The National Defense Authorization Bill: Renaming army bases.

[5fish]

Does this sound familiar stone age Egyptians and Native Americans , no nation just people...

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? - Quatr.us Study Guides

During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the […]

quatr.us

.

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the Nile Valley, harvesting wild grasses and digging up roots. People picked berries, and found bird eggs.May 8, 2018

Read the link sound like native Americans...

 

[jgoodguy]

I think there was a lot of lobbying by the UDC, which at that time wanted to preserve Confederate culture and white supremacy. If their fathers and grandfathers had not won a physical war, they would win a cultural/societal one. I've always thought that phase was a soft insurgency.

Using CSA names for forts was a political move, just like renaming them are.

 

[jgoodguy]

Does this sound familiar stone age Egyptians and Native Americans , no nation just people...

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? - Quatr.us Study Guides

During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the […]

quatr.us

.

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the Nile Valley, harvesting wild grasses and digging up roots. People picked berries, and found bird eggs.May 8, 2018

Read the link sound like native Americans...

Depends on which Stone Age.
The Old or the New and remember that the old gradually merges into the New which in turn merges into the Bronze.
Neolithic
Prehistoric Egypt - Wikipedia

Around 6000 BC, Neolithic settlements appear all over Egypt. Studies based on morphological, genetic, and archaeological data have attributed these settlements to migrants from the Fertile Crescent in the Near East returning during the Egyptian and North African Neolithic, bringing agriculture to the region.

 

[diane]

Native people Tribes are neither sovereign or nation if the United States has fiduciary obligation over them... United States is their legal Guardian...

Tribal nations have been recognized as sovereign since their first interaction with European settlers. The United States continues to recognize this unique political status and relationship.

As stated on the website of the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs: “The federal Indian trust responsibility is also a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation on the part of the United States to protect tribal rights, lands, assets, and resources.”

Note: A fiduciary duty is a commitment to act in the best interests of another person or entity. Broadly speaking, a fiduciary duty is a duty of loyalty and a duty of care. That is, the fiduciary must act only in the best interests of a client or beneficiary. And, the fiduciary must act diligently in those interests.

This link gives a brief legal history...

The status of that relationship has undergone a good deal of change in meaning - which would require a whole lot more bandwidth than anybody has got! There are many examples of nations who are relying on the protection of another nation because they are small and/or poor. It doesn't remove their nationhood.

That 'legally enforceable fiduciary obligation of the part of the United States' - well, good luck with that. Again, I refer you to Cobell vs Salazar. Examine that case and explain to me where the fiduciary obligations of the US weren't totally fubarred! That's why everybody represented in it got a couple thousand at most when they were owed a few million at least.

This 'guardianship' is out-dated anyway, that hasn't been the relationship between the tribes and the US government since Clinton began the self-sufficiency program. Guardianship or 'wards of the US government' actually was necessary because the ability to defend ourselves, feed ourselves and govern ourselves had been removed, and the same mentality that justified slavery predominated. Primitive people, low intelligence and all that rubbish. Well, take everything away and everybody would be a 'hang around the fort Indian'. Truth is, the people were far more successful at adaptation than the conquistadors thought...because adaptation is survival whether there's a conquest or a disease or a change in game patterns.

5fish, of course we're a nation. We have a flag! I know you love a puzzle. Take a swim in Indian-US law. Ok, I wouldn't do that to anybody...just dip a toe in! The in-coming BIA boss is a Pueblo - I'm looking forward to see what she does and how far she gets. So far, her plans look good!

 

[diane]

Does this sound familiar stone age Egyptians and Native Americans , no nation just people...

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? - Quatr.us Study Guides

During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the […]

quatr.us

.

What was Egypt like in the Stone Age? During most of the Stone Age, people in Egypt, like people everywhere else in the world, lived by hunting and gathering their food. They traveled around from place to place in the Nile Valley, harvesting wild grasses and digging up roots. People picked berries, and found bird eggs.May 8, 2018

Read the link sound like native Americans...

What's wrong with being Stone Age? It doesn't mean you're stupid, you know! Stone Age people catch up real fast when they see it's necessary. In the 60s there were still folks categorized like that around the world and still a lot of uncontacted peoples. Not no more! Now you see discordant images like 'stone age' people avidly watching their IPhone....

Got to modernize your thinking, 5fish, and catch up with them!

 

[jgoodguy]

What's wrong with being Stone Age? It doesn't mean you're stupid, you know! Stone Age people catch up real fast when they see it's necessary. In the 60s there were still folks categorized like that around the world and still a lot of uncontacted peoples. Not no more! Now you see discordant images like 'stone age' people avidly watching their IPhone....

Got to modernize your thinking, 5fish, and catch up with them!

I agree. Techwise the Apollo mission used stone-age tech relative to modern tech. Stone age tools were very good at cutting. The main problem is that they used wood for building and most of their structures no longer exist. The key moment in the advancement of civilization was when Stone Age peoples discovered agriculture and entered the Neolithic after which advancement was relatively rapid.

 

[diane]

I agree. Techwise the Apollo mission used stone-age tech relative to modern tech. Stone age tools were very good at cutting. The main problem is that they used wood for building and most of their structures no longer exist. The key moment in the advancement of civilization was when Stone Age peoples discovered agriculture and entered the Neolithic after which advancement was relatively rapid.

Nutrition. Have to have stable food sources to have stable bodies, then you have the time to advance. However, there still has to be an edge. If you're too comfortable, there's not much need for advancement! There's a great deal of 'primitive' thought and generational knowledge that has been lost forever throughout the world because outer advancement (cities, industry, etc) was of more value than inner advancement. A great many Aristotles lived in little grass shacks! Right now they are discovering a 'lost' civilization in the Amazon forest - wasn't always a jungle. Very interesting findings!

 

[jgoodguy]

Nutrition. Have to have stable food sources to have stable bodies, then you have the time to advance. However, there still has to be an edge. If you're too comfortable, there's not much need for advancement! There's a great deal of 'primitive' thought and generational knowledge that has been lost forever throughout the world because outer advancement (cities, industry, etc) was of more value than inner advancement. A great many Aristotles lived in little grass shacks! Right now they are discovering a 'lost' civilization in the Amazon forest - wasn't always a jungle. Very interesting findings!

Yes.
What I get from binge-watching Time Team.

 

[5fish]

5fish, of course we're a nation. We have a flag!

I see Native Americans have many flags and seals... I mean many...

Native American Flags | TME

www.tmealf.com

What's wrong with being Stone Age?

Well... I will admit the Native Americans adopted Horse riding , Guns , and I assume other items that improved their lives and living conditions.

I am trying to point out European explorers/settlers miss classified Tribes and Nations from the start.

 

[diane]

I see Native Americans have many flags and seals... I mean many...

Native American Flags | TME

www.tmealf.com

Well... I will admit the Native Americans adopted Horse riding , Guns , and I assume other items that improved their lives and living conditions.

I am trying to point out European explorers/settlers miss classified Tribes and Nations from the start.

Culture clash! It's funny to read what each thought of the other, by the way. For one thing, both said the other smelled bad!

 

[O' Be Joyful]

For one thing, both said the other smelled bad!

Some was eating a shit-load of fish and frog-legs Then there was them buffalo.

 

[Wehrkraftzersetzer]

I am trying to point out European explorers/settlers miss classified Tribes and Nations from the start.

No, they wanted to see primitives, they only would have accepted a fully armed fore of European type

 

[byron ed]

You, sir, are full of bovine scatology. American men, women and children killed by Indians were, each and evry one, trespassing on Indian land, cutting down their forests, hunting on their land and building cabins on their land. You must look at it from their point of view. If someone came to your house, burned it down, killed the kids and the animals, cut down all the trees in the yard and then built a new house on your land, what would you do? When the British invaded us in 1812, we did exactly the same as the Indians. We defended our land. There is precisely zero difference between the two actions.

Except to pull back a bit there. Native American tribes were trespassing on each other's hunting grounds, burning their abodes, killing the kids and the animals -- and btw taking slaves -- before the late arrivals of the Euros. There is a somewhat above zero difference between the two settings.

 

[Jim Klag]

Except to pull back a bit there. Native American tribes were trespassing on each other's hunting grounds, burning their abodes, killing the kids and the animals -- and btw taking slaves -- before the late arrivals of the Euros. There is a somewhere above zero difference between the two settings.

The bovine scatology also applies to you also. Regardless of what Indians did before white folk arrived, the white folk were trespassing, commiting ethnic cleansing, burning and pillaging all of which were ample justification for Indian reprisals. Meh!

 

[Jim Klag]

In addition - a parallel situation. Americans, for four years, killed, burned and pillaged their fellow Americans in the Civil War. If someone had invaded thereafter and committed similar depredation, would Americans be justified in making reprisals in kind against the invaders?

 

[byron ed]

The bovine scatology also applies to you also...

Is it too much to expect a staff member to be civil, say, 25 percent of the time?

Personal scatalogial issues aside, promoting false premise is a choice, as if there were "zero" difference between intra-tribal invasions and Euro invasions in the historical Americas. There were some similarities. Calm down.

 

[Jim Klag]

Is it too much to expect a staff member to be civil, say, 25 percent of the time?

Personal scatalogial issues aside, promoting false premise is a choice, as if there were "zero" difference between intra-tribal invasions and Euro invasions in the historical Americas. There were some similarities. Calm down.

See post #75 and do not presume to tell me to calm down.

 

[byron ed]

See post #75 and do not presume to tell me to calm down.

ok post #75 then

In addition - a parallel situation. Americans, for four years, killed, burned and pillaged their fellow Americans in the Civil War. If someone had invaded thereafter and committed similar depredation, would Americans be justified in making reprisals in kind against the invaders?

Or is it in addition - a parallel situation. Native Americans, for years, killed, burned and pillaged their fellow Native Americans in tribal wars. If someone had invaded thereafter and committed similar depredation, would Native Americans be justified in making reprisals in kind against the invaders?

So there's more than "zero" resemblance between the two scenarios, that all. Nothing to get one's shorts twisted over. Maybe be a little more precise in making grand pronouncements going forward.

 

[diane]

ok post #75 then


Or is it in addition - a parallel situation. Native Americans, for years, killed, burned and pillaged their fellow Native Americans in tribal wars. If someone had invaded thereafter and committed similar depredation, would Native Americans be justified in making reprisals in kind against the invaders?

So there's more than "zero" resemblance between the two scenarios, that all. Nothing to get one's shorts twisted over. Maybe be a little more precise in making grand pronouncements going forward.

You do get a little rise out of me with the 'they were killing each other anyway' trope. That can apply to everybody everywhere but justifies nothing anywhere. Conquest - empire - colonialism - assimilation are like the Four Horsemen.

 

[5fish]

In addition - a parallel situation. Americans, for four years, killed, burned and pillaged their fellow Americans in the Civil War. If someone had invaded thereafter and committed similar depredation, would Americans be justified in making reprisals in kind against the invaders?

No, they had plenty of land to share...