Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
When, and against whom, did the United States fight its first war, and who was president at the time? I suspect many well-educated adults would readily respond, "the War of 1812 when James Madison was president." They would be wrong. In fact, the first war the United States fought occurred in 180l, the first year of Thomas Jefferson's presidency, when the Nation had existed barely 25 years.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
America and the Barbary Pirates: An
International Battle Against an Unconventional Foe
by Gerard W. Gawalt
Gerard W. Gawalt is the manuscript specialist for early American history in the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress.
Interesting read on our first war on terror and pirates.
International Battle Against an Unconventional Foe
by Gerard W. Gawalt
Gerard W. Gawalt is the manuscript specialist for early American history in the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress.
Interesting read on our first war on terror and pirates.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Most Americans remain utterly ignorant of this nation’s first foreign war but that exotic, long-ago struggle set the pattern for nearly all the many distant conflicts that followed. Refusal to confront the lessons of the First Barbary War (1801-1805) has led to some of the silliest arguments concerning Iraq and Afghanistan, and any effort to apply traditional American values to our future foreign policy requires an understanding of this all-but-forgotten episode from our past.
The war against the Barbary States of North Africa (Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli—today’s Libya) involved commitment and sacrifice far from home and in no way involved a defense of our native soil. For centuries, the Islamic states at the southern rim of the Mediterranean relied upon piracy to feed the coffers of their corrupt rulers. The state sponsored terrorists of that era (who claimed the romantic designation, “corsairsâ€) seized western shipping and sold their crews into unimaginably brutal slavery.
By the mid-eighteenth century, European powers learned to save themselves a great deal of trouble and wealth by bribing the local authorities with “tribute,†in return for which the pirates left their shipping alone. Until independence, British bribes protected American merchant ships in the Mediterranean since they traveled under His Majesty’s flag; after 1783, the new government faced a series of crises as Barbary pirates seized scores of civilian craft (with eleven captured in 1793 alone). Intermittently, the United States government paid tribute to escape these depredations: eventually providing a bribe worth more than $1,000,000—a staggering one-sixth of the total federal budget of the time – to the Dey of Algiers alone.
When Jefferson became president in 1801, he resolved to take a hard line against the terrorists and their sponsors. “I know that nothing will stop the eternal increase of demands from these pirates but the presence of an armed force, and it will be more economical & more honorable to use the same means at once for suppressing their insolencies,†he wrote.
The president dispatched nearly all ships of the fledgling American navy to sail thousands of miles across the Atlantic and through the straits of Gibraltar to do battle with the North African thugs. After a few initial reverses, daring raids on sea and land (by the new Marine Corps, earning the phrase in their hymn “….to the shores of Tripoliâ€) won sweeping victory. A decade later, with the U.S. distracted by the frustrating and inconclusive War of 1812 against Great Britain, the Barbary states again challenged American power, and President Madison sent ten new ships to restore order with another decisive campaign (known as “The Second Barbary War, 1815).
The records of these dramatic, all-but-forgotten conflicts convey several important messages for the present day:
The U.S. often goes to war when it is not directly attacked. One of the dumbest lines about the Iraq War claims that “this was the first time we ever attacked a nation that hadn’t attacked us.†Obviously, Barbary raids against private shipping hardly constituted a direct invasion of the American homeland, but founding fathers Jefferson and Madison nonetheless felt the need to strike back. Of more than 140 conflicts in which American troops have fought on foreign soil, only one (World War II, obviously) represented a response to an unambiguous attack on America itself. Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a long-standing tradition of fighting for U.S. interests, and not just to defend the homeland.
Most conflicts unfold without a Declaration of War. Jefferson informed Congress of his determination to hit back against the North African sponsors of terrorism (piracy), but during four years of fighting never sought a declaration of war. In fact, only five times in American history did Congress actually declare war – the War of 1812, the Mexican War, The Spanish American War, World War I and World War II. None of the 135 other struggles in which U.S. troops fought in the far corners of the earth saw Congress formally declare war—and these undeclared conflicts (including Korea, Vietnam, the First Gulf War, and many more) involved a total of millions of troops and more than a hundred thousand total battlefield deaths.
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injuryâ€, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.â€
Cruel Treatment of enemies by Muslim extremists is a long-standing tradition. In 1793, Algerian pirates captured the merchant brig Polly and paraded the enslaved crewmen through jeering crowds in the streets of Algiers. Dey Hassan Pasha, the local ruler, bellowed triumphantly: “Now I have got you, you Christian dogs, you shall eat stones.†American slaves indeed spent their years of captivity breaking rocks. According to Max Boot in his fine book The Savage Wars of Peace: “A slave who spoke disrespectfully to a Muslim could be roasted alive, crucified, or impaled (a stake was driven through the arms until it came out at the back of the neck). A special agony was reserved for a slave who killed a Muslim – he would be cast over the city walls and left to dangle on giant iron hooks for days before expiring of his wounds.â€
There’s nothing new in far-flung American wars to defend U.S. economic interests. Every war in American history involved an economic motivation – at least in part, and nearly all of our great leaders saw nothing disgraceful in going to battle to defend the commercial vitality of the country. Jefferson and Madison felt no shame in mobilizing – and sacrificing – ships and ground forces to protect the integrity of commercial shipping interests in the distant Mediterranean. Fortunately for them, they never had to contend with demonstrators who shouted “No blood for shipping!â€
Even leaders who have worried about the growth of the U.S. military establishment came to see the necessity of robust and formidable armed forces. Jefferson and Madison both wanted to shrink and restrain the standing army and initially opposed the determination by President Adams to build an expensive new American Navy. When Jefferson succeeded Adams as president, however, he quickly and gratefully used the ships his predecessor built. The Barbary Wars taught the nation that there is no real substitute for military power, and professional forces that stand ready for anything.
America has always played “the cop of the world.†In part, Jefferson and Madison justified the sacrifices of the Barbary Wars as a defense of civilization, not just the protection of U.S. interests – and the European powers granted new respect to the upstart nation that finally tamed the North African pirates. Jefferson and Madison may not have fought for a New World Order but they most certainly sought a more orderly world. Many American conflicts over the last 200 years have involved an effort to enfort to enforce international rules and norms as much as to advance national interests. Wide-ranging and occasionally bloody expeditions throughout Central America, China, the Philippines, Africa and even Russia after the Revolution used American forces to prevent internal and international chaos.
The Barbary Wars cost limited casualties for the United States (only 35 sailors and marines killed in action) but required the expenditure of many millions of dollars – a significant burden for the young and struggling Republic. Most importantly, these difficult battles established a long, honorable tradition of American power projected many thousands of miles beyond our shores. Those who claim that our engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan represent some shameful, radical departure from an old tradition of pacifism and isolation should look closely at the reality of our very first foreign war—and all the other conflicts in the intervening 200 years.
The war against the Barbary States of North Africa (Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli—today’s Libya) involved commitment and sacrifice far from home and in no way involved a defense of our native soil. For centuries, the Islamic states at the southern rim of the Mediterranean relied upon piracy to feed the coffers of their corrupt rulers. The state sponsored terrorists of that era (who claimed the romantic designation, “corsairsâ€) seized western shipping and sold their crews into unimaginably brutal slavery.
By the mid-eighteenth century, European powers learned to save themselves a great deal of trouble and wealth by bribing the local authorities with “tribute,†in return for which the pirates left their shipping alone. Until independence, British bribes protected American merchant ships in the Mediterranean since they traveled under His Majesty’s flag; after 1783, the new government faced a series of crises as Barbary pirates seized scores of civilian craft (with eleven captured in 1793 alone). Intermittently, the United States government paid tribute to escape these depredations: eventually providing a bribe worth more than $1,000,000—a staggering one-sixth of the total federal budget of the time – to the Dey of Algiers alone.
When Jefferson became president in 1801, he resolved to take a hard line against the terrorists and their sponsors. “I know that nothing will stop the eternal increase of demands from these pirates but the presence of an armed force, and it will be more economical & more honorable to use the same means at once for suppressing their insolencies,†he wrote.
The president dispatched nearly all ships of the fledgling American navy to sail thousands of miles across the Atlantic and through the straits of Gibraltar to do battle with the North African thugs. After a few initial reverses, daring raids on sea and land (by the new Marine Corps, earning the phrase in their hymn “….to the shores of Tripoliâ€) won sweeping victory. A decade later, with the U.S. distracted by the frustrating and inconclusive War of 1812 against Great Britain, the Barbary states again challenged American power, and President Madison sent ten new ships to restore order with another decisive campaign (known as “The Second Barbary War, 1815).
The records of these dramatic, all-but-forgotten conflicts convey several important messages for the present day:
The U.S. often goes to war when it is not directly attacked. One of the dumbest lines about the Iraq War claims that “this was the first time we ever attacked a nation that hadn’t attacked us.†Obviously, Barbary raids against private shipping hardly constituted a direct invasion of the American homeland, but founding fathers Jefferson and Madison nonetheless felt the need to strike back. Of more than 140 conflicts in which American troops have fought on foreign soil, only one (World War II, obviously) represented a response to an unambiguous attack on America itself. Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a long-standing tradition of fighting for U.S. interests, and not just to defend the homeland.
Most conflicts unfold without a Declaration of War. Jefferson informed Congress of his determination to hit back against the North African sponsors of terrorism (piracy), but during four years of fighting never sought a declaration of war. In fact, only five times in American history did Congress actually declare war – the War of 1812, the Mexican War, The Spanish American War, World War I and World War II. None of the 135 other struggles in which U.S. troops fought in the far corners of the earth saw Congress formally declare war—and these undeclared conflicts (including Korea, Vietnam, the First Gulf War, and many more) involved a total of millions of troops and more than a hundred thousand total battlefield deaths.
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injuryâ€, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.â€
Cruel Treatment of enemies by Muslim extremists is a long-standing tradition. In 1793, Algerian pirates captured the merchant brig Polly and paraded the enslaved crewmen through jeering crowds in the streets of Algiers. Dey Hassan Pasha, the local ruler, bellowed triumphantly: “Now I have got you, you Christian dogs, you shall eat stones.†American slaves indeed spent their years of captivity breaking rocks. According to Max Boot in his fine book The Savage Wars of Peace: “A slave who spoke disrespectfully to a Muslim could be roasted alive, crucified, or impaled (a stake was driven through the arms until it came out at the back of the neck). A special agony was reserved for a slave who killed a Muslim – he would be cast over the city walls and left to dangle on giant iron hooks for days before expiring of his wounds.â€
There’s nothing new in far-flung American wars to defend U.S. economic interests. Every war in American history involved an economic motivation – at least in part, and nearly all of our great leaders saw nothing disgraceful in going to battle to defend the commercial vitality of the country. Jefferson and Madison felt no shame in mobilizing – and sacrificing – ships and ground forces to protect the integrity of commercial shipping interests in the distant Mediterranean. Fortunately for them, they never had to contend with demonstrators who shouted “No blood for shipping!â€
Even leaders who have worried about the growth of the U.S. military establishment came to see the necessity of robust and formidable armed forces. Jefferson and Madison both wanted to shrink and restrain the standing army and initially opposed the determination by President Adams to build an expensive new American Navy. When Jefferson succeeded Adams as president, however, he quickly and gratefully used the ships his predecessor built. The Barbary Wars taught the nation that there is no real substitute for military power, and professional forces that stand ready for anything.
America has always played “the cop of the world.†In part, Jefferson and Madison justified the sacrifices of the Barbary Wars as a defense of civilization, not just the protection of U.S. interests – and the European powers granted new respect to the upstart nation that finally tamed the North African pirates. Jefferson and Madison may not have fought for a New World Order but they most certainly sought a more orderly world. Many American conflicts over the last 200 years have involved an effort to enfort to enforce international rules and norms as much as to advance national interests. Wide-ranging and occasionally bloody expeditions throughout Central America, China, the Philippines, Africa and even Russia after the Revolution used American forces to prevent internal and international chaos.
The Barbary Wars cost limited casualties for the United States (only 35 sailors and marines killed in action) but required the expenditure of many millions of dollars – a significant burden for the young and struggling Republic. Most importantly, these difficult battles established a long, honorable tradition of American power projected many thousands of miles beyond our shores. Those who claim that our engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan represent some shameful, radical departure from an old tradition of pacifism and isolation should look closely at the reality of our very first foreign war—and all the other conflicts in the intervening 200 years.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
BTS;1174982 wrote: When, and against whom, did the United States fight its first war, and who was president at the time? I suspect many well-educated adults would readily respond, "the War of 1812 when James Madison was president." They would be wrong. In fact, the first war the United States fought occurred in 180l, the first year of Thomas Jefferson's presidency, when the Nation had existed barely 25 years.
Don't the wars against the Indians count as wars?
Don't the wars against the Indians count as wars?
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175018 wrote: Don't the wars against the Indians count as wars?
OK......Rephrase it .........
First FOREIGN war;)
OK......Rephrase it .........
First FOREIGN war;)
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
BTS;1175240 wrote: OK......Rephrase it .........
First FOREIGN war;)
So the indian wars were civil wars?:sneaky:
First FOREIGN war;)
So the indian wars were civil wars?:sneaky:
-
farmer giles
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:08 am
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175290 wrote: So the indian wars were civil wars?:sneaky:
I WOULD OF THOUGHT THE FIRST WAR WAS MORE OF AN INVASION :sneaky::sneaky:
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
I WOULD OF THOUGHT THE FIRST WAR WAS MORE OF AN INVASION :sneaky::sneaky:
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175290 wrote: So the indian wars were civil wars?:sneaky:
I think thats probably a fair statement.
farmer giles;1175306 wrote: I WOULD OF THOUGHT THE FIRST WAR WAS MORE OF AN INVASION :sneaky::sneaky:
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
I think thats probably a fair statement.
farmer giles;1175306 wrote: I WOULD OF THOUGHT THE FIRST WAR WAS MORE OF AN INVASION :sneaky::sneaky:
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
YZGI;1175381 wrote: I think thats probably a fair statement.
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
I hate to admit it but thats the absolute truth.
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
I hate to admit it but thats the absolute truth.
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Nomad;1175387 wrote: I hate to admit it but thats the absolute truth.
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
Agreed, same with me.
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
Agreed, same with me.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.
Yep. The Welsh still haven't forgiven us English. (Though by and large we get along these days)
Yep. The Welsh still haven't forgiven us English. (Though by and large we get along these days)
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Nomad;1175387 wrote: I hate to admit it but thats the absolute truth.
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
It's only from our perspective that it seems terrible but it is the kind of thing that has happened since time immemorial. But for an accident of history it could have been them invading europe. In africa when armed with rifles and cannon african armies did defeat European armies on several occasions. Disease probably did more than armed conflict to defeat the native americans. On a like for like basis they could hold their own when it came to warfare could they not?
posted by yzgi
The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.
Who else would you blame for the woes of the north american indian?
I romanticize the lives of the indigenous Native Americans way of life.
Under the circumstances they had no choice but to adapt or die off.
They didnt adapt well. Not that I blame them for that though.
It's only from our perspective that it seems terrible but it is the kind of thing that has happened since time immemorial. But for an accident of history it could have been them invading europe. In africa when armed with rifles and cannon african armies did defeat European armies on several occasions. Disease probably did more than armed conflict to defeat the native americans. On a like for like basis they could hold their own when it came to warfare could they not?
posted by yzgi
The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.
Who else would you blame for the woes of the north american indian?
-
farmer giles
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:08 am
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
YZGI;1175381 wrote: I think thats probably a fair statement.
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
i thimk my ancestors were invading germans ,every where you look on the earth some country has invaded another thats just the way things are
Throughout history people have migrated to new lands. The people with the biggest sticks, strongest swords or the higher technology have always conquered the less stronger peoples. Canada, Mexico and the US all had indigenous humans living on the land when Europeans migrated to North America. Even the native Indians warred against each other, constantly changing borders and boundaries between different tribes. This doesn't mean I agree with they way North Americans treated the natives but it is not much different than any nation or country since the beginning of time. The rest of the world just love to blame the U.S. for all Indian or native people woes.:-6
i thimk my ancestors were invading germans ,every where you look on the earth some country has invaded another thats just the way things are
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175840 wrote: Who else would you blame for the woes of the north american indian?
Today? I blame the individual. What's the statute of limitations on blaming one's financial situation or personal addictions on historical events?
How many generations passed before the Roman invaders were idenified as English?
Today? I blame the individual. What's the statute of limitations on blaming one's financial situation or personal addictions on historical events?
How many generations passed before the Roman invaders were idenified as English?
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
How many generations passed before the Roman invaders were idenified as English?
They never were. When the Roman Legions pulled out (a process completed by 410 AD) they left a Romano-British culture (a mix of Roman and Celt) that was attacked by the Irish, the Picts and the ancestors of the English (probably Angles and Saxons). Over the next 200 years or so the Romano-British were pretty much annihilated or assimilated, apart from a remnant in modern Wales and Cornwall. The words "Wales" and "Welsh" are derived from the Old English word "wealas", meaning "foreigner". The Welsh call their country Cymru and themselves Cymri.
Confused yet?;)
They never were. When the Roman Legions pulled out (a process completed by 410 AD) they left a Romano-British culture (a mix of Roman and Celt) that was attacked by the Irish, the Picts and the ancestors of the English (probably Angles and Saxons). Over the next 200 years or so the Romano-British were pretty much annihilated or assimilated, apart from a remnant in modern Wales and Cornwall. The words "Wales" and "Welsh" are derived from the Old English word "wealas", meaning "foreigner". The Welsh call their country Cymru and themselves Cymri.
Confused yet?;)
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Accountable;1175851 wrote: Today? I blame the individual. What's the statute of limitations on blaming one's financial situation or personal addictions on historical events?
How many generations passed before the Roman invaders were idenified as English?
You can only be responsible for what you yourself do. But I do think it behoves us all to know the past if only to prevent repeats of the same mistakes. There always will be those who want war and conflict or who convince themselves what they do is in the interests of their country/nation whatever doesn't mean we have to go along with it- or let them away with it
As to the romans-well it never happaned really. The english (the name comes from the angles who were a german nation that invaded after the romans left) didn't invade till much later from germany then came the saxons, (anglo-saxon) the vikings, then the normans and out of the mix up amongst all of them and those celts who had survived the romans and vestiges of the romans that stayed on who were already there you have what we now call the english. Right bunch of mongrels in other words. Anyone who talks about a pure bred englishman is an idiot. If you travel round the UK there are actually distinct tribal characteristics in the facial features if you care to look for them. Northern english culture is very different from southern. Blue eyes used to be more common than they are now, some parts of england have a higher proportion of blondes than others, Dark hair and blue eyes suggests irish/scots celt or danish viking.
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
How many generations passed before the Roman invaders were idenified as English?
You can only be responsible for what you yourself do. But I do think it behoves us all to know the past if only to prevent repeats of the same mistakes. There always will be those who want war and conflict or who convince themselves what they do is in the interests of their country/nation whatever doesn't mean we have to go along with it- or let them away with it
As to the romans-well it never happaned really. The english (the name comes from the angles who were a german nation that invaded after the romans left) didn't invade till much later from germany then came the saxons, (anglo-saxon) the vikings, then the normans and out of the mix up amongst all of them and those celts who had survived the romans and vestiges of the romans that stayed on who were already there you have what we now call the english. Right bunch of mongrels in other words. Anyone who talks about a pure bred englishman is an idiot. If you travel round the UK there are actually distinct tribal characteristics in the facial features if you care to look for them. Northern english culture is very different from southern. Blue eyes used to be more common than they are now, some parts of england have a higher proportion of blondes than others, Dark hair and blue eyes suggests irish/scots celt or danish viking.
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Right bunch of mongrels in other words.
Woof!:-6
Woof!:-6
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote:
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
We try, the minorities won't allow it.
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
We try, the minorities won't allow it.
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
farmer giles;1175306 wrote: I WOULD OF THOUGHT THE FIRST WAR WAS MORE OF AN INVASION :sneaky::sneaky:
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
farmer giles,
What country are you from anyways?
By your logic we are all invaders of sorts.
FYI........Using the word "injuns" is akin to saying "ni**er" here in the land of "cowboys".
Can you guess how much every year our budget goes to the Indians?
Billions!!!
But before this thread was hijacked my point was that after we declared our independence from Great Britain we had to send a fleet out to protect our goods from pirates of the Barbary States of North Africa.
The only real Americans are the injuns all those cowboys were invaders
farmer giles,
What country are you from anyways?
By your logic we are all invaders of sorts.
FYI........Using the word "injuns" is akin to saying "ni**er" here in the land of "cowboys".
Can you guess how much every year our budget goes to the Indians?
Billions!!!
But before this thread was hijacked my point was that after we declared our independence from Great Britain we had to send a fleet out to protect our goods from pirates of the Barbary States of North Africa.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote:
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
When the US government stops asking these questions:
1)check here if you are African American
2)check here if you are Native American
3)check here if you are Asian American
4)check here if you are Hispanic American
And has this one option only:
1)check here if you are American
I never check any boxes, but write in the other option "American"
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
When the US government stops asking these questions:
1)check here if you are African American
2)check here if you are Native American
3)check here if you are Asian American
4)check here if you are Hispanic American
And has this one option only:
1)check here if you are American
I never check any boxes, but write in the other option "American"
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Back to the subject of thread:
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injuryâ€, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.â€
Cruel Treatment of enemies by Muslim extremists is a long-standing tradition. In 1793, Algerian pirates captured the merchant brig Polly and paraded the enslaved crewmen through jeering crowds in the streets of Algiers. Dey Hassan Pasha, the local ruler, bellowed triumphantly: “Now I have got you, you Christian dogs, you shall eat stones.†American slaves indeed spent their years of captivity breaking rocks. According to Max Boot in his fine book The Savage Wars of Peace: “A slave who spoke disrespectfully to a Muslim could be roasted alive, crucified, or impaled (a stake was driven through the arms until it came out at the back of the neck). A special agony was reserved for a slave who killed a Muslim – he would be cast over the city walls and left to dangle on giant iron hooks for days before expiring of his wounds.â€
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injuryâ€, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.â€
Cruel Treatment of enemies by Muslim extremists is a long-standing tradition. In 1793, Algerian pirates captured the merchant brig Polly and paraded the enslaved crewmen through jeering crowds in the streets of Algiers. Dey Hassan Pasha, the local ruler, bellowed triumphantly: “Now I have got you, you Christian dogs, you shall eat stones.†American slaves indeed spent their years of captivity breaking rocks. According to Max Boot in his fine book The Savage Wars of Peace: “A slave who spoke disrespectfully to a Muslim could be roasted alive, crucified, or impaled (a stake was driven through the arms until it came out at the back of the neck). A special agony was reserved for a slave who killed a Muslim – he would be cast over the city walls and left to dangle on giant iron hooks for days before expiring of his wounds.â€
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
posted by BTS
But before this thread was hijacked my point was that after we declared our independence from Great Britain we had to send a fleet out to protect our goods from pirates of the Barbary States of North Africa.
Just to put it in a bit of perspective for you there was this little thing going on called the Napoleonic war which didn't end until 1815. The european navies were a bit busy doing other things to have time to deal with pirates.
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injury”, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.”
Wars between Christian and muslims had being going on for hundreds of years. the US were a fairly insignificant player on the world stage at this point. Attacks on shipping and Enslavement was a fairly realistic possibility for any sailor travelling in the Mediterranean in those days to suggest it was peculiarly anti american is ever so slightly paranoid don't you think?
But before this thread was hijacked my point was that after we declared our independence from Great Britain we had to send a fleet out to protect our goods from pirates of the Barbary States of North Africa.
Just to put it in a bit of perspective for you there was this little thing going on called the Napoleonic war which didn't end until 1815. The european navies were a bit busy doing other things to have time to deal with pirates.
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy. In 1786, America’s Ambassador to France, Thomas Jefferson, joined our Ambassador in London, John Adams, to negotiate with the Ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The Americans asked their counterpart why the North African nations made war against the United States, a power “who had done them no injury”, and according the report filed by Jefferson and Adams the Tripolitan diplomat replied: “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.”
Wars between Christian and muslims had being going on for hundreds of years. the US were a fairly insignificant player on the world stage at this point. Attacks on shipping and Enslavement was a fairly realistic possibility for any sailor travelling in the Mediterranean in those days to suggest it was peculiarly anti american is ever so slightly paranoid don't you think?
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1176122 wrote: posted by BTS
Just to put it in a bit of perspective for you there was this little thing going on called the Napoleonic war which didn't end until 1815. The european navies were a bit busy doing other things to have time to deal with pirates.
We had already fired the Brits and were on our own in the world. I do not see your point...
Wars between Christian and muslims had being going on for hundreds of years. the US were a fairly insignificant player on the world stage at this point. Attacks on shipping and Enslavement was a fairly realistic possibility for any sailor travelling in the Mediterranean in those days to suggest it was peculiarly anti american is ever so slightly paranoid don't you think?
You make my point:
Therefor our FIRST foreign war was in the Mediterranean to protect our goods. We no longer had England protecting them, and No I am not being paranoid as you suppose.
Maybe the US was insignificant in your point of view but we needed those goods and sent a few ships out to protect our interests. It was imperative that we recieved them.
Just to put it in a bit of perspective for you there was this little thing going on called the Napoleonic war which didn't end until 1815. The european navies were a bit busy doing other things to have time to deal with pirates.
We had already fired the Brits and were on our own in the world. I do not see your point...
Wars between Christian and muslims had being going on for hundreds of years. the US were a fairly insignificant player on the world stage at this point. Attacks on shipping and Enslavement was a fairly realistic possibility for any sailor travelling in the Mediterranean in those days to suggest it was peculiarly anti american is ever so slightly paranoid don't you think?
You make my point:
Therefor our FIRST foreign war was in the Mediterranean to protect our goods. We no longer had England protecting them, and No I am not being paranoid as you suppose.
Maybe the US was insignificant in your point of view but we needed those goods and sent a few ships out to protect our interests. It was imperative that we recieved them.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
BTS;1176175 wrote: You make my point:
Therefor our FIRST foreign war was in the Mediterranean to protect our goods. We no longer had England protecting them, and No I am not being paranoid as you suppose.
Maybe the US was insignificant in your point of view but we needed those goods and sent a few ships out to protect our interests. It was imperative that we recieved them.
If you mean foreign war as in away from the continental united states then yes it was your first. I wasn't actually disagreeing with you but rather
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy.
I was pointing out that that comment was ever so slightly paranoid since it was hardly anti-americanism when they attacked your ships-they were merely a handy soft target and you were a fairly insignificant power at the time. I'm not being derogatory just stating a fact. You do realise the 1812 war gets a footnote in british history books don't you? Remarkable in that the american frigates proved more than a match for the lighter british opponents-we'd got used to beating overwhelming odds being beaten by a jonathan was a shock to the system. Still the shannon came along and restored the natural order of things and we gave you the white house and the inspiration for your national anthem-might have been yankee doodle otherwise who knows. :sneaky:
If on the other hand you define foreign wars as attacks on lands that were not yours or on people that were not yours i.e it wasn't a civil war then it wasn't your first foreign war was it.
Battle of Fallen Timbers
What's the difference between an uprising and a war. the term uprising suggests they had been conquered in which case you must have had a war at some point with them in order to conquer them. We talk about british colonial wars basically you were doing the same sort of thing except it was on the north american continent.
OK I'm winding you up to some extent but you've not exactly been a peaceful let's only go to war when we really have to sort of nation have you? Face up to it, if you weren't a warlike nation the US wouldn't exist. On balance it's probably better to be warlike than not.
Therefor our FIRST foreign war was in the Mediterranean to protect our goods. We no longer had England protecting them, and No I am not being paranoid as you suppose.
Maybe the US was insignificant in your point of view but we needed those goods and sent a few ships out to protect our interests. It was imperative that we recieved them.
If you mean foreign war as in away from the continental united states then yes it was your first. I wasn't actually disagreeing with you but rather
Islamic enmity toward the US is rooted in the Muslim religion, not recent American policy.
I was pointing out that that comment was ever so slightly paranoid since it was hardly anti-americanism when they attacked your ships-they were merely a handy soft target and you were a fairly insignificant power at the time. I'm not being derogatory just stating a fact. You do realise the 1812 war gets a footnote in british history books don't you? Remarkable in that the american frigates proved more than a match for the lighter british opponents-we'd got used to beating overwhelming odds being beaten by a jonathan was a shock to the system. Still the shannon came along and restored the natural order of things and we gave you the white house and the inspiration for your national anthem-might have been yankee doodle otherwise who knows. :sneaky:
If on the other hand you define foreign wars as attacks on lands that were not yours or on people that were not yours i.e it wasn't a civil war then it wasn't your first foreign war was it.
Battle of Fallen Timbers
What's the difference between an uprising and a war. the term uprising suggests they had been conquered in which case you must have had a war at some point with them in order to conquer them. We talk about british colonial wars basically you were doing the same sort of thing except it was on the north american continent.
OK I'm winding you up to some extent but you've not exactly been a peaceful let's only go to war when we really have to sort of nation have you? Face up to it, if you weren't a warlike nation the US wouldn't exist. On balance it's probably better to be warlike than not.
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote: You can only be responsible for what you yourself do. But I do think it behoves us all to know the past if only to prevent repeats of the same mistakes. There always will be those who want war and conflict or who convince themselves what they do is in the interests of their country/nation whatever doesn't mean we have to go along with it- or let them away with it
That is the value in remembering.
That is the value in remembering.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Nomad;1176394 wrote: That is the value in remembering.
It's also why political leaders like to encourage selective memory and re-write history to justify what they do in our name. Even worse when they try and persuade that another's religion alone somehow makes them an enemy in the past now and for evermore.
It's also why political leaders like to encourage selective memory and re-write history to justify what they do in our name. Even worse when they try and persuade that another's religion alone somehow makes them an enemy in the past now and for evermore.
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1176425 wrote: It's also why political leaders like to encourage selective memory and re-write history to justify what they do in our name. Even worse when they try and persuade that another's religion alone somehow makes them an enemy in the past now and for evermore.
Minds are a terrible thing.
Minds are a terrible thing.
I AM AWESOME MAN
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
I seem to remember (I wasn't there) but did not a US vessel try to invade England and landed and tried to invade a small fishing community but over indulged in the local brew, gave up and went home..
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
cogob;1202163 wrote: I seem to remember (I wasn't there) but did not a US vessel try to invade England and landed and tried to invade a small fishing community but over indulged in the local brew, gave up and went home..
John Paul Jones landed at whitehaven but they went off task a bit and went to the pub. Being the only town in egland to be invaded by america is it's main claim to fame.
John Paul Jones landed at whitehaven but they went off task a bit and went to the pub. Being the only town in egland to be invaded by america is it's main claim to fame.
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote: .
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
It will happen when those people themselves stop referring to themselves as such.
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
It will happen when those people themselves stop referring to themselves as such.
-
Kathy Ellen
- Posts: 10569
- Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:04 pm
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote:
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
:yh_flag:yh_shamrk We won't because we're proud of our heritage. I like for people to know that my family came from Ireland. Who's it hurting when I say that I'm Irish American? I'm proud to be related to both countries. If it makes me happy, and puts a wee bit of joy in my life, why not, says I:-6 :yh_flag:yh_shamrk
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
:yh_flag:yh_shamrk We won't because we're proud of our heritage. I like for people to know that my family came from Ireland. Who's it hurting when I say that I'm Irish American? I'm proud to be related to both countries. If it makes me happy, and puts a wee bit of joy in my life, why not, says I:-6 :yh_flag:yh_shamrk
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Kathy Ellen;1202341 wrote: :yh_flag:yh_shamrk We won't because we're proud of our heritage. I like for people to know that my family came from Ireland. Who's it hurting when I say that I'm Irish American? I'm proud to be related to both countries. If it makes me happy, and puts a wee bit of joy in my life, why not, says I:-6 :yh_flag:yh_shamrk
crikey it was an off the cuff remark I didn't mean anything by it. Just about the only people in the UK that will say british if asked their nationality are northern Irish loyalists.
crikey it was an off the cuff remark I didn't mean anything by it. Just about the only people in the UK that will say british if asked their nationality are northern Irish loyalists.
-
Kathy Ellen
- Posts: 10569
- Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:04 pm
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1202409 wrote: crikey it was an off the cuff remark I didn't mean anything by it. Just about the only people in the UK that will say british if asked their nationality are northern Irish loyalists.
gmc, I didn't take it as an offense, honestly I didn't. I'm just very happy to have Ireland as part of my history:-6:p:D
gmc, I didn't take it as an offense, honestly I didn't. I'm just very happy to have Ireland as part of my history:-6:p:D
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
Kathy Ellen;1202431 wrote: gmc, I didn't take it as an offense, honestly I didn't. I'm just very happy to have Ireland as part of my history:-6:p:D
And we all love the Irish:
And we all love the Irish:
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
I'm a Native American, Irish, German American with a little Arkansas Redneck thrown in, so there.:yh_rotfl
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
gmc;1175865 wrote:
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
Well to be totally honest ive never referred to myself as an Irish, German, Austrian American. Im just an American, we are all mutts. I believe the ones that tag themselves as African Americans, etc. do it for the perks, you know like the National Negro College Fund and the good old NAACP. And God forbid if you refer to them as black even though being called white seems to be alright by caucasians. :rolleyes: I should probably shut up now....
When will amricans stop talking abouit african americans or irsih, german, arab, mexican etc etc americans and just be american?
Well to be totally honest ive never referred to myself as an Irish, German, Austrian American. Im just an American, we are all mutts. I believe the ones that tag themselves as African Americans, etc. do it for the perks, you know like the National Negro College Fund and the good old NAACP. And God forbid if you refer to them as black even though being called white seems to be alright by caucasians. :rolleyes: I should probably shut up now....
Weird that Americas very first war parallels what is going on today
tracy829;1205657 wrote: Well to be totally honest ive never referred to myself as an Irish, German, Austrian American. Im just an American, we are all mutts. I believe the ones that tag themselves as African Americans, etc. do it for the perks, you know like the National Negro College Fund and the good old NAACP. And God forbid if you refer to them as black even though being called white seems to be alright by caucasians. :rolleyes: I should probably shut up now....
Were I to use the phrase "just an american" on this forum I would immediately be accused of being anti-american, of disparaging america by using the word just thereby suggesting it was somehow insignificant. By not capitalising the word American I am being disrespectful (I kid you not I was so accused). If I said you were just mutts I would be accused of making derogatory comments about Americans as a species implying you are somehow sub-human. If I get even remotely close to suggesting you have no sense of humour, can't spell properly and can't take a joke well that would really have some of your countrymen throwing the toys out the pram.
Were I to use the phrase "just an american" on this forum I would immediately be accused of being anti-american, of disparaging america by using the word just thereby suggesting it was somehow insignificant. By not capitalising the word American I am being disrespectful (I kid you not I was so accused). If I said you were just mutts I would be accused of making derogatory comments about Americans as a species implying you are somehow sub-human. If I get even remotely close to suggesting you have no sense of humour, can't spell properly and can't take a joke well that would really have some of your countrymen throwing the toys out the pram.