Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why, after subdueing the indians, the United States...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why, after subdueing the indians, the United States...

    The United States did not invade Mexico ,and if we had took over Mexico instead of them takeing over us now a days what would our country be like?

  • #2
    Troops, money and negative public feelings about another war for something no one really wanted at the time, I expect.

    As for what the country would be like? We would still have a lot of Mexican people within our borders, but they would all be legal citizens, and unless we relocated all of them, maintaining order would eventually become a problem, just as it was in all the colony nations throughout the world.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thread Moved To Alternate Timelines

      ACG Staff
      On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

      ACG History Today

      BoRG

      Comment


      • #4
        1845

        The United States took Mexico in 1845 and then gave most of it back. The general mood of the Country at that time was Manifest Destiny; the desire to cross the continent. The Rio Grande was a clearly defined border and we had the rest of the territory to fill.

        After 1865 the nation had zero desire for another war. Only an attack on Americans or a serious threat to our security will motivate the public. That trend continues to this day.
        God Save The Republic.

        Comment


        • #5
          Although I have run across two individuals, out on the fringe, who thought we should take over all of Central America. One of them thought this would forstall the incipent UN invasion of the US.

          Comment


          • #6
            by subduing, you mean genociding or annihilating, right?

            if that, then the USA - with 60 states or so would be an even larger and prosperous economy, but with huge immigration from... its southern borders to central and south america...

            cancun would be in the USA, so more US laws.. and thus spring break would not be the same....
            "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

            Comment


            • #7
              If the US had kept on walking south and taken all of Mexico my guess is that you would have ended up handing it back.

              Bunch of angry Mexicans taking potshots at American soldiers, no really good productive land, no strategic value. It might have been as good for the locals to be run by the US as it was for the Philipines but probably created more animosity against the Anglos further south.
              What would Occam say?

              Comment


              • #8
                Unfortunate Mexico. So far from Gods blessings, so close to the United States.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Freed from the shakles of a Euro-style Aristocracy that to this day concentraits the wealth into the hads of a few pale-skinned families, the Mexican states would have been much better off (the richest man on Earth is a Mexican, named Slim)

                  However, the US would have been saddled with a Quebec-style province that always yammers about independance while sucking the rest fo the country dry.

                  On second thought, it would not have gotten that far. Mexico would have sided with the Confederacy, and the Union would have lost the Civil War.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                    Freed from the shakles of a Euro-style Aristocracy that to this day concentraits the wealth into the hads of a few pale-skinned families, the Mexican states would have been much better off (the richest man on Earth is a Mexican, named Slim)

                    However, the US would have been saddled with a Quebec-style province that always yammers about independance while sucking the rest fo the country dry.

                    On second thought, it would not have gotten that far. Mexico would have sided with the Confederacy, and the Union would have lost the Civil War.
                    true, true. except that Mr. Slim is of lebanon (does that count as pale skin?). he is quite a slimy, corrupt businessman, I hear.... no wonder he's so rich - can you be rich to that level otherwise anyways???
                    "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by piero1971 View Post
                      true, true. except that Mr. Slim is of lebanon (does that count as pale skin?). he is quite a slimy, corrupt businessman, I hear.... no wonder he's so rich - can you be rich to that level otherwise anyways???
                      How?
                      By having an original idea, and working your ass off... and my setting everything else life has to offer to one side. Thats why so few people go that route.

                      However, teaching people to envy and hate everyone who has more of something than they do themselves is foolish and dangerous, and the Left is going to pay a terible price for all the class-envy they have been promoting.

                      Pale-skinned; if you have ever been to Mexico City (I dont recomend it) You will see the upper-crust is almost entirley made up of people of Spanish lineage, who look down on the brown-skinned magority and openly despise and exclude them from their dealings.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by billscottmorri View Post
                        If the US had kept on walking south and taken all of Mexico my guess is that you would have ended up handing it back.

                        Bunch of angry Mexicans taking potshots at American soldiers, no really good productive land, no strategic value. It might have been as good for the locals to be run by the US as it was for the Philipines but probably created more animosity against the Anglos further south.

                        Yeah, yeah.................but look how well we did with Cuba
                        "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                        Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                        you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                          How?
                          By having an original idea, and working your ass off... and my setting everything else life has to offer to one side. Thats why so few people go that route.

                          However, teaching people to envy and hate everyone who has more of something than they do themselves is foolish and dangerous, and the Left is going to pay a terible price for all the class-envy they have been promoting.

                          Pale-skinned; if you have ever been to Mexico City (I dont recomend it) You will see the upper-crust is almost entirley made up of people of Spanish lineage, who look down on the brown-skinned magority and openly despise and exclude them from their dealings.
                          I dont' disagree with you on all of your post.
                          but we don't mean the same when we mention "rich". see for me a millionaire is not rich. it's just normal. I mean, everyone i know is one (ok, I live in switzerland, and I've been in the IT industry throught the last 15 years... so it helps) - but by rich, I mean the 10'000 people that rule the world - the super super rich, the people above the 500 million and up. those poeple, the cream of the cream of the cream, the top 0.001% - who owns 50% of the world's assets. well these people are usually not (inheritance excluded) created by beeing just nice, inventive and hard working. look at the carnegies, the rockfellers, and the many many others since and up to that Slim mexican guy (the way he hacked control of monopolies in the mobile telecom markets of south america is an illustration of how to corrupt governments). good ideas, hard work and being a big big SOB.

                          nothing new under the sun.

                          unless you prefer to believe myths like "all americans started as poor immigrants, etc."

                          bbut it's easier to believe the myth that
                          "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Oh, okay.

                            Yes, a healthy dose of skepticism and criticism of the top tier is nessecary, and about the only real defense against the top dogs... as is the case with George Soros and his ilk.

                            However, the rich generaly stay that way for only 4 or 5 generations here, the spiled rich kids dont have the drive that the founders of the family did, and either fritter it away or drop out of the true elietist circles.

                            The same thing seems to be happening in Europe, at a slower rate... but pity the Third World!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              oh, in the third world, the very rich elite are vastly more crooked and corrupt than everywhere else. it's not a white-man only desease by far! it's human.

                              now, true enough that some economic systems are better for honest wealth creation - the USA comes to mind. europe is gettign better, but might reverse back, due to the EU - after centuries of elitism - for sure that's a reason why so many europeans left tyrannical and economically blocked europe for the hopes of americas.

                              - to get back to the question. if manifest destiny would continue until stopped, until where would it go - surely cuba would be a state, Mexico could be a few ones as well, but where else would the movement of "go south young man" go?
                              "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X