>>14
That is an extraordinarily simplistic and ignorant explanation, and completely forgets the real questions: what was it that led to these attitudes? What possible benefits does such an ideology afford?
It's called colonism - you can't afford to have another pre-existing culture around when you are trying to both expand and preserve your own.
Moreover the US could not afford a powerful secondary nation within its borders.
Hence the "management" of the "indian problem".
It should be noted the methodology and reasoning behind the eradication of the indian nations has nothing in common with the european-jewish holocaust. In the latter case, it was for political acumen and reappropriation of wealth by the state. Allowing the german people to unleash the angers and frustrations (that arose as a result of the postwar economic fucktitude) upon a single group - along with the requisite party-led propaganda - was a perfect way of militarising the nation. Total war, indeed.
On the whole people commit themselves to the most advantageous ideology.