they weren't then (ie you believe they formed part of a legitimate resistance to the white man's occupation) would they be today if remaining Indians were to use such approaches against modern governments and non-native people?