Who believes that the Southwest USA still belongs to Mexico/natives?
350449
The Southwest belongs to the United States. It has since the 1800s. Why all of a sudden, are people claiming it belongs to Mexico? If Mexico wants it, then Mexico can just try to fucking take it. I'll be waiting for them, along with millions of other service members and armed citizens.
80040
Poor Mexico - so close to the United States, so far from God,’ runs a popular Mexican saying. This leads me to believe it is a 'public domain' quote, the origin unknown, or unremembered
891073
Nothing New About It\n\nhttp://www.limitstogrowth.org/WEB-text/aztlan.html\n\nIn 1997, then-President Zedillo proclaimed that \n“I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation \nextends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders.” \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDuring the ''conquista,'' \nSpain tried to impose on Mexico \na common western language, religion, and culture, \nand to the degree it was successful.  \nIt was also anti-American.  \nWe should remember \nthat the Spaniards were building the great cathedral \nat the Zocolo in Mexico City \na hundred years before George Washington \ntook control of the Continental Army \nat Cambridge, Massachusetts.  \nHere are two different world views, sharing the same continent.\n\nIn his article, Clash of Civilizations?, \nSamuel P. Huntington reminds us \nthat cultural differences may cause future wars, \nand that these wars will be along cultural ''fault lines.''  \n\nThe U. S.--Mexican border is one of those fault lines.  \n\nHuntington writes, \n''Civilization identity will be increasingly important in the future,\nand the world will be shaped in large measure \nby the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations \n\nThe most important conflicts of the future \nwill occur along the cultural fault lines \nseparating these civilizations from one another.'' \n\nIn regard to Mexico, Huntington writes, \n''During the past decade, \nMexico has assumed a position \nsomewhat similar to that of Turkey. \nJust as Turkey abandoned its historic opposition to Europe \nand attempted to join Europe, \nMexico has stopped defining itself \nby its opposition to the United States \nand is instead attempting to imitate the United States.''  \nHowever, \nunlike Canada, \nMexico has a large, nonwestern, indigenous population \nthat has not yet been integrated into modernity.  \nThis native population also carries \nan unconscious weight of resentment \ntowards the Spanish conquest, \nwhich it now mistakenly displaces onto the U. S. \n\nMexico's indigenous population \nis one of the contemporary strains in that society.  \nSub-Comandante Marcos \nand the uprising in Chiapas of indigenous people \nis a prediction of what is to come in Mexico \nif that strain cannot be relieved.\n  \nThe Mexican elites have decided, therefore, \nto reduce this strain by sending north \nas many poor and jobless Mexicans as they can.  \nInstead of solving their own problems, \nwhich might entail a reduction of their status, \nthe ruling Mexican elites have decided to keep the fiesta going\nand let the U. S. handle the cleanup. \n\nA top adviser \nto past Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari \ndescribed to Huntington all the changes \nthe Salinas government was making.  \nWhen the advisor finished, Huntington remarked: \n''That's most impressive.  \nIt seems to me that basically you want to change Mexico \nfrom a Latin American country into a North American country.''\nHe looked at me with surprise and exclaimed: \n''Exactly!  \nThat's precisely what we are trying to do, \nbut of course we could never say so publicly.'' \n \nWhat also could not be said publicly \nis that Mexico wants to reclaim its ''lost'' territory.  \nIt will use economics and illegal immigrants to do this.\n\nMany Mexican elites believe that to become a modern nation,\nMexico has to restructure its economy \nand regain the territory it lost during the first Mexican war.  \nFor over a century, \nMexican nationalists have used the myths and symbols \nof a lost but glorious indigenous past \nto motivate its plans for expansion. \n \nD. H. Lawrence wrote about this myth building in his novel, \nThe Plumed Serpent. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nIf the ''reconquista'' continues unchecked \nfor the next twenty years, \nthe U. S. will be a fundamentally different society than it is today.\n\nThere will be more poverty and low-wage jo
63638
Native Americans... but I would not put it as "disputing European land claims".... rather the question should be "Who did the Europeans steal the land from" !\nThe native americans lived in what is now called america for thousands of years before the Europeans arrived to loot and plunder and commit genocides... this sounds harsh but it is sadly true.
616827
Mexico most definitely DID NOT cede Texas to the US. Texas won her independence from Mexico in April of 1836 because President Santa Anna failed to live up to the terms of the Constitution of 1824.\n\nMost of the people who fought and died in the Texas Revolution were Mexican citizens. The majority of Texas' citizens - both Anglo and Hispanic alike - supported the Texans fight for independence.\n\nTexas was an independent Republic for ten years before joining the United States in 1846.\n\nInterestingly, when Texas won independence and joined the United States ten years later, Texas territory extended all the way up into Colorado. Do the illegal immigrants plan to recapture Colorado in their laughable plan to regain Aztlán???
729300
they did sell it, right after the mexican american war "Surveys consistently show 70% of Mexican citizens believe the U.S. stole the Mexican Cession illegally, when in fact the U.S. bought the land for $18 million after the Mexican-American War."  ( http://www.noinvaders.org/home.shtml  scroll down to "this is mexico we are taking over" )  and 18 million back then was still a dirt cheap price for the amount of land the US got.
1052424
I heard about it,and evidently there is truth to it!! I live in Arizona,and illegals have just about taken over the state!!!!! But, what the ILLEGALS and mexico FAILS to mention,is the U.S. PAID mexico for these territorys,which are NOW Arizona,New Mexico,Texas,and California.
285247
They think Texas is part of Mexico,no joke
883955
Surley the point of the question is not to keep going over the past, but to query the right of the US to deny to others what it has asserted for itself, that is freedom of movement to other countries.\n\nIt is ridiculous to assert that there were no laws, therefore everything was legal. All societies have rules of behaviour. The settlers simply declared their own rights over the land, and increasingly denied any rights to the Natives as they got stronger.\n\nOf course the past can't be undone, and the Indians were not pure and innocent; and today's Mexicans are in part descended from similar settlers.\n\nBut we could try to accept that there is nothing new about migration, and that immigrants are motivated by the same human desires that inspired the Pilgrim Fathers.
529567
OK thats a good question ... up to now I do agree with Gonzalez... I hate to tell you this mi amigo Hayleylov but it is true that there was a big part of land that was taken (NOT Conquered)that is known as US territory now. It is on many US History books and Predator maybe you should take a look before telling someone to read history without reading it yourself first.Pain and blood had run through the US street as well. Back in the time there were the indians who were forced to become "The Guests" of their OWN LAND and the worst part is that they still suffering the damage that this society have done to them. A fair land??? Yes it was fair for the ones that took the Land and worked the slaves. I mean common people this country was build on many people's pain and it continues to be that way until we stop to THINK whats really a GOOD REASON to treat humans that bad (Is power a good reason?) . Otherwise, kingdoms collapse like many did back on time. The pain will continue even if they legalize millions of people (mexicans, asians, cubans etc) it doesnt matter if the racism and hate still spreads around. What difference will it make????  \nPlus this country is based on immigration LEGAL or ILLEGAL you' all got here someway or another dindt ya?... So pleeeeeeeease stop being such close minded and be realistic for once before making comments. And do whatever you want to do with illegals as long as you do it as a ONE NATION UNDER GOD. Peace =)
1179034
You pose an interesting question, though it’s a little peculiar. If “white people” took the Native’s land, it seems that they would have the best understanding of the consequences that “taking” land leads to. Thus, your question actually answers itself. “White people’s” fear would logically follow from an understanding of the consequences that may come about.\n\nWith that said, I’d like to make a few other quick points. You repeatedly used the term “white people”, and it seems that you are trying to suggest this is a “white person” issue. That’s completely unfounded. For one, there are plenty of Americans of all skin colors and cultures that oppose illegal immigration, to include Americans of Mexican ancestry. Also, most “white” Americans oppose all illegal immigration, including illegal immigrants from “white” European nations. So this is not an issue of color at all, and I hope that you can see that.\n\nYou also mention in your comments that “white people” took the land from the Native’s but you fail to mention that so did other countries. First Spain “took” it, and then later Mexico “took” it. You say that California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas belonged to them, but you fail to mention that Mexico actually “took” these areas from the “Natives” first. This further shows that this has nothing to do with “white people”. In fact, with few exceptions the majority of warfare throughout all of human history has involved the “taking” of land from people who were there first. This happened in Asia, Africa, Europe, Australia, and the Americas, and it usually had nothing to do with skin color. When Africans fight Africans over land, they are also “taking” the land from someone else who had it first. It shows ignorance to speak of Africa as if it were unified just because the majority of the population shares the same skin color. The same goes for every other country or civilization throughout history. The “Natives” fought other “Natives” and “took” the land. What makes you think that a given “Native” tribe didn’t take the land from other “Natives” at some point in history? We know that warring tribes did this all of the time. The color designation is completely irrelevant and is therefore inappropriate.\n\nOne last point is that most Americans, including “white people”, have no problem with people coming to the U.S. legally. The issue revolves around legal entry into the country, and has nothing to do with the ethnic background of the person. The United States has the right to control its borders. Indeed, it must control its borders. The Mexicans that want to come to the United States usually want to come to get a job. However, if there were no controls on the number of people who could come into the United States there would be tragic consequences. Do you think that if ten million Mexicans came to the United States next month that the U.S. economy would be able to support them? All of the people working in lower income jobs would end up suffering because of simple supply and demand labor economics. The more workers that there are the less they need to be paid. So it makes sense for “white people” as well as every single other American to oppose illegal immigration. Tens of thousands of people of Mexican ancestry come to the U.S. legally every year, and we’re happy to have them.
1049723
The same reason that citizens of Mexico call it "Mexico" when it is actually "Los Estados Unidos Mexicanos" The United States of Mexico. So therefore The United States of America is "America". I dont want to say the whole thing all the time, it is too much. I am against people living in a pro-American, anti-anything else bubble, but I dont think that is the reason behind THIS!
633415
thats what ive been saying. im hopie, cherokee & blackfoot and have made the point that 'indians' & mexicans are the ones that have home rights. funnt how the answers flipped. one second they want mexicans out of their country but when the same is applied to them, theyre against it.
134629
at the moment only the good ol' USA is named United States.\nbesides the mexico example you mentioned, I don't know any others that were called United States in the past.
188073
Technically you're correct.  You'd do a better job making your point without the capital letters.\n\nYes, Mexico is part of North America, thus Mexicans are also Americans.  As a matter of fact they're a member of the Organization of American States (OAS).  \n\nThe answer to your question is "history."  The U.S.A. is the only country to use "America" in it's name.  It's a lot short to refer to someone as an "American" rather than a "United States of American".  Over time that was just the accepted terminology.  There's lots of terminology out there that isn't 100% precise.  Get over it.  It's no denigration of other countries.
658577
The reason that land belongs to the United States is because the people that lived there at the time wanted to be a part of the United States, not Mexico. Apparently, nobody wants to live in Mexico since they all want to come here. I wouldn't want to live in Mexico. If I were a Mexican citizen I would want the whole country of Mexico to become part of the United States.
1152341
The U.S. doesn't have an official language as such ... but we should have!!  And present day Mexicans have no claim whatsoever over any part of the U.S. ... even the Mexican constitution acknowledges where the border is drawn, and what belongs to Mexico ... and having read their constitution, I didn't find one reference to California or New Mexico or whatever they want to claim belongs to Mexico ... we have to deal with the realities of TODAY ... not the realities of hundreds of years ago ... at the same token, Russia could then claim Estonia again ... Sweden could claim the ports of Germany .... and on and on it goes ....