We think he was not a very smart man, too. I'm saying this on the ground he lost to poor planning and bad commandeering. ¡Felicidades!
i don't know if i would consider you an old school mexican either way, my question is this: there are different places that advertise themselves as the birthplace of texas, deer park and washington county as a couple of examples, what is the real birth place of texas?
As a matter fact... Right now I'm reading the book Lone Star. By, T.R. Fehrenbach Fascinating book about Texas and the Texans. I'll give 4 stars so far...
santa anna was a selfish b*stard and deserved to get got. But the tejanos, TRUE TEXAS FANS and original residents, were treated like foreigners by those "settlers" from the east. Typical american behavior, see a bike they like and steal it, resell it on craiglist.
Yes. I am. But I don't know why that's the cut-off or why that makes me have a different point of view. I learned both the Mexican and the U.S.'s point of view of those wars with that guy.
Well said. Had they fled after the Fannin massacre and the fall of the Alamo, I don't think a sane person could have blamed them, but history would, in my opinion, have been vastly different. We owe them a lot.
do you realize how ironic it is for someone called "conquistador" to talk about stealing land???? ...what the hell do you think conquistadors did??? by that logic one could say the mexicans stole mexico from the spaniards, who stole it from the aztecs, who stole it from the toltecs, who stole it from some forgotten tribe before them. and the apaches were in texas before the spaniards and mexicans stole it from them. and i think you miss a key distinction b/t lawful anglo settlers in texas vs. the ones who came when the revolution broke out. they terrorized the anglo settlers as much as the tejano ones. theft, rape, murder...they did not discriminate. they were here for selfish motives...texas was offering vast amounts of land for military service and it attracted alot of desperate people from the east. for the most part, the long-time anglo settlers did not want them there. most of the people who died at the alamo had been in texas for less that two years and some people like davy crocket were only in texas for a few weeks. and dont blame the americans...it was the spanish/mexican governments who allowed anglo settlement in texas. they could not get any of their own people to come live here. mexico has no one to blame but itself and its f***ed up, corrupt, inept government for the loss of texas. i just finished a really provoking and controversial book called "exodus from the alamo". the author makes that case that about 2/3rds of the garrison made a break for it in 3 separate groups only to be cut down by mexican calvary south and southeast of the alamo. and that the majority of mexican casualties were from friendly fire. the garrison was pretty much caught totally by surprise and thus there was no way for them to mount any real defense. it is well known that the mexicans burned the bodies of the rebels in 2 pyres south of the alamo. it uses primary sources such as battlefield reports from mexican officers and soldiers, newspaper articles from the u.s. and mexico and 2nd hand accounts, mainly from texians who talked to captured mexicans after san jacinto...its really amazing how much of the real history is whitewashed and how legends (in many cases, totally made up by american newspapers) can be twisted into historical fact. also, the common # of rebels is usually about 180, but sometimes you see 240...the book claims that there were 60 wounded/sick men in the hospital that account for the discrepancy. many dudes were still recovering from wounds/injuries suffered during the battle of san antonio a couple months before. also, the author makes the point that the texas revolution was in many ways, about slavery and points out that mexico was actually putting into practice what the u.s. preached. mexico abolished slavery and the anglos were ignoring it. again, citing articles from the colonial era and writings from prominent texans the author makes the case that slavery was probably the primary factor in the revolution. santa anna talked about the slavery issue at length as well and his desire to put an end to it in mexico, by force if necessary. he discussed marching into texas and liberating all the slaves.
Your ancestor? Or your brother? Aren't you old enough to have fought at San Jacinto yourself or were you just a wee lad at that time? Deckard post where he doesn't talk about how old he is=mind blown!
