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

To: FTL

If you knew anything about history you would not even post such a long, sweeping, rambling post and think that anyone was going to devote days of their life to answering it for you.

Pick out something simple like your United States having used biological smallpox warfare on the Indians claim and put it on general chat and it will be discussed.


297 posted on 04/18/2009 11:13:50 PM PDT by ansel12 (Romney (guns)"instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies ]


To: ansel12

If you knew anything about history you would be able to pick one that you have avoided answering - and answer it.


298 posted on 04/18/2009 11:24:45 PM PDT by FTL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies ]

To: ansel12
"Pick out something simple like your United States having used biological smallpox warfare on the Indians claim and put it on general chat and it will be discussed.

I never said that now, did I.

Nowhere in that line do I claim smallpox was a program by the US government since at the time there was no "US Government".

Another "nice" attempt at a canard and straw man though.

Here is what I wrote: "Deliberate small pox can be considered use of a biological WMD."

Funny how you tried to convert that statement into "United States having used biological smallpox warfare on the Indians".

How do you know I wasn't referring to the Early America, i.e. the EARLY Americans as in Brits, which is what we were, before we declared Independence?

The hostility between the British and Native Americans after the French and Indian War led to one of the first documented attempts at biological warfare in North American history.

In response to the 1763 uprising known as Pontiac's Rebellion, Amherst suggested using smallpox as a weapon for racial extermination.

In a series of letters he exchanged with his subordinate, Colonel Henry Bouquet, he proposed that Bouquet infect Native Americans with smallpox through gifts of blankets that had been exposed to the disease, and Bouquet readily agreed to comply. In fact, the commander at Fort Pitt had already attempted this very tactic. Although Amherst's name is usually connected with this incident because he was the overall commander, and because he gave the orders to Bouquet, evidence appears to indicate that the attempt was made without Amherst's prior knowledge

"At the time of the Pontiac rebellion in 1763, Sir Jeffrey Amherst, the Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America, wrote to Colonel Henry Bouquet: 'Could it not be contrived to send smallpox among these disaffected tribes of Indians? We must use every stratagem in our power to reduce them.' The colonel replied: 'I will try to inoculate the [Native American tribe] with some blankets that may fall in their hands, and take care not to get the disease myself.'

Smallpox decimated the Native Americans, who had never been exposed to the disease before and had no immunity."

Come back when you learn a little history yourself!

Given the fact that smallpox and other diseases killed millions of Native Americans - use of the term "Weapon of Mass Destruction" when a devastating disease is deliberately released among a population of people known to have no defense to it is not entirely without merit. Just as the term WMD is loosely used for a dirty bomb. Only in this case deliberately attempting to spread disease to a race without immunity could be considered far more deadly and in the end kill as many as a whole barrage of nukes.

Just because something can be called a WMD doesn't necessarily mean it was used on a large scale - I never said that - you attempted to but that was rejected.

If someone dumps truck fulls of radioactive waste or plague into a single city's water supply, that would be termed a WMD.

Smallpox is only one factor of a long list of things that if America did them nowadays to a stone age tribe - it would be called genocide.

But we're not talking about now - we're talking about then. And regardless, you won's see me apologizing for any of it cause I wasn't there.

Lets see if you are able to move on to any one of the other list of points to choose from and attempt to deny any of those happened.

And then, once you are able to admit they happened, lets see if you are able to take my position and not worry about apologizing for it even though you admit it happened.

It seems that you are very timid about both acknowledging facts and then not apologizing.

Brainwashed is all I can say.
301 posted on 04/19/2009 12:11:30 AM PDT by FTL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | 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