First off, it ain't my treaty. If it had been my place to treat with native tribes, they'd have been temporary armistices, not treaties. And the wars would have been resumed ASAP. If you fight a war, you win it by killing your enemy or making him integrate with your own way of life, not signing a peace treaty with him and promising to preserve his way of life. If it were my place to make a treaty, you wouldn't be suing or bitching about the white man, because your relatives would be fertilizing a field somewhere. Nothing personal. I just don't like America spilling blood fighting a war and then leaving the hassle of amalgamation or integration to be dealt with later. Either integrate or sow the f'in land with salt, but end a war with the war settled permanently.
Like, "as long as the rivers flow and as long as the grasses grow." Last time I looked they were still growing and flowing. We have your signature on the papers. The courts know this too and that is why the Indians win these law suits all the time. Indians have learned how to play the lawyer game.
But that is different from what you said--which is that an historic agreement between the U.S. and a party under duress shouldn't be honored in today's courts. I agree 100% that the written treaties that the U.S. made with Injun tribes should be honored, 100%. But I'm not about to agree that U.S. courts should set aside treaties on the grounds that they were made under duress. Treaties aren't contracts. They are international agreements. If past treaties are allowed to abridged on the basis of duress, then Germany can rearm and the Japanese can go back to venerating their emperor as a God.
Now, that being all said and done. Come on down to our Casino and bring lots of money.
As soon as you start selling top-grade guns and quality drugs, and renting clean hookers. Then I'm not only going to bring lots of money, I'll see if I can get a partner and buy a cathouse on the res myself, since the customers are guaranteed. :^)
It's your treaty like the Constitution is your constitution. Nobody made provision for the "palefaces" to put it to a vote every generation or it expires.
I was wondering how long it would take an "Injun" to point out a certain irony in Kelo. But I never thought it would happen first on FR, rather than in the MSM.