SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

SETTLERS RIGHT YET AGAIN

  • newacctidk [none/use name]
    ·
    3 months ago

    For sure. But like WW2 they could fool themselves that it was about fighting evil, WWI England could say it was about fighting for Belgium at that was at least true if not missing the entire context prior to that, Russia in WW1 could say it was about supporting their fellow Slavs which was something their success would have accomplished if things went well. There was nothing tangible for american troops. The most we got was the Zimmerman Telegram