Do you believe that European nations had an obligation to stop the conquest of the "New World" or do you believe that conquest of the "New World" was inevitable?
I believe they could've stopped the slavery that was beginning, but they couldn't stop going to the "New Worold." If they stopped slavery, then it would have been a little rougher, because the Natives would have made a fight to keep there territory. So I think the middle.
Great job answering. Are you discussing this from the Native American perspective or from the European? Remember, European technology was far more advanced than that of the Native Americans. Native Americans were not able to stop the guns, germs, and steel of the Europeans. Do you believe that Europeans had a duty to stop what they were doing, or do you believe that the conquest of the Americas was inevitable? Be very clear in your answer to make it stronger.
What if slavery was removed from the New World? How would history change? What are the economic implications of such a change? Think about the tons of silver and gold that were removed from American mines. Would that have happened without slavery? Keep thinking. Good job, now try to develop your answers, using detail and facts as a way to support your argument.
I think the New World would have been conquered anyway because, there were many travelers and explorers that probably did discover the land, but were not known for it because it was already found. if the European nations defended the land maybe we would be speaking a different language today.
i beileve they would of stopped but they couldnt because they didnt have the right wepons tools and technology to do that. if they did stop history will change. if they stopped slavery people that are rich back then wouldnt have other people to work for them
I believe that the European nations had an obligation to stop, they chose to stay on the land. They probably thought that since the 'government'(they had none) of that land was so weak that they could go onto the land and become leader/a ruler. While doing so they; killed, imprisoned &captured the Indians. Which was unruly to the land as well as the Indians.
The only thing during this time period that was inevitable was the fact that they were heading towards land. There could have been a way of them visiting the "the new world" without damaging the population or harming the Indians.
The conquest of the new world was inevitable but could've been less agressive. The europeans realized the natives thought of them as gods, and used that to their advantage. The natives had wood and spears, and the europeans had weapons, metal, and disease immunity; The europeans used that too to their advantage. They could have come friendly with weapons down, but instead they came with weapons up and firing. Are the europeans the "heroes" we know them as, or are they the slave taking murderers we don't know anything about? Brandon Mallack Period 3
I belive the European nations had an obligation to stop the conquering of the "New World." But, they didn't have the modern technolagy of weapons to stop the "New World" from being conqured.
I believe they could've stopped the slavery that was beginning, but they couldn't stop going to the "New Worold." If they stopped slavery, then it would have been a little rougher, because the Natives would have made a fight to keep there territory. So I think the middle.
ReplyDeleteI feel they couldent stop it from happening bcause they dident have the weapons to do so. Jesse Havens P2
ReplyDeleteJesse,
ReplyDeleteGreat job answering. Are you discussing this from the Native American perspective or from the European? Remember, European technology was far more advanced than that of the Native Americans. Native Americans were not able to stop the guns, germs, and steel of the Europeans. Do you believe that Europeans had a duty to stop what they were doing, or do you believe that the conquest of the Americas was inevitable? Be very clear in your answer to make it stronger.
-Mr Caravano
Anthony,
ReplyDeleteWhat if slavery was removed from the New World? How would history change? What are the economic implications of such a change? Think about the tons of silver and gold that were removed from American mines. Would that have happened without slavery? Keep thinking. Good job, now try to develop your answers, using detail and facts as a way to support your argument.
-Mr. Caravano
I think the New World would have been conquered anyway because, there were many travelers and explorers that probably did discover the land, but were not known for it because it was already found. if the European nations defended the land maybe we would be speaking a different language today.
ReplyDeleteKyle Mattina
i beileve they would of stopped but they couldnt because they didnt have the right wepons tools and technology to do that. if they did stop history will change. if they stopped slavery people that are rich back then wouldnt have other people to work for them
ReplyDeleteNo I don't think that they had an obligation to stop. I think that they were just being selfish and greedy.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the European nations had an obligation to stop, they chose to stay on the land. They probably thought that since the 'government'(they had none) of that land was so weak that they could go onto the land and become leader/a ruler. While doing so they; killed, imprisoned &captured the Indians. Which was unruly to the land as well as the Indians.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing during this time period that was inevitable was the fact that they were heading towards land. There could have been a way of them visiting the "the new world" without damaging the population or harming the Indians.
The conquest of the new world was inevitable but could've been less agressive. The europeans realized the natives thought of them as gods, and used that to their advantage. The natives had wood and spears, and the europeans had weapons, metal, and disease immunity; The europeans used that too to their advantage. They could have come friendly with weapons down, but instead they came with weapons up and firing. Are the europeans the "heroes" we know them as, or are they the slave taking murderers we don't know anything about?
ReplyDeleteBrandon Mallack Period 3
I think one of the mean reason they had the new world is because they were having fight in the city's these why the explore
ReplyDeleteMichael per4/5
I belive the European nations had an obligation to stop the conquering of the "New World." But, they didn't have the modern technolagy of weapons to stop the "New World" from being conqured.
ReplyDelete