Originally Posted by FluffyNinja

After listening to some of the controversy surrounding the recent Absolut Vodka ad that ran in Mexico, I began to reflect on the Mexican War of 1846 and its validity. My question is, was the Mexican War justified? And, if not, do we owe anything (land, reparations, apologies, etc.) to the people of Mexico as a result?

I mean, think about it, the most commonly accepted version of this history says that Sam Houston virtually "tricked" the US Senate into annexing Texas by making public claims that Texas would ally itself with Britain. The US could not "stomach" having our most recent "international enemy" sitting on our back doorstep, so they folded. Sam Houston's bluff payed off. We learn later, from some of Houston's own correspondence, that he never originally had any intent to side with the British. In the end, the US ended up with a pretty sweet deal. We took a pretty valuable "chunk" of land from Mexico for $15 million and by the settlement of a "lopsided" treaty.

There are many other implications from the era, that when taken in context, may have made this more legitimate. I'm really quite divided on this question. Just wondering if any of you have an opinion?