Boston Bombing News Thread

[Apotheoun]

Is this what is being taught in schools today? Amazing.

 

The United States STOLE NOTHING. The land came by way of The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which came at the end of the 2 year Mexican-American War (1846-1848). In that treaty the United States PURCHASED the land for $15 Million. Mexicans that were living in the area that comprised California, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, parts of Wyoming and Colorado were given a choice to stay and become full US citizens or they could leave to live in Mexico.

 

Mexico, having claiming its independence from the Spanish Empire (whose land the above belonged to) in 1821, it was not even their land to start with.

 

The remaining parts of land were PURCHASED in 1853, known as the Gadsden Purchase, for $10 million for the southern part of Arizona and the southwestern part of New Mexico.

 

In total, the United States PAID Mexico $25 Million from 1848 - 1853 for the land you incorrectly state as "stolen."

 

You can find other things in history to support your theories other than parroting an absolute false history to support your claims.

I am just pointing out that America, like Russia, conquered another country and then forced the said country to give it territory. Neither America or Russia are ever going to voluntarily give up what they conquered, nor would I expect them to, which is why I told a certain poster that it is not because of who is presently the president of the Russian Federation that Chechnya is a battle zone, it is because the people of Russia are not looking to give up what their ancestors won by war.

 

St. Michael if you think that Mexico wanted to sign the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo you are not the brightest bulb in the bunch. When you are defeated in a war you sign whatever the victor wants you to sign. And yeah, America paid for the region, after we smashed Mexico to pieces.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Nihil Obstat]

You could pay ten million dollars for a couple acres of land in one of the more expensive areas in Calgary. :|

Not adjusting for inflation, naturally. . . Heh.

 

Edited April 21, 2013 by Nihil Obstat

[Apotheoun]

:unsure: Apotheoun is probably older than you are, and I don't think he's been in a formal school for a long time, although i'm sure he'll correct me if i'm wrong :unsure: (thus ends my contribution to this thread). 

Yes, I am nearly 50 years old, so I am sure that I am a lot older than St. Michael.  :w00t:

 

I was educated in the days when America was always held to be "right" and "just," but I do not believe that any more than I believe that the moon is made of cheese or that pigs can fly.   :pigsfly:

 

As far as elementary, middle, and high school are concerned, I ended that era of boredom in 1981. But as far as college is concerned, that era ended in 2005 when I completed my MA in Theology at Franciscan University. And as I said in another post, the vast majority of Catholic kids I met at San Francisco State in the late 90s and early 2000s knew very little about their faith. It was quite sad.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[4588686]

I am just pointing out that America, like Russia, conquered another country and then forced the said country to give it territory. Neither America or Russia are ever going to voluntarily give up what they conquered, nor would I expect them to, which is why I told a certain poster that it is not because of who is presently the president of the Russian Federation that Chechnya is a battle zone, it is because the people of Russia are not looking to give up what their ancestors won by war.

 

 

Russia gave up huge chunks of territory that the ancestors of living Russians conquered and that it had held for generations.  And, more importantly, it is not very clear that there was much desire to actually leave Russia among the Chechen population or the Chechen elite.  For example, if you read anthropolgies of Chechnya before the invasion you will see that many Chechen families kept awards won by family members who fought for the USSR during the Great Patriotic War (WWII).  And shortly before the war Dudayev made great hay of the fact that he was voting in the Russian federal elections.  The reason this situation spiraled out of control was very much the result of the deficiencies of the major actors involved on both sides.   

 

As much as I enjoy reading your thoughts on a lot of subjects, your thesis here just doesn't hold water.  

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Apotheoun]

I really respect your wisdom on religious subjects.  But I think that this view of the Chechen war is the result of an ignorance of the mechanics of what actually caused the war.  Russia gave up huge chunks of territory that the ancestors of living Russians conquered and that it had held for generations.  And, more importantly, it is not very clear that there was much desire to actually leave Russia among the Chechen population or the Chechen elite.  For example, if you read anthropolgies of Chechnya before the invasion you will see that many Chechen families kept awards won by family members who fought for the USSR during the Great Patriotic War (WWII).  And shortly before the war Dudayev made great hay of the fact that he was voting in the Russian federal elections.  The reason this situation spiraled out of control was very much the result of the deficiencies of the major actors involved on both sides.   

That's your opinion, and I disagree. Russia is unlikely to give up any territory that has been incorporated into the Russian Federation itself. Only the former Republics, which were not a part of the RSFSR have been let go, and even they remain in the Russian sphere of influence. Why do you think it was Russia that contacted the U.S. government about the Boston Marathon bombers before any of this mess happened. They do know what is going on in their territory, even if American government officials in their smug superiority reject the idea. I respect you Hasan, but not when it comes to religious, political, economic, or common sense issues.   :dance2:

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[4588686]

Kazakhstan, for example.  Which is many times more massive than Chechnya.  

[4588686]

That's your opinion, and I disagree. Russia is unlikely to give up any territory that has been incorporated into the Russian Federation itself. Only the former Republics, which were not a part of the RSFSR have been let go, and even they remain in the Russian sphere of influence. Why do you think it was Russia that contacted the U.S. government about the Boston Marathon bombers before any of this mess happened. They do know what is going on in their territory, even if American government officials in their smug superiority reject the idea. I respect you Hasan, but not when it comes to religious, political, economic, or common sense issues.   :dance2:

 

 

It's not my opinion.  I've given specific facts and counterexamples and you have given unsubstantiated conjectures and the impressions from a Russian guy you met at Church.  

[Apotheoun]

Kazakhstan, for example.  Which is many times more massive than Chechnya.  

Kazakhstan was not a part of the Russian Federation, it was a separate Soviet Republic. Chechnya has been an administrative unit of the Russian Federation for a very long time, and the Russians are not going to let it go anymore than the USA will let California secede from the union.

[Apotheoun]

It's not my opinion.  I've given specific facts and counterexamples and you have given unsubstantiated conjectures and the impressions from a Russian guy you met at Church.  

Let's get one thing straight . . . both of us are expressing opinions, but alas your opinions are stupidity dressed up as a college paper.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[4588686]

Kazakhstan was not a part of the Russian Federation, it was a separate Soviet Republic. Chechnya has been an administrative unit of the Russian Federation for a very long time, and the Russians are not going to let it go anymore than the USA will let California secede from the union.

 

That's because the Soviet Union divided chinks of the Russian Empire, of which Kazakhstan had been a part since the 18th/19th century in various degrees, into formally separate republics, although substantively they remained subjugated. 

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Apotheoun]

That's because the Soviet divided chinks of the Russian Empire, of which Kazakhstan had been a part, into formally separate republics, although substantively they remained subjugated. 

Again, what you have failed to show is that regions incorporated into the RSFSR were allowed to just leave peacefully. Moreover, Kazakhstan remains in the Russian sphere of influence, and will for the foreseeable future.

 

My Russian friends would be laughing their heads off at your comments.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Apotheoun

[StMichael]

To defend your ignorance by attacking me is to be expected.

 

If the US so defeated Mexico then why does Mexico even exist? It would have been more states for the US.

 

Furthermore, $15 million in 1848 was not chump change, by any means. In 2012 dollars it would be $441,176,470.59.

 

There would be no reason for the United States to pay a nation they defeated a dime for anything. Did Russia pay another country for they land they occupy? If they did, then you have a case. If they didn't you are stretching taffy.

 

And it matters not if the treaty was signed under duress or not, it was signed. Furthermore, a few years later (5) they sold us even more land. Was that also under duress?

 

Do yourself a favor and read the treaty, grab a history book and stop parroting false history.

 

I am just pointing out that America, like Russia, conquered another country and then forced the said country to give it territory. Neither America or Russia are ever going to voluntarily give up what they conquered, nor would I expect them to, which is why I told a certain poster that it is not because of who is presently the president of the Russian Federation that Chechnya is a battle zone, it is because the people of Russia are not looking to give up what their ancestors won by war.

 

St. Michael if you think that Mexico wanted to sign the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo you are not the brightest bulb in the bunch. When you are defeated in a war you sign whatever the victor wants you to sign. And yeah, America paid for the region, after we smashed Mexico to pieces.

 

[4588686]

Again, what you have failed to show is that regions incorporated into the RSFSR were allowed to just leave peacefully. Moreover, Kazakhstan remains in the Russian sphere of influence, and will for the foreseeable future.

 

My Russian friends would be laughing their heads off at your comments.

 

 

Why does it make any difference that it was part of the Russian Federation given how the Soviet state actually functioned prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union?  The Russian Federation was only a few years old when the Chechen wars broke out.  Under the logic you presented there isn't any reason that Kazakhstan should be  just as dearly held as Chechnya.  Moreover, areas withing the Russian Federation were given just the sort of regional autonomy that could have been worked out with Chechnya and somehow Russian society didn't collapse.  

 

 

I am glad to see that you've found friends.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Hasan

[Apotheoun]

To defend your ignorance by attacking me is to be expected.

 

If the US so defeated Mexico then why does Mexico even exist? It would have been more states for the US.

 

Furthermore, $15 million in 1848 was not foolish person change, by any means. In 2012 dollars it would be $441,176,470.59.

 

There would be no reason for the United States to pay a nation they defeated a dime for anything. Did Russia pay another country for they land they occupy? If they did, then you have a case. If they didn't you are stretching taffy.

 

And it matters not if the treaty was signed under duress or not, it was signed. Furthermore, a few years later (5) they sold us even more land. Was that also under duress?

 

Do yourself a favor and read the treaty, grab a history book and stop parroting false history.

St. Michael we conquered Mexico and took their territory. We also gave them some cash to make it easier to swallow, but America's acquisition of the Southwest was by conquest pure and simple. Mexico is just lucky that the United States didn't absorb the whole country, but the issue of slavery prevented that from happening.

[Apotheoun]

 

I am glad to see that you've found friends.

Thanks. You should try it. It would help to balance out your egoism, and help you to see that many of your "facts" are just your subjective opinion masquerading as facts. Perhaps as you get older you will move away from your college attitude that what you think has value to other people.