Genocide, as defined by international law, is probably not the word to use when describing the atrocities commited against the American Indians. I'll give you that one.
It is true that, for the most part, the US government did not publically approve of genocide, although you can find many instances of tacit understanding by the government of the fact that "elimination" would take place.
There are also many instances of honorable men who strongly disagreed and refused to take part, such as Captain Silas Soule at Sand Creek.
So, OK, no genocide, just brutality unconfined by morals or any social dictates, that took place with regularity in the history of the US. Because it doesn't fit the technical definition of genocide does not make it any less horrific, which is what I am concerned about when definition takes the place of realism, or of what is acceptable and what is not based on the definition of a word.
Here is a link with excerpts, including the outrage expressed by the public (to a certain extent) and the courageous acts of honor, leading to the death of Soule, by a few decent men who were there at the time.
Quote:http://www.lastoftheindependents.com/chivington.html
Quote:According to John S. Smith, Colonel Chivington knew these Indians to be peaceful before the massacre. Smith witnessed, as did helpless Indian mothers and fathers, young children having their sex organs cut away. U.S. soldiers mutilated Native American women, cutting away their breasts and removing all other sex organs. After the Massacre, soldiers displayed the women's severed body parts on their hats and stretched them over their saddle-bows while riding in the ranks. The sex organs of every male were removed in the most grotesque manner. One soldier boasted that he would make a tobacco pouch with the removed privates of White Antelope, a respected elder. Conner witnessed a soldier displaying the body parts of a woman on a stick. The fingers of Indians were cut off to get at the rings on them. Connor remembered a baby only a few months old who had been hidden in the feed box of a wagon for protection. When the soldiers discovered the baby some time later, the baby was thrown onto the frozen ground to die. In going over the site the next day, it was noted that every corpse was mutilated in some way, and scalped.
Two other men, Robert Bent and James Beckwourth were forced to ride with Chivington that morning. They recorded similar images. Beckwourth noted that before the massacre, White Antelope (age 75) ran out to meet the soldiers. He came running out to meet the command, holding up his hands and saying Stop! Stop! He spoke in as plain English as I can. He stopped and folded his arms until shot down. Bent remembered seeing the shooting of a little girl carrying a white flag. He also remembered seeing an Indian woman on the ground whose leg had been shattered by a shell. As she lay helpless, a soldier drew his saber, breaking the arm she had risen in defense. She then rolled over on her other side. The soldier did not leave until breaking her other arm with his saber, whereupon he left without killing her. Bent saw a pregnant woman who had been cut open and disemboweled. Her unborn child lay mutilated almost beyond human recognition beside her. Quite a number of mothers were slain; still clinging to their babies. Such was the scene that cold gray morning at Sand Creek, November 29, 1864.
(Afterward, when the public learned of the atrocities, Chivington was brought up on charges. His best friend, Captain Silas Soule had refused to take part in the massacre and had agreed to be a witness at Chivington's trialÂ…)
Quote:Soule himself could not be a witness at any of the investigations, because less than a week after his release he was shot from behind and killed on the streets of Denver. Although Chivington was eventually brought up on court-martial charges for his involvement in the massacre, he was no longer in the U.S. Army and could therefore not be punished. No criminal charges were ever filed against him. An Army judge, however, publicly stated that Sand Creek was "a cowardly and cold-blooded slaughter, sufficient to cover its perpetrators with indelible infamy, and the face of every American with shame and indignation."
So it goes. Today, I think the brutality is still there, strong as ever, just more subtle and sophisticated. But I digress.
