Mexicans have every right to be in California, and some other states

Howdy YALL - nobody but us normal lookin American boys and republicans and christains belongs in this country, ONLY. nobody else needs to be heer, so git out so we can have moor spaces for are own normal people who are ONLY us christains and us republicans, an NOBODY else belongs heer.dont mess wit Texas, arizonea , republicans, and christains.. i'll tell you what we no whats best for america. git-r-done i'll tell you what. YEE-HAW i say COWBOY UP.

[edit on 10-5-2010 by lemonfresh]

Originally posted by DogsDogsDogs
reply to post by oshdra

 

If I am hearing you correctly you are saying that the illegal migrants who come here are entitled to come into the US because we are perceived as "rich". Not that we are rich by American standards, we are just richer than the poor migrants. Sadly, this is a familiar concept for me & part of the basis for my opposition.

No, i don't think any inmigrant is 'entitled'. What I mean is that if you are hungry you are going to go whatever you can to get food. It may be illegal for you to get food but if you have no other choice then what? you should left yourself die? Its not that illegals have any 'special right' is that you are not acknowledging the full problem if you just stay on the legal side of the issue.

I've been on the wrong side of that attitude many times. Most recently, we worked hard for 4 years, saving the money to replace our fence & make it 8 feet instead of 6 because people were throwing trash & remains of fast food into our yard. In less than 2 weeks, our fence had graffiti all over it. The city painted it to cover up the graffiti (which looks like crap), but it just keeps on getting spray painted. I guess it's okay to destroy our property because we managed to get something the kids in the housing project a few blocks away didn't want to work for.

I have a great dislike for graffiti, I always hate when i found my car with something less (like a mirror or the radio). I am not saying that USA has to support that kind of behavior. But now, lets remember how many dictators the USA has supported (just from the top of my mind): Batista in Cuba, Pinochet in Chile, Diaz in Mexico.... You can really expect to live in a nice neighbourhood when you have been in such a bad company. Who doesn't want to be left alone and to everybody mind their own business??? but it turns out that all we live in the same boat, so maybe mexican problems are not so just mexican problems, because in the globalized world it becomes evident all we are interrelated.

]This is the problem. That Mexicans think they have a right to steal from anyone they perceive as rich, just because they are poor.

I dont think so. When you are really hungry you don't mind what is legal. Law has fail to you. You go and do whatever you can to survive. Its not a matter that some people feels with the right to do the wrong, is that these people is struggling to survive. And yes, sometimes people have already all they need, but they don't have any idea how to make a better living. I am not saying that prevents them to be law enforced, I am saying that IMHO you are not understanding the real nature of the problem.

This is also why, once they come here, they break the law again & again. We have Mexicans who are citizens- from several generations of Americans, who have this same attitude & do these things.

You know what would be great?? That american people inspired this inmigrants into how to do a great country, and the importance of defend your own nation, so they can return to their home a build a better world.

You talk about the Bible, but you ignore the commandment You must not steal. It is a sin. It is wrong. You wouldn't like it if someone stole what you have.

Or maybe you are forgetting what bible says about love for the others?

Or maybe that's what life is for you. To you, it's normal. Nobody wants neighbors like that. We don't steal from each other here.

No??? what about the FED??? what about the 1848 war? Here you are trying to blame on the virtual me a certain defect so you can have peace in your soul and say : "Yes, those are a bunch of bad guys that deserve to burn in hell" dont you?. But the reality is that mexicans are people just like americans, and i have see that both are capable of noble and bad things, so do not feel that special. Dont deceive yourself.

We don't feel entitled to damage another person's things because we are jealous or bitter that we don't have the same things. In America, that is WRONG.

I want to think that in USA there is a fair distribution of richness, but in the world, there isn't. The world is bitter. If the IMF makes a loan that become such a burden that the borrower have no opportunity to repay, then, you may say they are lazy but the world is begining to suspect they are being stealed.
Its not the cars, nor the fancy houses, its the food, its the oppression, its the ignorance.

I'll tell you what. People here, at least- and probably in the other border states and everywhere, are sick & tired of having things stolen from them and destroyed. Things they worked HARD for. Many people have guns now to protect their property because people with the attitude you describe break into people's homes at night while they're sleeping. It's called "home invasion" and some of us have no peace because of it.

Well, if people is trying to enter your home at night, then I agree, you need a gun, you have the right to defend yourself, and I totally understand your feelings. But I have to say the issue is not that simple, from my point of view, both USA and Mexican citizens are being used and manipulated, you may keep saying that the illegals are the problem but you will end with a big circle of violence. Maybe we can not solve such a big problem, but man: you can turn into hate or try to find the truth. The real fight is in the heart of every man.

You go ahead & try to take what you believe you are entitled to. We will have something for you, but I don't think it will be what you want. It is your choice.

%), you know?? I can hear Lord Sidius (the Stars Wars emperor) saying: Yess! Yess!! I can feel your anger, I can feel your hate! Welcome to the Dark Side!
Lucky for me, I am not hungry. I do like my life. I don't have to steal. The other day I returned like a hundred box that somebody gave me by mistake. I am telling you, you are not seeing the big picture.

Whether you meant to or not, you have just explained why people in the US don't want you here. You just can't get along.
[edit on 10-5-2010 by DogsDogsDogs]

And I think that you have just the typical behaviour of the person that just hear what it want to hear. Does USA is all innocence?? come on!!

Originally posted by semperfoo

Here is some history for you. California and Texas were a part of the spanish empire. After Mexico fought against spain for its independence, it simply claimed those territories as spoils of war.

Well, this link tells a diferent history. As in this map


Those territories were part of the New Spain.

Mexico never controlled these areas either. They were self governed, self appointed etc. Texas decided to fight for its own independence away from Mexico for this very reason.

I think previous post gave much better arguments for Texas independence.

They win their independence from Mexico and decide to join the Union. Mexico does not like this, and decides to go to war with the US. The US kicks mexicos ass, and takes by force California and texas along with the American south west by force, essentially doing what Mexico did to the Spanish (spoils of war). We also went on to buy California after the Mexican American war was over. Also see Gadsden purchase.

So did California was taken by force or by purshase??

People like you OP are the true morons of history. Do not speak of things
you know nothing of. If the US "stole" land from Mexico, then Mexico stole land from Spain. Get over it.

kthxbye

[edit on 083131p://0205pm by semperfoo]

By the same logic we can also say that Brasil stole their land from Portugal, and that USA stole their land from the British empire, you de facto erased the spirit of every independence war.

"Morons of history" as if all history wasn't writed under the subjetivity of the writers. You either showed too much knowledge about the subject.

Still I keep my argument. The discussion is somewhat sad. The scars are real. Don't you think it would be better to do something so USA and Mexico become better neighbours?

Improve love in the world.

Originally posted by lemonfresh
Howdy YALL - nobody but us normal lookin American boys and republicans and christains belongs in this country, ONLY. nobody else needs to be heer,

ONLY "Normal lookin American boys"?? It will be a very sad place with no girls around.

Also, yours is not a very christian proposition (I suppouse by "christains" you mean a follower of Jesus Christ, right?). Tell me, where does the love is in your statement?

reply to post by oshdra


I feel for you, Oshdra, I really do. It's horrible that the lifestyle you describe is acceptable in Mexico. It is tragic. It is not acceptable in the United States. People are upset that the illegals bring that lifestyle with them when they come. Why come here if it will be just the same? It is up to YOU to make your life better- to each of us. No one can do that for you. It doesn't work. The majority of us will not live that way.
I didn't say Mexicans should "burn in hell". I implied- but I should have said more simply, that too many Mexicans are antisocial. There is a reputation based on experience. Y'All have a similar idea there, I'm sure. It's very important. Some people- of ANY nationality- INCLUDING WHITE, don't care enough- DON'T RESPECT THEMSELVES ENOUGH, to try to behave in socially acceptable ways. If Americans or French or whatever came to Mexico & did things that offended you- laughed & sang loudly at a funeral or something, or broke your dishes when they came to your house, TODO DEL TIEMPO, what would you expect them to do? Especially after you told them but they kept on? You wouldn't want them or anyone like them to come back, right? Even if it was "just the way they were". Would you learn to just accept it?

It is obvious to me that God DIDN'T INTEND for us to be a "global community". Otherwise, there would be one continuous continent & we would all speak the same language. Read the story in the Bible about the tower of Babel. A "global community" is just a crazy, unrealistic notion that got out of hand. It is a fantasy. Impossible. It isn't as if people of a country in North America, for example, could go back & forth easily to Africa or Japan or whatever & those people could come here. How would they do that- grow wings & fly? It is about that logical. It isn't practical.

People who come into this country illegally are not welcome here. People who simply take whatever they want- FOR ANY REASON, are not welcome here. We have had enough of antisocial behavior out of ANYONE- of ANY nationally. It adds insult to injury when it is someone who isn't supposed to even be here according to the laws of our state & our country & our traditions. That will not change even if the Federal law is changed. If someone has made you believe otherwise, they lied to you. I'm sorry even if I am not the one who lied to you. I'm sure you understand "No, you can't".
If a person immigrates through legal channels, it is completely different because it shows they DO CARE about following the laws of the US, not the "law of the jungle".

I don't think you comprehend what I am saying, so I'm going to stop trying to communicate with you. My Spanish isn't good enough to even try or I would try.
Maybe talk to your priest or minister or something. Maybe they can explain.
Good Luck to you. Be Blessed.




[edit on 11-5-2010 by DogsDogsDogs]

Originally posted by DogsDogsDogs
reply to post by oshdra

 

I feel for you, Oshdra, I really do. It's horrible that the lifestyle you describe is acceptable in Mexico. It is tragic. It is not acceptable in the United States.

It is not acceptable in Mexico. What I mean was that people in Mexico is also very upset with the criminals and the people that do not respect law. We do not like that either. So when we found something is mission in our car, we go to police, make a declaration, and be sad because its very difficult for something else to happen. BUT WHAT MAKES YOU THINK MEXICO FIND THIS ACCEPTABLE???? of course Mexico does not.

But I will insist in my point again: do you really expect for those people to choose to die?
I do not support what they do, but I do not deceive myself: they have very few options. I do not take it personal, I do not hate, I follow law because I believe in it, and just like you, I will do whatever is necessary to protect my family from them. Your focus is on illegals, in Mexico the focus is on the bad government, but it the end, the core of the problem is much more than that.

People are upset that the illegals bring that lifestyle with them when they come.

Yes, I totally understand that.They are not very educated and you obviously want them to go away. And they feel desperate and when somebody told them about some crazy idea like 'Aztlan' they totally buy it.
So, you can act 'traditionally': build a wall, and shot them from there, and they also traditionally will hate you and look for some way to fire back. OR we may be more evolved, learn from the past and do something different this time.

It is up to YOU to make your life better- to each of us.

I agree! now, I am here trying to bring a message of forgiveness and solidarity with the people less lucky than us, what are you doing?

too many Mexicans are antisocial.

You know? the typical mexican loves parties and I have hear they are famous for that. Maybe is the fear for be in a place where they know they are not very welcome. (And I am sure you are thinking: then why do they come?? and the answer: because they are hungry).

Even if it was "just the way they were". Would you learn to just accept it?

I understand that the concept of 'respect' is very important. It was the famous mexican President Benito Juarez the one who said:“Among individuals as among nations, the respect to other people's rights is peace”. And obviously many immigrants are miserably failing at that.
The problem is this people exist, you do not want them, Mexico does not know what to do with them. Nobody wants them. What do you expect for them to do? what will you do in their situation? (and do not forget they don't have your knowledge or resources).

It is obvious to me that God DIDN'T INTEND for us to be a "global community". Otherwise, there would be one continuous continent & we would all speak the same language.

I have a very different opinion. I even wrote an essay on this subject. To Have different languages is an advantage because when you speak more than one language your brain learn to think different and so you have more chances to overcome your own paradigms.
Also, you are very arrogant to affirm you Know God's intentions and ways, those are a mystery. Using your logic I can say: "as God allow illegal immigrants to be, then its evident that he wants you to learn to deal with them (and that does not include shot them, because we all know God is love)".

Read the story in the Bible about the tower of Babel. A "global community" is just a crazy, unrealistic notion that got out of hand. It is a fantasy. Impossible.

It is impossible but just because you think is impossible. The problem with Babel is that those people were so arrogant they though they could defy God. And speaking of Babel, take a look to this link. Rumor goes that arrogant people is still here trying to defy God, and I think upsetting you with annoying immigrant is a way of do it.

People who come into this country illegally are not welcome here. People who simply take whatever they want- FOR ANY REASON, are not welcome here. We have had enough of antisocial behavior out of ANYONE- of ANY nationally.

You know? you have made that very, very clear. And I have state that I understand and agree with you. But I am still waiting for you to answer my points.

I don't think you comprehend what I am saying

I clearly understand you. I have say many times that I see your points.

so I'm going to stop trying to communicate with you.

Well, you have not begin to address my points so the communication has not be very effective.

My Spanish isn't good enough to even try or I would try.

You have a very nice english, so you do not need to worry for that.

Maybe talk to your priest or minister or something. Maybe they can explain.

I am quite sure one of the main messages of Jesus Christ is about love and forgiveness, are you sure you are getting that?

Good Luck to you. Be Blessed.
[edit on 11-5-2010 by DogsDogsDogs]

Come on! this is just getting interesting and I really would like you to address my points. Stop looking for reasons to say that in Mexico life is horrible because all people is uneducated.

I think your main decision is this: love? or hate?; what does the bible says about that??

I have made no secret of my religious beliefs> an exploitable "vulnerability" to get a toe in the door

You have an incredible inconsistency in your grammar & articulation> hmmm

Your "points" are utterly invalid, AFAIC & you are dodging & weaving in this post.
> waste of time. I have nothing more to say

I have read Getting To Yes and I am reading Leading Through Conflict now. Best of luck in your efforts. If I were your boss, I'd say you need more practice first.

Originally posted by oshdra
Well, this link tells a diferent history. As in this map

Even the link to the map states "New Spain". Spain controlled all that land, as well as it controlled Mexico.

Those territories were part of the New Spain.

Correct, as in the spanish empire.

I think previous post gave much better arguments for Texas independence.

Self governance eludes to self sustainability. These "states" essentially functioned on their own, even after Mexico won its independence from Spain.

So did California was taken by force or by purshase??

Spoils of war mate (just like Mexico did after they won their independence from spain). After the annexation of Texas (recall they won their independence from Mexico) Mexico was pissed. They declared war on the United States, which they end up losing, in which the US turns around and ends up taking California (spoils of war). At least the US had the dignity to pay Mexico for California.

By the same logic we can also say that Brasil stole their land from Portugal, and that USA stole their land from the British empire, you de facto erased the spirit of every independence war.

Exactly, someone (everyone) has "stolen" land from someone. What makes this issue of illegals in the US today is the fact that they drain funds from social programs that are in place for LEGAL citizens. Economically, it becomes a drain on the system. It does not benefit the collective good of this nation.

Still I keep my argument. The discussion is somewhat sad. The scars are real. Don't you think it would be better to do something so USA and Mexico become better neighbours?

People need to get over it. No one living today was alive when all this took place. This does not effect anyone living today. The "scar" is one of superficiality. It is an issue that doesn't even really exist, accept in the deluded minds of people who are on the outter fringe of society. These people typically do not know history, but instead spouse propaganda while disregarding the facts to further a much maligned agenda.

La Raza and other fringe groups do not have a legit leg to stand when it comes to the argument of "their stolen land".




[edit on 113131p://3705pm by semperfoo]

Originally posted by DogsDogsDogs
I have made no secret of my religious beliefs> an exploitable "vulnerability" to get a toe in the door

Isn't it curious you consider it a vulnerability? I have no problems to discuss my own beliefs, and if something I think is proved wrong I am more than willing to change my mind.

You have an incredible inconsistency in your grammar & articulation> hmmm

Yes I have. Help me!

Your "points" are utterly invalid

Why?
From my point of view is not that they are invalid, is that you just do not believe you may be wrong.

AFAIC & you are dodging & weaving in this post.
> waste of time. I have nothing more to say

Dodging? Let me see, for all I have to say your only answer was: "Your points are utterly invalid". For your points I patiently addressed every one of them: your need for respect, your need for security, your frustration, etc, etc. I acknowledge them as real and tried to say that the things are more complex than that.

I have read Getting To Yes and I am reading Leading Through Conflict now. Best of luck in your efforts. If I were your boss, I'd say you need more practice first.

Thanks for your words. Hope you keep a good spirit.

[edit on 12-5-2010 by oshdra]

Originally posted by semperfoo

Still I keep my argument. The discussion is somewhat sad. The scars are real. Don't you think it would be better to do something so USA and Mexico become better neighbours?

People need to get over it.

Sure! but as I was saying, this subject has a politic agenda, so do not expect it to be forget just like that.

No one living today was alive when all this took place. This does not effect anyone living today.

Well, also there is nobody around from when the dinosaours got extint, but thanks to that event the mamals were able to evolve and thanks to that, we are here.
You know? you just got me the idea, lets write a novel in a world were Mexico didnt lose those territories. It will be a great imagination exercise. Think about it, for the good and for the bad, it would be a very different world.

The "scar" is one of superficiality. It is an issue that doesn't even really exist, accept in the deluded minds of people who are on the outter fringe of society. These people typically do not know history, but instead spouse propaganda while disregarding the facts to further a much maligned agenda.

I agree, history can be and is manipulated. As I was saying, in Mexico this is a very "real" scar, because is a topic deep in the culture. We can debate if the territory transfer was fair or not but in the end, it does not really matter. What matter is what people has on its mind, and I am telling you that this is a topic quite actual in Mexico.

Now, what makes you think that the history you know is THE REAL history?, as you just accepted history is manipulated so, in the end, the "proves" we may get are not 100% conclusive.

La Raza and other fringe groups do not have a legit leg to stand when it comes to the argument of "their stolen land".
[edit on 113131p://3705pm by semperfoo]

As far as popular Mexico knows, Santa Anna was a traitor, he was the commander in chief and he was the one that made it easy for General Scott to do a successful invasion, he sold the national territory for his personal benefit. All Mexico learns that in elementary school.

So, i do not think there is any chance to change the mind of all those fringe groups.
From their point of view, you are the one that wish to confuse them.

From my point of view, your conclusion is just too convenient. The New Spain was a Viceroyship, while its "states" were somewhat independent, they all were responsability of one person: the Viceroy. And the viceroy was defeated, so all the territores were free and under one government, all divisions came later in Mexico and Southamerica.
The issue is just imaginary? make that clear to Mexico government so they can correct the text books. I don't think your idea is gonna solve the problem, you do not even acknowledge it!, you just label it as unreal!, this is not a bizantine problem. Sure, the immigration factor has made it more popular, but ignoring its emotional side is going to make it bigger.

www.youtube.com...

Using religion in the imposition of martial law

Originally posted by oshdra
I agree, history can be and is manipulated. As I was saying, in Mexico this is a very "real" scar, because is a topic deep in the culture. We can debate if the territory transfer was fair or not but in the end, it does not really matter. What matter is what people has on its mind, and I am telling you that this is a topic quite actual in Mexico.
Now, what makes you think that the history you know is THE REAL history?, as you just accepted history is manipulated so, in the end, the "proves" we may get are not 100% conclusive.

I am not sure how to continue with you, if all you are going to do is disregard history because it does not favor your view.

As far as popular Mexico knows, Santa Anna was a traitor, he was the commander in chief and he was the one that made it easy for General Scott to do a successful invasion, he sold the national territory for his personal benefit. All Mexico learns that in elementary school.

Labeling someone as a traitor is a serious charge. California economically back then was not nearly as important as Texas was. Additionally, this totally overlooks the fact that Mexico was imbursed, even after they tucked tail and ran. This hardly qualifies as the US stealing anything (when they rightfully could have).

So, i do not think there is any chance to change the mind of all those fringe groups.

No...fortunatly, however, this small minority isn't taken that seriously to begin with.

From their point of view, you are the one that wish to confuse them.

Whats that saying? "Ignorance is bliss."

From my point of view, your conclusion is just too convenient.

I'm sure it is...to you. But to any rational person, it is completely logical.

The New Spain was a Viceroyship, while its "states" were somewhat independent, they all were responsability of one person: the Viceroy. And the viceroy was defeated, so all the territores were free and under one government, all divisions came later in Mexico and Southamerica.

The "New Spain" was a colony from the Spanish Empire. Much like the American colonies were to the british empire. All decisions were based on the interest of Spain. As I said, Mexico never controlled the southwest territories of todays US. It was after they gained their independence from spain, that they simply took these states as spoils of war.

The issue is just imaginary? make that clear to Mexico government so they can correct the text books.

Mexico has far more pressing issues they need to deal with, than to worry about what happened back in the 1850's.

I don't think your idea is gonna solve the problem, you do not even acknowledge it!, you just label it as unreal!, this is not a bizantine problem. Sure, the immigration factor has made it more popular, but ignoring its emotional side is going to make it bigger.

Im not trying to solve what you percieve as a "problem". Just simply attempting to deny ignorance on the subject.



[edit on 103131p://3305am by semperfoo]

Originally posted by semperfoo
I am not sure how to continue with you, if all you are going to do is disregard history because it does not favor your view.

What makes you so sure you are not the one doing just that? Also, you are not acknowledging what I am trying to say: Real history may be one thing, but you can not ignore what is on people minds, even if people minds are just full of lies.

You are seeing that people is quite sure about ideas you "know" are lies, but what are you doing to be sure that what you "know" are not the lies of the side that won? Is common knowledge that the victorious side will just say great things about itself and wrote them on stone.

Labeling someone as a traitor is a serious charge.

Yes is quite serious and yes he was, Mexico history is full of them.

California economically back then was not nearly as important as Texas was.
Additionally, this totally overlooks the fact that Mexico was imbursed, even after they tucked tail and ran. This hardly qualifies as the US stealing anything (when they rightfully could have).

They rightfully could have???? are you just legalizing stealing?? Are you saying that the law between nations must be jungle law??

Mexico was (as usual) in economic problems, but what do you mean with "tucked tail and ran"?? that Mexico didn't really care to present battle?? In Mexico city, there is a museum dedicated to the invasions, on its time it was one of the last defending points of the country, after defeating it the american general demanded to surrender all ammunition yet in store, General Anaya gave his famous answer: "if there were any ammo left, you would not be here", and how is that G. Anaya was left without ammo??: Santa Anna orders. He was a traitor.

No...fortunatly, however, this small minority isn't taken that seriously to begin with.

Fortunatetly, But let me remind you this is a subject in elementary school, so what do you think most kids feel about it?

From their point of view, you are the one that wish to confuse them.

Whats that saying? "Ignorance is bliss."

Mmm, do not take it wrong but isn't your position justifying your right to steal?
You have took your time to state that:

-North West territories were not really part of Mexico
-Mexico do not really need them
-Mexico was willing to sell them
-That the event is ancient and so we must not care about it

how is that Mexico was willing to sell them just after losing a war with the buyer? how is it possible to be 'history morons' if we must not care for ancient events? If those territories were so useless, why to fight a war for them?

From my point of view, your conclusion is just too convenient.

I'm sure it is...to you. But to any rational person, it is completely logical.

Fallacies sound logical but they are not. I am also able to declare "ALL I AM SAYING IS TRUE", but that do not mean all I say is true. So, you declare "all I have stated is logical", but that does not mean is logical, it only means you want yours readers to think it is. Now please take note that for the very same fact I just prove you used a fallacy I am able to say that your way of reasoning is not quite logical.

The "New Spain" was a colony from the Spanish Empire. Much like the American colonies were to the british empire. All decisions were based on the interest of Spain. As I said, Mexico never controlled the southwest territories of todays US. It was after they gained their independence from spain, that they simply took these states as spoils of war.

Mexico never controlled them?? Mexico didn't even exist before the independence war, previously we have the Anahuac alliance that controlled the central part of today Mexico and many other nations and tribes. New Spain was much more that the ancient borders of prehispanic times.

Please! Tell me, when the independence war was won, which were the territories that gained its freedom from Spain?? have you read some document about this? I mean, the original idea was to prevent the Full New Spain to be under the control of France (Napoleon invaded Spain in those days), not just Mexico city. And if the New Spain was a single unity, why do you think some of the territories were spoils? Mexico didn't even had the problems that led the Great Colombia to break into three different nations.

The issue is just imaginary? make that clear to Mexico government so they can correct the text books.

Mexico has far more pressing issues they need to deal with, than to worry about what happened back in the 1850's.

Sure!, like its citizens need for emigration. But as I was saying, this is still a scare in the popular culture.

Im not trying to solve what you percieve as a "problem". Just simply attempting to deny ignorance on the subject.
[edit on 103131p://3305am by semperfoo]

Well, this thread was created, there are crazy people with their 'aztlan' ideas, is a subject in elementary history books... With all the immigration problems it may just be an idea biting people's souls.
I am also trying to deny ignorance.

Originally posted by oshdra
What makes you so sure you are not the one doing just that?

You're saying anything right now..stop.

Also, you are not acknowledging what I am trying to say: Real history may be one thing, but you can not ignore what is on people minds, even if people minds are just full of lies.

It doesn't matter. I don't care what is on the mind o the ignorant. They've made up their minds. Im not going to change that. I will however educate those who need it.

You are seeing that people is quite sure about ideas you "know" are lies, but what are you doing to be sure that what you "know" are not the lies of the side that won? Is common knowledge that the victorious side will just say great things about itself and wrote them on stone.

Quit repeating yourself, I know what you are saying... Disregard history because it "may" be a lie. This notion in this case is preposterous.

They rightfully could have???? are you just legalizing stealing??

It has been done countless times in histories past. The Roman Empire, British Empire, Persian Empire...its been done ever since man walked outta the cave to hunt.

Mexico was (as usual) in economic problems, but what do you mean with "tucked tail and ran"??

It's an analogy for getting their ass handed to them.

Fortunatetly, But let me remind you this is a subject in elementary school, so what do you think most kids feel about it?

Kids are ignorant...i dont care.

Mmm, do not take it wrong but isn't your position justifying your right to steal?
You have took your time to state that:

-North West territories were not really part of Mexico
-Mexico do not really need them
-Mexico was willing to sell them
-That the event is ancient and so we must not care about it

-They were not a part of Mexico because they did not consider themselves Mexican. They were left over relics from the expanded Spanish Empire that no longer existed.
-I never said that.
-Mexico did sell California and parts of New Mexico and Arizona (see Gadsden Purchase)
-The event happened over 160 years ago! Yes, its time to get over it.

how is that Mexico was willing to sell them just after losing a war with the buyer?

Listen carefully, cause I will not say it again...Spoils of war. "To the victor goes the spoils" An example of this would be just like Mexico took the southwest from Spain after it won its independence.

how is it possible to be 'history morons' if we must not care for ancient events? If those territories were so useless, why to fight a war for them?

Because you people do not understand the history you seem to think you do.
And if at the time, the US was "in" to stealing land from Mexico, why then did the US stop where it did? Why not take over all of Mexico?

Fallacies sound logical but they are not. I am also able to declare "ALL I AM SAYING IS TRUE", but that do not mean all I say is true. So, you declare "all I have stated is logical", but that does not mean is logical, it only means you want yours readers to think it is. Now please take note that for the very same fact I just prove you used a fallacy I am able to say that your way of reasoning is not quite logical.

This is because you are: A) Not a thinking person. And B) Refuse to see the facts for what they are.

Mexico never controlled them?? Mexico didn't even exist before the independence war, previously we have the Anahuac alliance that controlled the central part of today Mexico and many other nations and tribes. New Spain was much more that the ancient borders of prehispanic times.

You're entire History today is predicated on Spain. You use Spains language even to this day. Several Mexicans can trace their ancestry back to Spanish decent. Mexico never controlled the territories in question...They were self governed, self sustained. And DID NOT want to be a part of Mexico. States like Texas fought Mexico for their independence. They won it. Texas was not "stolen" it chose to secede. They did to Mexico what Mexico did to spain.

Please! Tell me, when the independence war was won, which were the territories that gained its freedom from Spain?? have you read some document about this? I mean, the original idea was to prevent the Full New Spain to be under the control of France (Napoleon invaded Spain in those days), not just Mexico city. And if the New Spain was a single unity, why do you think some of the territories were spoils? Mexico didn't even had the problems that led the Great Colombia to break into three different nations.

The above is all the territory that encompassed "the new spain".

New Spain included the areas now known as the western United States and the Louisiana Purchase, Mexico, northern Central America, the Caribbean, and the Philippines. The capital city of New Spain was Mexico City.

New Castile included all of South America, except the Portuguese territories of Brazil and the British, French, and Dutch Guyanas (or Guianas). The capital city of New Castile was Lima (now the capital of Peru.)

New Grenada was the region that encompassed Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador. The capital city of New Grenada was Bogota (now the capital of Colombia).

Additional Spanish possessions were developed in Africa - Equatorial Guinea (which remains the only Spanish-speaking country in Africa) and Morocco.

Originally posted by semperfoo
I will however educate those who need it.

You mean, you will mislead those who hear you, because:

a) You show total disregard for the human dimension of reality ( You do not acknowlege your point of view is not the only one. )
b) You presume to be "rational" but statements like "I will educate those who need it" prove your mind is quite set. What are you going to do when "reason" does not give you an answer?
c) You are not wiling to really communicate. You're lack of humility is going to cause you problems. Here right now for me is quite evident how hard is to communicate with you.

Disregard history because it "may" be a lie. This notion in this case is preposterous.

Be rational, or do not be. You CAN NOT communicate readers on this forum an absolute prove of your words, so you can not come and definitely prove us anything, then as a rational being I CAN NOT accept your statements just because you say so. As far as I concerned you may be a profesional lier, so please, be coherent. History may be a lie and you can not prove us the opposite.

...its been done ever since man walked outta the cave to hunt.

So, as people have been ignorant for millenia, it is correct to keep doing ignorant things. Tell me, what is the education you want to give? Roma stole, British stole, USA stole, and so Mexico has the right to stole? We can use the argument to support Aztlan fringe groups.

Kids are ignorant...i dont care.

Kids are the future, I do care.

-They were not a part of Mexico because they did not consider themselves Mexican.
They were left over relics from the expanded Spanish Empire that no longer existed.

Quite an arbitrary statement. Mexico as an abstract entity was defined by documents, not by people´s feelings. You may call them territories relics or whatever, the point is you are not able to probe your theory about them being "spoils of war", at most you have expresed an arbitrary opinion about their abstract status.

-I never said that.

Then, what do you mean by "California was not as important as Texas" , "Mexico was inburse" and "Mexico didnt really care until it was found gold".

-Mexico did sell California and parts of New Mexico and Arizona (see Gadsden Purchase)

Yes, BUT after a war. how willing is that???

-The event happened over 160 years ago! Yes, its time to get over it.

USA independence was more than 200 years ago!!! Stop 4th of July celebrations!!
Sorry for repet: The subjec is in actual history books. Could you care to elaborate something that is not only a wish?

Mexico took the southwest from Spain after it won its independence.

I think the problem is you don't get the concept of "viceroyalty". New Spain was one of several Viceroyalties, each viceroyality fougth its own war. The southwest was not in a different viceroyalty. What you are saying is that each mexican territory fought its own war, and that is just not true.

Because you people do not understand the history you seem to think you do.

I am quite sure you do not know the full history either %) you have your cup quite full.

And if at the time, the US was "in" to stealing land from Mexico, why then did the US stop where it did? Why not take over all of Mexico?

Excellent question! rumor goes many mexicans just wished that, but I hear (and is just something I hear) the racist side of the invaders didn't allow that to happen. But who knows? Maybe Mexico was just lucky.

This is because you are: A) Not a thinking person. And B) Refuse to see the facts for what they are.

A) Really? why? you are still making declarations as if they were axioms. That is not very rational (or educated) from your part.
B) Just because you say so, is not a fact. Your wishes and opinions are not facts.

You're entire History today is predicated on Spain.

The meztisos heritage include the prehispanic cultures. Mexico carries the weight of the conquest, not the Spain happines of the victory.

You use Spains language even to this day.

with lots of indigenous words, with a different accent, Mexico does not even like the Spanish talked in Spain.

Several Mexicans can trace their ancestry back to Spanish decent.

Some even to their prehispanic and europeans roots too.

Mexico never controlled the territories in question...They were self governed, self sustained.

That is the same as saying that Washington does not rule over Alaska because Alaska has their own government (From where did you get this idea?, please show me a source).

And DID NOT want to be a part of Mexico. States like Texas fought Mexico for their independence. They won it. Texas was not "stolen" it chose to secede. They did to Mexico what Mexico did to spain.

Yes, but Texas had lots of USA immigration, they were the fringe Aztlan of their time. And this is only true for Texas.

The above is all the territory that encompassed "the new spain".

NO, that is no "new spain" that is the old Spanish Empire, it was divided in Viceroyalties like New Spain, New Granada, "Rio de la Plata", etc. When the New Spain won its independence (and I am refering to just ONE viceroyalty, not the full empire), it won it for all its territories, to say any of them was a "spoil of war" is like saying that a slave took his own arms and teeth as a spoil when getting its liberty.

Are you sure you are not confusing the concepts of Spanish Empire, New Spain and Viceroyalty?

I just want to make clear my position about the OP statement.

I do not think that mexicans holds any special right to being in the states that were part of the old Mexico. Sovereignty matters.

But I do think the USA must take responsibility for an act that violated its neighbours rights (the 1848 war).

I do not mean to say (as DogsDogsDogs may be thinking) for the immigrants to have any right to be disrespectful. I hope for a politic of friendship and solidarity with the people who is looking for a chance to get a decent life.

I totally disagree with semperfoo desire to completely dismiss this issue. His arguments are (in my opinion) the words of somebody that wish to justify and forget its own wrong actions.



[edit on 14-5-2010 by oshdra]

reply to post by beyondsense


Guess what. NO. As a matter of fact Mexicans have ZERO rights to anything in the United States. Rights were made for law abiding Americans Not law BREAKING Mexicans.

But I do think the USA must take responsibility for an act that violated its neighbours rights (the 1848 war).

From reading this thread only it seems that the war in 1848 was initiated by Mexico by trying to take back territories from Texas?

reply to post by seism


I think you are confusing the Gadsden Purchase with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. But we still payed money for it either way you look at it. Nobody took it. Although as the victors in the Mexican American War, we could have taken the entire nation of Mexico as the spoils of war.

Yeah, let's turn the Southwest US into constant stream of violent bloodbath like the rest of Mexico.

Great Idea.

That will do people so much good.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by slank]