Joke's on them.
This dude gets *everything*.
Found this a while back on the Internet:
In 1776 the Sioux defeated the Cheyenne in war and took the Black Hills from them.
About 100 years later the US did the same to the Sioux.
Why does the first conquest confer legitimate title and the second doesn’t?
So who gets the Black Hills, the Cheyenne or the Sioux?
Joke's on them.
This dude gets *everything*.
simple answer: white people, you know, the ones that have it now.
If everybody gave back what everybody took, the world would be plucked up.
Neither. The Cheyenne 'stole' it, too.
Maybe give Wyoming 'back' (not sure where they came from, before they were driven out of Wyoming, into Nebraska, then Kansas, then to their current locations*) to the Apaches; move the Blackfoot, Cheyenne, and Crow out to make room for them, while the Lakota/Sioux move back to northern Minnesota....
*There are other, competing, theories concerning how these Athabaskan speakers ended up in the Southwest. One such is that they peacefully migrated into lands recently abandoned by other groups. LOL
In any case it is all moot, because anything that happened before the white man came upon the scene anywhere doesn't count for purposes of this U.N. abomination. Only white man vs "victimized" nonwhite group "takings" will be covered by this, EXCEPT "Zionists" will be deemed guilty of any and all charges concerning any lands anywhere, at any time, most especially Israel.