- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 5,395
- Reaction score
- 2,782
- Location
- Minneapolis
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
LOL, your article clearly states that this is the highest estimate and that credible estimates go as low as 900,000.
Your own article states that credible estimates put the number as low as 900,000.
I'm pretty sure that the settlers in North America were more interested in getting away from religious persecution.
Well aside from the fact that not one of the three countries which you listed are in the Middle East, besides Kharzai we didn't do anything which could even be construed as installing them, and Musharaff actively worked against U.S. interests.
I never said the United States inserts puppet dictators in the Middle East, although we do. I said that one of the major reasons we are targeted by terrorist organizations was for installing puppet dictators in general. I was trying to keep my arguments to the Middle East region because that's what you wanted to argue about, but that region certainly doesn't contain the best examples. Historically, our puppet dictators have been installed in other parts of the world -- places like Honduras (Roberto Cordova) and Taiwan (Chiang Kai-shek), El Salvador (Cristiani), South Vietnam (Ngo Dinh Diem), and in Africa -- Liberia (Samuel Doe), Zaire (Mobuto Sese Seko) and Morocco (Hassan II). The Carter Administration inserted Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines. The CIA backed Efrain Rios Montt's campaign to oust the leadership in Guatemala. We inserted Noriega in Panama. We continued to support Ozal in Turkey despite the fact that he committed many of the same crimes we criticized Saddam Hussein for. For 20 years, we backed Pahlevi in Iran, with the CIA managing daily operations to support his tactics of torture and violent suppression. And remember Pinochet in Chile? Guess who led the effort to overthrow his predecessor? These are not all examples of dictators that the United States flat out "installed," but most of them are, and we financially supported every single one of them. And the President in Azerjiban is widely viewed as a product of American influence, although it's hard to say what is and isn't true there.
As to the population of Native Americans, perhaps you should read more carefully. The estimate of 900,000 was credible at the time -- 100 years ago. Since then, no attempt to discern the actual number has used such primitive methodology (they were estimates that were based on multiplying previously recorded estimates) and none have ever estimated the number to be so low. That's why I used the number 12 million, all of the most credibly studies hover around 12 million. It's funny that you "clarified" that 18 million is the highest estimate, since my post SAID that's the highest estimate. Either way, there's a more important number -- .8%. Native Americans used to comprise 100% of this country, now they are .8% of the nation's demographic. We took their land, brutally killed their men, women, and children, and subsequently destroyed major portions of their languages and cultural traditions, then we forced them to convert to Christianity.
I'm not sure why you would want to defend these actions. It removes any credibility you might otherwise retain.