Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oglala riders retrace history (127th Anniversary of the Custer's Last Stand)
Billings Gazette ^ | June 25, 2003 | JAMES HAGENGRUBER

Posted on 06/25/2003 1:13:13 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John

CROW AGENCY - The descendants of Crazy Horse trotted across 360 miles of prairie for a chance to charge up Last Stand Hill early this morning.

The 20 riders of the Great Sioux Nation Victory Ride set out June 9 from the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation in South Dakota. They wanted to take a slow, contemplative path to the battlefield where their ancestors found victory 127 years ago.

It was a chance to remind the tribe's young people of the one unmistakable outcome of the battle, rider Doug War Eagle said.

"We're still here," he said.

Tuesday night the riders pitched tents in a cottonwood grove along the Little Bighorn River, about 400 yards from where Crazy Horse and his family camped. Not far away camps were filled with horsemen and women from other tribes.

They will all be galloping across the battlefield today to mark the Indian Memorial dedication. Horses were vital in Plains Indian culture, and it's only fitting they play a starring role in the dedication, said Kitty Belle Deernose, curator of the battlefield museum.

"Indian people are still very much a horse culture," she said.

The Crow are sending 200 riders, including one riderless horse to honor Pfc. Lori Piestewa, a Hopi soldier who was mortally wounded in a March 23 ambush in Iraq. She was the first American Indian servicewoman killed in action.

The Oglala Sioux have sent 39 riders. The Northern Cheyenne will decorate 20 horses before riding up to the monument to honor their fallen warriors. The Cheyenne-Arapaho tribes of Oklahoma have also sent a horse, Deernose said.

Mel Lonehill, of Batesland, S.D., is part of the Oglala delegation, "Lokal Oyate Kawilau," which translates to "Gathering of the Traditional People." The group began riding on battle anniversaries 10 years ago.

"We honor our ancestors by riding," Lonehill said.

Horses came to the Plains Indians with the Spanish conquistadors. The Sioux called them the "holy dog," Lonehill said. "The horse came to our people and said he would travel with us if we would respect him."

Re-enacting a horse charge up Last Stand Hill is an amazing feeling, Lonehill said. If the rider is focused and spiritually prepared, he can visualize oncoming enemy warriors, even with tourists as spectators.

The Cheyenne River Sioux riders used their horseback journey to the battlefield as a chance to educate young people on traditional values. During the two weeks of the Great Sioux Nation Victory Ride, the descendants of Crazy Horse camped in sites once covered by their ancestors' teepees. They told stories each night and paid respects to their traditional allies, the Northern Cheyenne.

A support crew drove ahead each day to set up camps. The riders raised their own money but received food and places to stay along the way. The horses spent every third day at rest in a trailer, said rider Scott Dupree. The riders weren't always so lucky.

"I was sore by the time we got here," he said.

The days were long and hard, but spirits surged at the sight of the Deer Medicine Rocks outside of Lame Deer, said rider Floyd Clown. The group was given permission to camp next to the sacred rock formations, which bear prophetic drawings of the battle and the eventual murder of Sitting Bull.

The ride was mostly to infuse traditional values in the young people, Clown said. Marking the Indian memorial dedication is just a side event.

"Our monument is already there," Clown said. "That big, white monument up on Last Stand Hill shows our victory. It shows that our grandfathers were here."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Montana; US: South Dakota; US: Wyoming
KEYWORDS: crazyhorse; custer; lakota; littlebighorn; loripiestewa; sioux; sittingbull
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
I visited the Little Big Horn battlefield three years ago. My favorite battlefield, partly because the crowds are modest, mostly because you can see so much without driving or walking too far. (There are only trees in the river and creek valleys.) It's right off I-90, not more than a mile or two off the interstate, roughly half way between Sheridan, WY and Billings.
1 posted on 06/25/2003 1:13:14 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Wasn't there a scandle not too long ago about renaming the park there, or something like that? As I recall the name Custer offended the Indian groups or something like that. If true it just seems strange that the connection of Custer to the site seemed to offend, but the celebration of the battle there and the resulting deaths isn't supposed to offend anyone.
2 posted on 06/25/2003 1:19:28 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Well there was a controversy about it. American Indian activists and their Liberal friends lobbied Bush 41 to change the name of the Custer National Battlefield to Little Big Horn Battlefield. GHWB signed that into law. Not one of his better moments, but considering who replaced him, the name change was bound to happen anyway.
3 posted on 06/25/2003 1:24:20 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
I visited Little Big Horn in the summer of 1997. It really is impressive and, at least, back then, the battle was presented as a clash of cultures that could not live in harmony.

4 posted on 06/25/2003 1:25:09 PM PDT by JohnGalt (They're All Lying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
I wonder if there will be as much bruhaha for a reenactment of the US Cavalry's victory at Wounded Knee? I need to get a few blanks for my Krag anyway.
5 posted on 06/25/2003 1:33:11 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
The article failed to mention that descendants of the 7th Cavalry soldiers will also reinact their ancestor's roles.

This time, they decided to bring the Gattling guns...
6 posted on 06/25/2003 1:37:36 PM PDT by WorkingClassFilth (Defund NPR, PBS and the LSC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
A *great* book on the subject is "Son of the Morning Star" by Evan S. Connell. If you have any interest at all in the subject, you'll want to read that. The Custer visitors center has an excellent museum in the basement, but not well known and I think they keep it closed to regular riff-raff like us.
7 posted on 06/25/2003 1:41:20 PM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
At reinactments, do the savage Indians still torture and murder all the enemy survivors of the fight? Name another battle in history where the winners butchered the losers, every last one. Rather than be proud of the Custer battle, Indians should be forever labeled as the dumb savages that they are.
8 posted on 06/25/2003 1:57:27 PM PDT by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Try Washita, Sand Creek, and the aforementioned Wounded Knee. The United States did not cover itself with glory in dealing with the aboriginal population of North America. No other way to spin it.

9 posted on 06/25/2003 2:01:56 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Custer disobeyed orders and his ambition got most of his command killed. What happened at Little Bighorn was in part payback for Washita and Sand Creek. Some of the Cheyenne there were survivors of those massacres.
10 posted on 06/25/2003 2:04:22 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kms61
Thank you.
11 posted on 06/25/2003 2:09:48 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (ziggy zoggy, ziggy zoggy, HOY HOY HOY!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kms61
What I'm trying to address is the fact that you won't find US citizens celebrating the death of indians. Here it seems the reverse is taking place. If this wasn't the case then this celebration (to instill character in their youth) could take place on 364 other days during the year.

I don't make the case that the US has been fair with Indians. I am not quite as convinced as other people that we were in all instances wrong, or that a holocaust level series of events took place. And that does seem to be the prevailing idea the media desires to get across.

They are not alone.
12 posted on 06/25/2003 2:11:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
During the Indian Wars of this time, I think you'll find absolute slaughter (at least of all males) was practiced by the U.S. Cavalary against the Indians, just as it was practiced by the Indians against whites.

Although I have some Cherokee blood in me, one of my ancestors also served as one of Custer's scouts during the infamous attack on Black Kettle's band of women, children, and elderly camped on the Washita River.

As mentioned above, read "Son of the Morning Star," which was the nickname many Indians had for Custer during the nine or so years between the time he massacred literally hundreds of women and children under the light of Venus (the Morning Star) and Little Big Horn.

Colonel John M. Chivington, also responsible for the Black Kettle Massacre if I remember my history, told his men to kill all Indians, saying "...kill and scalp all, little and big... nits make lice."

I think both sides practiced "kill 'em all" for the most part.

13 posted on 06/25/2003 2:13:07 PM PDT by Scoutmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Sherman and Sheridan taught the South to cry
Then the two went out West and showed the Indian how to die

Part of a song written by Mississippi songwriter about 1995..

14 posted on 06/25/2003 2:19:47 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vetvetdoug
"I wonder if there will be as much bruhaha for a reenactment of the US Cavalry's victory at Wounded Knee? I need to get a few blanks for my Krag anyway."

Nah. That and actions such as "The Sand Creek Massacre" with so many genocidal deaths are poor choices to celibrate.

The racism, cultural intolerance, and phylosophy of "Manifest Destiny" that contributed to these black parts of American History is nothing to be proud of.

Myself, I spent time in the 1/17 Airborne (Air) Calvary when I was a young paratrooper in the 82nd so I am neither anti Cav or military. But in looking at the two above mentioned military actions, I am no more proud of them then I am of the shameful relocation of Cherokees and other Indians by Andrew Jackson in the 1830s known as "The Trail of Tears."
15 posted on 06/25/2003 2:20:35 PM PDT by bicycle thug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Alamo.

That was when war was war.

Ahhhhhh. The inexperienced awe of martial pride. The drum beat of clashing weapons...the harmony of barritone moans of the mortal casualties and the tenor maimed with highlights from the sublime altos, sopranos, and boys in nearly or fatal gang rape... the perfume of burning all that cannot be carried away...war's booty...the soul reviving silence of the dead's putrification...such motivation.

Yes, we should miss those days when war was war. Now, we really can kill them all.
16 posted on 06/25/2003 2:24:43 PM PDT by SevenDaysInMay (Federal judges and justices serve for periods of good behavior, not life. Article III sec. 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John; vetvetdoug; PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
The Crow are sending 200 riders, including one riderless horse to honor Pfc. Lori Piestewa, a Hopi soldier who was mortally wounded in a March 23 ambush in Iraq.

For a 200 mile ride, I would love to be that horse!... (because it would be such an honorable role as well as easy)

The image of the tribute riderless horse *always* tears me up.

There is another re-enactment trail ride that hundreds of riders (non-indian too) go on every year, the Trail of Tears ride.... You guys ever gone on any sections of that? - My horse was on it once, but I have not.

17 posted on 06/25/2003 2:26:15 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog (Not all those who wander are lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
We celebrate plenty of military victories, and battles, almost by definition, are where people get killed.

I look at this as their celebrating a victory, not the deaths of Custer and his men in particular.

Incidentally, among the books I've read on the subject was one (don't remember the name right now) that examined the forensic evidence of the battle. Their seems to be some indication that there were at least a few survivors who managed to escape and evade, but eventually died of wounds or exposure....there were some skeletons found a considerable distance from the actual site of the battle.
18 posted on 06/25/2003 2:28:24 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bicycle thug
No such thing as a sarcasm tag but I meant that statement as sarcasm.
19 posted on 06/25/2003 2:29:33 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kms61
I look at this as their celebrating a victory, not the deaths of Custer and his men in particular.

That's the right answer I was trying to come up with....

20 posted on 06/25/2003 2:32:17 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog (Not all those who wander are lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kms61
Thank you for the additional comments.
21 posted on 06/25/2003 2:32:18 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Scoutmaster
I posess a Springfield .69 caliber Musketoon that was dropped by Chivington's Colorado Cavalry at Glorietta Pass early during the Civil War that is currently on loan to a museum. Chivington was a piece of art.
22 posted on 06/25/2003 3:00:53 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vetvetdoug
Thank you for the clarification. My wife uses my blindness to her sarcasm to use me as a foil/straightman when she wants to do humor laden commentary. So, I well understand this. ;-)
23 posted on 06/25/2003 3:28:10 PM PDT by bicycle thug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I don't make the case that the US has been fair with Indians. I am not quite as convinced as other people that we were in all instances wrong, or that a holocaust level series of events took place. And that does seem to be the prevailing idea the media desires to get across. A very interesting book in that regard is, "The Invented Indian" by (or edited by, I can't recall exactly) James Clinton. You might check it out. While I am not defending every action by the US, IMO I have read enough first-hand accounts to say that the word savage was not applied through racisim alone.
24 posted on 06/25/2003 3:50:28 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots
Thank you. I should read up on the topic more.
25 posted on 06/25/2003 3:57:08 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
We have been there too. It is a very special place. You can almost feel things that happened there.
26 posted on 06/25/2003 4:00:22 PM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots
Clearly there were depredations on both sides. And the aboriginals fought among themselves before the Europeans ever arrived...For example the Sioux were originally woodland dwellers until conflict with the Chippewa forced them onto the Plains.

That said, if we consider American culture/civilization to be superior, then we should hold ourselves to a higher standard. The moral equivalency argument isn't one that I find compelling.

What happened in the Americas wasn't unique...invasion and conquest is a near-universal human theme, and the more technologically advanced culture ALWAYS supplanst the less advanced one. We could have handled the transition better and more ethically, but maybe that's expecting to much of 16th-19th Century humans (or maybe 21st Century humans for that matter).

We weren't the worst--I think it's indisputable that the Spaniards hold the dubious distinction, although the Russians in Alaska gave them a run for their money--but we weren't the best either.

The Indians probably fared somewhat better under British Colonial rule than in the American nation-state that supplanted it, and there was much less conflict in British Canada than on the American Frontier...so much so that it was possible to maintain order on the Canadian Frontier with a paramilitary police force (the North West Mounted Police, which later became the RCMP) rather than an army of conquest and occupation, as was necessary south of the border.

I would guess of all the colonial powers, the Indians probably fared best under the French, who were generally more interested in trade than in settlement.
27 posted on 06/25/2003 4:03:37 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kms61
Killings there were on both sides, yes, but depredations? Read this first hand account from Rachael Pratt, aged 15 when captured by the Comanches in Texas. She describes what happened to her new born baby. " He was about 6 weeks old, when I supposed they thought he was too much trouble, five or 6 sturdy Indian men came where I was suckling my infant; one of them caught it by the throat and choked it till it was black in the face and while doing so the rest of the men were holding me from trying to relieve my child. At length they pulled it from my arms by force, threw it up in the air and let it fall upon the frozen ground until life was, to all appearances, entirely gone.I tried to recover it, and as soon as they saw that it had recovered a little, they treated it as before several times, then they tied a thong around it's neck and threw it into the large hedges of prickly pears, which are 10 or 12 feet high, they would pull it down through the pears... several times , then they tied the end of the rope to their saddles, and would drag it round to me." This is not a rare account, there were others and worse from this book: Mary Donoho, first LAdy of the Santa Fe Trail. Check out the first hand accounts of the first Jesuits among the tribes of the NE ( A Few Acres of Snow is a book that describes some of these). They were tortured in the most terrible ways imaginable, by men, women and children. I guess one could make the arguement that the destruction of their cultures were equally henious, and perhaps they were, but in all my reading of American history, I have yet to read an account of pure torture, often done apparently for the pure enjoyment of it, done to Indians by whites.Killings, yes, torture, no. Yet unfortunate as it may be, there are lots of such accounts of such treatment to settlers by Indians. IMO, this was a clash of cultures between which there could be no reconciliation.
28 posted on 06/25/2003 4:39:16 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots
Read the accounts of the Sand Creek Massacre. Chivington's men went on an orgy of butchery that would have made the SS cringe. Depredations on Indians by whites? Absolutely and in spades.

"Ours" was a civilized, Christian culture, or at least we like to think so. We should have done better.
29 posted on 06/25/2003 4:43:23 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Doesn't matter - if you ain't cav you still ain't shit.
30 posted on 06/25/2003 4:51:21 PM PDT by satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kms61
If you know of such accounts, I'd like a reference, because they may well exist. I haven't read everything yet, she said modestly, just most of it. Now I have to go for the evening, unfortunately, but it's been fun.
31 posted on 06/25/2003 4:52:37 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kms61
I don't think that counts as equavlent, because it was a battle, and stuff happens in war. I'm talking about just for fun, torture.
32 posted on 06/25/2003 4:54:47 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: kms61
***Try Washita, Sand Creek, and the aforementioned Wounded Knee. The United States did not
cover itself with glory in dealing with the aboriginal population of North America. No other
way to spin it. ***


Read the book MASSACRES OF THE MOUNTAINS by J. P. DUNN JR.
written around 1888.

Another good one is MY LIFE ON THE PLAINS BY G. A. CUSTER

And THE INDIAN WARS OF 1864 by Captain Eugene Ware.

Also THE SAVAGE YEARS An anthology edited by Shepard Rifkin.

You will never think of the Indians as "sweet little red skinned darlins" again.

The Little Big Horn is in CROW indian territory. The CROWS fought along side the 7th Cavalry. The Sioux, Cheyennes and Arapaho were INVADERS into CROW Land.
Will this re-enactment have the CROWS defeated by the Sioux and Chyennes again?
33 posted on 06/25/2003 4:55:53 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (If Custer had won the day would it be called another MASSACRE?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything about "sweet little red skinned darlins." I'm fully aware of what went on between the Indians and the whites, as I've said in other posts.

The Indians were no saints. You seem to be under the illusion that the whites were. That's where we part company.
34 posted on 06/25/2003 5:01:51 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots
Sand Creek was no battle. It was an attack on a camp of Cheyenne who were believed that they were under a truce. The death toll was 25 Indian men, and 98 women and children, many of whom were mutilated. There were 9 casualties on the militia side, most caused by friendly fire. That doesn't sound like a battle to me.

Links to follow later. I'll be away for a while.
35 posted on 06/25/2003 5:05:13 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: kms61
***Read the accounts of the Sand Creek Massacre.******


I have. What the Soldiers found in the camp of these "innocent Indians" will interest you.
A blanket fringed with the scalps of white women.
Scalps of men and boys so fresh they had not been tanned or streached on hoops yet.

"...What says the dust of the two hundred and forty and eight men, women, ranchers, emigrants, herders, and soldiers, who lost their lives at the hands of these Indians? Peaceble? Now we are peaceably disposed, but decline giving such testimonials of our own peaceful proclivities, and I say here as I said in my own town, in the Quaker country of Clinton, State of OHIO, one night last week, I STAND BY SAND CREEK!"
J. M. CHIVINGTON 1883

"Colonel Chivington's speech was received with an applause from every pioneer which indicated that they, to a man, heartily approved of the course of the colonel twenty years ago, in the famous affair in which many of them took part, and the man who applied the scalpel to the ulcer which bid fair to destroy the life of the new colony, in those critical times, was a doubt the hero of the hour."
---ROCKEY MOUNTAIN NEWS 1883
36 posted on 06/25/2003 5:25:25 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
I just finished "Son of the Morning Star", quite a history lesson...
37 posted on 06/25/2003 5:29:23 PM PDT by in the Arena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Irrelevant even if true, which is doubtful. Your source is hardly a credible one. Nevertheless, attacking under a flag of truce, and massacring women and children was a criminal act. Not unlike Waco.

I never thought I would run across anyone who actually defended the mass murderer Chivington. May he burn in Hell.
38 posted on 06/25/2003 6:08:51 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kms61
The death toll was 25 Indian men, and 98 women and children

And those missing men were down at the sports bar shooting pool? Denver and surrounds were being bloodied by raids. Unspeakably vicious raids. Women and children. At least some raiders had been traced to the Sand Creek camp. Those scalps were fresh.

Chivington's men were scum and they committed atrocities. They cut off womens' breasts for coin purses. They were barbaric but it didn't happen in a vacuum.

39 posted on 06/25/2003 6:56:10 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: kms61
***Irrelevant even if true, which is doubtful. ***


Are you saying fresh scalps in a "peaceful" Indian camp are irrelevant?
I suppose when Custer found slaughtered settlers and followed their murderer's tracks in the snow back to the Washita camp (where he witnessed a white captive child taken in the raids by these "peaceful" indians disemboweled by a squaw) is irrelivant also!

When Captain Ware went west in the spring 1864 he found the plains at peace. He was informed by older soldiers that the Indians would go back on the warpath when the grass was tall enough to support a war pony! They did.


The soldiers later cursed Chivington because he padded the number of Indian dead at Sand Creek. They hoped he had killed more!

You doubt this evidence?
Report on the Conduct of the War 1864-65 pt 3.
Report of 1867 on Condition of Indian Tribes.
Senate Document No. 26, 1866-67
Documents from Interior Department concerning Custer's Fight on the Washita. Sen. Doc. No 13, 1868-69.
Documents from War DEpartment concerning Custer's Fight on the Washita. Sen Doc No. 18, 1868-69.

You have been getting your history from too much Hollywood trash like,
TOMAHAWK
SOLDIER BLUE
LITTLE BIG MAN.
40 posted on 06/25/2003 6:57:06 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kms61
The Indians probably fared somewhat better under British Colonial rule than in the American nation-state that supplanted it,

Rummel, in Death by Government, puts the Indian death toll for the period from the Constitution to the end of the Indian wars at about 3000. I don't see any evidence to increase that number. That is less than 30 per year, not exactly evidence of genocide. Some of those deaths were on purely punative missions or in clearly defensive roles.

In the middle of this period the United States took a time out and killed 600,000 of our own. We had the capacity to obliterate any and all Indian tribes at any time we chose to do so. We did not. Read the Eastern newspapers of the time. The Indians had very powerful defenders and the sympathetic ear of the people.

41 posted on 06/25/2003 7:08:40 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kms61
attacking under a flag of truce, and massacring women and children was a criminal act

And so is hiding behind a flag of truce. We just lost some good folks when the Iraqis did that. An Indian camp was more of a base than a city. People were always coming and going to hunt, to visit, to raid. Some of those in the Sand Creek camp had just come from butchering whites on the Eastern Slope.

I spent some time in the area when I was younger and mothers would command obedience from their children by threatening to "skin them alive". That was a holdover from the deep fears of the settlement days.

42 posted on 06/25/2003 7:31:29 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK
Did I ever say it did? My point is we were supposed to be the civilized ones. We didn't always act like it.
43 posted on 06/25/2003 7:54:10 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
It IS irrelevant in that IF, and I stress IF, what you say is true, it did not excuse the murder of noncombatant women and children. The fact that you apparently are trying to excuse those actions speaks volumes about your character.

We have nothing further to discuss. I don't conduct dialogue with poltroons.
44 posted on 06/25/2003 7:57:10 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK
I've heard that saying too and I grew up nowhere near the site of any Indian massacres.

Some of y'all are playing a moral equivalency game here. "They did it, so that excuses our side doing it." I'm not accusing anybody of being a Democrat, but....
45 posted on 06/25/2003 7:59:46 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: kms61
No, I'm not doing the moral equivalancy thingie. Troopers after the Civil War were by and large the worst of the worst and it showed. Chivington's men weren't even up to that level. Many were recruited from the bars and shantytowns of Denver. They DID have a right to be outraged at what the Indians were doing around Denver. Scum + outrage = atrocity.

The nation was aghast at what happened at Sand Creek. I think that the broad reaction was a better reflection of the state the country's morals than what a few drunken bums did at Sand Creek.

46 posted on 06/25/2003 8:09:30 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK
Wasn't directed at you in particular, just some of the posts in general on this thread.
47 posted on 06/25/2003 8:16:10 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kms61
My point is that the U.S. policy toward the Indians was by and large humane. The Eastern press was quick to point out any transgressions on the part of the whites. They served as an unrelenting conscience for our dealings.

We could not tolerate the continuation of these barbaric stone age cultures. The murders had to be stopped. We did a fair job, at least in concept, of providing for them. The Reservations were not designed to keep the Indians in, they were designed to keep whites out. There were broken promises and outright crookedness in some cases but the policy was in the right direction.

I can promise the Greenies that the Clinton created National Monuments will be sancrosect as long as the grass shall grow . . .

48 posted on 06/25/2003 8:40:41 PM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Scoutmaster
I agree. An ugly Chapter in American History. On the one hand, you have the Indians who were herded on ever-shrinking Reservations and lied to again and again. Every time we discovered gold on a Reservation, we took another piece and crammed the population into the smaller remainder. I have yet to visit a Reservation I can say is unequivocally "livable." Certainly those in the West are not.

Then again, the response of the Indians was to slaughter entire wagon trains of pioneers with such savagery, using live prisoners for target practice, or butchering the men while alive, flaying them etc. and gang raping the women until they died from loss of blood.

The operative philosophy of the US Govt at the time was "the only good Indian is a dead Indian." To some extent, they brought it on themselves early in our history. There were friedly tribes and warring tribes. The warring tribes sometimes sacked entire small communities. Their philosophy requiring that they kill 10 enemy for every brave lost in battle.

Well, the Judeo-Christian Western society developed to generally sparing non-combatants, women and children. The warring tribes sometimes sacked entire small communities -- their philosophy requiring that they kill 10 enemy for every brave lost in battle. It didn't take too many instances of seeing multiple massacres of women and children to convince the general public that Indians were "savages" (so called because they weren't baptized Christians) and their fate was sealed with a decision to mass exterminate all members of the warring tribes.

I remind my liberal friends of these good old days when they tell me modern Americans are so uncivilized. I agree, but only with respect to the 40 million aborted (murdered) babies since 1970.

49 posted on 06/25/2003 8:59:38 PM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MARTIAL MONK
Agree somewhat in that it was a fait accompli...it's the way of the human race, like it or not.

It WAS, however, naked aggression by today's standards. The Trail of Tears in particular was nothing more than a land grab at gunpoint, in defiance of a Supreme Court ruling, no less. And the Southern tribes were far from stone age or barbaric. They were on a technological level not much different than the whites, and many worshiped the Christian God.

It's to be remembered as well that Custer's campaign, the article on which started this thread, was a direct result of a broken treaty over the Black Hills.

It's part of our history....and it's how this country got to where it is today. But there are a lot of things that weren't very noble about how it all happened. Some people on FR apparently have a hard time admitting even that.

There may be a bit too much revisionism and political correctness going on WRT the way the Indians lived. I think that's a shame, because they're much more interesting as real people than as cardboard cutouts. BUT, there's also a fair amount of political correctness coming from the other side...an unwillingness to face up to some of the sordidness which the whites perpetrated. We've seen a bit of that on this thread tonight...along with some some just plain mean spirited ignorance.
50 posted on 06/25/2003 9:01:05 PM PDT by kms61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson