Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2011 at 8:53pm.
What do YOU think?
Most conflicts can be avoided -- but someone has to give in. Did the settlers and the Metis gain or lose from this conflict?
The Metis won. They had to fight for their right, the leader of the settlers wasn't listening *straight*. They could have made deals or something, well they never had a government that time, maybe the government would have provided a law/rules.
This is what I think.
Could I hear your opinion please?
The settlers invaded Metis territory. It's human (and animal) nature to defend one's territory.
So no peaceful solution could have been found? Unless the leader of the settler wasn't so demanding right?
But I can't get this off of my head. Why couldn't a peaceful solution have been found?
Just cause there was no other way to fight?
If they didn't fight, the Metis would have had to accept a compromise that would have been to their disadvantage.
Some conflicts and wars are justified.
Oh okay. So it all depended on the individuals, if they were ready to listen, then fights would not have happened. But since they were not ready to listen, fights were bound to occur.
Yep.
Related Questions
Metis of the Red River - About the Conflict that occurred between the Selkirk ...
The Settlers - Describe the conflict between the settlers and the Nor’...
The Settlers - Describe the conflict between the settlers and the Nor’...
Metis of the Red River - How were the Metis of the red river self-sufficient? ...
Distinction between Metis... - I have to create a distinction between the Metis ...
Social studies - Describe attitude of George Simpson and his wife towards ...
CONFLICT - Was conflict over the red river settlement inevitable? Wat? Yes it ...
Help in Understanding - Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 6, 2011 at 8:45pm. ...
To Jiskha Tutors and Others - Need to do a comic strip of things that happened ...
bobpursely - Was conflict over the red river settlement inevitable? Wat? Yes it ...
For Further Reading
