Over the years, there have been various debates about how American frontiersmen handled the Natives who previously occupied the Americas. Even in the way in which we define the two groups of people--Native Americans and White Americans—expresses that there are fundamental differences between those who inhabited North America at this time. Despite the fact that there is only a single word separating Native Americans from White Americans, the two seem to be as different as giraffes and sea turtles. For example, White Americans (including the African Americans, Caucasians, immigrants, etc.) take their basic family units and separate them into counties, towns, or cities. The Native Americans take their basic family units, as well as those of their neighbors, and combine them to make a larger, close-knit community. The examples of the ways in which these two groups are as vast as the west lands. However, as the west lands quickly became less immense, the white Americans realized that if they wanted to continue in westward expansion, they would soon have to deal with the seemingly problematic Native Americans. Many questions surfaced as the white Americans acknowledged that the Native Americans were limiting their expansion. For instance, how were they going to deal with the natives? Could they still enact treaties? And most importantly, how were the natives going to react to their actions?
Age old questions like "to be, or not to be?", come to mind while confronting loaded topics such westward expansion and how it effected the native Americans. Given the option, to kill or let live, I would have personally killed. Considering that the east coast was becoming overpopulated, the frontier was rapidly shrinking, and the severe differences between the white American and Native American cultures were becoming threatening, it is hard for me to deny that I would have taken place in conquering the land and natives. However, I would like for the record that I am not a...