Didn't you go to school in the US?

 

Johnny Cash won the war for us when he ran over Hitler in his red white and blue Hummer.

 

nope, canada

yes, because the US singlehandedly killed all the bad nazis for us!

 

(rofl)

We totally would have if Russia didn't do it first@@

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

I'm afraid to say that the Native Americans would've probably been absued by someone else, then.

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

I'm afraid to say that the Native Americans would've probably been absued by someone else, then.

 

Not completely true. If the Europeans didn't come when they did, we could have advanced ourselves enough to protect ourselves from further dangers.

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

I'm afraid to say that the Native Americans would've probably been absued by someone else, then.

 

Not completely true. If the Europeans didn't come when they did, we could have advanced ourselves enough to protect ourselves from further dangers.

Disease killed far mroe Native Americans than actual Europeans did. So I have a feeling plague would've gotten you.

 

 

...Unless you had another plague before they came, and so instead the Europeans were struck down by disease....

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

I'm afraid to say that the Native Americans would've probably been absued by someone else, then.

 

Not completely true. If the Europeans didn't come when they did, we could have advanced ourselves enough to protect ourselves from further dangers.

Disease killed far mroe Native Americans than actual Europeans did. So I have a feeling plague would've gotten you.

 

 

...Unless you had another plague before they came, and so instead the Europeans were struck down by disease....

 

There were no diseases before the Europeans came. The Europeans brought the disease with them.

Well I'd be living on the land, already trained as a warrior, most likely killed my share of buffalo, and have insane horseback/archery skills.

Because nukes had been invented sooner and we were starting over as hunter-gatherers?

 

No, because I'm Native American, and that's what we did before there was a United States. No one said anything about any other country taking the territory, so I'm happy to assume the Native's still roamed the land.

I'm afraid to say that the Native Americans would've probably been absued by someone else, then.

 

Not completely true. If the Europeans didn't come when they did, we could have advanced ourselves enough to protect ourselves from further dangers.

Disease killed far mroe Native Americans than actual Europeans did. So I have a feeling plague would've gotten you.

 

 

...Unless you had another plague before they came, and so instead the Europeans were struck down by disease....

 

There were no diseases before the Europeans came. The Europeans brought the disease with them.

...What...?

 

The Native Americans had diseases, just far fewer due to their lifestyle. (No farm animals, less travel/trade, etc.)

 

You also never hear of them because frankly, they aren't historically important.

 

But to say the Americas were disease free is like saying there are no homosexuals in the Middle East.

 

...What...?

 

The Native Americans had diseases, just far fewer due to their lifestyle. (No farm animals, less travel/trade, etc.)

 

You also never hear of them because frankly, they aren't historically important.

 

But to say the Americas were disease free is like saying there are no homosexuals in the Middle East.

 

Our immune systems were pretty well against what disease we did have, so there was rarely fatalities from a virus. It's the same philosophy when you go to basic training, you WILL get sick because different areas have different strings of viruses, and you're immune system hasn't built up a defense to them, so you get it a lot easier, and it hits you harder.

 

Saying historically they're not important is as ignorant as it gets. You can actually learn a lot from the Native Americans if you have an open mind and actually learned the culture and everything they've done.

 

There's a difference between 'disease' and 'sick'.

 

 

There were no diseases before the Europeans came. The Europeans brought the disease with them.

 

 

...What...?

 

The Native Americans had diseases, just far fewer due to their lifestyle. (No farm animals, less travel/trade, etc.)

 

You also never hear of them because frankly, they aren't historically important.

 

But to say the Americas were disease free is like saying there are no homosexuals in the Middle East.

 

Our immune systems were pretty well against what disease we did have, so there was rarely fatalities from a virus. It's the same philosophy when you go to basic training, you WILL get sick because different areas have different strings of viruses, and you're immune system hasn't built up a defense to them, so you get it a lot easier, and it hits you harder.

 

Saying historically they're not important is as arrogant as it gets. You can actually learn a lot from the Native Americans if you have an open mind and actually learned the culture and everything they've done.

 

There's a difference between 'disease' and 'sick'.

 

You originally said there were no diseases before the Europeans, which was what I was arguing against. I agree with you in that the Native Americans were not much affected by their own diseases, though. The joys of not living in unsanitary cities such as there were in Europe.

 

Generally for something to be 'historically important' it has to have shaped the world in some way, or have consequences for the future.

The diseases that struck the Native Americans lack either characteristic, because the Native American lifestyle prevented them from causing much damage, and their isolation prevented it from spreading. (And do you think swine flu or avian flu will be remember and spoken of 100 years from now?)

 

I never said Native American culture was unimportant, remember. Just most of their diseases. Although if syphilus originated in the Americas, as some believe, then that one could be considered important, as it infected the entire world.

My original statement was worded wrong. We had disease in the very beginning, but quickly defeated it, so we didn't have disease, we had sickness. When the Europeans came and brought their disease they were immune to, along with the horses and cows and livestock, that just added and became a fatal combination for our relatively weak immune systems.

 

I still argue your statement that they're historically unimportant. They're historically important to me, so I'll battle that fact to the grave. Granted they didn't impact the world, there's actually relatively few countries who impacted the world.

The world without the United States...hmmm.

 

Well I have to imagine it would be something like this:

Not true, if any country 'won' the war it would have been Russia.

The world without the United States...hmmm.

 

Well I have to imagine it would be something like this:

Not true, if any country 'won' the war it would have been Russia.

Soviet Union. Don't leave Borat out of this!

The Native Americans and every other native people of North America and South America NEVER invented a wheel. Even though wheels have been found on children's toys, not one wheel was used whatsoever for transportation. The native people, in some cases, were very advanced for their time (the Nahua come to mind), but many of these groups of people had been stagnant in developing technology for hundreds of years. The idea of "don't fix what isn't broken" seems to be a common theme among the indigenous people of the Americas. These people *most likely* would have made slight improvements without European intervention, but as I said before, they could not even implement the use of a wheel which leads one to wonder how advanced these civilizations (if you even want to call them that) would have become.

The Native Americans and every other native people of North America and South America NEVER invented a wheel. Even though wheels have been found on children's toys, not one wheel was used whatsoever for transportation. The native people, in some cases, were very advanced for their time (the Nahua come to mind), but many of these groups of people had been stagnant in developing technology for hundreds of years. The idea of "don't fix what isn't broken" seems to be a common theme among the indigenous people of the Americas. These people *most likely* would have made slight improvements without European intervention, but as I said before, they could not even implement the use of a wheel which leads one to wonder how advanced these civilizations (if you even want to call them that) would have become.

The question is, would they have needed to? Not every culture has the same wants and needs, they probably would have been fine without the many inventions that we of European descent hold so dear.

The wheel is universal. Instead of 1 person carrying as much as he can carry, a cart can carry a lot more.

The Native Americans and every other native people of North America and South America NEVER invented a wheel. Even though wheels have been found on children's toys, not one wheel was used whatsoever for transportation. The native people, in some cases, were very advanced for their time (the Nahua come to mind), but many of these groups of people had been stagnant in developing technology for hundreds of years. The idea of "don't fix what isn't broken" seems to be a common theme among the indigenous people of the Americas. These people *most likely* would have made slight improvements without European intervention, but as I said before, they could not even implement the use of a wheel which leads one to wonder how advanced these civilizations (if you even want to call them that) would have become.

 

Just to note, that bold statement was a horrible phrase. You can't even argue they weren't a civilization.

 

Just because they didn't invent the wheel when the Europeans came doesn't mean they wouldn't have in the future. They didn't need a wheel at the time. They could have easily said "Čhaŋgléka waŋ káǧiŋ na pačháŋgleya hiyúye." (Rough translation, to build a hoop and send it rolling). Some people don't see that because one doesn't, doesn't mean one can't.

How can you not call this a civilization?

 

Ethnocentricity helps, probably.

The Native Americans and every other native people of North America and South America NEVER invented a wheel. Even though wheels have been found on children's toys, not one wheel was used whatsoever for transportation. The native people, in some cases, were very advanced for their time (the Nahua come to mind), but many of these groups of people had been stagnant in developing technology for hundreds of years. The idea of "don't fix what isn't broken" seems to be a common theme among the indigenous people of the Americas. These people *most likely* would have made slight improvements without European intervention, but as I said before, they could not even implement the use of a wheel which leads one to wonder how advanced these civilizations (if you even want to call them that) would have become.

 

indeed. their choice of lifestyle justifies the massacre they received from europeans

The Native Americans and every other native people of North America and South America NEVER invented a wheel. Even though wheels have been found on children's toys, not one wheel was used whatsoever for transportation. The native people, in some cases, were very advanced for their time (the Nahua come to mind), but many of these groups of people had been stagnant in developing technology for hundreds of years. The idea of "don't fix what isn't broken" seems to be a common theme among the indigenous people of the Americas. These people *most likely* would have made slight improvements without European intervention, but as I said before, they could not even implement the use of a wheel which leads one to wonder how advanced these civilizations (if you even want to call them that) would have become.

 

indeed. their choice of lifestyle justifies the massacre they received from europeans

 

You know, I don't know why...but that made me lol in real life.

I think you guys misinterpreted my post. I was trying to say civilization is a very ambiguous term. What defines what is a civilization and where is the cutoff point? And please, do not copy paste Wikipedia's definition of civilization just to be a jerk. I am not putting down any native people. I'm sorry if it came off that way.

 

On another point, (directed at Shadowfax) it would be very foolish to assume that all native tribes of the Americas were peaceful and simply slaughtered by brutal Europeans. Yes, there are plenty of examples of peaceful groups, but many of the groups of people (like the Nahua I mentioned in my first post who were conquered by Cortez, along with many other similar groups throughout the Americas) are in a constant state of warfare. Their entire lives are based off an ancient tradition of warfare. Their rise to power in the area was fueled by warfare and their demise will always be through military conquest. These people have been doing this for thousands of years before the arrival of ANY Europeans. Am I saying that it was right for Cortez to destroy the Nahua society? No, but there are two sides to each coin.

I think you guys misinterpreted my post. I was trying to say civilization is a very ambiguous term. What defines what is a civilization and where is the cutoff point? And please, do not copy paste Wikipedia's definition of civilization just to be a jerk. I am not putting down any native people. I'm sorry if it came off that way.

 

On another point, (directed at Shadowfax) it would be very foolish to assume that all native tribes of the Americas were peaceful and simply slaughtered by brutal Europeans. Yes, there are plenty of examples of peaceful groups, but many of the groups of people (like the Nahua I mentioned in my first post who were conquered by Cortez, along with many other similar groups throughout the Americas) are in a constant state of warfare. Their entire lives are based off an ancient tradition of warfare. Their rise to power in the area was fueled by warfare and their demise will always be through military conquest. These people have been doing this for thousands of years before the arrival of ANY Europeans. Am I saying that it was right for Cortez to destroy the Nahua society? No, but there are two sides to each coin.

 

I don't exactly have a definition, nor care to think up of one, but I can say that I would definitely call the Native American's a civilization. I see no reason not to. They were their own people. They had their own culture, they're own society, they're own way of life. That's a civilization in my eyes.

 

Faux didn't say that they didn't have warfare, nor do I think he meant it. The Europeans did slaughter a lot of the Native American's unfairly. They had no strong reason to what they did, they had no strong reason to take away their land (it's greed, that's not just), put them in concentration camps, rape their women, take their children away and sent to boarding schools, break their treaties, none of that. I don't blame everyone white person for what happened (like I know some native's today do), because they didn't take part in it. I can't say "I hate you for your ancestors", as that's not right. However, I can say that those who did take part, I have absolutely no respect for.