Anne,
I have to agree with you there. It was the willingness to kill and massacre 
for land with no rules. The Indians were seen as savages and heathens, not 
worthy of life. The Europeans saw the Indians, and every other indigenous 
person as holding land given to them by God. The Africans were put on the 
earth to be slaves for Europeans (it was even interpreted that way in the 
Bible).  There are people who want to pretty it up, but that is the 
unvarnished truth. It had nothing to do with a standing army, and everything 
to do with the rules (or lack there of) of engagement.

Anita



>From: Anne Pemberton <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history         
>      <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Lack of a Standing Army and Indians
>Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 10:20:57 -0400
>
>I really do no think that a standing or larger army was the solution to the 
>Indian problem. It required diplomacy and the outright trade/purchase of 
>the desired lands from the Indians. It is to our shame that we took so much 
>land without purchasing it, and decimated the Indian population for doing 
>nothing more than enjoying the lands they had "owned" since times 
>ancestoral.
>
>Think how you would feel is an Indian took a shine to your house and 
>property and came with arms to force you out and take it over without 
>compensating you in any way for it?
>
>The only reason the US had an "Indian problem" was because we refused to 
>assimilate to the Indian culture and share in what they had. We were 
>selfish and wanted it all to ourselves.
>
>Anne
>Anne Pemberton

_________________________________________________________________
Like puzzles? Play free games & earn great prizes. Play Clink now. 
http://club.live.com/clink.aspx?icid=clink_hotmailtextlink2