A. Lincoln.

[ABSTRUSE]

He was the worst about violating treaties HE'D made....just decide he didn't want to honor it, and that was that.

One of the worst things he did was when the Surpreme Court ruled FOR the Cherokee, he decided to ignore their decision, and told the court "YOU enforce it."

He opened up the Black Hills to miners, after promising military help to keep them out.

The list is long. I'd spit on his grave if I got the chance.

I would donate spit for the cause. Funny thing is my elementary school was named after him....it burned down and they combined it with Lincoln's.

 

[cloudy]

Jackson:

1813 - As Major General of U.S. Army, through the Treaty of Fort Jackson, Andrew Jackson imposes retributive measures on the entire Creek Nation though only a minority had been involved in the Red Stick rebellion. He threatens the Creek nation saying that if they do not cede the land they will prove themselves enemies to the United States. Though President Madison had called for land cessions to pay for the costs of the war, Jackson requires much larger land cessions and does not allow all friendly Creeks to remain in their homelands as Indian Agents had already promised under Madison’s direction. Jackson requires half of the Creek territory, 23 million acres of land, be ceded.

Jackson ignores orders to enforce Article IX of the Treaty of Ghent which required the return of Creek territory ceded in the Treaty of Fort Jackson. The Treaty of Ghent legally nullified the Treaty of Fort Jackson; but, disregarding a directive from the Secretary of War, Jackson refuses to return Creek land.

1816 - Jackson is insubordinate when he learns of the treaty signed with the Cherokee in Washington on March 22. In this treaty the United States acknowledges the Cherokee right to land the Creeks had ceded in the Treaty of Fort Jackson. Secretary William Crawford reminds Jackson that the treaty had been “approved by the Senate and House of Representatives, and is the supreme law of the land. Submission to it is a duty which will not be neglected.” Jackson refuses to submit to the ratified treaty. In a letter to James Monroe (May 12th 1816) Jackson says that the Cherokee “never had the least semblance of claim ” to those four to five million acres.

Andrew Jackson uses threats and secret bribes to gain the land cessions he desires in treaties signed with Cherokee and Chickasaw leaders.

1818 - After an initial unsuccessful attempt to persuade Chickasaw to remove, Jackson threatens violence, withholds overdue annuities, misrepresents the facts, and bribes some of their leaders. A large Chickasaw land cession is consequently obtained on October 19. Jackson considers sections of Chickasaw land to legally belong to American settlers though the Chickasaw land had not been ceded.

1820 - Choctaw treaty signed October 20. Jackson threatens the Choctaw that if they do not accept the treaty their “nation will be destroyed.”

1830 - After passing the House and the Senate, Andrew Jackson signs The Indian Removal Act on May 28th. This act gives the President the power to negotiate removal treaties. It does not in itself mandate removal. But the illegal and immoral tactics used to coerce Indian acceptance of the treaties results in the removal of almost 50,000 Indians from the East to a location beyond the Mississippi River during Jackson ’s presidency.

Chickasaw agree to removal, August 27th, after Andrew Jackson threatens that they will be destroyed if they resist; that their land “will be taken possession of by your white brethren” and they “will look on your conduct as acts of ill will & ingratitude…”

Choctaw Chiefs at first refuse to sign The Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek. After superintendents threaten invasion of Creek lands and government, they sign the treaty on September 27th. Superintendents had been instructed to be sure Indians gave “their own free consent” to removal. Before Congress ratifies the treaty Superintendent John H. Eaton assures Congress that no threats, bribes, or secret agreements have been made.

1832 - In response to Supreme Court Justice John Marshall’s ruling in Worcester v. Georgia, that Georgia’s laws are of no effect in Cherokee lands, President Andrew Jackson writes, “the decision of the supreme court has fell still born, and they find that it cannot coerce George to yield to its mandate.”

1834 - John Ross meets with Jackson in Washington on February 5th in an attempt to avert Cherokee removal. Jackson says “I tell you that you cannot remain where you are now… It [is] impossible that you can flourish in the midst of a civilized community. You have but one remedy within your reach. And that is, to remove to the West and join your countrymen, who are already established there.” Jackson reminds Ross of the fate of the Creeks, suggesting that the Cherokee will suffer the same if they do not accept removal.

Between 4,000 and 8,000 Cherokee alone died on the Trail of Tears. Jackson was a monster.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Madison seemed pretty cool though. I hope tonight they go through some more...I love learning history....I wonder if Colly gives private lessons.

 

[cloudy]

Madison seemed pretty cool though. I hope tonight they go through some more...I love learning history....I wonder if Colly gives private lessons.

no shit.

I don't know as much about most of them as I do about Jackson, of course. Lincoln deserves my contempt, as well, but he wasn't anywhere near Jackson. It amazes me still, though, that people don't know what these presidents did, and even worse, don't care. They put them up as heroes, never realizing how far from heroic they were.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

no shit.

I don't know as much about most of them as I do about Jackson, of course. Lincoln deserves my contempt, as well, but he wasn't anywhere near Jackson. It amazes me still, though, that people don't know what these presidents did, and even worse, don't care. They put them up as heroes, never realizing how far from heroic they were.

I think things will change as more information comes to light through the research of many people who can dig out more facts. Jefferson was a bit of an odd duck as well.

 

[cloudy]

Madison was president when Tecumseh began his rebellion, I know that much. Do some checking on Henry Harrison - one of his miliary leaders, later president. He was another Jackson-like man. He was like Custer - would wait until the men left, then go into a village, and slaughter women, children, elderly....burn the village to the ground, then retreat.

Such heroic courage.

 

[eric shawn listo]

Recorded it but haven't watched it yet so won't read this thread until I have. My wife found the first half very ineresting.

Lame, I know....just wanted to post in a thread started by Abs...

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Recorded it but haven't watched it yet so won't read this thread until I have. My wife found the first half very ineresting.

Lame, I know....just wanted to post in a thread started by Abs...

Aw...shucks.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Madison was president when Tecumseh began his rebellion, I know that much. Do some checking on Henry Harrison - one of his miliary leaders, later president. He was another Jackson-like man. He was like Custer - would wait until the men left, then go into a village, and slaughter women, children, elderly....burn the village to the ground, then retreat.

Such heroic courage.

Jackson is one of my favorite presidents to study. He was, in many ways, the proverbial riddle wrapped in an enigma.

As a general, he ended seminole raids into Georgia by hanging two british subjects who were, in a large part, responsible. Created an international incident. From all I can tell, he just didn't give a damn about propriety.

He hated indians, but you do have to understand he had been fighting them all his life and had seen first hand massacre and raiding sites.

I am not trying to defend him, but you do have to understand his times and experience. The UK, France and Spain all used indian auxillarys to harass the US and each other. He fought int he war of 1812 and while it's hard to fathom for some of us, he hated the British as much as he hated the indians. He was a man born and raised onthe frontier, where the law of the jungle was vendetta and the blood fued. He fought duels over matters of honor and held grudges for years.

He saw things alot of the time in military terms. He was first and foremost a general, even asking to be addressed as General jackson rather than Mr. President. to his mind, indigenous populations within the boundaries of the country were ready ade agent's provocature should US interests buck up against continental ones. In military terms then, moving the Cherokee out of the territroy claimed by the US and proximal to major US cities and population centers was simple common sense.

You can legitimately make the argument one of his biggest failings was he thought like a general, even when he was occupying a position where he should have been thinking like a statesman. He gave orders and expected them to be followed, when they weren't he "sacked" the subordinate who let him down. I think he went through 6 secretaries of state and know he fired three secretaries of commerce before he found one who would enforce his policies against the national bank.

Military men holding positions of high authority has almost universally been a bad idea. Until the advent of Eisenhower and the "political general" their record isprety dismal. Imperial Japan is probably one of the worst examples. When tojo was forced to resign and they were schoosing a new Prime minister a career Navy man, was asked to take th post. His observation is probably spot on. He declined with the observation that he was well meaning, but lacked the skills neccessary to se things beyond the military need.

Military men, have been trained to see the world in a very narrow focus. By temprament and training, they are ill suited to see all sides of an issue and nuances in meaning. they tend to be rigidly autocratic and to see things only in terms of how it would affect them militarily.

I think jackson is a prime example of a man who undertook civilian authority, but never stopped being a general in his own mind.

 

[cloudy]

I understand that, Colly, but what really makes me look upon him as one of the worst is his ignoring anything that didn't suit HIM, including the Supreme Court, and the lies, bribery, and underhandedness that marked his tenure as president.

He wanted what he wanted, by any means necessary, even if it meant slaughtering the very people who had fought beside him. They were good enough to fight with him, but weren't even "people" when it was time for him to pay the piper.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I understand that, Colly, but what really makes me look upon him as one of the worst is his ignoring anything that didn't suit HIM, including the Supreme Court, and the lies, bribery, and underhandedness that marked his tenure as president.

He wanted what he wanted, by any means necessary, even if it meant slaughtering the very people who had fought beside him. They were good enough to fight with him, but weren't even "people" when it was time for him to pay the piper.

Well, he got to where he was by ignoring anything that didn't suit him. A sane man would not have pitted a few regulars, some pirates and ahodge podge of militia units against the best the British had to offer. He was advised several times to abandon New Orleans, but he refused. refused and won the day.

Being right on the field of combat, again and again, probably did inspire an arrogant self confidence. But that is what made him such a good commander, he didn't question himself once the day for battle dawned.

I do think it severely handicapped him as a president though. A good statesman has to be flexible and wiling to listen to others and adapt. A good general, has to be decisive and determined to enforce his will, both on his troops and on his enemy. Taking a political mindset onto the battlefield will get your ass hupped and your men killed in droves, ask Lincoln and Jef Davis how well their political generals fared. taking a military mindset into government can be just as disaterous, ask Japan or italy.

Many of the very things that made him a good general made him a poor statesman. this country andothers have suffered a good deal of hardship by taking military heros and asuming they would be good leaders outside the military. Jackson is defintely not on the short list of good generals who made good politicians.

 

[cloudy]

Well, he got to where he was by ignoring anything that didn't suit him. A sane man would not have pitted a few regulars, some pirates and ahodge podge of militia units against the best the British had to offer. He was advised several times to abandon New Orleans, but he refused. refused and won the day.

Being right on the field of combat, again and again, probably did inspire an arrogant self confidence. But that is what made him such a good commander, he didn't question himself once the day for battle dawned.

I do think it severely handicapped him as a president though. A good statesman has to be flexible and wiling to listen to others and adapt. A good general, has to be decisive and determined to enforce his will, both on his troops and on his enemy. Taking a political mindset onto the battlefield will get your ass hupped and your men killed in droves, ask Lincoln and Jef Davis how well their political generals fared. taking a military mindset into government can be just as disaterous, ask Japan or italy.

Many of the very things that made him a good general made him a poor statesman. this country andothers have suffered a good deal of hardship by taking military heros and asuming they would be good leaders outside the military. Jackson is defintely not on the short list of good generals who made good politicians.

You're exactly right, as usual.

It dismays me, though, to see men like Jackson revered. Too many don't know, and don't care. Sad.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

You're exactly right, as usual.

It dismays me, though, to see men like Jackson revered. Too many don't know, and don't care. Sad.

Jackson was a bigger than life personality. All to often in history, such men are remembered for the legend of the prsonality, than they are for their deeds. Jackson stomped the British at New Orleans. If you go down the list of British ass whippings during the period, you'll find it's a very very short list. Andy derives a lot of his reverence for that, his battlefield prowess. His personal and political failings, tend to get lost in the glow of his military triumphs. Even so many years later.