[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'W')hat this UN bureaucrat suggested is that the US government actually adhere to the promises it made in the hundreds of treaties with Indian nations (I know, radical stuff, huh?), specifically by restoring their original reservations, which make up a tiny fraction of US territory.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TreeFarmer', 'T')his was nothing but busy-body UN claptrap.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', 'T')he more pertinent case for comparison is Kosovo. The US claims that this "special" case deserves to be partitioned from Serbia because of a local Albanian majority. Using this logic every Indian reservation should have the automatic right to secede. Hell, I should get to secede my land because I am the 100% majority on it.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', 'I') think it would be really cool to transfer most, if not all BLM land to the various Native American tribal groups and let them decide what to do with them; give'em a ten year exemption on taxes, and pretty much unconditional wavers for whatever they want to build.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'W')e also stole Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California from Mexico.


Does the UN think we should give those states back as well?

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'B')ut what we were taught, left us with the impression that the natives just kind of left voluntarily after welcoming the visitors with bountiful gifts of corn and turkey. Everyone was happy happy.

[Cloud9]

I know I bought stolen property. That is why I have title insurance.

[JohnRM]

Okay, I agree, as long as indians don't use the land to build casinos. If they go back to living like real indians, then I'm cool with it....provided that I can join them.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'N')ot all natives were friendly though. Depended on the tribe.. some were quite vicious and brutal, "savages" indeed.

[AdTheNad]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'N')ot all natives were friendly though. Depended on the tribe.. some were quite vicious and brutal, "savages" indeed.

[Cloud9]

The Indians lost the continent because they failed to realize the threat. They did not understand that the Europeans were more than a Mohican problem or a Powatan problem, they were an Indian problem. That failure combined with the whites banding together to fight a common enemy lost the continent for them. The way things are going, the Indians may get a portion of it back by default. The European model of conquest was based on perpetual growth. Infinite growth has slammed into the wall of finite resources.

[Pops]

The Indians didn't "own" land so how could it be stolen?

They were a victim of overpopulation just like nomads in all the rest of the world. The romantic notion of being a hunter gatherer had long since passed elsewhere because agriculture made surpluses made babies.

Unless the UN plans to resettle all those babies to some other planet and give this one back to a few million "natives" the idea is silly.

[Cloud9]

The UN is a wet dream of globalists, technocrats, power freaks and romantics. It is a hollow institution overrun with graft. Where was it during the Rwandan genocide? Where will it be during the South African genocide? They want to end the private ownership of guns when we can’t even control the gangs in in a single city like LA. They want to return lost lands to lost peoples; here is one for you, North Africa and the Middle East were Christian 600 years before they were Muslim. Losers lose and winners win only to lose to the next wave of winners. Such is the nature of things. As we slide down the curve of this great contraction, there are going to be a lot of losers. Can’t run a modern war machine without oil.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'I')t was already mostly Americans living there.

[Ferretlover]

"US should return stolen land to Indian tribes, says UN"
Hogwash. They've been paid for it. Many receive all the welfare benefits offered to everyone in the US> They've built casinos and are raking in millions, if not billions.
If they want some land, they can pay for it like the rest of us. Heck, in some places, I bet they can get some really good deals still.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Why not to send all of these pesky Indians to their new land on Madagascar?

[Serial_Worrier]

Typical anti-American, anti-Israel UN scum. They turn the other way when Syria is butchering their own people in 2012, but call America on the carpet for crimes committed 150 years ago.

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdTheNad', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'T')hat would be the ones you "ethnically cleansed".

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'T')hanks to whitey - Native Americans have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism.......

Serial_Worrier sounds like a Syphilis infected Conquistador.

[SeaGypsy]

Here in Australia, we have an 'Aboriginal Land Rights Act', which entitles indigenous people with a continuous relationship with the land, to claim 'Aboriginal Title'. A bit of a con, this title effectively gives veto to local tribes over projects such as mining operations, forestry etc. It does not give them freehold rights. They cannot sell land under this title. They can only lease land under agreement ("Heads of Agreement") with local, state and federal government consent. Usually this involves substantial monies going to the remote communities in these areas. Often the Aboriginal royalties are enough to get the inhabitants off welfare payments, removing them from unemployed statistics, making the feds happy. Unfortunately the majority of this extra money goes into alcohol, gambling and drugs. There has been very little improvement in living standards in the communities affected.

Our Land Rights Act was a direct product of UN reports influencing policy. Fundamentally, the UN thinks we should as a nation be able to build a new house in the middle of nowhere, for a family with no income, where the children are having children themselves at age 14 or 15, every time the population warrants a new house. Then new schools, hospitals, police stations, roads, heliports, etc etc. There is no real thought as to the sustainability of these communities as financial enterprises, simply an attitude that: You (Australia) are rich. The people you disenfranchised (Aboriginals) are poor. Therefore you should pay for them to become like you. It's a ridiculous over-simplification.

Most people who live and work in these remote areas (including the vast majority of senior elders, believe there is way too much welfare (whether in the form of social security payments or royalties); and that these act as a severe disincentive to productive activity by younger folk.

These UN committees come out bush, spend 3 days in each of 3 or 4 communities, listen only to the welfare advocacy end of the spectrum of locals, then go home to publish scathing reports blaming non-aboriginal Australians for 'Chronic neglect' of these poor people.

In most of these communities, there were much greater outcomes back before government welfare came to town.