The Iraqi's just don't get it.

[foxy-abby]

I'm not going to reply to the trashing of my post in regards to Iraq because I think that Z18 did a fine job. But, I will say that in regards to the Soviet Union truth factory -- my wife grew up in Moscow, and I have been there 4 times, and you can rest assured that Americans have far better access to the truth, via independent press (not government owned and controlled), than our friends in Russia. Even today.

 

[Electro]

btw, i didnt post my views about anything .... remember that.

 

[Eric5273]

Oh, do tell -- I want to hear this What lies did your friend expose? Was the Soviet Union really a lovely place and not a totalitarian and expansionist regime? Was the government (especially under Stalin) not responsible for more murders and other atrocities than Hitler?

She and her family moved to the US in 1994. She said things got so much worse after the communist government fell that they had to leave because her family could not find jobs. She still has some family there and things are far worse now than they ever were before. They have huge unemployment, lots of homeless, and high crime -- all things that did not exist there before.

I met her grandfather a few times, and he does not speak english very well, but he speaks of Stalin the way my grandfather spoke of FDR. He thinks he was a great leader. I'm sure you would find plenty of Russians who would disagree as well. But if you took a poll of Russian citizens who were alive when Stalin was the Soviet Premier, You would probably come up with pretty close to an even split.

But that's not the stuff I am talking about. I am talking about things like freedom and choice. When I was in school, I learned that you could not choose what you wanted to be in the Soviet Union -- they would decide who became a doctor, lawyer, janitor, etc. There is not one bit of truth to that. Everyone could become what they want, and the government paid for you to go to school including things such as medical school. Of course if you did not have the grades to quality, then you couldn't, but that is no different than here -- you still need to be accepted into medical school, law school, etc. Everyone received free health care, everyone was guaranteed a job and a place to live. In general, Russian people had a lower standard of living than people in America, but you have to realize that in 1917, Russia was still a third world country. So you can not compare their economy with the US, who at the same time, was an industrialized world power. A more realistic comparison would be to compare them to India, China, Brazil, or another large country that was a third world country in 1900.

As far as freedom, she said people could do what they want. They had political protests just like we did here. They had elections, people voted for their choice of candidates, etc. She said during the Afghan war, there were tons of protests and that is what eventually caused Russia to withdraw -- public pressure -- much like here with Vietnam.

Other than them being Communist and us being Capitalist, we were much more alike than you would think. And they learned the same propoganda about us that we learned about them. She said in school they would be shown videos of the homeless in the South Bronx and were told that is how things are in the US. She said they were told of the evils of capitalism and told that corporations control the American government.

Agreed.... so shouldn't we remove for our benefit, their benefit, and the world, these regimes?

Not at the cost of tens of thousands of lives. Instead we should make it policy not to sell arms to non-democratic countries. If things are so bad in these countries, the people will eventually revolt, just like they did in France, Russia, Iran, Spain, and a few dozen other countries over the last couple hundred years.

Again, don't believe everything you are told about all countries. Yes, there are plenty of evil governments, but things are fine in some countries, yet we are told their leaders are evil. They tend to be countries that refuse to allow foreign investment by American businesses such as Cuba or Iran. But on average, the common person in Cuba lives much better than other countries in the Caribbean, and the people in Iran are much better off than other countries in the Middle East. In these cases, our government's foreign policy is purely economic.

If you want a good accessment of which countries have human rights abuses, go to the websites of Human Rights Watch, or the International Red Cross, or some other Human Rights group. You will find countries such as North Korea, Turkmenistan, Sudan and Columbia listed. But countries like Iran and Cuba will be absent from their list, and there is a reason.

Oh, please. Elected? You mean like how Saddam was elected? He has never been accused of abuses? Wow. We're in different realities again, becuse that's not my understanding.

Yes, he was elected to his office twice and both elections were monitored by the United Nations. I have never read any accusations of Human Rights abuses, but please do post any articles of such abuses and I would be happy to read them. And please use a neutral source -- not an Israeli newspaper. Israel always accuses Arafat of being a terrorist. But the only human rights abuses in Palistine that I have read about are those by Israeli soldiers.

Do they speak English such that they could understand what they're hearing? Why do they tolerate terrorists running around and attacking Israel?

They see Israel, the country that stole their land, as their enemy. These "terrorists" you refer to are heroes to them. If you remember your elementary school history, you will remember a group of terrorists burning a ship in the boston harbor in the 1770s. Why did their countrymen "tolerate" them?

If they have access to free information and aren't under an environment of oppression, then why the abject poverity and the toleration and sometime support of those who commit terrorist acts in Israel? Someting doesn't add up.

Because they see Israel as the reason they are in poverty.

Sometimes you have to support the lesser of two evils, and in the ever changing geopolitical world, this shifts around a bit. I wish we didn't have to do this, but it's been the right choice in the past as many or more times than it was the wrong choice (though we've certainly screwed things up often too -- Cuba comes to mind -- supporting Batista without demanding he change things helped Castro rally the populace to his aid).

Twisted sense of history you have here?

Maybe you ought to read a book sometime about the Cuban revolution. We are the ones who armed Castro and his people. He was American educated, came from a wealthy family, and his people were armed and trained in the US. He was no different than any of the other leaders we trained in Central America, except that when he got into power, instead of being a puppet leader, he actually did what he said he was going to do, and started making economic reforms.

Even after he took power (about a year later), he visited the US, and went to Washington to ask for aid. Eisenhower refused to meet with him because he had cracked down on corruption and kicked a few US businesses out of Cuba. So needing a trading partner and foreign aid, he turned to Russia. And of course, then in the eyes of the American press, he becamse "communist".

Again, I question whether these people were truly democratically elected... again, Saddam was 'elected'. FREE elections are the key, and also by a populace who has had freedom of the press and education such that they cannot be easily duped into electing a bad person into power.

Good point. In prior centuries, governments repressed the people by force. Today it is done through propoganda. People think they have democracy.

Saying we don't want to see freedom in general is ludicrous and contrary to history, though. Our security and vital interests come first, but then after that comes freedom for other people.

"vital insterests" as you say, always come first with our foreign policy. And those interests tend to be not the interests of the masses, but the interests of the elite who own the large corporations. Our leaders would overthrow a democratic government to install Hitler in power if it meant American business interests would benefit. But yes, I agree that all things being equal, we would prefer if the people had freedom.

 

[Eric5273]

Also, with regard to Cuba under Castro, or the Soviet Union under Stalin, or even Iran or Iraq in the 1980s, you have to remember that every country always goes through a period of political instability after a revolution. Usually the leaders, to eliminate any risk of losing power, will crack down on opposition -- usually by force or secret police, etc.

Obviously I disagree with such measures, but this is the history of the world. Even here in the good ole USA, we had the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. Take a look at some of the text:

deport aliens "dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States" during peacetime.

This act allowed the wartime arrest, imprisonment and deportation of any alien subject to an enemy power.

any treasonable activity, including the publication of "any false, scandalous and malicious writing," was a high misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment.

By virtue of this legislation twenty-five men, most of them editors of Republican newspapers, were arrested and their newspapers forced to shut down.

Many Americans questioned the constitutionality of these laws. Indeed, public opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts was so great that they were in part responsible for the election of Thomas Jefferson, a Republican, to the presidency in 1800. Once in office, Jefferson pardoned all those convicted under the Sedition Act, while Congress restored all fines paid with interest.

 

[nkb]

Much like the way I was taught about communism when I was in school. Only much later in life, when I have a friend that grew up in the Soviet Union, do I find out that most of what I learned were lies.

You crack me up, Eric.

Aren't you the one who has argued in multiple posts that propaganda can make people think they live in a free society?

But, now, you're turning around and using testimony of someone who grew up under one of the greatest propaganda machines ever seen, to make a point.

The Soviet Union had one of the tightest controls over information of any country ever. In fact, the only non-government information sources (Voice of America, BBC and Radio Liberty) that were available to Soviet citizens were jammed, for decades, at a cost of millions of dollars.

Now, I don't know what you learned in school about the Soviet Union, but I'm guessing it was along the lines of people not having freedom, which would have been an accurate portrayal.

 

[nkb]

She and her family moved to the US in 1994. She said things got so much worse after the communist government fell that they had to leave because her family could not find jobs. She still has some family there and things are far worse now than they ever were before. They have huge unemployment, lots of homeless, and high crime -- all things that did not exist there before.

That happens every time. When a totalitarian regime, that has been in power for a long time, falls, everything goes to hell. One of the main reasons is crime. During the repressive times, crime was rampant. In a lot of cases, it was in the government's best interest to let the crime syndicates do their thing, because the black market was the only way for non-privileged people to get anything. But, when you let the mob reign free, they will end up having a lot of power.

All of a sudden, law enforcement is either taken away, or greatly reduced (as it was during the rebuild), crime runs rampant. Crime organizations control everything now, crime bosses are the rich guys.

I met her grandfather a few times, and he does not speak english very well, but he speaks of Stalin the way my grandfather spoke of FDR. He thinks he was a great leader. I'm sure you would find plenty of Russians who would disagree as well.

That is one of the dumbest arguments you have made. Her grandfather remembers the grand old times when the Soviet Union was great, a force to be reckoned with, and was standing up to those capitalist expansionists that wanted to take away their way of life. At the time of Stalin, the propaganda machine was running in high gear. Do you think gramps heard about the millions of people that were systematically murdered or shipped off to Siberia?

But if you took a poll of Russian citizens who were alive when Stalin was the Soviet Premier, You would probably come up with pretty close to an even split.

Yeah, no sh|t. Because people who weren't happy with Stalin are DEAD.
If the Nazis had won the war, and the Nazis still ruled in Europe, what do you think people would be saying about Hitler? Of course, things are different, because the Nazis only ruled for about a dozen years, and all the misdeeds were uncovered for all to see.

Everyone received free health care, everyone was guaranteed a job and a place to live.

Crappy health care, artificially created jobs, and sub-standard living arrangements. We could do the same, and our economy would eventually collapse as well.

As far as freedom, she said people could do what they want. They had political protests just like we did here. They had elections, people voted for their choice of candidates, etc. She said during the Afghan war, there were tons of protests and that is what eventually caused Russia to withdraw -- public pressure -- much like here with Vietnam.

I submit that your friend is either not very smart, or brainwashed. If she actually believes that they had free political protests, which did not have to be sanctioned by the government, then she is delusionary. Voting? Sure, they had elections. Of course, there was no opposition to the Communist party, but that is a minor detail.

As far as Afghanistan, please clarify something. Where did the Soviet people get their information on the state of things in Afghanistan, to even be opposed to it? From the government media? I don't think so. The notion that public pressure in the Soviet Union had anything to do with the decision to withdraw is absurd.

Other than them being Communist and us being Capitalist, we were much more alike than you would think. And they learned the same propoganda about us that we learned about them. She said in school they would be shown videos of the homeless in the South Bronx and were told that is how things are in the US. She said they were told of the evils of capitalism and told that corporations control the American government.

Finally, we agree on one point. Yes, they were programmed to see us as the evil empire. Yes, they were shown how bad things can be in the West. Propaganda in a totalitarian system is an amazing tool, isn't it?

 

[Z18]

nkb: You said it all better than I could -- thanks for the assist

The only thing I'll add is I have a good friend who just married a girl who lived in Moscow her whole life and has now left to live here. I will ask him what her perceptions were there as to the issues brought up.

 

[Sig]

Eric-

Have you ever thought about emigrating?

You come across as a miserable person who feels victimized to be stuck in this God-foresaken-land.... perhaps you would be better off in another country.

I'm sure there are plenty of places that will take you

 

[Eric5273]

Eric-

Have you ever thought about emigrating?

You come across as a miserable person who feels victimized to be stuck in this God-foresaken-land.... perhaps you would be better off in another country.

I'm sure there are plenty of places that will take you

No, I like where I live. I am one of the elite who benefits from all these pro-big-business policies of the Bush Administration. From my perspective, the economy has been booming the last 3 years. I've seen my company's profits rise 100% over the last 3 years. As the dollar sinks in value compared to the Euro, that puts money in my pocket since I am primarily an exporter.

Last year I paid less in taxes than I paid in maintanance on my NSX. I feel sorry for the average worker who actually has to pay taxes and gets almost nothing in return.

But I can be impartial and recognize the reality of how things are. Our government's policies are designed to make people like me richer at the expensive of the average guy. What cracks me up is that the average guy out there actually thinks there are people in Washington who care about him.

 

[nkb]

The only thing I'll add is I have a good friend who just married a girl who lived in Moscow her whole life and has now left to live here. I will ask him what her perceptions were there as to the issues brought up.

Well, I can give you some of the perspectives from my mother, who was born in Belarus in 1930, and who also worked her entire career at Radio Liberty, a US-run radio station that broadcast into all the parts of the former Soviet Union.

Her father, who was an army officer, was executed during one of the many random Stalin "cleansings". Her mother was taken away in the middle of the night, never to be seen again. She tells me stories of people being arrested for no apparent reason. Very few had the balls to speak out, because it was general knowledge that you could be sent to Siberia into the gulags.

Her aunt took her, and they got the hell out of there at the first chance they had, which happened to be at the end of WWII.

I still remember when I was a kid, every once in a great while, a distant relative of hers would be allowed to visit us (very rare) in Germany, where we lived. Their jaws would drop to the floor when they walked into a bakery or a butcher shop, because they couldn't believe the food that was readily available. They would act like kids in a candy store wherever they went, because they were amazed at how great things were in the West.

In her 40+years of working at the radio station, my mother came into contact with 100's of people from the Soviet Union, and I don't think many of them would agree with most of Eric's statements. The majority were happy to be out of that place.

 

[Eric5273]

The majority were happy to be out of that place.

Most people are happy to leave a place after they have left, thus the reason for their leaving.

If you took a poll of Americans who left the United States to become a citizen of another country, most of them too would say they are happy to have left.

 

[KGP]

Eric, you might find your time better spent by going here. After all, 90 of your last 100 posts are off topic and mostly political in nature. Just trying to help a brotha out.

 

[KGP]

Last year I paid less in taxes than I paid in maintanance on my NSX. I feel sorry for the average worker who actually has to pay taxes and gets almost nothing in return.

Hmmm... I contributed nearly half my earnings by way of taxes last year, for which the "average worker" (as it seems you term them) benefits from my resolve to do better for my family and myself. On the other hand, you claim to pay nearly zilch, while bringing forth ideas and arguements for our society being screwed up because of "pro-big-business policies." Tell ya what, start paying what I pay, then I'll listen to maybe more than bits and pieces of what you have to say.

 

[Sig]

Most people are happy to leave a place after they have left, thus the reason for their leaving.

If you took a poll of Americans who left the United States to become a citizen of another country, most of them too would say they are happy to have left.

Funny how you correlate US expatriots to those who emigrated from oppressive regimes. If the two concepts are equivalent in your mind, then any kind of discussion is a waste of time.

The vast majority of those who emigrate from the US have significant wealth. Whereas the vast majority of those trying immigrate, legally and illegaly, are poor.

Yeah, you must be right, America stinks for the little person. Funny how they still fall all over themselves to live here. It wasn't too long ago that my family, filled to brim with 'average guys' and gals, darted Europe for the U.S. Having spent time in many countries on both sides of the pond, I can assure your jaded mind that the opportunity for the 'average guy' is exponentially higher in the U.S.

 

[Eric5273]

Originally posted by KGP
Tell ya what, start paying what I pay, then I'll listen to maybe more than bits and pieces of what you have to say.

I pay my taxes according to the law. I pay everything I am supposed to pay. It just so happens that there are all kinds of tax loopholes and exemptions that are passed by our government so that people such as myself don't have to pay taxes. Things such as the oil depreciation allowance -- they have similar tax codes for many other industries as well.

Basically, if you re-invest your profits, you don't have to pay capital gains tax. And within the next few years, I'm guessing they will eliminate the capital gains tax entirely, which will mean that I will pay zero taxes since all of my earnings come from capital gains.

 

[BadCarma]

Eric,you be good or you will be incarnated on the same planet as Johnny Depp in your next life and it will be in a country like America(not France) during the 50's and Mc Carthy is not running the inquisition but is President. and Remember VOTE BUSH or your Karma will be shit!BTW the only difference between you and Johnny Depp is Depp has talent!

disclaimer: Eric you know I like you very much and am just having little joke between comrades da,just because you are on my ignore list does not mean I dislike you.I still read the 'odd' post gleaned from others whom also like you so much they quote your words,they are very very amusing.

 

[KGP]

I pay my taxes according to the law.

So, you live your life as, in your words, "the pro big business goverment," has defined what is best for our country, and thus you capitalize. But you also feel that you need to tell others how to make things better for the overall good for our society, which is in direct contrast to how you live your life fiscally and legally. My friend I think you have a scewed idea as to what democracy is, and how voting should take place. Live your life and vote as you see it being best for you, not others. I don't need your help in telling me how to live my life, nor do I need you telling me how and where to spend my hard earned dollars.

I went to the library today to to find some books on great american bluenose scandalmongering meddlers. I found none.

 

[saxonsaxon]

taxes and America

I pay my taxes according to the law. I pay everything I am supposed to pay. It just so happens that there are all kinds of tax loopholes and exemptions that are passed by our government so that people such as myself don't have to pay taxes. Things such as the oil depreciation allowance -- they have similar tax codes for many other industries as well.

Basically, if you re-invest your profits, you don't have to pay capital gains tax. And within the next few years, I'm guessing they will eliminate the capital gains tax entirely, which will mean that I will pay zero taxes since all of my earnings come from capital gains.

First of all Eric, I am gald there are people like you out there. One of the reason that I still live in NYC is precisely folks like you. I am glad that you take time to explain and present your views in a very calm way (something I lack) and try to educate us. Thank You!
As for people from the ex communist block. From my experience most of the students who have gone through a communist style education system are very well prepared and find US system of education weak (post K 12 level).
My question is since their governments wanted to control them so much, why all the education? keeping people stupid and busy with unimportant things is the best way to control them and keep them "happy".
Romans were masters at it, and for centuries kept the plebs content. Why then the Soviets and other easter european communist governments provided free and high quality education for all its citizens?

 

[nkb]

Re: taxes and America

As for people from the ex communist block. From my experience most of the students who have gone through a communist style education system are very well prepared and find US system of education weak (post K 12 level).

I would agree with you if you are talking about K-12 education being weak here (it is, compared to all other industrialized countries that I have been exposed to). But, college level, I don't think that assessment is accurate. Never mind Eastern European colleges, I don't think most Western European ones can match up with schools here (not talking about cost, of course, just quality of education).

My question is since their governments wanted to control them so much, why all the education? keeping people stupid and busy with unimportant things is the best way to control them and keep them "happy".
Romans were masters at it, and for centuries kept the plebs content. Why then the Soviets and other easter european communist governments provided free and high quality education for all its citizens?

Educating their citizens was absolutely necessary, since they needed to continue advancing in technology and sciences to keep up with the West. Having knowledgable scientists does not stop a country from keeping people stupid about a lot of other things. Now, if you ever have a chance to check what their humanities curriculums were like, I think you will be surprised. History in the Soviet Union was very different from the rest of the world. They had quite an interesting twist on some world events, especially ones that involved either the USSR or the USA.

 

[Eric5273]

I'll agree with nkb here, at least as far as his last post goes.

The purpose of Communism is to do for the collective good. The better educated everyone is, the more productive people can be. But that does not mean that people are well informed about politics and current events. The German public in the 1930s were probably the most educated public in the world at that time, and Germany was clearly the world leader as far as technology, science, etc. But the people were victims of the most immense propoganda campaign ever.

As far as the Soviet Union goes, this had nothing to do with Communism, but more to do with the political system they had. Also, as far as the comment above that all the candidates in their elections were Communist, you have the same problem here in that all the candidates in our elections are Capitalist -- the American Communist party was banned from participating in national elections in the 1940s.

But I hate that politics is always brought into discussions of Communism and Capitalism. Communism has nothing to do with politics, and is purely an economic system. There is no reason why you cannot have Democracy and Communism.

 

[nkb]

I'll agree with nkb here, at least as far as his last post goes.

Eric,
I don't want you to get the impression that I always disagree with you. I actually agree with quite a few of your views, but you lose me when you go to the extreme.

But I hate that politics is always brought into discussions of Communism and Capitalism. Communism has nothing to do with politics, and is purely an economic system. There is no reason why you cannot have Democracy and Communism.

In the true definition of communism, you are absolutely correct, it is purely an economic theory. However, when most people speak about communism these days, they are almost always referring to the Soviet Union, which was instrumental itself in equating communism with its own form of government. Of course, they attempted to do the same thing with the West, equating democracy with capitalism (or at least the US form of democracy).

 

[saxonsaxon]

Re: Re: taxes and America

I would agree with you if you are talking about K-12 education being weak here (it is, compared to all other industrialized countries that I have been exposed to). But, college level, I don't think that assessment is accurate. Never mind Eastern European colleges, I don't think most Western European ones can match up with schools here (not talking about cost, of course, just quality of education).
Educating their citizens was absolutely necessary, since they needed to continue advancing in technology and sciences to keep up with the West. Having knowledgable scientists does not stop a country from keeping people stupid about a lot of other things. Now, if you ever have a chance to check what their humanities curriculums were like, I think you will be surprised. History in the Soviet Union was very different from the rest of the world. They had quite an interesting twist on some world events, especially ones that involved either the USSR or the USA.

What I mean by education is that most educated people in the soviet block knew of the weaknesses of their countries and were able to read through the lines to get the true picture of what was going on. From my exprience I find students from E.E. more interesting, more engaging and more aware of life. Naturally not everybody who arrived from that part of the world is a super genius that has seen all, but generally they seem much better educated.
As for history, most countries, especially superpowers have skewed their history and explained events in an irrational way. Examples:
1. Dropping 2 A bombs on Japan killing close to 150.000 civilian human beings
2. The whole affair in Vietnam - over 3 million dead SE Asians
3. Fighting for freedom and democracy in WWII with segregated forces.
4. Model of democracy that untill 50 years ago did not allow its black population to vote.
5. Genocide of the Native Americans

and the list goes on and on. So, yes the Soviet Union and other communist countries did "rewrite" parts of the history, but most educated people knew about it and were aware of this manipulaton by their governments. Here on the other hands most people think that the US is a bastion of democracy and has done nothing but spread it all over the world and people bellieve it. That is a difference between crude propaganda of the soviet kind and the advanced US propaganda model that we are under.

 

[Eric5273]

I disagree. I really see no difference -- propoganda is propoganda. The only difference is that these other countries colapsed so the people then learned (afterwards) a clearer picture of things. Much like Germans learned after WWII of all the terrible things their government had done. Such luck has not occured here in the US yet, but will one day most likely.

 

[Z18]

Re: Re: Re: taxes and America

1. Dropping 2 A bombs on Japan killing close to 150.000 civilian human beings
2. The whole affair in Vietnam - over 3 million dead SE Asians
3. Fighting for freedom and democracy in WWII with segregated forces.
4. Model of democracy that untill 50 years ago did not allow its black population to vote.
5. Genocide of the Native Americans

1. As opposed to invading the mainland, which would have been orders of magnitude worse; also interesting you skipped the fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden, as if getting nuked vs. fire bombed is somehow really that much different.

2. Communism and the spread thereof has cost a lot more lives than that. And most certainly, the communist governments have caused more deaths and other human rights violations internally than any external force that was trying to stop communist expansionism.

3. Looking back but also living in this era it's hard to assess this one. From my standpoint today, it seems wrong, strange, and unncessary. From back then, though, would other group of soldiers accepted and worked with different racial groups effectively? I don't know. This 'here and then' perspective should also be applied to the Japanese-American internment (which I'm surprised you didn't have in your list of 'bad things the US has done').

4. Yes, inexcusable, immoral, wrong, hypocritical, anti-constitutional, etc., but you should add women as well to your list.

5. Could have been done a lot better in hindsight; that said, the typical image of a bunch of peaceful native americans hanging out and then us slaughtering them and taking their land isn't accurate either -- many tribes were in constant war with each other for centuries and practiced some nasty stuff.

 

[Eric5273]

Re: Re: Re: Re: taxes and America

1. As opposed to invading the mainland, which would have been orders of magnitude worse; also interesting you skipped the fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden, as if getting nuked vs. fire bombed is somehow really that much different.

There would have been no invasion of the mainland. Before the A-bombs were dropped, Japan offered to surrender with one condition -- that Emperor Hirohito be allowed to stay in power. Well, after the dropping of the 2 A-bombs, Japan surrendered unconditionally, but Emperor Hirohito was allowed to stay in power anyway. So those 150,000 people were killed either for "piece of mind" or more likely, to show the rest of the world (Soviet Union) what we were capable of. Under no circumstances would there have been an invasion of Japan.

5. Could have been done a lot better in hindsight; that said, the typical image of a bunch of peaceful native americans hanging out and then us slaughtering them and taking their land isn't accurate either -- many tribes were in constant war with each other for centuries and practiced some nasty stuff.

In 1492 when Columbus landed in the Carribean, the approximate Native American population of North America was 15-20 Million. By 1750 that population had fallen to around 3 million, and 0by 1850 that population had fallen to less than 200,000. The last of the Indian wars ended in 1922 when the Apaches surrendered their last land to the United States. There were less than 50,000 Native Americans living in the United States at that time.