Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: hedgetrimmer
Because it mentions Indians in reference to commerce and representation, you infer that establishing foreign sovereign states within the boundaries of the US is ok?

Someone far more knowledgable than I needs to answer this, but weren't most "indian territories" outside of the US at the time of the ratification of the constitution, and thus technically the US developed around them.

45 posted on 07/10/2008 10:12:43 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: Phantom Lord

Indian territories were merged with US territories to create states. Oklahoma indian territory for one, merged in 1906 or somewhere around there to create the state of Oklahoma.

Oklahoma could not become a state unless while the indian territory remained a separate tribal ‘nation’.

You’ll be interested to know that the UN promotes the idea of sovereign nations for tribes and indigenous groups within the borders of countries, because it creates disunity and dissolves national authority over them. See Kosovo for more information.


46 posted on 07/10/2008 10:25:46 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson