WWPKD Posted September 2, 2005 Author Posted September 2, 2005 This one is easy folks. If "Fighting Sioux" is "hostile and abusive" replace the name with the name of the greatest enemy of the Sioux. Not only would you be protecting the Sioux you'd be "hostile and abusive" to their greatest enemy! Double win, right? University of North Dakota Cavalry. Chants of "Go Sioux!" made them upset. Chants of "Go Cavalry!" should make them happy, right? And thus we've shown the name-change "logic" doesn't pass muster. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thats the best idea ive heard yet. touch
WWPKD Posted September 2, 2005 Author Posted September 2, 2005 The Cavalry aren't a people. Of course you will never get it. Also, I don't remember the last time I seen a leprechaun, but I do remember the last time I seen a Sioux, or thousands of them, just recently actually...... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I dont remember the last time I "seen" a leprechaun either, I see a lot of them, and I have seen of many of them, but then again we will never get it. I do however, for the most part, get the basics of the English language.
dagies Posted September 2, 2005 Posted September 2, 2005 The Cavalry aren't a people. Of course you will never get it. Also, I don't remember the last time I seen a leprechaun, but I do remember the last time I seen a Sioux, or thousands of them, just recently actually...... Good. We've at least established "Warriors" and probably "Braves" are not hostile and offensive.
The Sicatoka Posted September 2, 2005 Posted September 2, 2005 I like that!!! That way I have an excuse to not hold back on campus. Lets run w/ that Sica!!!! But you should be horribly upset by that. You keep telling us you're a veteran and the "Fighting Cavalry" would be "hostile and abusive" to veterans, and stereotypical as well. For the same reasons "Sioux" upsets you, as a veteran, "Cavalry" should upset you. PS - I didn't think we'd seen you hold back yet.
tp033 Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 Two options: University of North Dakota Fighting Sue (mascot: a fierce lunch lady) University of North Dakota Fighting Soo (mascot: a fierce Soo Line Train- like Purdue)
GrahamKracker Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 But you should be horribly upset by that. You keep telling us you're a veteran and the "Fighting Cavalry" would be "hostile and abusive" to veterans, and stereotypical as well. For the same reasons "Sioux" upsets you, as a veteran, "Cavalry" should upset you. PS - I didn't think we'd seen you hold back yet. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was never apart of the cavalry, and if it was up to me, they should have ended the use of the cavalry when we annihilated them in 1876 (at least the 7th, anyways).
Supertrex Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 I was never apart of the cavalry, and if it was up to me, they should have ended the use of the cavalry when we annihilated them in 1876 (at least the 7th, anyways). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We??? You were never part of that nation...and never will be...you're ansestors fought that fight. You and your current nation do not resemble your ansestors at all and are really just a bunch of imposters. This whole name thing is just a smoke screen that you and your buddies use to cover the real problems that the people you represent have - and it keeps you in power. When the Sioux name is dropped (and it will be), you'll have one less phantom issue to address and soon, you'll be thrown under the bus where you belong. Meanwhile, you'll have done a great disservice to your heritage and the history of a group of indian nations will eventually be forgotten or you'll have to run to a museum to hear of it... While you're at it, why don't you explain how your cartoon indian logo resembles, in any significant way, the Fighting Sioux logo of today...If the Fighting Sioux logo looked like yours, I think you'd have a valid complaint...
Goon Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 I think the name should be changed to Cowboys or Calvary.
squirtcoach Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 I was never apart of the cavalry, and if it was up to me, they should have ended the use of the cavalry when we annihilated them in 1876 (at least the 7th, anyways). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If it were up to Saddam, The US military would had ended the use of the 1st Armored Cavalry, too.
GrahamKracker Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 If it were up to Saddam, The US military would had ended the use of the 1st Armored Cavalry, too. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This is what happens throughout history, stances change. I've seen a Japanese Submarine moored in Hawaii, don't forget that we, the US, are responsible for training Bin Laden......So what's your point?
Ranger Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 There's also a Japanese mini-sub sunken in 60-foot water near Ford Island, in addition to the Arizona and Utah. There are memorials at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We can't rewrite history. Regardless of these aggressive acts, Japan and the US are extremely strong strategic partners. Both countries overlooked their differences and moved forward. They did not point fingers to events that occurred decades ago and then use them to determine current and future decisions. Remember the past - yes. Continually use it as a crutch - no. The "training" -- if that's what you must call it -- of the Mudj, which Bin Laden was associated with, was very basic. It consisted of pointing and pulling the trigger of an aging Redeye and then later non-indication friend or foe variant Stinger man-portable surface-to-air missiles at anything that flew in the Afghan sky ... "die if it flies" in air defense artillery terminology. Not exactly offensive/defensive tactics or military decision-making strategy. For the record, modern US Army cav units, especially the ACR's, are outstanding combat teams. Adopting the Fighting Calvary nickname and logo, even using US Army logos on the Unis, would be sweet.
iramurphy Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 I was never apart of the cavalry, and if it was up to me, they should have ended the use of the cavalry when we annihilated them in 1876 (at least the 7th, anyways). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Kracker, As a vet you should be more respectful. Most of our soldiers in the Cav units aren't even sure where North Dakota is much less care about the Fighting Sioux name. The Cav. units tend to be fast and deadly. Anohter thing would be I don't think you are old enough to have served under Crazy Horse (who happened to be one of the greatest cavalry leaders in the history of warfare) so your term "we annihilated them", is not accurate. I wouldn't think kicking some narcisstic, egotistical jerk like Custer who put his troops in harms way, against the orders of his superiors and the advice of his subordinate staff, when he was outnumbered about 10 to 1, is such a great feat. Nor was he a hero when he killed women and children or outnumbered and overmatched American Indian forces. Let's stick to the Fighting Sioux name and whether or not it is worth keeping for either UND or the Sioux nation. In your recent posts you have intermittently raised some decent points. It is hard to separate the proverbial wheat from the crap however. Same goes for the rest of us, I guess. What do you think our chances are against Winona St. Saturday??
Goon Posted September 6, 2005 Posted September 6, 2005 This is what happens throughout history, stances change. I've seen a Japanese Submarine moored in Hawaii, don't forget that we, the US, are responsible for training Bin Laden......So what's your point? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now we are all over the place lets stay on taks...
Blackheart Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 I was never apart of the cavalry, and if it was up to me, they should have ended the use of the cavalry when we annihilated them in 1876 (at least the 7th, anyways). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> total bull shi*...
GrahamKracker Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 Kracker, As a vet you should be more respectful. Most of our soldiers in the Cav units aren't even sure where North Dakota is much less care about the Fighting Sioux name. The Cav. units tend to be fast and deadly. Anohter thing would be I don't think you are old enough to have served under Crazy Horse (who happened to be one of the greatest cavalry leaders in the history of warfare) so your term "we annihilated them", is not accurate. I wouldn't think kicking some narcisstic, egotistical jerk like Custer who put his troops in harms way, against the orders of his superiors and the advice of his subordinate staff, when he was outnumbered about 10 to 1, is such a great feat. Nor was he a hero when he killed women and children or outnumbered and overmatched American Indian forces. Let's stick to the Fighting Sioux name and whether or not it is worth keeping for either UND or the Sioux nation. In your recent posts you have intermittently raised some decent points. It is hard to separate the proverbial wheat from the crap however. Same goes for the rest of us, I guess. What do you think our chances are against Winona St. Saturday?? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good points. Its hard sometimes staying the course because of all of the crap thrown my way.....you know, even if the name ever does change, we'll still have great teams here at UND.
mksioux Posted September 7, 2005 Posted September 7, 2005 .....you know, even if the name ever does change, we'll still have great teams here at UND. What do you care? You will be long gone...off as far away from UND as possible, telling everyone who will listen how homogenous and racist UND is. And why are you using the term "we"? As if you care one bit about UND's athletic teams or being a part of the UND community in general. All I've heard from you is how much you hate UND and how racist everyone is. You stuck one finger up at common ground a long time ago.
squirtcoach Posted September 8, 2005 Posted September 8, 2005 This is what happens throughout history, stances change. I've seen a Japanese Submarine moored in Hawaii, don't forget that we, the US, are responsible for training Bin Laden......So what's your point? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Graham, my point is you're only the second person I've heard of who desired to end the use of the US Cavalry. I was merely trying to understand out YOUR point regarding the United States Cavalry. You claim to speak for a lot of people when you use the word 'we' so freely.
Fighting Sioux Fan Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 As a person of Norwegian descent, I like the idea of the Fighting Norskies! What better mascot would there be then a marauding berserker? But the North Dakota Binge Drinkers works, too. GF was #2 in that category and the state is #1! That is an accurate depiction of our state! Are Binge Drinkers hostile and abusive? Fighting Cavalry is good, too! What a great name to switch to, it goes from one side of the battle to the other! On a serious note, what about Roughriders?
SiouxMeNow Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 As a person of Norwegian descent, I like the idea of the Fighting Norskies! What better mascot would there be then a marauding berserker? But the North Dakota Binge Drinkers works, too. GF was #2 in that category and the state is #1! That is an accurate depiction of our state! Are Binge Drinkers hostile and abusive? Fighting Cavalry is good, too! What a great name to switch to, it goes from one side of the battle to the other! On a serious note, what about Roughriders? OUT! condom-name...remember the UMC Trojans? Opponents would scream out at the intros..."FOR HER PLEASURE!!"...NEXT...
SiouxMeNow Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 oh for crying out loud! This thread hasn't been active since last September ...anyone got a rubber to put over my head to put me out of my misery???
Recommended Posts