You open up a wide margin.

What about Hitler?
And slave trade?
Use of fossil fuels?

Yes, we have to learn from error. History does present a lot of error.


You can learn from past events, and try to improve your future action
based on those historical events, but you can not criticize a person who
live in the past and made the decisions they did.

I think a person is welcome to criticize the past, and learn from it.

From
the point of view of the people who lived there and and been subject to
Indian attacks for the previous 100 years it was the most logical and
humane way to handle the situation.

They took their land.
They took their food.
They took their way of living....

I know I will get lots of flack.
john



"Keith Nuttle" wrote in message ...

On 5/14/2015 4:03 PM, jloomis wrote:
Yes, and the son of a "itches" left a holy mess in the Redwoods.
No care for anything, streams, animals, vegetation.
Just come and take the forest, burn down the slash, and leave....
Following this assault they again logged about 3 times, and with
continuing selectivity as to what the market would bear.
Now when you go in an Old Growth forest, there are few and far between
trees left.
We wonder why the salmon spawning grounds are slack, and the forest is
struggling to survive...
Yes, they left a mess.
I am cleaning up a logging operation from about 1950 on my property.

You must judge events of the past by the paradigms in effect at the time
the event happened. You can judge by today's paradigms, but it is not
legitimate.

You can learn from past events, and try to improve your future action
based on those historical events, but you can not criticize a person who
live in the past and made the decisions they did. You don't have the
same facts they had at the time of the event.

I good example is the removal of the Indians from the Indiana. From
the point of view of the people who lived there and and been subject to
Indian attacks for the previous 100 years it was the most logical and
humane way to handle the situation. The alternative would have been to
continue the Indian wars for another 100 years.