by Concerned » Sun 16 Jul 2006, 13:49:30
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PeakKYJelly', '
')Just a small question. When the Indians fought each other, and stole land from one another, does that bother you as much as when the Europeans did the same exact thing to the Indians?
How could it bother me
"as much" on the equivalence scale localised fighting and shifting land boundaries, is totally different to the European assault.
I just don't buy into the argument that because the Indians fought each other, this somehow justifies European genocide. There is a significant difference between essentially localised fighting and shifting land boundaries compared to the eventual extermination of a peoples and culture.
If China (or other Entity) gets powerful enough do they get to drop a few H bombs on the US because the US dropped two on Japan?
Could they gas Germans because Germans gassed Jews? Could they firebomb British cities ...