"The Americans are truly a lucky people. They are bordered to the north and south by weak neighbors and to the east and west by fish." - Otto von Bismarck.
@@feeldafood2953 The US gave and received a bloody nose to and by the British. The proto-Canadians were not responsible for any defeat inflicted in that war. *They* got their asses kicked until they were saved by the Brits.
Abraham Lincoln once asked General Winfield Scott this question: "Why is it that you were once able to take Mexico City in three months with five thousand men, and we have been unable to take Richmond with one hundred thousand men?" "I will tell you," said General Scott. "The men who took us into Mexico City are the same men who are keeping us out of Richmond."
Also of note are the Irish brigades that fought for Mexico. Many were immigrants to America, and many deserted the US Army. The irish were catholic and catholics were distrusted and faced prejudice in the US Army, and since many of the Irish were not officially American citizens yet, they abandoned American army to fight for Mexico which was predominately catholic. They were some of the most experienced and fierce fighters in Mexico, and if captured they were treated as deserters and traitors.
I think i saw a little bit of a documentary about that a few years back.They talked about one unit of irish defectors called the Saint Patrick's brigade.I forget which battle they were in but they continued to fight when the mexicans began to retreat.They were all captured and executed by the U.S. army.
It’s not entirely our fault, we had just gotten our independence from Spain - we were still getting our ducks in a row so to speak and the US took advantage of that vulnerability. But what is concerning and has been concerning for some time is the uneven development of the country to date, el Norte has boomed and is pro America while the south of the country has been severely undeveloped and ignored, in other words it doesn’t seem like we have learned our lesson. The central government/ administrations need to do a better job of creating even development and focusing on developing the south and poorer parts of the south while reigning in the northern areas . It’s a risk for us losing half our country again…
No worries, you guys are invading again with a vast coalition of countries. Already a majority in some areas of the US, it's only a matter of time before the Americans let you take back (in one way or another) much or more of the land taken from you. Similar to the weak and divided country that you were when the US invaded, now so is the US weak and divided, allowing you this opportunity for victory which you would not otherwise have.
Cowboy, which US-Americans 🇺🇲 brag about as their own, is an art created by Mexicans 🇲🇽 when TEXAS was a Mexican province in the 19th century. United States and its eternal habit of stealing things from others. Cowboy = Mexico Hallowen = Ireland Santa Claus = Holland Burger = Germany Dollars = Spain
The creators of Cowboy 🐴👢 culture it was the Mexicans 🇲🇽 (Not the US-Americans, who copied the traditions of the northern Mexicans). Those who raised cattle in the current area of Texas, when it was Mexican 🇲🇽 territory, before the annexation to the United States, their lifestyle and work were inherited from Mexicans living in present-day Texas territory. California also had skilled men on horseback, according to Richard Henry Dana, who wrote a book about that region in 1840 when it still belonged to Mexico. As described: When they make long trips, they ride horses until they get tired and grab another one, they pull the saddle and bridle on it, and after exhausting the animal, they take a third one, and so on until the end of the trip. There are no better runners like Mexicans in the world.
Well, this story failed to mention the reason why Texas decided to break away from Mexico. Short version: Back then Mexico allowed immigrants to settle in the northern part of the territory, but needed to registered with the local authorities and learn the language (Spanish). Many immigrants comply but the vast majority just settled without registration in fact becoming illegals, and many brought slaves with them. Slavery was illegal in Mexico in that time. When Mexican officials, became aware of what was going on in Texas, they tried to reinforce its anti-slavery and immigration laws on its land, but it was too late.
I disagree. You may want to do more research. They totally ignored Mexican provocations and abuses. Partially because they oversimplified the issue with Texas.
History is funny,. American squatters multiply and conquer Mexican land, land is developed and improved, Mexicans return to land to enjoy improvements, multiply and prosper. The end..
@Chip the Irish celebrate it for the catholic church. Mexico Celebrates st. Patrick's Day to honor the Irish Brigade under John Riley who defected to the Mexican Army to Escape Irish immigrants being . prosecuted by the American. After the war they were hanged by the United states for desertion. The Mexican government protested the hanging stating they were POW and they shouldn't be hanged to no avail. 🇲🇽☘
@@edwinhernandez9276 they were called " los patreanos" ( St. Patrick's' brigade) a brigade, made up of Irish catholic Priests, and U.S. army deserters, who were on a mission, to help out the unfair war against a small catholic nation and their stand against slavery, and came to their aid, they flew the irish flag, during the war!
In 1824 Mexico’s authoritarian ruler Agustín de Iturbide enacted a colonization law authorizing the Mexican federal government to allow legal immigration into Texas. This statute allowed foreigners to gain title to land. Mexican liberals argued in favor of allowing foreigners to immigrate. This would satisfy multiple objectives, including promoting economic growth, increasing the number of males available to defend the country, and bringing new capital and skills into the country to replace those lost when many Spaniards were expelled or chose to leave the country. The process for gaining an official land title was expensive and time-consuming, and many residents chose not to have the land surveyed or complete the application process. The Mexican law required immigrants to practice Catholicism and stressed that foreigners needed to learn Spanish and all people wishing to live in Texas were expected to report to the nearest Mexican authority for permission to settle. Many Americans immigrated to Mexico, where land was cheaper. A few Americans who had become naturalized Mexicans settled in Texas during that time. Most of the immigrants came from the southern United States. Immigration of United States had begun to accelerate rapidly. The new population was not fully assimilated and by 1826, approximately 3,000 Americans from the United States were living illegally in Texas. Most of the immigrants came from the southern United States. Many were slave owners, and most brought with them significant prejudices against other races, attitudes often applied to the Tejanos. Most Anglo Americans tried to isolate themselves from Mexicans. By 1830, Texas had a population of 7,000 foreign-born residents, with only 3,000 Mexican nationals. In regard to slavery, influential settler Stephen F. Austin, who reasoned that the success of his colonies needed slave labor and the economics it produced to lure more whites to the area. Anglos from the United States soon vastly outnumbered the Tejanos. Mexican authorities became increasingly concerned about the stability of the region.The colonies teetered at the brink of revolt in 1829, after Mexico abolished slavery. In response, President Anastasio Bustamante implemented the Laws of April 6, 1830, which, among other things, prohibited further immigration to Texas from the United States, increased taxes, and reiterated the ban on slavery. The law explicitly banned any further immigration from the United States to Texas and any new slaves. The new Law rescinded all empresario contracts that had not been completed and prohibited Americans from settling in any Mexican territory adjacent to the United States. Secretary of State Lucas Alamán, who wrote the 1830 law, said that "Texas will be lost for this Republic if adequate measures to save it are not taken. Law of April 6, 1830 under President Anastasio Bustamante was issued because the Mexican state of Texas was in danger of being annexed by the United States. New issued settlement contracts were brought under federal rather than state control. Provisions of the law were designed to encourage Mexican citizens to move from the interior to Texas. Mexicans who agreed to relocate to Texas would get good land, free transportation to Texas, and some financial assistance. Convicts would be sent to Texas to build fortifications and roads to stimulate trade. The lack of a formal policy had not stopped many immigrants. Settlers simply circumvented or ignored the laws. A number of people had left the United States to settle in the Mexican northern provinces.The ban and other measures did not stop US citizens from migrating to Texas by the thousands, and by 1834, it was estimated that over 30,000 Anglos lived in Texas, compared to only 7,800 Mexican-born residents. Mexican authorities noted that slave reforms passed by the state were being ignored. By the end of 1835, almost 5,000 enslaved Africans and African Americans lived in Texas, making up 13 percent of the non-Indian population (The Mexican rules were widely disregarded and slavery remained in Texas until the end of the American Civil War).The attitudes of the immigrants prompted the Mexican-American War on February 2nd 1848, in which Mexico lost almost 55 percent of its territory to the United States drawing a bullshit line trough territory that used to be nothing but Mexico and some of these territories we know currently as Arizona,NewMexico,Texas,Nevada and of course California. All of those states used to be absolutely Mexico! so now you have people who are indigenous here who were made foreigners on there own land. I don't know what's more criminal; crossing over a borderline of a country looking for the economic opportunity that allows you to work and earn or... going to another land across an ocean, taking over land killing &pushing its native people into concentrated areas, creating a trail of tears, deceiving other people of their true intentions and really trying to collect all these peoples gold to take it to their royal families killing"civilizing" them as they settle &conquer, or also bringing along a group of people who they used to perform hard labor of fields with no pay other than food,roof,lynching,shooting,cutting,burning!!! Mexicans have more right to this land than other races!.
Fun Fact México still has a Royal Family living in Europe after the exile of the Iturbides that if México decided to become a monarchy again they can reclaim the throne as the house of Iturbide.
Mexico has many more claimants than the Iturbides. Actual relations of the last emperor of Mexico, Maximilian I live in Mexico as we speak. There are also claimants to the Aztec throne in Europe and Mexico as well, I am a descendant too.
If Mexico wanted to be a monarchy we wouldn't get the Iturbides, believe me! We have many other historical houses, including Spaniard, Aztec and even Austrian.
That awkward time when you go to war over a relatively small part of land only to end up defeating your opponent so severely that there's an option to annex the entire country.
would be an intriguing alternative history if to see how things would of been if USA would of annexed Mexico, maybe the name would of been different, would also assume the civil war would be different as well
If there would have been a civil war. With the annexation of Mexico, probably would have tipped the favor of power to the side of the Southern Democrats going into the 1850s. However, the great instability caused by Mexico would have most likley led to other internal conflicts later on.
The instability would require a massive occupation by the US military until the unrest was put down and order would be established. "Mexico" would be carved up in to "Texas", "North Mexico" consisting of the areas currently own by the US along with the Baja territory, and "Central Mexico" territories. The Senate would debate what to do about it as the southern slave states would want them to be slave states and the northern free states along with the locals would want them to be free states. By the time the US civil war would come along they would probably try to stay neutral but be raided by the Texas military and California Union troops coming in to fight them off. Post Civil War they would boom due to the agriculture (and later oil) being largely untouched by the war, post war migration, and the Confederacy being reconstructed and war torn which would eventually lead to statehood but with Mexicans being treated as second class citizens by the nation at large. Mexico would also become flooded with former slaves due to proximity and the area would be a blend of "Whites", "Native Mexicans", Blacks, and Indigenous Native communities with no side having a massive population advantage. In fact the US might even consider carving out a new homeland for freed slaves in the region instead of creating Liberia. The US would also seriously consider a "Mexican Canal" north-south through the Yucatan Peninsula instead of the Panama and Nicaragua Canals. Post World Wars would see a lot of integration of Mexican and American communities and the Civil Rights Era would also see a massive political change in the region with "Native Mexicans" and Blacks gaining a lot of power and influence and the Cold War economic boom would greatly benefit the regions quality of living and stability rivaling the modern California and the US Eastern Seaboard.
Keep in mind Mexico had just fought off imperial nation #1(Spain) for independence. Imperial nation #2 (France) from invasion. American expansion saw their chance and said, " now! while they're tired" No other Latin American country can say that.
The French were weak at the time. Their nation was bankrupt and so was their military. Their troops were tired and starving. While that is something great that Mexico can brag about, the fact that they had a hard time fighting off a power that was bankrupt and was going downhill fast isn't saying too much. It just confirmed to the American's that Mexico was not prepared for any further advances.
Blue Lynx World one question, imagine people fighting with machetes versus an army, maybe they were weak, but just imagine that, mexico would be a great nation if US didn’t ruined our country, US ruined and are ruining allot of countries, US is a joke for everyone now
Do you believe Santa Ana killing hundreds of ex Americans settlers, invited by the new Mexican government, then burning their bodies in a pile, to make a point. Nothing to do with killing American citizens, on American soil? "REMEMBER THE ALAMO"
Anparraf it’s conquest, honestly STFU, this happened all the time since the dawn of humans, your own people are ruining your country, stop playing the blame game and fix your country, and name some countries America ruined besides the overused Iraq and Afghanistan?
In the grand scheme of things, Mexico has benefitted tremendously from being a neighbor of the US. Strategic protection from invasion and trade with a much larger economy. This war was a small price to pay.
@@cc-oo7vn Seems highly unlikely. Russia has a serious demographic problem though, even worse than China's. If you people don't get your birthrate up, there isn't going to be much of a Russia left in fifty years.
The most consequential and least understood war in American history. Thank you for your effort to inform people about this in a succinct and interesting way.
Man, if I were a middle or high school history teacher in today's age I would use these videos to supplement like half of my lectures. Absolutely brilliant!
@@WSlopeAggie definitely agree with you. Funny they always happen to be the good guys. You know that old saying "to the victors belong the spoils" and they get to write their side of the story. But there's always two sides to every story. This particular story is missing the fact that one of the first things Mexico dealt with when it gained independence was slavery, the Americans that came to Texas brought slaves, that was the whole reason why the war started that and then destiny manifest by president Polk. Why they always forget to mention it is beyond me, or they don't even acknowledge the saint Patrick's battalion, that's part of the real history. It's called history after all not story. Cheers friend 🍻
At the time many people (well Military Professionals anyway) in Europe thought that that Mexico could very well win this war, or at the very least it would be a very bloody war. What people forget now with the perfection of hindsight was that on paper, Mexico a the time was at least as powerful militarily as the US (perhaps more), with the advantage of interior defense and very difficult terrain for any invader. What happened during that war was a stunning revelation as to how important political stability, professionalism in an army, and frankly economic might really was in a war. Latin America lost a lot of prestige during that war that was never regained. It also marked the start of the US being regarded as a 'western nation' at least on par with a European nation by the European world powers.
Fun fact: The Mexican Emperor (Maximillian I of Mexico) was not a Mexican, in fact, he was an Austrian Archduke and a brother to Franz Josef I (Emperor of Austria-Hungary)
Maximilian I didn't become emperor of Mexico until the late 1850s and was able to retain his position until about 1867 due to the assistance of Napoleon III and the French and the fact that the US was preoccupied with bullying its own southern states in that late unpleasantness of the War Between The States.
This is True and verified in history. Much of the wars from 1820 into 1900’s were bandits, private armies and war lords. European powers were trying to continue their colonial policies.
Yeah, wrong emperor. The first Mexican Emperor,* 1821-1823, was a Mexican Creole of noble Basque and Spanish ancestry, named Agustín. You know Cinco de Mayo? That's a (?the first) battle the Mexicans won against the French in 1862 when Napoleon III invaded Mexico to install his Austrian puppet emperor Maximillian. The French beat them later, took over Mexico city, and installed Maximillian in power, but the Mexicans kicked the French back out again in 1867 and executed Maximillian. (Notably, the USA/CSA Civil War was 1860-1865, and, afterwards in 1865-1867, the USA started actively supporting Mexico and threatened to intervene against the French, as per the Montoe Doctrine, not that I'm saying that's why the Mexicans won or the French left then.) *Not counting native "emperors", like of the "Aztec Empire", whose leading ethnic group at least are sometimes also called "Mexicans", the Nāhuatl word being "Mēxihcah" (that's the plural), and the Nāhuatl word for the "Valley of Mexico" around modern day "Mexico City" being "Mēxihco".
@@rwdyeriii RE: ". . . the fact that the US was preoccupied with bullying its own southern states in that late unpleasantness of the War Between The States." The South fired the first shots of the Civil War at the Battle of Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861.
@@tamashi_soul The population was over a billion. Mexico was just so disorganized that it couldn't muster a large army and as a result, America didn't need large armies either.
Meanwhile Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812, (30 years earlier) with 600,000 men. Actually most battles in Europe didn't involve huge armies facing each other. Usually around 70,000 per side, as in the battle of Waterloo, which was a major turning point in history. Sometimes less than half that. There weren't very many people in North America at that time.
@@tamashi_soul Literally after this war ended in China, the Taiping rebellion began and, over the next 15 years, 20 million people would die in that conflict. There were plenty of people in the world.
@@NoahBodze Bruh you're comparing lands with hundreds of millions of people at the time to unsettled lands with a couple scattered tribes here and there.
The United States is a country that has the habit of stealing and copying the cultures of other countries, and appropriating them as if they were its own. EXAMPLE: From Mexico, not only did he steal territory, but also the Cowboy culture of Mexicans, Cowboy is of Mexican origin. From Germany, stealing gastronomy, from Burgers and Hot Dogs. From Netherlands, I steal the figure of Santa Claus. They believe that they are the direct heirs of the legacy of Ancient Rome because they think that the United States was born as an inspiration to Ancient Rome, to say that Washington created the United States in the likeness of Ancient Rome, and that the United States. What a funny joke 🤣 HAHAHA They have more legacy from Ancient Rome, Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Argentina than the United States.
Constancio Rosellini there’s a difference between stealing and settlers 😂. What a joke of a comment. I’ve been all over the world. Europe, Brazil and South America. They have culture but it’s minute.
@@ConstancioRosellini5873 The creators of Cowboy 🐴👢 culture it was the Mexicans 🇲🇽 (Not the US-Americans, who copied the traditions of the northern Mexicans). Those who raised cattle in the current area of Texas, when it was Mexican 🇲🇽 territory, before the annexation to the United States, their lifestyle and work were inherited from Mexicans living in present-day Texas territory. California also had skilled men on horseback, according to Richard Henry Dana, who wrote a book about that region in 1840 when it still belonged to Mexico. As described: When they make long trips, they ride horses until they get tired and grab another one, they pull the saddle and bridle on it, and after exhausting the animal, they take a third one, and so on until the end of the trip. There are no better runners like Mexicans in the world.
@@andresmora5192 Compatriota Mexicano, tienes toda la razon. El Cowboy es un arte creado por los Mexicanos, los Gringos lo copiaron, esos Gringos no tienen identidad. Aqui un Mexicano-Italiano de Xalapa, Veracruz. Saludos.
Every budding empire wanted to look like a victim when they bully. Think of the narrative of the poor settlers being killed by the evil Indians. When in fact, the native americans were trying to defend their homelands from invaders.
Mexico was indeed in a position that made winning the war impossible. Throughout the 20s and 30s Mexico faced multiple Civil wars, coups, fought attempts by the Spanish to reconquer the country, the Pastry War from 1838 when the French invaded Mexico for the first time (the second invasion happened in the 1860s when the French proclaimed the Second Mexican Empire in the middle of the American Civil War), attempts at secession and then the Texas revolution. There was no competition at all here.
I watched The First episode of the "Grant" miniseries last night and He had stated that the Americans new that Mexico had a bad army so they felt confident of victory. Whether right or wrong whose to say but this is the way history plays out. The Mexican Government would have been better off taking the $$$ offered at first, Should've, Would've, Could've. Que Sera, Sera...
@@dffndjdjd Racims, Nepotism, Regionalism, Classicm and no Ethnic unitiy. Oaxcas(Zaotecs,Mixtecs)Nahautl. Oto Pameans and Mayans had higher populations but didn't fight for the experimental govt of Mexico, because Santa Ana had declared war on them. Santa Ana is Pro Iberian, in today's time he would be the Salinas Gortari The US on the other hand obliterated the Native populations and then boosted up their numbers with Scotch Irish,slaves and Volga German immigration. But even some of the Irish defected to Mexico (ST. Patricks Batallion). This is why the US invaded through Veracruz because they knew Mexico was at war with the Mayans(Yucatecs) and the Mayans would let them pass easily, meanwhile in Monterrey they had hostility because the concept of 'mexican'(Mixed raza) was accepted. This is why BENITO JUAREZ was able to defeat the French(top 5 land army in the late 1800s) because he had Nahautl and Mixtec support. What Plagues the country today is that the neo libs(aka Conservative Party in 1840) hijaked the Mexican govt in the 60s 'HALCONAZO'. Prior to that Mexico was a nationalist country that had a top 7 economy. ..after NAFTA , PRIAN sold out it's citiwna so that they can send their kids to Harvard and Paris to study abroad...just like the Russian and Chinese Oligarchs. Oh yea and theres the fact that the ATF( same ones from Waco & Ruby Ridge) arm and fund the Rogue state of Sinaloa.
And the reason was a mentality of mexican peoples predominantly a spanish ones contrary to the US where you have mostly a UK or German mentality completely different mind set
9:37 The Battle of San Pasquale is literally in my backyard. The hill has a big cross on it, to represent the battle. Whenever I look into my backyard, I always remember that a battle was fought here.
@Great Cornholio "how dare he not use the word all properly, must mean hes lying"- a guy who forgot this was a RUclips comments section, and not a fucking language arts class lmao
By the start of the war Texas had already won their independence from Mexico at the Battle of San Jacinto. Sam Huston with an army of volunteers defeated Santa Anna and drove him back into Mexico. The Mexican American war was about the gold in Cal and the other precious minerals in the SW.
it started because the US annexed Texas, Texas's border was disputed. US troops occupied the Border the US claimed and Mexican troops attacked thus starting the war.
What is astounding is that so few troops (on either side) determined the outcome of about 1/2 the entire North American continent. It seems like once an "army" left a conquered town, the opposing side could just walk right in.
That part of North America was very sparsely populated, even including the Indians. That's also the reason why the United States was able to annex that vast tract of land. It would've been different if there was a huge population of loyal Mexicans inhabiting it .
War is final determination from the winner. Lots of soldiers on both sides killed so its not just a few. Lots of historian estimated 25,000 Mexican soldiers died, as well as 15,000 American soldiers
Imagine loosing a region with a lot of gold and Potential for expansion that would be eventually the richest and most populous state in the union. lol *This post was made by the United States of America*
@@gingerale2131 It wouldn't have been the case of Mexico. Their government is so chaotic (and corrupt), that that gold would have just ended in the pockets of some elite people.
Although it wasn’t directly relevant to the war, one of the reasons why Mexico was unstable was because there were several battles between Mexico and the Navajo nation along the US border. The two nations were constantly attacking each other.
I was thinking the same thing, train and treat your troops well or they will surrender in large numbers like many Iraqi conscripts in the 1990 Gulf War.
When you are in another country, you don't consider deserting. When you are a conscript, and you aren't being fed or paid, fading into the background is easy.
@@wrightmf ... The Iraquí endured 10 years of war with Iran and had no beef with the US ... That was the main reason of their surrender in the Gulf. The dummy US did not go after Saddam then, and it cost a useless war to benefit the military industrial complex
I know man Porfirio Diaz said that And he's right, México is too close to USA and relies on USA We should be pursuing our interests and govern ourselves
But Mexico has Chihuahua State. Just listen to what these two sisters from California US say about it - ruclips.net/video/r2qwNGh1IZM/видео.html - Ha Ha.
Omega 01 Mexico can’t produce mass destruction weapons because of the US Mexico Can’t produce any advanced military equipment because of the US Mexico can’t be an allied of China or Russia because of the US Mexico can’t buy technology from China because of the US Mexico can’t produce enough food for its population because of the US Mexico can’t even refine its own Gasoline being an oil rich country Mexican politicians from PRI, PRD and PAN have sold out Mexican people to the US but many Mexicans don’t realize that.
@GordoScarface Well you clearly didn’t if you’re Making these dumbass comments 😂 btw I was being sarcastic, just in case you were too ignorant to figure it out.
Imagine fighting 2 wars in spam of 10-15 years , without support and fighting 2 major superpowers, without good military personel , gotta admit ,that is having balls.
@MEXICAN AMERICANS There wasn’t planes or mobile vehicles and harsh terrain to navigate. Put Mexico and America in a war now and it’ll take less then a month to defeat Mexico lol Edit: I’m not responding to anyone replying to this two year old comment. Don’t waste your time
@MEXICAN AMERICANS Nah, Anglo, Scandinavian and Germanic American warriors are and always will be the most toughest and fearless and most attractive warriors of our world. I bet any name you give me won’t even compare to Chapman or any other names I could list. The most fearless and selfless warriors of our era are of European decent
Mexico is the most beautiful tradegy work ever written but what makes it beautiful is that Mexicans still fight for a better future even when they have bad apples among themselves such as the government or criminal organizations the normal folk will always fight and work for a better future for its family with values and tradition that’s what makes the motherland great even if it doesn’t have a good economic status or the best stability
Its how a lot of major commanders on both sides got their experience in war and made a lot of relationships that contributed to their actions in the civil war
The American Civil War saved Mexico don’t get it twisted. The Juárez government was in exile from The Second Mexican Empire under Maximilian. Juárez was running out of money, arms, and most importantly men and things were very desperate in 1865! When the UNION claimed victory over the Confederacy they had lots of unused cannons, rifles, and other arms that they GAVE JUÁREZ and him small group of supporters besides SENDING UNION TROOPS who technically were volunteers and not under official US Army capacity. It was because of this American intervention that Juárez was able to defeat Maximilian and RESTORED the Mexican Republic. It’s become trendy by those ignorant of Mexican and American history to claim that the US is a bully to Mexico when it’s Mexico who started the Mexican American War and was later saved by the United States just 20 years later.
I kind of knew the story of California once being a part of Mexico especially because I saw a movie called my family mi familia. Which I recommend to people to watch the movie because it's a really good movie about a family and their struggles. And there was a part of the movie that mentioned that when one of the characters dies that he wanted on his Tombstone to just say "when I was born here this was Mexico when I die this is still Mexico." So that little part of the movie it kind of stuck with me that I kind of already knew that California was once Mexico and even my older brother explained the history of California. But I never really knew how Texas and Nevada how they broke away from being Mexico and how it ended up being U.S. instead. History is really interesting when you really think about it.
what people don't know is that many Mexican Citizens did not want to be apart of Mexico in both California and Texas because of how corrupt the government in Mexico City was. Because Mexico was becoming increasingly centralized many in the North wanted Independance. This is why the Spanish Speakers in Texas joined the Texas Revolution.
Mexcio was not even united before the Spanish came it was full of tribes Mexico inherited the Spanish colony and Americans took it away.. not much deeper than that.
"For myself" Ulysses S Grant wrote later about the United States war against Mexico "I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation" "I do not think there was ever a more wicked war than that waged by the United States on Mexico. I thought so at the time, when I was a youngster, only I had not moral courage enough to resign"
@@ron88303 you never know, but all i do know is that the US wouldn't be as powerful as it is today if it wasn't for those southern stolen lands. In fact all of it was stolen lmao
@@anaosuna Please… every piece of land currently occupied by humans was “stolen” which was previously stolen from earlier inhabitants which was also stolen from earlier inhabitants. So tired of the liberal victimhood narrative…
@@ron88303 doesn't matter. Its way unjust and not "win in war" it was stolen straight up. The usa did pay the Mexicans though but they had no choice. It was take the money or nothing.
Sounds similar to when people say DC comics. When people don’t realize the C in dc stands for comics and D was for for Detective. So when people refer to DC comics their basically saying, Detective comics comics.
Catalina Island in California was not included in the treaty of surrender and therefore was declared a permanently leased territory to the USA. This is also why a Mexican National cannot be considered illegal or deported from Catalina Island. You wouldn’t find this info in Wikipedia but you in the copy of surrender which can be found in the Autry Museum of the American West in Los Angeles CA.
I'll be honest: for such a sweep of a victory, textbooks don't really discuss it much: "The USA declared war on Mexico and sent troops to the Rio Grande River. They were led by Zachary Taylor. [...] After a few years, the US obtained the Mexican Cession." Basically all there was about this.
@@fathomthat4690 Well, tell me which country has purebred populations? The USA has populations from Europe, Asia, Africa and American Indians. I consider your comment unwise
@@fathomthat4690 I don't know enough about Mexican history to say anything about your comment, but why did you comment it here? It has no relevance to what the original comment said and is phrased like a personal attack.
No brother it wasn't phrased as a personal attack, like I said was just making a statement of fact, problem is a lot of people read things in to texts.. as far as the context the statement made, it is based on factual history.
The Mexican governor fled New Mexico to Mexico City, while many New Mexicans were prepared to fight, but after he fled, New Mexicans showed no resistance to Kearny.
@@asm42 ... It was a valid point to make. Why would you want to mix with a different culture on a grand scale? Especially a needy one. Nations that are homogeneous have better standards of living and are more united as a whole. But think the US could’ve taken more of northern Mx states and all of baja, that were scarcely populated
General Robert E. Lee once said, "The Civil War is our penance for the Mexican War" (or words to that effect.) General Grant agreed, as did many officer veterans of both wars.
Thomas Jefferson said, "I fear for my country when I realize God is just," when discussing the issue of slavery. I'm pretty sure he would believe that the Civil War was penance for slavery.
Dude for a Country that's a small penance to pay. You got massive land (including oil) for perpetuity, it's not like in the future the US is going to say, hey Mexico we recognize we were bullies/invaders, you can have this back. And Sure people died in the Civil War, but so did many in the Mexico war itself. If loss of life is paramount then no country would had ever gone to war.
@@greg_4201 at least he knew how to balance a budget. That alone makes him more intelligent than any president in the past hundred years... he even managed to double the size of the US while doing it.
Really after going through all the trouble of a war. They should have annexed the entire country of Mexico. It probably would have been better for all involved. There would be no need for illegal border crossing today because they would already be American citizens and they would be free to go wherever they want within the Country.
What a load of Pro Mexican BS. The Republic of Texas incorporated ALL the territory north and east of the Rio Grande river, not the Brazos your BS map is trying to implicate. The Battle of San Jacinto ended with the defeat of Santa Anna, who signed away that territory as a result of this War for Texas independence. You tube, you need to flag this story as BS.
What about Santa And crimes against Texans, and the killing of Americans, in America? What about the hundreds of captured people who were murdered, and piled and burned as a warning to other people seeking freedom?
The Brazos river was never the Tx border with Mexico... The Rio Grande was the established border... I cringed the whole time the video kept showing the incorrect Tx border.. If you believe the Brazos was the Tx border, you probably also think Taiwan is a part of Communist China.
Yeah Napoleon and Caesar thought so too but they didn’t receive a reward, Caesar 30 something knives in him, Napoleon exile to Elba, Austria Prussia and Russia were certain of their rule on their “Poland” until blood slaughter and desolation from napoleons cannons answered back in retaliation, we keep beating the bush we are bound one way or another to be stung!
That is actually the only good reason to go to war. Take more land because yours is becoming too crowded. We need to tale Baja Mexico now as it is and save the Vaquita from extinction
@@georgefloydspaceshuttlepro1839 Of course, it is not like that it is precisely Canadian and American companies that are contributing to extinction, right? lol
@@georgefloydspaceshuttlepro1839 Holy shit, Are you seriously talking about saving vaquita? It's not anymore a hunting to please some Chinese, it's a biological problem of vaquitas to reproduce fastly enough to recover. And you certainly wouldn't want to break trust within your allies, better fill up the empty spaces in U.S., we all have them, that would help everyone.
The 15 million that the United States paid were to cover damages caused U.S. troops in Mexico which were significant. It’s not like the United States purchased any lands.
The US, France, Russia, and England all played a role of Mexico losing its territory. In 1806 France invades Spain. In 1811 Mexican Independence begin. In 1812 Russia invades Spanish California. In 1813 US invaded Spanish Texas and lost. In 1816 U.S. Invaded and captured Spanish Florida. In 1821 the Mexican Empire was form. In 1824 the Mexican Republic was form. In 1829 Spain invaded Mexico and lost. In 1836 U.S. filibusters invaded Mexico and captured Texas but failed to capture California. That same year US and English threaten Mexico with war for the released of the California Filibusters. In 1838 France invaded Mexico and lost. In 1841 Russia sold it's holding, forts and weapons to the US in California. Before the US-Mexican war. In 1846 Mexican American War began. In 1848 Mexico lost its northern territory. In 1853 US filibusters invaded Mexico and were defeated in Baja California and in Sonora. In 1862 France invaded Mexico. In 1868 Mexico gain their Independence from France. In 1914 US invaded Mexico and lost. In 1916 Mexico Invades US under Poncho Villa and lost.
Julius Ceasar said in his war comentaries that "One should divide and conquer". I read that book about 30 years ago but that's what he did to the tribes in Gaul.
@@themostpopularvideos8539 You move your people into a region owned by another country, take over as a majority, then claim they're being discriminated and oppressed and start a war to "liberate" them from the oppressors. Annex that and grow your country to get the resources.
Most of my childhood was spent in Louisiana and I do not remember this war ever being mentioned. Maybe that says something about the quality of an education in that state.
@J Calhoun yeah I found out mainly about the civil war just by research at home than school. And I'm an American IN ANERICAN HISTORY CLASS! They don't teach good. Only one history teacher was good and he was Ex military.
War of 1812, Mexican/American War, Plains Indian Wars & Spanish/American War were barely mentioned in history classes when I was a kid growing up in 1960s-1970s in Ohio, but at least they were mentioned. Learned more about these wars from a great interest in history.
Well not all of it that's true because Texas want to leave Mexico in fact they asked America twice to become part of the United States and we both declined it
The best thing that ever happened for those territories was the Mexican/American war. If they were still part of Mexico they would be poor and overrun by Mexican drug cartels. 100% fact.
@@Longtack55 The northerners who supported a tyrannical government were the real traitors. Generals like Lee and Jackson should be just as respected George Washington.
@@Cornponetheape Research history and study the constitution, the southern states were being heavily taxed and Lincoln was slowly opening the gateway for large businesses to start taking over, going against the US constitution. Another example is when South Carolina seceeded Lincoln sent troops into Fort Sumter violating international law provoking the South Carolina militia to attack the fort, literally the same events that happened in this video provoking Mexico to attack US troops is the same events that happened at Fort Sumter, I shouldn't even have to mention the Union invading the South after the states democratically seceeded. I shouldn't even have to mention how the North also had black slaves and none of them were released until long after the southern states released theirs.
Fun Fact: The Senate voted in favor of declaring war on Mexico and thus California, Texas and the Southwest eventually entering the Union, states that would be critical in the Civil War.... by one vote. The senator who cast that vote, Edward A. Hannegan, was also appointed by his state legislature.... by one vote. The state rep, Madison Marsh, who cast that deciding vote was also elected..... by one vote. An ordinary farmer's vote in DeKalb County Indiana. Henry Shoemaker.
As a Mexican, (don't mind my name or image lol) We are told about this war from a slightly different perspective. Many heroic actions...too many to be true. Our story is full of great moments, such as The Independence, the Battle for Fort Chapultepec, (I know we lost, but the greatness is still there) Battle of Puebla, etc. But in those times we were having severe problems. IN MY OPINION, that intervention was...unnecessary? sooner or earlier the main states would regain stability (It would be very hard, but we would have accomplished it.), and IN MY OPINION, the US just wanted to have more territory for their ambitions. Thus, our friendship with America is still one of the strongest of all time. We help each other (The Escuadron 201 that fought on the Philipines, or the Braceros who went to work to the USA to keep the economy on the march, or the thousands of material and stuff we send to the US in WW2) And we're glad to have you as neighbors. Long live the Mexican-American friendship! (Edit: I'm not saying the americans hate mexicans)
@@g_g1241 Besides, apart from learning important lessons, you can't go back and change/undo history. The European descent inhabitants can't just all fly back to Europe today and abandon North America to the Native American tribes again, for example. Furthermore, all those generations of imperialists are dead now. The question is do we LEARN from our mistakes and seek a better future.
Mexico DID NOT exist. That vast territory was Spain, the Virreinato de La Nueva España. So, it doesn't belong to the nowadays, so called, Mexico. US poisoned people's minds populating that territories with the idea of independence because they were sure after independence they will become a much weaker country, as it has been proved to happen. After that, they outperformed Mexicans and just took as much territory as they wanted. The rest, is history!
@Robert Ortiz-Wilson not spanish tho, people living there were mestizos mix of spanish and indigenous, which they migrated to all parts of what used to be the center of new spain or what's "mexico" today
@GordoScarface like i told u not spanish not mexicans, they were criollos or mestizos, and almost all of new spain armies were Made of indigenous people
@@matthewokoh7947 i know the names are no debate, they come from spain, but that doesn't mean it was 100% spaniard a Lot of american discredit México saying it only belonged to us 10 years , those territories have way more mexican influence than spanish influence, spain barely Even cared about those territories, they basically took half of our territory, and what used to be new spain, so don't Say it was only spanish pls
@GordoScarface i know the names are spanish bro, read My comments i forgot to mention i wasn't talking about that, My Bad, i'm talking more of the cultural influence on those territories
It's crazy how small the 'armies' were. "100 lancers vs Kearnys army of about 150 at the battle". Many soccer hooligan clashes have had more participants! I mean, compare with the contemporary Crimean War, where the initial armies (before mobilization) had like 80,000 men. It does makes it obvious why the European powers dismissed american military powers as footnotes during these times.
The main reason here is that Mexico is deeply unstable and central government has little control of the nation therefore unable to raise or maintain large armies. Just two decades later millions of men fought on each side of the American civil war, so this war isn't really a testament to the full strength of new world military might.
@@leiyaca Well, to be fair the american civil war affected every US citizen directly, the battles were inside the country and the war set half the country to fight the other half. So it still wasn´t a real organized war against another country. It was a full scale civil war that used up all the resources in the country. Still a very minor conflict by european standards. The Napoleonic wars half a century before, had more than 5 times more military deaths than the whole american civil war.
Noticed the same.... Think it is because it is hard to march thru miles of desert logistically knowing that the towns are very inhabited.... and basically no opposition
Its funny when you look at it, specially california, mexico had upper california and lower california, but then lost the upper one, still mexico really wanted two californias, so now we have northern lower california and southern lower california.
Yes ask yourself why they won't teach you this in high school they don't want put this into your head.But rather teach history across the country which we shouldn't really learn 😂
I love history and really never knew how deep the Mexican-American war went. Thank you for such a nicely put together very educational video! I think this video should be used in history curriculums
Almost everything that isn’t in history curriculums should be included and everything taught today should be removed. History tends to repeat itself and no one seems to actually understand this. History is as true as the man who wrote it
The reason why Western Texas was disputed: After the Battle of San Jacinto and Santa Anna's defeat by Houston, two treaties were signed. The first Treaty is shown in the video. The disputed land is the land listed in that second treaty. After the first treaty was signed, Texian Revolutionaries realized they were in a unique position, as Santa Anna was their prisoner. They went back and demanded more from the Mexican President/General. Santa Anna later claimed he signed the treaties under duress. Both sides chose the treaty that favored their own interests. To the US, they were making a statement north of the border. To Mexico, the US invaded Mexican territory.
Problem was those were NOT treaties. As Santa Anna was a POW. Mexico did not acknowledge it. It was more a terms of a ceasefire. But the Americans called it a treaty to rationalize their annexation of Texas
@@fallen4life080 What other choice did the Texans have? Santa Anna established himself as the de facto dictator of Mexico. The opportunity presented itself, and they capitalized on it. This isn't villifying Mexico. The Spanish blockade of Veracruz crippled the new country. The USA had the luxury of establishing itself, settling on a Constitution after an early failure, and putting down early dissent. Mexico did not have that luxury. Some even called for a European to rule as king in order to get recognition. The people did their best, and borderline military rule seemed to some to be the only path to internal stability. Santa Anna was the government, and his past actions proved he would return once the southern revolts were well behind him. Forcing a POW to sign a treaty isn't ideal, but it was the only option. Houston was well aware of the situation and needed to end the war quickly. There was no guarantee of negotiation after release, and Santa Anna had a long memory of those who wronged him.
I am half mexican and Irish born in san francisco american I respect my people of mexico and Irish. I celebrate mexico independence day and Irish independence day too. I respect Irish in their honor of serving the battle with mexico.
@@vincivinci6018 that's right. Mexican flag and Ireland flag are alike except mexico have their bald eagle and the cactus in their flag. I have both flags. Cinco de mayo I put it out along with our Irish flag to celebrate for cinco de mayo and for Irish independence day I put out mexico flag out too and celebrate along as well.
Northern Mexico (today part of USA) was also very sparsely populated, so the Americans did not have to face very stiff local resistance. Also the Mexicans that lived there were mainly Criollos/Castizos who were still a little bitter that they had lost control over the region when Mexico gained independence, so they were not as loyal to the Mexican state.
Divide and conquer methods and conniving moves to weaken and overcome Mexico I believe...gained or stolen? so in reality who entered whos land here. hmmm!!
Sparsely populated is a underestatement......California at the time of the war only had 15,000 Mexican citizens and were outnumbered by indigenous peoples 6 to 1.
The chaotic situation in Mexico prevented a curious clause in the boundary treaties with the United States signed in 1929, which consisted in letting it know that for the Mexican government Texas was delimited by the Río de las Nueces, something that was also used by Spaniards and French at the time. What would have allowed to create a special situation that would have prevented the war.
What was left out was that the Californios led by Mariano Vallejo also wanted to break away from Mexico and they seceded created an independent California which lasted for 25 days. The reason California was so easy to take is that it had technically become an independent nation and Vallejo enthusiastically supported US annexation.
Could you make video about Sudeten crisis? Or something between 2 world wars in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary? After the Great war there was a lot of conflict and it would be interesting to see it explained like that. Great video btw.
Both the Mexican and American soldier were almost on par in terms of training and overall discipline. It was the same on the officer side due to the fact that many Mexican military leaders (as well as Americans) fought in earlier conflicts and were accustomed to the state warfare. The real winner on the battle were the American cannons, the Mexican artillery corps did not have the same funding and training that the American regiments had. Some of those regiments were also present on both sides of the civil war and were extremely competent.
@@EmperorSenate Totally agree with your analyses. Artillery was the main difference, and in some cases small arms as well. In addition, with regards to the artillery, most of the pieces fielded by the Mexican Army was antiquated and the powder quality inferior. As an interesting side note, when Scott landed in Veracruz and began the Central Mexico campaign he followed the same route as Cortez had taken in 1520. In addition, when the Duke of Wellington heard of his campaign, he predicted that Scott was lost and would be beaten.
@Andres Figueroa ... The Mexican army had more people under arms ... Lacked the US organization and discipline, but with a few months of training and some up to date cannons and rifles would be up to par with USA. The lack of vision and lack of geopolitical views when it was obvious that US was expanding is proof even to this day of Mexican incompetence!!! Mx naval warfare zero! Even the Chileans scared away the United States from the pacific in Panama in those years with a superior ship...US had to navigate all the way thru the dangerous tip of South America to have a ship on the Pacific Ocean in those days!
@@coleparker ...Wellington thought that the incredible numbers of population will become a n army.... but the Mexican people showed cowardice!! That was later taken into account by the French that colonized the Mexicans later!
Europe Specially France and Britain had in mind that divide and rule ....So cruel thinking and still conflict border zones are there between every two countries .. African Indo Pak Usa Mexico Latin Countries These are results of colonization and hunger of power and money.
"After the United States gobbled up California and half of Mexico, and we were stripped down to nothing, territorial expansion suddenly becomes a crime. It's been going on for centuries, and it will still go on." - Herman Goering, Nuremberg war trials
I like how they cut it off flat at the line that the United States boundaries have drawn out for the states which wasn't how it was only until recently after this date. You got to remember Arizona Nevada New Mexico and part of Texas and Southern Utah were all considered one state which was called New Mexico which prevented the Confederates from moving Westward
@Juan Taco we do that , we are autochthonous that mean we was in our lands always , after to our lands came mfs to take ours lands.🇲🇽🇦🇱🇲🇽🇦🇱 eagles brothers
@Antoine The great it depends on how you look at it; they were immigrants living in the us that felt persecuted by americans, they felt more loyalty to the religion than the state, and that's how they defined their stance, as Protestants vs Catholics, not as Americans vs Mexicans.
You can see it in so many angles Irish are hard core catholics and the rest are Protestant so there was a difference here besides Irish we’re discriminated by other Anglo White people even getting a job for them was hard in those days.
@Antoine The great I would advice you to drop ideologies and just look at things aa they were. My point is that they were both traitors to the US gov AND loyal to the catholic religion. That's not the same as someone that just deserts and becomes a thief. Its like the people who betrayed the axis to be loyal to the allies, we see them differently than lets say, the special forces that defected the mexican amry to become narco mercenaries
My great-great-great grandfather fought in the Mexican-American war and the re-enlisted for the Civil war at the age of 46. He died of pneumonia before he saw any action in the Civil war.
the only problem with that is numbers still and now tech, plus I think most Mexican people would rather the USA govern them. the Country is rampant with Crime and corruption. there's no way Mexico would win a war with the US now. I've been half expecting a revolution and them asking to become an America Territory, but no people just leave and come into the US.
@@DUSaggin nah trust me Mexicans wouldn’t want the US governing Mexico a big reason why mexico is the way it is now is because of the US involving itself in domestic issues such as crime which has caused it to skyrocket leading to more instability
@@chino2620 yeah, i just wish there was a way to help. every culture and peoples deserve a decent safe place to call home they can be proud of. i wish it didn't always have to take fighting, killing and suffering revolutions and to change shit.
Not really; those places were hardly inhabited by anyone but natives. There were only a few thousand Mexicans in all of California at the time, so sending an army of a few hundred soldiers was more than enough. Similar story for New Mexico and Western Texas.
Its understandable for the time considering how little population inhabited those locations. Still, considering how important those regions are now, kind of funny to see small armies deciding massive outcomes.
the US had 73,532 soldiers and volunteers and Mexico had 70,000 regulars and 12000 irregulars who participated in that war. it seem like less because of how much time the narrator focus on that one unit/army (who barely did shit) and regulars is a bit of a stretch since most of the Mexican army was peasants who were conscripted with very little training.
The 1848 treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (a city to which the Mexican government had fled with the advance of U.S. forces), signed on February 2, 1848, ended the war between the United States and Mexico and extended the boundaries of the United States west to the Pacific Ocean. This agreement, along with the 1853 Gadsen Purchase, created the southern border of the present-day United States. By its terms, Mexico ceded territory, including the present-day states California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, most of Arizona and Colorado, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Wyoming. The U.S. government paid Mexico $15 million (in present dollars would be some $650 million today), "in consideration of the extension acquired by the boundaries of the United States" and AGREED TO PAY American citizens debts owed to them by the Mexican government. Other provisions included protection of property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living within the new boundaries of the United States, the promise of the United States to police its boundaries, and compulsory arbitration of future disputes between the two countries. Mexico also relinquished all claims to Texas, and recognized the Rio Grande as the southern boundary with the United States.
I still say James Polk was one of the most successful Presidents in American history. He came in with a handful of talking points, accomplished all of them, and then declined to run again because he did everything he set out to do.
Sadly President Polk died fairly young at 54, only a few months after leaving the White House. I have visited his birthplace and personally cleared ages of leaves by hand from the tombstone of his grandmother, which bears a touching commemorative poem on it. Polk is a tragically underrated president who accomplished an amazing amount in such a short time. Modern presidents are a joke in comparison.
Please add subtitles in your videos and your videos and content are really awesome I like that but by adding subtitle will certainly ensure better understanding of content I hope you will act accordingly.❤
"The Americans are truly a lucky people. They are bordered to the north and south by weak neighbors and to the east and west by fish."
- Otto von Bismarck.
Daniel Escovedo remember 1812
@@feeldafood2953 remember 1870
@@feeldafood2953 The US gave and received a bloody nose to and by the British. The proto-Canadians were not responsible for any defeat inflicted in that war. *They* got their asses kicked until they were saved by the Brits.
Archipelago and Island nations: *all we see are fish*
@@tremedar "B-but, muh Burning of Washington...."
Abraham Lincoln once asked General Winfield Scott this question: "Why is it that you were once able to take Mexico City in three months with five thousand men, and we have been unable to take Richmond with one hundred thousand men?"
"I will tell you," said General Scott. "The men who took us into Mexico City are the same men who are keeping us out of Richmond."
Great reply
johnny reb!!!!!!! the best fighters in Spanish american war, ww1, ww2 all came from the south!!!!! look it up
@@jaysnider2203prove it
@@prestigev6131 Yet they lost the civil war, so you're not making sense. West point is in the south, but enrollment is not restricted to southerners.
Prestige V61 West Point is in new York my friend
Also of note are the Irish brigades that fought for Mexico. Many were immigrants to America, and many deserted the US Army. The irish were catholic and catholics were distrusted and faced prejudice in the US Army, and since many of the Irish were not officially American citizens yet, they abandoned American army to fight for Mexico which was predominately catholic. They were some of the most experienced and fierce fighters in Mexico, and if captured they were treated as deserters and traitors.
I think i saw a little bit of a documentary about that a few years back.They talked about one unit of irish defectors called the Saint Patrick's brigade.I forget which battle they were in but they continued to fight when the mexicans began to retreat.They were all captured and executed by the U.S. army.
Yes but we still won. You actually know some history. I guess we should now feel even more sry for Mexico huh.
Search for saint patrick’s battalion song. Makes me close to tears.
They had honours and a monument here in México, some of us mexicans know about they're proud history.
And their descendants became Canelo Alvarez.
As a Mexican myself I feel shame as to how we lost so much cause of so much division between us in the country
And still so much division in Mexico that allows the corruption to thrive.
It’s not entirely our fault, we had just gotten our independence from Spain - we were still getting our ducks in a row so to speak and the US took advantage of that vulnerability. But what is concerning and has been concerning for some time is the uneven development of the country to date, el Norte has boomed and is pro America while the south of the country has been severely undeveloped and ignored, in other words it doesn’t seem like we have learned our lesson. The central government/ administrations need to do a better job of creating even development and focusing on developing the south and poorer parts of the south while reigning in the northern areas . It’s a risk for us losing half our country again…
No worries, you guys are invading again with a vast coalition of countries.
Already a majority in some areas of the US, it's only a matter of time before the Americans let you take back (in one way or another) much or more of the land taken from you.
Similar to the weak and divided country that you were when the US invaded, now so is the US weak and divided, allowing you this opportunity for victory which you would not otherwise have.
Siguen igualito wue!
bruh first they come to you as neighbours then they ll steal everything from you . (they = the british)
"The US did not want to look like a bully"
*Kicks the hell out of México*
I love but hate at the same time that you did it with accent marks
What did the Spanish Empire do to conquer the Mexican Territory to begin with? Kisses and Roses no doubt.
@@briansimerl4014 why did the US imitated a behavior themselves considered barbaric?
@@mastrorick false dichotomy, one no more morally right than the other. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
@@briansimerl4014 maybe americans were not very different from the japanese...
Fun fact: The original cowboys, rodeo and southern clothing are originally from Mexico!
si lo se, esto es un poco justo :/
Americans enemies are the people who run Hollywood
@Darren the girlilla Till no we didn’t y’all just think that. we never said we invented.
Cowboy, which US-Americans 🇺🇲 brag about as their own, is an art created by Mexicans 🇲🇽 when TEXAS was a Mexican province in the 19th century.
United States and its eternal habit of stealing things from others.
Cowboy = Mexico
Hallowen = Ireland
Santa Claus = Holland
Burger = Germany
Dollars = Spain
The creators of Cowboy 🐴👢 culture it was the Mexicans 🇲🇽
(Not the US-Americans, who copied the traditions of the northern Mexicans).
Those who raised cattle in the current area of Texas, when it was Mexican 🇲🇽 territory, before the annexation to the United States, their lifestyle and work were inherited from Mexicans living in present-day Texas territory.
California also had skilled men on horseback, according to Richard Henry Dana, who wrote a book about that region in 1840 when it still belonged to Mexico. As described:
When they make long trips, they ride horses until they get tired and grab another one, they pull the saddle and bridle on it, and after exhausting the animal, they take a third one, and so on until the end of the trip. There are no better runners like Mexicans in the world.
Well, this story failed to mention the reason why Texas decided to break away from Mexico. Short version: Back then Mexico allowed immigrants to settle in the northern part of the territory, but needed to registered with the local authorities and learn the language (Spanish). Many immigrants comply but the vast majority just settled without registration in fact becoming illegals, and many brought slaves with them. Slavery was illegal in Mexico in that time. When Mexican officials, became aware of what was going on in Texas, they tried to reinforce its anti-slavery and immigration laws on its land, but it was too late.
So nothings changed except for slavery
I like how you managed to throw your victim narrative into that bullshit story
@@bobbye7353 Pretty much this.
@@bobbye7353, Not my victim story, just history. The irony right! Pick up a book and read all about it Bobby Boucher jr.
@@bobbye7353 didn't know history is a "victim narrative" lmao
THIS IS A TRUE ACCOUNT. No opinions, editorializing, justification, just pure facts and history. NOW MY FAVORITE. !!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!
I disagree. You may want to do more research. They totally ignored Mexican provocations and abuses. Partially because they oversimplified the issue with Texas.
Plenty was omitted and it is does have editorial bias. Just grow up, please.
@@earnthis1 do your own video and stop crying then
The only thing I learned from this was how many ads can be fit in a single youtube video
History is funny,. American squatters multiply and conquer Mexican land, land is developed and improved, Mexicans return to land to enjoy improvements, multiply and prosper. The end..
Get RUclips Red ya lil bish.
I didn't have any and i also don't have RUclips red
I've seen worse on YT. Its getting out of hand for sure.
@Derek SchwartzIt still amazes me how little we were actually taught for twelve years of our lives? Pathetic really?
The Irish fought for Mexico during the war . MEXICO celebrates St. Patrick's day in there honor to this very day 2020 . 🇲🇽 ☘
@Chip the Irish celebrate it for the catholic church. Mexico Celebrates st. Patrick's Day to honor the Irish Brigade under John Riley who defected to the Mexican Army to Escape Irish immigrants being . prosecuted by the American. After the war they were hanged by the United states for desertion. The Mexican government protested the hanging stating they were POW and they shouldn't be hanged to no avail. 🇲🇽☘
...ok, but why the long spaces tho
@@oldprophet I have one for you too. Its called One Man's Hero " with Tom Berenger. I'll check your out to , thanks . 🌝
@@edwinhernandez9276 they were called " los patreanos" ( St. Patrick's' brigade) a brigade, made up of Irish catholic Priests, and U.S. army deserters, who were on a mission, to help out the unfair war against a small catholic nation and their stand against slavery, and came to their aid, they flew the irish flag, during the war!
Wow - a part of history I never knew! Thanks.
No one:
Santa Anna: *Change team, change team, change team, change team*
*DEFEAT*
We are sure that he isn't an italian by blood?
No one? What?
@@alexandrub8786 no Italians actually with tho when they switch teams
@@alexandrub8786 lol
In 1824 Mexico’s authoritarian ruler Agustín de Iturbide enacted a colonization law authorizing the Mexican federal government to allow legal immigration into Texas. This statute allowed foreigners to gain title to land.
Mexican liberals argued in favor of allowing foreigners to immigrate. This would satisfy multiple objectives, including promoting economic growth, increasing the number of males available to defend the country, and bringing new capital and skills into the country to replace those lost when many Spaniards were expelled or chose to leave the country.
The process for gaining an official land title was expensive and time-consuming, and many residents chose not to have the land surveyed or complete the application process. The Mexican law required immigrants to practice Catholicism and stressed that foreigners needed to learn Spanish and all people wishing to live in Texas were expected to report to the nearest Mexican authority for permission to settle.
Many Americans immigrated to Mexico, where land was cheaper. A few Americans who had become naturalized Mexicans settled in Texas during that time. Most of the immigrants came from the southern United States. Immigration of United States had begun to accelerate rapidly. The new population was not fully assimilated and by 1826, approximately 3,000 Americans from the United States were living illegally in Texas. Most of the immigrants came from the southern United States. Many were slave owners, and most brought with them significant prejudices against other races, attitudes often applied to the Tejanos. Most Anglo Americans tried to isolate themselves from Mexicans.
By 1830, Texas had a population of 7,000 foreign-born residents, with only 3,000 Mexican nationals. In regard to slavery, influential settler Stephen F. Austin, who reasoned that the success of his colonies needed slave labor and the economics it produced to lure more whites to the area. Anglos from the United States soon vastly outnumbered the Tejanos.
Mexican authorities became increasingly concerned about the stability of the region.The colonies teetered at the brink of revolt in 1829, after Mexico abolished slavery. In response, President Anastasio Bustamante implemented the Laws of April 6, 1830, which, among other things, prohibited further immigration to Texas from the United States, increased taxes, and reiterated the ban on slavery. The law explicitly banned any further immigration from the United States to Texas and any new slaves. The new Law rescinded all empresario contracts that had not been completed and prohibited Americans from settling in any Mexican territory adjacent to the United States. Secretary of State Lucas Alamán, who wrote the 1830 law, said that "Texas will be lost for this Republic if adequate measures to save it are not taken. Law of April 6, 1830 under President Anastasio Bustamante was issued because the Mexican state of Texas was in danger of being annexed by the United States. New issued settlement contracts were brought under federal rather than state control. Provisions of the law were designed to encourage Mexican citizens to move from the interior to Texas. Mexicans who agreed to relocate to Texas would get good land, free transportation to Texas, and some financial assistance. Convicts would be sent to Texas to build fortifications and roads to stimulate trade.
The lack of a formal policy had not stopped many immigrants. Settlers simply circumvented or ignored the laws. A number of people had left the United States to settle in the Mexican northern provinces.The ban and other measures did not stop US citizens from migrating to Texas by the thousands, and by 1834, it was estimated that over 30,000 Anglos lived in Texas, compared to only 7,800 Mexican-born residents.
Mexican authorities noted that slave reforms passed by the state were being ignored. By the end of 1835, almost 5,000 enslaved Africans and African Americans lived in Texas, making up 13 percent of the non-Indian population (The Mexican rules were widely disregarded and slavery remained in Texas until the end of the American Civil War).The attitudes of the immigrants prompted the Mexican-American War on February 2nd 1848, in which Mexico lost almost 55 percent of its territory to the United States drawing a bullshit line trough territory that used to be nothing but Mexico and some of these territories we know currently as Arizona,NewMexico,Texas,Nevada and of course California. All of those states used to be absolutely Mexico! so now you have people who are indigenous here who were made foreigners on there own land.
I don't know what's more criminal; crossing over a borderline of a country looking for the economic opportunity that allows you to work and earn or... going to another land across an ocean, taking over land killing &pushing its native people into concentrated areas, creating a trail of tears, deceiving other people of their true intentions and really trying to collect all these peoples gold to take it to their royal families killing"civilizing" them as they settle &conquer, or also bringing along a group of people who they used to perform hard labor of fields with no pay other than food,roof,lynching,shooting,cutting,burning!!!
Mexicans have more right to this land than other races!.
Fun Fact México still has a Royal Family living in Europe after the exile of the Iturbides that if México decided to become a monarchy again they can reclaim the throne as the house of Iturbide.
True
Mexico has many more claimants than the Iturbides. Actual relations of the last emperor of Mexico, Maximilian I live in Mexico as we speak. There are also claimants to the Aztec throne in Europe and Mexico as well, I am a descendant too.
If Mexico wanted to be a monarchy we wouldn't get the Iturbides, believe me! We have many other historical houses, including Spaniard, Aztec and even Austrian.
@@AlexToussiehChannel The Iturbides *were* Spaniards
are they gonna ask the permission of the Cartels who seemed to have the country by its nutsack?
That awkward time when you go to war over a relatively small part of land only to end up defeating your opponent so severely that there's an option to annex the entire country.
would be an intriguing alternative history if to see how things would of been if USA would of annexed Mexico, maybe the name would of been different, would also assume the civil war would be different as well
If there would have been a civil war. With the annexation of Mexico, probably would have tipped the favor of power to the side of the Southern Democrats going into the 1850s. However, the great instability caused by Mexico would have most likley led to other internal conflicts later on.
@@Privateering101 there really is no way to know
The instability would require a massive occupation by the US military until the unrest was put down and order would be established.
"Mexico" would be carved up in to "Texas", "North Mexico" consisting of the areas currently own by the US along with the Baja territory, and "Central Mexico" territories. The Senate would debate what to do about it as the southern slave states would want them to be slave states and the northern free states along with the locals would want them to be free states. By the time the US civil war would come along they would probably try to stay neutral but be raided by the Texas military and California Union troops coming in to fight them off.
Post Civil War they would boom due to the agriculture (and later oil) being largely untouched by the war, post war migration, and the Confederacy being reconstructed and war torn which would eventually lead to statehood but with Mexicans being treated as second class citizens by the nation at large. Mexico would also become flooded with former slaves due to proximity and the area would be a blend of "Whites", "Native Mexicans", Blacks, and Indigenous Native communities with no side having a massive population advantage. In fact the US might even consider carving out a new homeland for freed slaves in the region instead of creating Liberia.
The US would also seriously consider a "Mexican Canal" north-south through the Yucatan Peninsula instead of the Panama and Nicaragua Canals. Post World Wars would see a lot of integration of Mexican and American communities and the Civil Rights Era would also see a massive political change in the region with "Native Mexicans" and Blacks gaining a lot of power and influence and the Cold War economic boom would greatly benefit the regions quality of living and stability rivaling the modern California and the US Eastern Seaboard.
Jsjs Mexican pride dies last
Keep in mind Mexico had just fought off imperial nation #1(Spain) for independence. Imperial nation #2 (France) from invasion. American expansion saw their chance and said, " now! while they're tired" No other Latin American country can say that.
The French were weak at the time. Their nation was bankrupt and so was their military. Their troops were tired and starving. While that is something great that Mexico can brag about, the fact that they had a hard time fighting off a power that was bankrupt and was going downhill fast isn't saying too much. It just confirmed to the American's that Mexico was not prepared for any further advances.
Blue Lynx World one question, imagine people fighting with machetes versus an army, maybe they were weak, but just imagine that, mexico would be a great nation if US didn’t ruined our country, US ruined and are ruining allot of countries, US is a joke for everyone now
I think France sold it's territory in North America and went to colonize west Africa,
Do you believe Santa Ana killing hundreds of ex Americans settlers, invited by the new Mexican government, then burning their bodies in a pile, to make a point.
Nothing to do with killing American citizens, on American soil?
"REMEMBER THE ALAMO"
Anparraf it’s conquest, honestly STFU, this happened all the time since the dawn of humans, your own people are ruining your country, stop playing the blame game and fix your country, and name some countries America ruined besides the overused Iraq and Afghanistan?
"Poor México, so far away from God and so close to the U.S."
-Porfirio Díaz.
In the grand scheme of things, Mexico has benefitted tremendously from being a neighbor of the US. Strategic protection from invasion and trade with a much larger economy. This war was a small price to pay.
@@ryankuypers1819 true.
@@ryankuypers1819 America shall perish
@@cc-oo7vn Seems highly unlikely. Russia has a serious demographic problem though, even worse than China's. If you people don't get your birthrate up, there isn't going to be much of a Russia left in fifty years.
That's what the last white Mayor of Newark used to say Hugh Adonnizio "Poor Newark so far from God so close to New York City!"
The most consequential and least understood war in American history. Thank you for your effort to inform people about this in a succinct and interesting way.
Also To think we almost kept Cuba, Cuba should be a us state But the reason it’s not was because it wasn’t fully white
@@ZuluGamingSeries We shouldve kept it all and expanded to Panama.
Alot of similarities to the Russia/Ukraine conflict..
@@ZuluGamingSeriesthat’s horrible.
@@shonuff5297 How gringo of you, thinking everything in the world's up for the taking...
Man, if I were a middle or high school history teacher in today's age I would use these videos to supplement like half of my lectures. Absolutely brilliant!
HOENIX (AP) - An autopsy determined a migrant died from multiple gunshot wounds over the weekend after reportedly being shot by Border
If you would used this video as a source of history to teach middle school kids they would grow old as miss informed as you are.
@@bajaboy27 Our education misinforms kids as it is, even if it's 'official material'.
@@WSlopeAggie definitely agree with you. Funny they always happen to be the good guys. You know that old saying "to the victors belong the spoils" and they get to write their side of the story. But there's always two sides to every story.
This particular story is missing the fact that one of the first things Mexico dealt with when it gained independence was slavery, the Americans that came to Texas brought slaves, that was the whole reason why the war started that and then destiny manifest by president Polk. Why they always forget to mention it is beyond me, or they don't even acknowledge the saint Patrick's battalion, that's part of the real history.
It's called history after all not story.
Cheers friend 🍻
@@bajaboy27 Manifest Destiny was great for the US, absolutely awful for Mexico.
At the time many people (well Military Professionals anyway) in Europe thought that that Mexico could very well win this war, or at the very least it would be a very bloody war. What people forget now with the perfection of hindsight was that on paper, Mexico a the time was at least as powerful militarily as the US (perhaps more), with the advantage of interior defense and very difficult terrain for any invader. What happened during that war was a stunning revelation as to how important political stability, professionalism in an army, and frankly economic might really was in a war. Latin America lost a lot of prestige during that war that was never regained. It also marked the start of the US being regarded as a 'western nation' at least on par with a European nation by the European world powers.
The west is the best. Western culture created the modern world.
poppycock! in comparison, mexico was smaller, weaker nation , the pundits you are referring to, just want you to believe otherwise!!
Frank Montenegro
Well, the Mexicans would’ve very well won the war if it wasn’t for an unstable country.
Very interesting reflection, thanks for sharing Ian chapman
The problem with mexico is the mexicans living in it.
Fun fact: The Mexican Emperor (Maximillian I of Mexico) was not a Mexican, in fact, he was an Austrian Archduke and a brother to Franz Josef I (Emperor of Austria-Hungary)
Yes I saw his coffin in Vienna.
Maximilian I didn't become emperor of Mexico until the late 1850s and was able to retain his position until about 1867 due to the assistance of Napoleon III and the French and the fact that the US was preoccupied with bullying its own southern states in that late unpleasantness of the War Between The States.
This is True and verified in history. Much of the wars from 1820 into 1900’s were bandits, private armies and war lords. European powers were trying to continue their colonial policies.
Yeah, wrong emperor. The first Mexican Emperor,* 1821-1823, was a Mexican Creole of noble Basque and Spanish ancestry, named Agustín. You know Cinco de Mayo? That's a (?the first) battle the Mexicans won against the French in 1862 when Napoleon III invaded Mexico to install his Austrian puppet emperor Maximillian. The French beat them later, took over Mexico city, and installed Maximillian in power, but the Mexicans kicked the French back out again in 1867 and executed Maximillian. (Notably, the USA/CSA Civil War was 1860-1865, and, afterwards in 1865-1867, the USA started actively supporting Mexico and threatened to intervene against the French, as per the Montoe Doctrine, not that I'm saying that's why the Mexicans won or the French left then.)
*Not counting native "emperors", like of the "Aztec Empire", whose leading ethnic group at least are sometimes also called "Mexicans", the Nāhuatl word being "Mēxihcah" (that's the plural), and the Nāhuatl word for the "Valley of Mexico" around modern day "Mexico City" being "Mēxihco".
@@rwdyeriii
RE: ". . . the fact that the US was preoccupied with bullying its own southern states in that late unpleasantness of the War Between The States."
The South fired the first shots of the Civil War at the Battle of Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861.
Its interesting how many cities in the southwest are named after the people involved, Freemont, Stockton, Monterey
What I find interesting is how small these armies are.
Probably because it was when the world population wasn’t that high
@@tamashi_soul
The population was over a billion. Mexico was just so disorganized that it couldn't muster a large army and as a result, America didn't need large armies either.
Meanwhile Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812, (30 years earlier) with 600,000 men. Actually most battles in Europe didn't involve huge armies facing each other. Usually around 70,000 per side, as in the battle of Waterloo, which was a major turning point in history. Sometimes less than half that. There weren't very many people in North America at that time.
@@tamashi_soul Literally after this war ended in China, the Taiping rebellion began and, over the next 15 years, 20 million people would die in that conflict.
There were plenty of people in the world.
@@NoahBodze Bruh you're comparing lands with hundreds of millions of people at the time to unsettled lands with a couple scattered tribes here and there.
Fun fact: "Buckaroo" comes from US cowboys trying to say "vaquero." Mexicans were the og cowboys.
Woulda thought bud what u think Texas is for
The United States is a country that has the habit of stealing and copying the cultures of other countries, and appropriating them as if they were its own.
EXAMPLE:
From Mexico, not only did he steal territory, but also the Cowboy culture of Mexicans, Cowboy is of Mexican origin.
From Germany, stealing gastronomy, from Burgers and Hot Dogs.
From Netherlands, I steal the figure of Santa Claus.
They believe that they are the direct heirs of the legacy of Ancient Rome because they think that the United States was born as an inspiration to Ancient Rome, to say that Washington created the United States in the likeness of Ancient Rome, and that the United States.
What a funny joke 🤣 HAHAHA
They have more legacy from Ancient Rome, Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and Argentina than the United States.
Constancio Rosellini there’s a difference between stealing and settlers 😂. What a joke of a comment. I’ve been all over the world. Europe, Brazil and South America. They have culture but it’s minute.
@@ConstancioRosellini5873
The creators of Cowboy 🐴👢 culture it was the Mexicans 🇲🇽
(Not the US-Americans, who copied the traditions of the northern Mexicans).
Those who raised cattle in the current area of Texas, when it was Mexican 🇲🇽 territory, before the annexation to the United States, their lifestyle and work were inherited from Mexicans living in present-day Texas territory.
California also had skilled men on horseback, according to Richard Henry Dana, who wrote a book about that region in 1840 when it still belonged to Mexico. As described:
When they make long trips, they ride horses until they get tired and grab another one, they pull the saddle and bridle on it, and after exhausting the animal, they take a third one, and so on until the end of the trip. There are no better runners like Mexicans in the world.
@@andresmora5192 Compatriota Mexicano, tienes toda la razon.
El Cowboy es un arte creado por los Mexicanos, los Gringos lo copiaron, esos Gringos no tienen identidad.
Aqui un Mexicano-Italiano de Xalapa, Veracruz.
Saludos.
"They didn't want to look like bullies" has to be one of the most ironic lines
Every budding empire wanted to look like a victim when they bully. Think of the narrative of the poor settlers being killed by the evil Indians. When in fact, the native americans were trying to defend their homelands from invaders.
Mexico was indeed in a position that made winning the war impossible. Throughout the 20s and 30s Mexico faced multiple Civil wars, coups, fought attempts by the Spanish to reconquer the country, the Pastry War from 1838 when the French invaded Mexico for the first time (the second invasion happened in the 1860s when the French proclaimed the Second Mexican Empire in the middle of the American Civil War), attempts at secession and then the Texas revolution. There was no competition at all here.
I watched The First episode of the "Grant" miniseries last night and He had stated that the Americans new that Mexico had a bad army so they felt confident of victory. Whether right or wrong whose to say but this is the way history plays out. The Mexican Government would have been better off taking the $$$ offered at first, Should've, Would've, Could've. Que Sera, Sera...
William Edmondson
Por Que paga mass .?
@@dffndjdjd Racims, Nepotism, Regionalism, Classicm and no Ethnic unitiy. Oaxcas(Zaotecs,Mixtecs)Nahautl. Oto Pameans and Mayans had higher populations but didn't fight for the experimental govt of Mexico, because Santa Ana had declared war on them. Santa Ana is Pro Iberian, in today's time he would be the Salinas Gortari The US on the other hand obliterated the Native populations and then boosted up their numbers with Scotch Irish,slaves and Volga German immigration. But even some of the Irish defected to Mexico (ST. Patricks Batallion).
This is why the US invaded through Veracruz because they knew Mexico was at war with the Mayans(Yucatecs) and the Mayans would let them pass easily, meanwhile in Monterrey they had hostility because the concept of 'mexican'(Mixed raza) was accepted.
This is why BENITO JUAREZ was able to defeat the French(top 5 land army in the late 1800s) because he had Nahautl and Mixtec support.
What Plagues the country today is that the neo libs(aka Conservative Party in 1840) hijaked the Mexican govt in the 60s 'HALCONAZO'.
Prior to that Mexico was a nationalist country that had a top 7 economy. ..after NAFTA , PRIAN sold out it's citiwna so that they can send their kids to Harvard and Paris to study abroad...just like the Russian and Chinese Oligarchs.
Oh yea and theres the fact that the ATF( same ones from Waco & Ruby Ridge) arm and fund the Rogue state of Sinaloa.
And the reason was a mentality of mexican peoples predominantly a spanish ones
contrary to the US where you have mostly a UK or German mentality completely different mind set
american invaded texas and the president vicente guerrero let them lived on peace, the problem arrives when the slavery became ilegall
"Go back to your country"
"Sorry sir, I didn't cross the border, the border literally crossed me"
So the guy was born before 1848?
@@dmeads5663 still you live in stolen land
reaching
Nopelien 🤝
Leshly Lopez Annexed isn’t stolen
9:37 The Battle of San Pasquale is literally in my backyard. The hill has a big cross on it, to represent the battle. Whenever I look into my backyard, I always remember that a battle was fought here.
A general died near my village during the Mexican Revolution behind a boulder his name was Pedro Moreno
Jack Sparrow No it’s in Rancho Bernardo, aka Northern San Diego
Great Cornholio Who asked?
@Great Cornholio That is literally correct.
@Great Cornholio "how dare he not use the word all properly, must mean hes lying"- a guy who forgot this was a RUclips comments section, and not a fucking language arts class lmao
By the start of the war Texas had already won their independence from Mexico at the Battle of San Jacinto. Sam Huston with an army of volunteers defeated Santa Anna and drove him back into Mexico.
The Mexican American war was about the gold in Cal and the other precious minerals in the SW.
it started because the US annexed Texas, Texas's border was disputed. US troops occupied the Border the US claimed and Mexican troops attacked thus starting the war.
Also to keep Texas....war is always for multiple gains.
Great point about Cali gold though
It didn't take them even a year to discover gold in California, strange, right?
Really? When was gold discovered in CA? I believe this war preceded that
1848 or 1849 @strategicprepper2648
Ahhh...the old "there's a rebellion in Mexico City" trick!
What is astounding is that so few troops (on either side) determined the outcome of about 1/2 the entire North American continent. It seems like once an "army" left a conquered town, the opposing side could just walk right in.
That part of North America was very sparsely populated, even including the Indians.
That's also the reason why the United States was able to annex that vast tract of land.
It would've been different if there was a huge population of loyal Mexicans inhabiting it .
great point. That's thinking outside the box.
Because USA was Not Like Europe or Asia all that Land was worthless. Of course now it’s Crazy to think because that Land is very valuable
War is final determination from the winner. Lots of soldiers on both sides killed so its not just a few. Lots of historian estimated 25,000 Mexican soldiers died, as well as 15,000 American soldiers
@@reynaldoflores4522Mexicans got wiped. Cope
Hey, I do the same thing whenever I play Civ. "I'm just gonna take alittle bit of land" *Ends up taking the capitol and annexing the whole country*
whats mine is mine, whats theirs is mine, and whats yours is also mine
@Paul Coover Sid Miers Civilization 5
IKR? I don't see why people get so upset about history. Sht happens.
THAT'S CIVILIZATION, SON!
@@drivebye2709 My friends also complain when I commit slavery in Stellaris to, smh.
@@rawrimadeinosaur7513 rookie numbers, I commit mass genocide in Stellaris
What a great video! Keep up the good work.
Less than two weeks before the signing of the peace treaty, gold was found in California.
Imagine loosing a region with a lot of gold and Potential for expansion that would be eventually the richest and most populous state in the union. lol
*This post was made by the United States of America*
@@gingerale2131 it sure is crazy that conservative Americans want to get rid so bad of California 😐😂
@@OnasaD We don’t want to get rid of Callie. We need it. What we don’t need is their shitty politics.
@@gingerale2131 It wouldn't have been the case of Mexico. Their government is so chaotic (and corrupt), that that gold would have just ended in the pockets of some elite people.
*flashback to South African gold rush*
Although it wasn’t directly relevant to the war, one of the reasons why Mexico was unstable was because there were several battles between Mexico and the Navajo nation along the US border. The two nations were constantly attacking each other.
Yes the Mexicans and natives fought for land
@Jasta 2 I know a lot of Mexicans don't know that spaniards killed natives for land also Mexicans
@@Zumi909 Mexicans have convinced themselves they are the same as the Natives lmfao
@@joeroganstrtshots881 well our ancestors were but then the spanish came so now we are mostly mestizos
What are you talking about? The native American's were a spiritual peace loving people, one with the earth, that never did anything violent.
Mothers Britain & Spain fought each other, their daughters USA & Mexico also fight each other
and the result was the same... lmao
Family feud!
Not true. The Spanish defeated the British many times including by helping the Americans in the revolutionary wars and so did the French.
@@TolitoGangster And Mexicans have defeated the gringos many times. Also this story is not over yet, the world goes around a lot.
@@voluptuosidadeslapalabraWhat do you see in the future?
Would you mind sharing the software you use for your maps? Theyre great for storytelling
Mexico’s problem? Conscripts.
“Slaves make lousy defenders of freedom.”
- Len Jackson
I was thinking the same thing, train and treat your troops well or they will surrender in large numbers like many Iraqi conscripts in the 1990 Gulf War.
And endless civil wars, recipe for disaster!
When you are in another country, you don't consider deserting. When you are a conscript, and you aren't being fed or paid, fading into the background is easy.
"Slaves make lousy defenders of freedom."
Imagine that....
@@wrightmf ... The Iraquí endured 10 years of war with Iran and had no beef with the US ... That was the main reason of their surrender in the Gulf.
The dummy US did not go after Saddam then, and it cost a useless war to benefit the military industrial complex
“Poor Mexico so far from God, so close to the USA”....
I know man
Porfirio Diaz said that
And he's right, México is too close to USA and relies on USA
We should be pursuing our interests and govern ourselves
But Mexico has Chihuahua State. Just listen to what these two sisters from California US say about it - ruclips.net/video/r2qwNGh1IZM/видео.html - Ha Ha.
To be frank the USA are even farther from God.
@@Eddy_111 Why's that? God doesn't even exist.
Omega 01
Mexico can’t produce mass destruction weapons because of the US
Mexico Can’t produce any advanced military equipment because of the US
Mexico can’t be an allied of China or Russia because of the US
Mexico can’t buy technology from China because of the US
Mexico can’t produce enough food for its population because of the US
Mexico can’t even refine its own Gasoline being an oil rich country
Mexican politicians from PRI, PRD and PAN have sold out Mexican people to the US but many Mexicans don’t realize that.
As a Mexican, this is sad. I love my country, but no phrase describes Mexico better than "so much wasted potential". True then, true now. Just sad.
@GordoScarface More land means moe natural resources. More potential. Are you stupid?
@GordoScarface wow you are so right! 5 star historian and 10/10 time traveler
@GordoScarface Well you clearly didn’t if you’re Making these dumbass comments 😂 btw I was being sarcastic, just in case you were too ignorant to figure it out.
It will be a successful country eventually. It just needs time.
@Nikola Tesla all countries have there times
Wonderful content! Very useful :)
Seeing you here feels weird lol
Imagine fighting 2 wars in spam of 10-15 years , without support and fighting 2 major superpowers, without good military personel , gotta admit ,that is having balls.
☺️ I hope to find mine for the years that come.
The US was not a superpower by any means back then
@MEXICAN AMERICANS Bruh shut up
@MEXICAN AMERICANS There wasn’t planes or mobile vehicles and harsh terrain to navigate. Put Mexico and America in a war now and it’ll take less then a month to defeat Mexico lol
Edit: I’m not responding to anyone replying to this two year old comment. Don’t waste your time
@MEXICAN AMERICANS Nah, Anglo, Scandinavian and Germanic American warriors are and always will be the most toughest and fearless and most attractive warriors of our world. I bet any name you give me won’t even compare to Chapman or any other names I could list. The most fearless and selfless warriors of our era are of European decent
Mexico is the most beautiful tradegy work ever written but what makes it beautiful is that Mexicans still fight for a better future even when they have bad apples among themselves such as the government or criminal organizations the normal folk will always fight and work for a better future for its family with values and tradition that’s what makes the motherland great even if it doesn’t have a good economic status or the best stability
What's a "TRADEGY"?
@@yelyharmony2047 Tragedy: an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress, such as a serious accident, crime, or natural catastrophe.
America🇺🇸🇺🇸
The CIA are the only bad apple in this world
Clearly the “normal people” have lost that fight lmao
I come to learn that the Mexican-American War is among the contributing factors that led to the American Civil War.
Yeah God don’t like ugly.
Yes because many did not want anymore slave states, and in the South many wanted more.
Yes indeed
Its how a lot of major commanders on both sides got their experience in war and made a lot of relationships that contributed to their actions in the civil war
The American Civil War saved Mexico don’t get it twisted. The Juárez government was in exile from The Second Mexican Empire under Maximilian. Juárez was running out of money, arms, and most importantly men and things were very desperate in 1865! When the UNION claimed victory over the Confederacy they had lots of unused cannons, rifles, and other arms that they GAVE JUÁREZ and him small group of supporters besides SENDING UNION TROOPS who technically were volunteers and not under official US Army capacity. It was because of this American intervention that Juárez was able to defeat Maximilian and RESTORED the Mexican Republic.
It’s become trendy by those ignorant of Mexican and American history to claim that the US is a bully to Mexico when it’s Mexico who started the Mexican American War and was later saved by the United States just 20 years later.
I kind of knew the story of California once being a part of Mexico especially because I saw a movie called my family mi familia. Which I recommend to people to watch the movie because it's a really good movie about a family and their struggles. And there was a part of the movie that mentioned that when one of the characters dies that he wanted on his Tombstone to just say "when I was born here this was Mexico when I die this is still Mexico." So that little part of the movie it kind of stuck with me that I kind of already knew that California was once Mexico and even my older brother explained the history of California. But I never really knew how Texas and Nevada how they broke away from being Mexico and how it ended up being U.S. instead. History is really interesting when you really think about it.
what people don't know is that many Mexican Citizens did not want to be apart of Mexico in both California and Texas because of how corrupt the government in Mexico City was. Because Mexico was becoming increasingly centralized many in the North wanted Independance. This is why the Spanish Speakers in Texas joined the Texas Revolution.
Mexcio was not even united before the Spanish came it was full of tribes Mexico inherited the Spanish colony and Americans took it away.. not much deeper than that.
Love MI Familia one of my favorite movies I own the dvd
That’s one of my favorite movies! I actually think of this exact part watching this.
@missrobyncalifornia so you know I was referring to "el Californio." LOL 😅
"For myself" Ulysses S Grant wrote later about the United States war against Mexico "I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation"
"I do not think there was ever a more wicked war than that waged by the United States on Mexico. I thought so at the time, when I was a youngster, only I had not moral courage enough to resign"
That’s fair, but are those territories better off today as US states?
Mexico is the Ukraine of this continent.
@@ron88303 you never know, but all i do know is that the US wouldn't be as powerful as it is today if it wasn't for those southern stolen lands. In fact all of it was stolen lmao
@@anaosuna Please… every piece of land currently occupied by humans was “stolen” which was previously stolen from earlier inhabitants which was also stolen from earlier inhabitants.
So tired of the liberal victimhood narrative…
@@ron88303 doesn't matter. Its way unjust and not "win in war" it was stolen straight up. The usa did pay the Mexicans though but they had no choice. It was take the money or nothing.
Ah yes, "Rio Grande river", also known as Great River river
as a mexican I can tell you in spanish:
me gusta el rio "great river river"
River Great River
I'm chinese and this reminds me of Americans calling the Yellow River "Huanghe River" which translates to Yellow River River
Sounds similar to when people say DC comics. When people don’t realize the C in dc stands for comics and D was for for Detective. So when people refer to DC comics their basically saying, Detective comics comics.
*Big River River, grande means big
Catalina Island in California was not included in the treaty of surrender and therefore was declared a permanently leased territory to the USA. This is also why a Mexican National cannot be considered illegal or deported from Catalina Island. You wouldn’t find this info in Wikipedia but you in the copy of surrender which can be found in the Autry Museum of the American West in Los Angeles CA.
Wow! So interesting, thanks
Great info! I didn't know that
Wow! Thanks for sharing!
It must suck then
@@XxxXxx-br7eq No one cares what a bot says. Santa Catalina attracts wealthy tourists, which means it doesn’t “suck”
I'll be honest: for such a sweep of a victory, textbooks don't really discuss it much:
"The USA declared war on Mexico and sent troops to the Rio Grande River. They were led by Zachary Taylor. [...] After a few years, the US obtained the Mexican Cession."
Basically all there was about this.
As a Texan, we are taught this very differently. Very interesting
Almost every country does that, here in Mexico the rebellions of the South are barely mentioned
Here in México we know the US is a bully with the World, and our goverment is terrible so it makes we lost the war. Saludos desde 🇲🇽
taco al pastor that happens to weak countries, try to keep up, nvm it’s too late
@Michael Melton Buddy, i pray you're not a day over 30.
That's because the idiots who made this video never bother to read any history books.
Sad part of History, as a Mexican, this Is a dark chapter of my Country History.
Mexico was named by the Spanish, Mexicans are half breeds ,European and native Americans no such thing as a Mexican before 1492.
@@fathomthat4690 Well, tell me which country has purebred populations? The USA has populations from Europe, Asia, Africa and American Indians. I consider your comment unwise
@@emilioduran5650 just stating fact , you shouldn't take it more than face value . That is unwise!
@@fathomthat4690 I don't know enough about Mexican history to say anything about your comment, but why did you comment it here? It has no relevance to what the original comment said and is phrased like a personal attack.
No brother it wasn't phrased as a personal attack, like I said was just making a statement of fact, problem is a lot of people read things in to texts.. as far as the context the statement made, it is based on factual history.
The Mexican governor fled New Mexico to Mexico City, while many New Mexicans were prepared to fight, but after he fled, New Mexicans showed no resistance to Kearny.
would have made no difference except the amount of people that died if they would have fought
J Calhoun My family has lived for two hundred years in Baja. Why didn’t y’all take all of northern Mexico with you and rid us from the sureño pest?
@@NesRuA the racist Democrats didn't want a mixing of the races and didn't annex the entire country when they should have.
That man was a true coward.
@@asm42 ... It was a valid point to make. Why would you want to mix with a different culture on a grand scale?
Especially a needy one.
Nations that are homogeneous have better standards of living and are more united as a whole.
But think the US could’ve taken more of northern Mx states and all of baja, that were scarcely populated
love this video it helped me with my Homework I am subscribed so best believe im coming back
General Robert E. Lee once said, "The Civil War is our penance for the Mexican War" (or words to that effect.) General Grant agreed, as did many officer veterans of both wars.
Thomas Jefferson said, "I fear for my country when I realize God is just," when discussing the issue of slavery. I'm pretty sure he would believe that the Civil War was penance for slavery.
Dude for a Country that's a small penance to pay. You got massive land (including oil) for perpetuity, it's not like in the future the US is going to say, hey Mexico we recognize we were bullies/invaders, you can have this back.
And Sure people died in the Civil War, but so did many in the Mexico war itself. If loss of life is paramount then no country would had ever gone to war.
@@keithedwards9953 thomas jefferson was stupid like that
@@greg_4201 at least he knew how to balance a budget. That alone makes him more intelligent than any president in the past hundred years... he even managed to double the size of the US while doing it.
Really after going through all the trouble of a war. They should have annexed the entire country of Mexico. It probably would have been better for all involved. There would be no need for illegal border crossing today because they would already be American citizens and they would be free to go wherever they want within the Country.
That was probably the most profitable war in history.
More like the most profitable invasion.
This war lead to the Civil War. I don't see what's so profitable about it.
@@robiking011 you don't see what's profitable about the vast mineral wealth and tax base of the entire southwest of USA?
In your face, Punic Wars!
@@robiking011 Just do the sum of gdp of the southwestern states, california and texas are single-handedly carrying the entire american economy.
Finally somebody explains the Mexican-US war in an unbiased way.
Juan Carlos. It neglected the dirty tricks in Alio California.
What a load of Pro Mexican BS. The Republic of Texas incorporated ALL the territory north and east of the Rio Grande river, not the Brazos your BS map is trying to implicate. The Battle of San Jacinto ended with the defeat of Santa Anna, who signed away that territory as a result of this War for Texas independence.
You tube, you need to flag this story as BS.
What about Santa And crimes against Texans, and the killing of Americans, in America? What about the hundreds of captured people who were murdered, and piled and burned as a warning to other people seeking freedom?
The Brazos river was never the Tx border with Mexico... The Rio Grande was the established border... I cringed the whole time the video kept showing the incorrect Tx border..
If you believe the Brazos was the Tx border, you probably also think Taiwan is a part of Communist China.
It sounded rather biased to me, in favor of Mexico
USA in 1776: "we cannot tolerate tyranny and oppression"
USA, couple of years later: "Forget that sh!t, u weak and this is mine now"
Yeah Napoleon and Caesar thought so too but they didn’t receive a reward, Caesar 30 something knives in him, Napoleon exile to Elba, Austria Prussia and Russia were certain of their rule on their “Poland” until blood slaughter and desolation from napoleons cannons answered back in retaliation, we keep beating the bush we are bound one way or another to be stung!
That moment when America started a war to essentially say "Shut up and take my money."
That is actually the only good reason to go to war. Take more land because yours is becoming too crowded. We need to tale Baja Mexico now as it is and save the Vaquita from extinction
@@georgefloydspaceshuttlepro1839 Of course, it is not like that it is precisely Canadian and American companies that are contributing to extinction, right? lol
U.S. to other countries: "Plata o Plomo" (like Pablo Escobar used to say)
@@georgefloydspaceshuttlepro1839 Holy shit, Are you seriously talking about saving vaquita? It's not anymore a hunting to please some Chinese, it's a biological problem of vaquitas to reproduce fastly enough to recover. And you certainly wouldn't want to break trust within your allies, better fill up the empty spaces in U.S., we all have them, that would help everyone.
The 15 million that the United States paid were to cover damages caused U.S. troops in Mexico which were significant. It’s not like the United States purchased any lands.
Mexico : Yay I'm independent and big
USA : That's free real estate
France: it's a Free real es................. nevermind
Yay a bunch of innocent people have land it must be liberated
The US, France, Russia, and England all played a role of Mexico losing its territory. In 1806 France invades Spain. In 1811 Mexican Independence begin. In 1812 Russia invades Spanish California. In 1813 US invaded Spanish Texas and lost. In 1816 U.S. Invaded and captured Spanish Florida. In 1821 the Mexican Empire was form. In 1824 the Mexican Republic was form. In 1829 Spain invaded Mexico and lost. In 1836 U.S. filibusters invaded Mexico and captured Texas but failed to capture California. That same year US and English threaten Mexico with war for the released of the California Filibusters. In 1838 France invaded Mexico and lost. In 1841 Russia sold it's holding, forts and weapons to the US in California. Before the US-Mexican war. In 1846 Mexican American War began. In 1848 Mexico lost its northern territory. In 1853 US filibusters invaded Mexico and were defeated in Baja California and in Sonora. In 1862 France invaded Mexico. In 1868 Mexico gain their Independence from France. In 1914 US invaded Mexico and lost. In 1916 Mexico Invades US under Poncho Villa and lost.
We were never truly independent.
Normie
When you're divided you fall! This is common all over the world!
Julius Ceasar said in his war comentaries that "One should divide and conquer". I read that book about 30 years ago but that's what he did to the tribes in Gaul.
That is why the CIA exist.
Yep. Divided people fall. A lesson Americans need to grasp.
@@socalbeachcomber9811 it is far too late, china smells blood :(
Great Dame China won’t even get past India, Japan and South Korea, lol
Putin's tactic regarding the Donbass region these days is quite similar to the one of the United States regarding Texas.
Elaborate
@@themostpopularvideos8539 You move your people into a region owned by another country, take over as a majority, then claim they're being discriminated and oppressed and start a war to "liberate" them from the oppressors. Annex that and grow your country to get the resources.
Most of my childhood was spent in Louisiana and I do not remember this war ever being mentioned. Maybe that says something about the quality of an education in that state.
The Mexican/American War, like the War of 1812,were never really covered in history class.
@J Calhoun yeah I found out mainly about the civil war just by research at home than school. And I'm an American IN ANERICAN HISTORY CLASS! They don't teach good. Only one history teacher was good and he was
Ex military.
Its just propaganda
War of 1812, Mexican/American War, Plains Indian Wars & Spanish/American War were barely mentioned in history classes when I was a kid growing up in 1960s-1970s in Ohio, but at least they were mentioned. Learned more about these wars from a great interest in history.
No. you just wern't paying attention stop making excuses for your stupidity...
US: Hey Amigo sell me that territory.
Mexico: NO!
US: That's wasn't very cash money of you
birdman
Well not all of it that's true because Texas want to leave Mexico in fact they asked America twice to become part of the United States and we both declined it
The best thing that ever happened for those territories was the Mexican/American war. If they were still part of Mexico they would be poor and overrun by Mexican drug cartels. 100% fact.
1.000.000 $
Matt King 100% not fact. Look at my state of nuevo leon, its wealthy and modern
Imagine fighting along with these Generals and then fought to each other in the Civil War. That might be painful for Grant and the others.
Grant actually wrote in his memoirs that he was very ashamed of the mexican-american war.
The Southern Generals were traitors and should have been strung up - not immortalised in stone the way they are in the south today.
@@Longtack55 The northerners who supported a tyrannical government were the real traitors. Generals like Lee and Jackson should be just as respected George Washington.
@@religionisatragedy9742 How the hell were they tyrannical?
@@Cornponetheape Research history and study the constitution, the southern states were being heavily taxed and Lincoln was slowly opening the gateway for large businesses to start taking over, going against the US constitution. Another example is when South Carolina seceeded Lincoln sent troops into Fort Sumter violating international law provoking the South Carolina militia to attack the fort, literally the same events that happened in this video provoking Mexico to attack US troops is the same events that happened at Fort Sumter, I shouldn't even have to mention the Union invading the South after the states democratically seceeded.
I shouldn't even have to mention how the North also had black slaves and none of them were released until long after the southern states released theirs.
Love your videos, so much interesting details.
Fun Fact: The Senate voted in favor of declaring war on Mexico and thus California, Texas and the Southwest eventually entering the Union, states that would be critical in the Civil War.... by one vote.
The senator who cast that vote, Edward A. Hannegan, was also appointed by his state legislature.... by one vote.
The state rep, Madison Marsh, who cast that deciding vote was also elected..... by one vote. An ordinary farmer's vote in DeKalb County Indiana. Henry Shoemaker.
Uh the vote to go to war with Mexico was 40-2
thanks henry for that vote
Every vote counts.
God's manifest destiny.
As a Mexican, (don't mind my name or image lol) We are told about this war from a slightly different perspective. Many heroic actions...too many to be true. Our story is full of great moments, such as The Independence, the Battle for Fort Chapultepec, (I know we lost, but the greatness is still there) Battle of Puebla, etc. But in those times we were having severe problems. IN MY OPINION, that intervention was...unnecessary? sooner or earlier the main states would regain stability (It would be very hard, but we would have accomplished it.), and IN MY OPINION, the US just wanted to have more territory for their ambitions.
Thus, our friendship with America is still one of the strongest of all time. We help each other (The Escuadron 201 that fought on the Philipines, or the Braceros who went to work to the USA to keep the economy on the march, or the thousands of material and stuff we send to the US in WW2) And we're glad to have you as neighbors. Long live the Mexican-American friendship!
(Edit: I'm not saying the americans hate mexicans)
I just hate the country for history, but not the people, after alle most of them arent aware what has happened in those lands
@@g_g1241 Besides, apart from learning important lessons, you can't go back and change/undo history. The European descent inhabitants can't just all fly back to Europe today and abandon North America to the Native American tribes again, for example. Furthermore, all those generations of imperialists are dead now. The question is do we LEARN from our mistakes and seek a better future.
Mexico DID NOT exist. That vast territory was Spain, the Virreinato de La Nueva España. So, it doesn't belong to the nowadays, so called, Mexico.
US poisoned people's minds populating that territories with the idea of independence because they were sure after independence they will become a much weaker country, as it has been proved to happen. After that, they outperformed Mexicans and just took as much territory as they wanted. The rest, is history!
@@thunderbird1921 Exactly, what's done is done. All we can do is learn the truth from history and hopefully don't repeat it.
Don't call the US, America. It's an insult to every other country here.
Interesting when my expat friends ask why most of the cities along the west coast have Spanish sounding names...it's because they liked the food?
@Robert Ortiz-Wilson not spanish tho, people living there were mestizos mix of spanish and indigenous, which they migrated to all parts of what used to be the center of new spain or what's "mexico" today
@@irwinveloz1404 still the reason those cities have Spanish names are because of Spain not Mexico
@GordoScarface like i told u not spanish not mexicans, they were criollos or mestizos, and almost all of new spain armies were Made of indigenous people
@@matthewokoh7947 i know the names are no debate, they come from spain, but that doesn't mean it was 100% spaniard a Lot of american discredit México saying it only belonged to us 10 years , those territories have way more mexican influence than spanish influence, spain barely Even cared about those territories, they basically took half of our territory, and what used to be new spain, so don't Say it was only spanish pls
@GordoScarface i know the names are spanish bro, read My comments i forgot to mention i wasn't talking about that, My Bad, i'm talking more of the cultural influence on those territories
Thanks for this . I've learned so much about How Texas and California came about
Sounds like Santa Ana really was the Napoleon of the West. Just as schizophrenic.
Do you know why Santa Ana only had 5,000 troops at the Alamo? The Mexican army only had two pickups.
He just wanted power, and he'd do anything to get it. His loyalty was to his own success which is why he failed
Historians of his time call him a entizer of the homeland
Except a lousy commander
He was not, he was a snake
It's crazy how small the 'armies' were. "100 lancers vs Kearnys army of about 150 at the battle". Many soccer hooligan clashes have had more participants!
I mean, compare with the contemporary Crimean War, where the initial armies (before mobilization) had like 80,000 men. It does makes it obvious why the European powers dismissed american military powers as footnotes during these times.
Yeah. And that is without taking account of the recent Napoleonic wars which cassually had battles of hundreds of thousands of men.
The main reason here is that Mexico is deeply unstable and central government has little control of the nation therefore unable to raise or maintain large armies. Just two decades later millions of men fought on each side of the American civil war, so this war isn't really a testament to the full strength of new world military might.
@@leiyaca Well, to be fair the american civil war affected every US citizen directly, the battles were inside the country and the war set half the country to fight the other half. So it still wasn´t a real organized war against another country. It was a full scale civil war that used up all the resources in the country. Still a very minor conflict by european standards. The Napoleonic wars half a century before, had more than 5 times more military deaths than the whole american civil war.
Noticed the same.... Think it is because it is hard to march thru miles of desert logistically knowing that the towns are very inhabited.... and basically no opposition
Europe still laughs at Americans... =Washed away Europeans
Now I understand why many Names in the southern usa , are in Spanish .
amazing
Its funny when you look at it, specially california, mexico had upper california and lower california, but then lost the upper one, still mexico really wanted two californias, so now we have northern lower california and southern lower california.
It was first colonized by Spain then it turned into Mexico so yea that’s why there were a lot of Spanish names in those areas
how did u not know dis before💀💀
Yes ask yourself why they won't teach you this in high school they don't want put this into your head.But rather teach history across the country which we shouldn't really learn 😂
The biggest strategic factor was the timing of the war. Mexico was not ready, the US was.
When your rival sees infighting, it is the BEST time to attack.
I love history and really never knew how deep the Mexican-American war went. Thank you for such a nicely put together very educational video! I think this video should be used in history curriculums
Almost everything that isn’t in history curriculums should be included and everything taught today should be removed. History tends to repeat itself and no one seems to actually understand this. History is as true as the man who wrote it
This is a false telling of the history.
Wait till you hear the Mexican side of the story 😂
@@edwinvillanueva1832 Bahaha points to you.
@@DylanWOWilliams how?
This video title should be "16 Ads Crammed Into 16 Minutes"
try firefox and it's ad blocker. you will know heaven my friend
@@benjamingallegos5653 I'm on my phone so I just do the trick where you skip to the last 10 sec and hit replay
You are truly dumb to not use RUclips adblocker which you can get FOR FREE!
@@mike.mentzers_top_guy You are truly dumb for not seeing my comment that says I am on a phone and cannot access Adblock
7 ads
The reason why Western Texas was disputed:
After the Battle of San Jacinto and Santa Anna's defeat by Houston, two treaties were signed. The first Treaty is shown in the video. The disputed land is the land listed in that second treaty. After the first treaty was signed, Texian Revolutionaries realized they were in a unique position, as Santa Anna was their prisoner. They went back and demanded more from the Mexican President/General.
Santa Anna later claimed he signed the treaties under duress.
Both sides chose the treaty that favored their own interests. To the US, they were making a statement north of the border. To Mexico, the US invaded Mexican territory.
Didnt Santa Anna sign a treaty saying that the border was the rio grande
@@dogbean5015 That was the second treaty, yes.
Problem was those were NOT treaties. As Santa Anna was a POW. Mexico did not acknowledge it. It was more a terms of a ceasefire. But the Americans called it a treaty to rationalize their annexation of Texas
@@fallen4life080 What other choice did the Texans have? Santa Anna established himself as the de facto dictator of Mexico. The opportunity presented itself, and they capitalized on it.
This isn't villifying Mexico. The Spanish blockade of Veracruz crippled the new country. The USA had the luxury of establishing itself, settling on a Constitution after an early failure, and putting down early dissent. Mexico did not have that luxury. Some even called for a European to rule as king in order to get recognition. The people did their best, and borderline military rule seemed to some to be the only path to internal stability.
Santa Anna was the government, and his past actions proved he would return once the southern revolts were well behind him. Forcing a POW to sign a treaty isn't ideal, but it was the only option. Houston was well aware of the situation and needed to end the war quickly. There was no guarantee of negotiation after release, and Santa Anna had a long memory of those who wronged him.
Santa Anna was coerced into signing the treaty as a PoW illegally.
The American flag map icons are backwards. When hanging vertically, the field of stars are on the left.
I am half mexican and Irish born in san francisco american I respect my people of mexico and Irish. I celebrate mexico independence day and Irish independence day too. I respect Irish in their honor of serving the battle with mexico.
"EL BATALLÓN DE SAN PATRICIO"
THEY ARE HONORED IN MÉXICO EVERY YEAR.
@@vincivinci6018 that's right. Mexican flag and Ireland flag are alike except mexico have their bald eagle and the cactus in their flag. I have both flags. Cinco de mayo I put it out along with our Irish flag to celebrate for cinco de mayo and for Irish independence day I put out mexico flag out too and celebrate along as well.
You're a mexilarper.
Irish and Mexicans are both very brave peoples
And then general Santa Ana went to cuba and spend all of his money on prostitutes and tequila. Yeeeehhaa
Man, Tekila is not produced on Cuba
That doesn’t sound as bad as Napoleons sad then sadder island 🏝
Lmfao 🤣🤣🤣
@@mariosanabria8064 In Cuba they make rum, but call it ron.
@@C0wb0yBebop Napoleon wasn't even that bad
Northern Mexico (today part of USA) was also very sparsely populated, so the Americans did not have to face very stiff local resistance. Also the Mexicans that lived there were mainly Criollos/Castizos who were still a little bitter that they had lost control over the region when Mexico gained independence, so they were not as loyal to the Mexican state.
"Border crossed us!" my ass.
Divide and conquer methods and conniving moves to weaken and overcome Mexico I believe...gained or stolen? so in reality who entered whos land here. hmmm!!
@@murphyjack90 it did
Sparsely populated is a underestatement......California at the time of the war only had 15,000 Mexican citizens and were outnumbered by indigenous peoples 6 to 1.
@@Rob8729 there actually wasn’t many Indeginous people at that time there, 6 to 1 is false, unless you have proof to back up your claims?
USA could have colonized all of america that’s the scary part .
That would have been based.
It's happening right now. Maybe not the way you expect, but we are adopting so many foreign american ways in the north.
The chaotic situation in Mexico prevented a curious clause in the boundary treaties with the United States signed in 1929, which consisted in letting it know that for the Mexican government Texas was delimited by the Río de las Nueces, something that was also used by Spaniards and French at the time. What would have allowed to create a special situation that would have prevented the war.
What was left out was that the Californios led by Mariano Vallejo also wanted to break away from Mexico and they seceded created an independent California which lasted for 25 days. The reason California was so easy to take is that it had technically become an independent nation and Vallejo enthusiastically supported US annexation.
bro mexican generals fled california as well
Could you make video about Sudeten crisis? Or something between 2 world wars in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary? After the Great war there was a lot of conflict and it would be interesting to see it explained like that. Great video btw.
Yes! Some videos about ww1 and ww2 are coming :)
@@Knowledgia yey
Knowledgia yey try mapping
10:41 Everybody gangsta ‘til the buildings start speaking Mexican Spanish
Actually, when the war started, many European countries believed the Mexicans had a superior army and would eventually win.
Both the Mexican and American soldier were almost on par in terms of training and overall discipline. It was the same on the officer side due to the fact that many Mexican military leaders (as well as Americans) fought in earlier conflicts and were accustomed to the state warfare. The real winner on the battle were the American cannons, the Mexican artillery corps did not have the same funding and training that the American regiments had. Some of those regiments were also present on both sides of the civil war and were extremely competent.
@@EmperorSenate Totally agree with your analyses. Artillery was the main difference, and in some cases small arms as well. In addition, with regards to the artillery, most of the pieces fielded by the Mexican Army was antiquated and the powder quality inferior.
As an interesting side note, when Scott landed in Veracruz and began the Central Mexico campaign he followed the same route as Cortez had taken in 1520. In addition, when the Duke of Wellington heard of his campaign, he predicted that Scott was lost and would be beaten.
wey, ni de broma ganabamos :(
wey, not kiddingly won :(
@Andres Figueroa ... The Mexican army had more people under arms ... Lacked the US organization and discipline, but with a few months of training and some up to date cannons and rifles would be up to par with USA.
The lack of vision and lack of geopolitical views when it was obvious that US was expanding is proof even to this day of Mexican incompetence!!!
Mx naval warfare zero!
Even the Chileans scared away the United States from the pacific in Panama in those years with a superior ship...US had to navigate all the way thru the dangerous tip of South America to have a ship on the Pacific Ocean in those days!
@@coleparker ...Wellington thought that the incredible numbers of population will become a n army.... but the Mexican people showed cowardice!!
That was later taken into account by the French that colonized the Mexicans later!
Meanwhile, Britain and France looking t each other, knowing well, that they had created a monster.
Europe Specially France and Britain had in mind that divide and rule ....So cruel thinking and still conflict border zones are there between every two countries ..
African
Indo Pak
Usa Mexico
Latin Countries
These are results of colonization and hunger of power and money.
@@combinedstudy6427 just wait till you learn about ghengis khan
@@combinedstudy6427 Someone doesn't know history
And then they went to be that monster to Mexico 20 years later as well. (sigh) France.
More like "If you can't have it, neither of us can, and that's good enough".
"After the United States gobbled up California and half of Mexico, and we were stripped down to nothing, territorial expansion suddenly becomes a crime. It's been going on for centuries, and it will still go on."
- Herman Goering, Nuremberg war trials
GeDiceMan the fat lady sings........
Well it's a crime when you lose.
California declared independence from Mexico
@@dmeads5663 Are you meaning the Bear Flag Revolt by the trappers and Fremont or the Mexican internal disputes.
The allies were hypocrites
Everyone else: *uses videos to teach the class*
Me, an intellectual: *memorizes all of the material so well that i can teach it now* 🧠
I like how they cut it off flat at the line that the United States boundaries have drawn out for the states which wasn't how it was only until recently after this date. You got to remember Arizona Nevada New Mexico and part of Texas and Southern Utah were all considered one state which was called New Mexico which prevented the Confederates from moving Westward
Respect mexico
From albania Albania
Albania had suffered too from westerns europeans and from slavs
This country all story was in war😔🇦🇱❤🇲🇽
stay in your business no need to respect mexico
@@blurock29 XD
@Juan Taco 🇦🇱🇲🇽 , strong culture , strong peoples , strong mafias😂😜 Real heroes🇦🇱🇲🇽🇦🇱🇲🇽🇦🇱🇲🇽🇦🇱
@Juan Taco we do that , we are autochthonous that mean we was in our lands always , after to our lands came mfs to take ours lands.🇲🇽🇦🇱🇲🇽🇦🇱 eagles brothers
Albania is one of my favs bc of Dua Lipa! 🇦🇱❤️🇲🇽
Wait you forgot to add the batallón made of Irish that change sides and fought for Mexico and against the USA
@Antoine The great it depends on how you look at it; they were immigrants living in the us that felt persecuted by americans, they felt more loyalty to the religion than the state, and that's how they defined their stance, as Protestants vs Catholics, not as Americans vs Mexicans.
This video was kind of half assed tbh.
You can see it in so many angles Irish are hard core catholics and the rest are Protestant so there was a difference here besides Irish we’re discriminated by other Anglo White people even getting a job for them was hard in those days.
@Antoine The great I would advice you to drop ideologies and just look at things aa they were. My point is that they were both traitors to the US gov AND loyal to the catholic religion. That's not the same as someone that just deserts and becomes a thief. Its like the people who betrayed the axis to be loyal to the allies, we see them differently than lets say, the special forces that defected the mexican amry to become narco mercenaries
No point in arguing you can't fix stupid
Love the dramatic music at the end
My great-great-great grandfather fought in the Mexican-American war and the re-enlisted for the Civil war at the age of 46. He died of pneumonia before he saw any action in the Civil war.
That's great that you know your family's history-ad what a history!!
Sounds like my family:
Some parts are interesting, but none of that good juicy action (WW2)
Did they put Covid down as the cause of death?
@@jabbadabbajew6035 Could you possibly come up with a more stupid reply?
@@johnbarkl1700 by good juicy action do you mean people's guts spilling out and grown men screaming for their mom?
back when presidents rode into battle
Imagine Commander Bone Spurs in battle.
James Picklehead bone spurs hid in his bunker during the protests lol.
@@jamespicklehead5610 Imagine commander "You didn't build that" "Bitter clingers" riding into battle.
names please.
Taylor became president after the war. He also served in the Black Hawk War of 1832 (as did Lincoln and Jefferson Davis).
Mexico in XIX century: Ohno they are sending too many people into Texas!
Mexico now: *I'm about to do what is called a pro gamer move*
Imitation is a form of flattery.
Then Cartels...
the only problem with that is numbers still and now tech, plus I think most Mexican people would rather the USA govern them. the Country is rampant with Crime and corruption. there's no way Mexico would win a war with the US now. I've been half expecting a revolution and them asking to become an America Territory, but no people just leave and come into the US.
@@DUSaggin nah trust me Mexicans wouldn’t want the US governing Mexico a big reason why mexico is the way it is now is because of the US involving itself in domestic issues such as crime which has caused it to skyrocket leading to more instability
@@chino2620 yeah, i just wish there was a way to help. every culture and peoples deserve a decent safe place to call home they can be proud of. i wish it didn't always have to take fighting, killing and suffering revolutions and to change shit.
From Thailand I lobe U.S. and mexico.
The numbers of soldiers in the armies is halarious for a huge shanks of land
Not really; those places were hardly inhabited by anyone but natives. There were only a few thousand Mexicans in all of California at the time, so sending an army of a few hundred soldiers was more than enough. Similar story for New Mexico and Western Texas.
Yeah i know but still
wat?
Its understandable for the time considering how little population inhabited those locations. Still, considering how important those regions are now, kind of funny to see small armies deciding massive outcomes.
the US had 73,532 soldiers and volunteers and Mexico had 70,000 regulars and 12000 irregulars who participated in that war. it seem like less because of how much time the narrator focus on that one unit/army (who barely did shit) and regulars is a bit of a stretch since most of the Mexican army was peasants who were conscripted with very little training.
The 1848 treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (a city to which the Mexican government had fled with the advance of U.S. forces), signed on February 2, 1848, ended the war between the United States and Mexico and extended the boundaries of the United States west to the Pacific Ocean. This agreement, along with the 1853 Gadsen Purchase, created the southern border of the present-day United States. By its terms, Mexico ceded territory, including the present-day states California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, most of Arizona and Colorado, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Wyoming. The U.S. government paid Mexico $15 million (in present dollars would be some $650 million today), "in consideration of the extension acquired by the boundaries of the United States" and AGREED TO PAY American citizens debts owed to them by the Mexican government. Other provisions included protection of property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living within the new boundaries of the United States, the promise of the United States to police its boundaries, and compulsory arbitration of future disputes between the two countries. Mexico also relinquished all claims to Texas, and recognized the Rio Grande as the southern boundary with the United States.
You're comment is a bunch of bs. This is what they teach in US classrooms but everyone knows the US stole the land from Mexico.
I still say James Polk was one of the most successful Presidents in American history. He came in with a handful of talking points, accomplished all of them, and then declined to run again because he did everything he set out to do.
Sadly President Polk died fairly young at 54, only a few months after leaving the White House. I have visited his birthplace and personally cleared ages of leaves by hand from the tombstone of his grandmother, which bears a touching commemorative poem on it.
Polk is a tragically underrated president who accomplished an amazing amount in such a short time. Modern presidents are a joke in comparison.
Yes he stole land from México, a good crook
He was a slave owning prick that invaded another country so that he could expand slavery.
@@bolanos3 He won it, and then paid you anyways... Cope.
@@bolanos3 exactly! Fn thief
Please add subtitles in your videos and your videos and content are really awesome I like that but by adding subtitle will certainly ensure better understanding of content I hope you will act accordingly.❤
The number of casualties in this war is almost as great as the number of midroll adds in this video
Forward to the end and press the replay button:)
or go Premium. It's worth it.
@@jdwyer4851 you do realise you can just restart a video so you don't need to spend money on premium