“Did America unlawfully seize land from the Indians or not?”
Yes.
“The only possible answer to the question is Yes.”
And?
“Following your logic, they would be justified in slaughtering Americans in order to reclaim their land.”
False. 1) They all agreed to recognize the seizures after the fact in various treaties. Thus, they have no claim. 2) The re-taking of land from Muslim invaders was justified not only because Christians never recognized the seizures by treaty but also because the Muslim invaders - by their own ;aw - mistreated Christians and denied them rights which it was immoral to deny. American Indians were made U.S. citizens in the 1920s by law and are not denied any of the basic human rights.
“That you can’t follow your own logic offers a crystal-clear repudiation of your own thought process.”
Actually I have no problem whatsoever following my own logic in all cases. The problem is not my logic but your apparent poor grasp of history or its details.
“Logic and reasoning are not things that vary by situation.”
No, and mine has not either. The problem is that you are not making proper distinctions. After all, by your own logic you have participated in theft after the fact. When will you turn yourself into the local Indian tribunal for judgment? Or will you just be a hypocrite?
“I have enjoyed playing with you, much like a cat with a rodent. Thank you for that.”
In this case, I am the cat. You really seem to have no idea of what you’re talking about.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/indian-treaties
So treaties forced upon a country being exterminated are righteous? Interesting viewpoint.
Even under logic as stupid as that, America still managed to violate these treaties.
Your assertion is merely that might makes right. Kind of what America fought against at its inception.