Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/08/2025 7:29:10 AM PST by ProgressingAmerica
Today we get into the claim that the U.S. stole northern Mexico, and why that is false.
Knowing this history is incredibly important, and you shouldn't need to hire a lawyer to understand it. That's why I'm here to help!
I'm Jake the Lawyer, your Internet Esquire. On this channel I'll be explaining concepts, history, and legal doctrines we've all heard of, but might not totally understand.
Thank you for watching! I'll be dropping episodes every Wednesday. Please enjoy and have a wonderful day.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Kind of like with “Palestine” and Israel.
If Mexico had retained it, it would indeed be a large 3rd world dump and its residents today would not be able to afford the drugs that Mexican cartels traffic into the US. So Mexico would be considerably larger and poorer than it is today. What a mess.
"white, European, Christian men" - those bastards!
The phrase “forced” implies coercion, that is, obedience by force, perhaps through threats.
......................................................
I completely understand your observation. You are right to point out that the difference between “defeated and forced to sign” and “coerced” is subtle and often overlaps, especially in the context of a military or political agreement.
Your point is crucial for understanding the legal status of the Treaty of Velasco (1836), which Santa Anna signed with Texas:
“Forced to sign” / Physical Coercion (Capture): Santa Anna was captured on the battlefield after the defeat at San Jacinto. The agreement he signed (the Treaties of Velasco) was a direct condition for obtaining his freedom. He was, undoubtedly, acting under the force of circumstances and intense pressure to save his life. In legal terms, this is considered a vitiation of consent due to violence or coercion.
Legal and Political Coercion: Under the international and constitutional law of the time, for a treaty or agreement to be valid, it had to be negotiated and ratified by the competent authority of the nation (Congress or the sovereign authority), and not under duress.
The Underlying Issue: Mexican historiography emphasizes that Santa Anna's signature was invalid because it was made while he was a prisoner (coerced/forced) and without the legal authority to recognize Texas's independence. The Mexican Congress declared this, annulling the treaties on the grounds that they were signed under duress and, therefore, had no legal validity.
Mexican troops clashed with Americans in the disputed area north of the Rio Grande claimed by both countries. Abraham Lincoln was in Congress at the time and demanded that the President prove that the spot where American blood was shed was US territory. So he was known as “Spotty” Lincoln.
Exactly the same with most other turd world hellholes. Israel, Rhodesia, America. Civilization is built in savage lands with nothing, they are turned in to first world prosperous countries, then the savages who did absolutely nothing wander in and demand they hand it all over to them.
We paid for it?
Referring to "area north of the Rio Grande" as "disputed" was just a bunch of wordplay from Mexico that's been repeated over and over again in our lifetimes to support the liberal narrative of big bad Americans. Texas' succession from the new nation of Mexico was just as real as Mexico succeeding from Spain. After that, Mexico had no say in whether or not Texas joined the U.S. Mexico attacking above the Rio was a pure attack on the U.S.
Who with any credibility or authority or influence said it was stolen??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.