why didnt native americans FIGHT back?

[RidonKs]

Unless you mean the Americas as a whole when you say "Native American" I don't know what empires you're talking about.



Edit: I see you edited.

see man not to like rub anything in or anything but as an american, this is YOUR geographical history. and culture may be mysterious but one thing is for sure... what happened hundreds or even thousands of years ago can still have an effect on today. this in particular does and the evidence is actually the absence, to paraphrase good ol donald rumsfeld, of any mainstream understanding of what came before the american empire (i again use the word empire deliberately). i mean people have a better understanding of native american culture and history now than they did in say the 50s. but to make a seemingly appropriate analogy, the 'white guilt' over the negro slave trade is about a thousand times more of a cultural entity than any remorse over the native american slaughtering which should be called genocide though i guess it happened to long ago to qualify for that word. maybe it happened long enough ago that it doesn't matter... maybe that's what you believe. i don't believe that but it gets trickier. which is why going waaaaay back in time is less valuable and less effective for understanding than going back into recent history that allow for the study of a much wider array of sources, and also offer contemporary context since the ripple effects of say the 1980s are much easier to explore than the far subtler intangible manifestations of our ancient lineage and origins.

[cuad]

Compare to Africa. Europeans colonized Africa but never "conquered" it because Africans were not susceptible to European diseases, and so their numbers held up.

Not only that, but the Euros couldn't handle the malaria.

[NumberSix]

see man not to like rub anything in or anything but as an american, this is YOUR geographical history. and culture may be mysterious but one thing is for sure... what happened hundreds or even thousands of years ago can still have an effect on today. this in particular does and the evidence is actually the absence, to paraphrase good ol donald rumsfeld, of any mainstream understanding of what came before the american empire (i again use the word empire deliberately). i mean people have a better understanding of native american culture and history now than they did in say the 50s. but to make a seemingly appropriate analogy, the 'white guilt' over the negro slave trade is about a thousand times more of a cultural entity than any remorse over the native american slaughtering which should be called genocide though i guess it happened to long ago to qualify for that word. maybe it happened long enough ago that it doesn't matter... maybe that's what you believe. i don't believe that but it gets trickier. which is why going waaaaay back in time is less valuable and less effective for understanding than going back into recent history that allow for the study of a much wider array of sources, and also offer contemporary context since the ripple effects of say the 1980s are much easier to explore than the far subtler intangible manifestations of our ancient lineage and origins.

Who says I'm an American?

[DeuceWallaces]

First, they did fight back both along side and against Euros/White Americans including some big victories in 19th Century. You're an idiot if you didn't know that.

Second, they were unified in a few cases in the NA and nearly all of the major SA native empires.

Third, they were annihilated by our diseases.

[cuad]

this helped quicken the destruction of native american empires but they were doomed from the get go regardless of the germs that killed them off so much more quickly. we're talking about 500 years ago.... in fact the supposed 500th anniversary of the european conquest of the americas was about 13 years ago if i'm not mistaken. bottom line being what they managed to do in a few hundred years with the help of their livestock's germs they would have done anyway by now. and the natives were not capable of defending themselves adequately.

Just not likely at all. A European army (handicapped by the months travel time from Europe) could never have handled a full sized American army. NEVER.

[NumberSix]

Just not likely at all. A European army (handicapped by the months travel time from Europe) could never have handled a full sized American army. NEVER.

American army of what?

[cuad]

American army of what?

Definitely not Americans.

[kNIOKAS]

Um from what I heard it was like 10 or 5% of natives left when whites came in to colonise them. The diseases absolutely wiped out their population in an extremely brief time. It was said that colonists could travel around easily, because the roads were prepared, but no natives left to use them. Then after some times forests grew back, and it was supposedly the cause of the little ice age (?).

What I heard was rad like that.

edit: apparently, one of possible explanations there
http://www.juancole.com/2011/10/did-...e-ice-age.html

Richard Nevle, a geochemist at Stanford, argues that the European advent in the New World, which killed 90% of the 80 million native Americans, caused the Little Ice Age.

The native peoples of the New World burned a lot of wood. When they largely didn’t exist anymore, because they suffered high mortality from a host of European diseases to which they had no immunity, they stopped putting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Instead, forests grew rapidly since they weren’t being chopped down anymore, and land wasn’t being cleared for agriculture. Forests take in carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen, plus they fix some carbon dioxide in the soil. They are what is called a “carbon sink,” though not a really efficient one, since much of the carbon they take out of the atmosphere eventually finds its way back there. I suspect the dramatic fall-off in the burning of fossil fuels was the much more important cause here.

[RidonKs]

Who says I'm an American?

ah my mistaken assumption. apologies if you aren't. f*ck you if you're just pulling my leg.

[gigantes]

besides the many reasons listed above, native americans were commonly in warring / aloof relationships with other tribes or networks of tribes.

europeans exploited this fact over and over again. as in, why bother dividing and conquering when you don't need to divide in the first place? turn your enemies against each other and manipulate the hell out of them.


anyway, it was damned if you resisted and damned if you tried to make peace. the only real option left was to survive as best you could, even if it meant losing your land and much of your way of life and culture.

[MavsSuperFan]

native americans did fight back.

Google Geronimo

[QUOTE]Geronimo (Mescalero-Chiricahua: Goyaał

[MavsSuperFan]

custer's last stand and dade's massacre were 2 of the more renowned native american victories over the United states of america.

But overall america killed and raped them with impunity

On December 23, 1835, two U.S. companies of 110 troops (including soldiers from the 2nd Artillery, 3rd Artillery and 4th Infantry Regiments) under Major Francis Langhorne Dade departed from Fort Brooke (present-day Tampa), heading up the King Highway (military road) on a resupply and reinforce mission to Fort King (present-day Ocala). The Native Americans in Florida had grown increasingly furious at attempts by the U.S. army to forcefully relocate them to a reservation out west and Dade knew his men might be attacked by the Seminole Indians who were shadowing his regiment, but believed that if an attack were to occur, it would occur during one of the river crossings or in the thicker woods to the south. Having passed these, he felt safe and recalled his flanking scouts in order that the command could move faster.

Although the terrain he was now in, pines and palmettos, could not have concealed anyone who was standing or walking, it could and did conceal crouched or prone warriors waiting in ambush. The Seminoles did not refrain from attacking in the other places because they thought they could achieve better surprise later, but because they were waiting for Osceola to join them. They finally gave up waiting and attacked without him.

Several Seminoles with their warriors assembled secretly at points along the march. Scouts reportedly watched the troops in their sky-blue uniforms at every foot of the route and sent reports back to the Indian chiefs. The troops marched for five quiet days until December 28, when they were just south of the present-day city of Bushnell, Florida. They were passing through a high hammock with oaks, pines, cabbage palms, and saw palmetto when a shot rang out. Many sources state that the first storm of bullets brought down Major Dade and half his men.[1] As it would turn out, in the late afternoon of that day, 180 Seminoles lay in wait approximately 25 miles (40 km) south of Fort King. The Seminoles had terrain and the element of surprise in their favor. Major Dade, who was on horseback, was killed in the Seminoles' very first shot fired personally by Chief Micanopy, which by pre-arranged plan began the attack. Following Dade's death, command passed to Captain George W. Gardiner. Many of the soldiers, in two single file lines, were also quickly killed. Only a few managed to get their flintlock muskets from underneath their heavy winter coats.
...

Only three U.S. soldiers were reported to have survived the attack. Private Edward Decourcey, who had been covered by dead bodies, and Ransome Clarke who appeared "dead enough" with five wounds and bleeding cuts on his head. The next day, a Seminole pursued them on horseback and Decourcey was killed after they had split to avoid joint capture. Clarke made it back to Fort Brooke, collapsing within a mile of the Fort and being helped all the way back by a friendly Indian woman. Clarke provided the only narrative from the Army's side of what had occurred. A third soldier, Private Joseph Sprague, also returned to Fort Brooke and continued serving in the Army. He was illiterate, and did not leave a report of the battle.
...
After the battle, many large plantations were burned and settlers killed. By the end of 1836, all but one house in what is now Dade and Broward counties had been burned by the Indians. The Indians were emboldened by their successes against Dade's command, the stalemate at the subsequent Battle of Ouithlacoochie and the killing by Osceola of hated Indian agent Wiley Thompson, which is what had delayed Osceola. While about half of Dade's men consisted of new American immigrants, the rest of the killed soldiers were from many other states.

Although eventually America won the 2nd Seminole war, and massacred them.

[masonanddixon]

Check out the French and Indian war

[MavsSuperFan]

this quote basically sums up american indian wars

"The government is in the wrong, and this is the chief cause of the persevering opposition of the Indians, who have nobly defended their country against our attempt to enforce a fraudulent treaty. The natives used every means to avoid a war, but were forced into it by the tyranny of our government." -Major Ethan Allen Hitchcock (would eventually become a Major general (2 star))

[NumberSix]

this quote basically sums up american indian wars

"The government is in the wrong, and this is the chief cause of the persevering opposition of the Indians, who have nobly defended their country against our attempt to enforce a fraudulent treaty. The natives used every means to avoid a war, but were forced into it by the tyranny of our government." -Major Ethan Allen Hitchcock (would eventually become a Major general (2 star))

You really don't need to go into detail.

Some people wanted to start a new country in a place where there was already people.