The Bold American Land Grab That Changed History
video description
Date: 2025-11-01
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 13
NormanBartlett
CA never took part in the Mexican Revolution. The Spanish leaders didn’t even know about it until a year afterwards when Mexican troops arrived demanding the surrender of the Spanish Governor. The leaders at the time were pure Spanish with large rancheros and catholic priests and friars etc. they didn’t want to be ruled by peasants. With no help from Spain possible they turned their eyes to the US for help. This can be seen in the writings of Vallejo. There were some plots to over throw Mexican rule and Mexico sent reinforcements to tighten its grip as it also fought to keep control over Texas. In fact a number of Mexican territories revolted over the despotism of Mexico City and Santa Anna. The year before the war with the US over Texas, Mexico sent their own appointed Governor to CA with a small army to install him, but they were defeated in battle by Pia Pico who became the new Governor. Vallejo became an early state senator, Pico established the CA Republican Party. Notice that the only revolt came in Los AngelesCa was a Spanish possession for 300 years and has been an American state nearing 200. Mexico had it under its thumb for 20 odd years CA never really belonged to Mexico in the grand scheme of things.
reply
CA never took part in the Mexican Revolution. The Spanish leaders didn’t even know about it until a year afterwards when Mexican troops arrived demanding the surrender of the Spanish Governor. The leaders at the time were pure Spanish with large rancheros and catholic priests and friars etc. they didn’t want to be ruled by peasants. With no help from Spain possible they turned their eyes to the US for help. This can be seen in the writings of Vallejo. There were some plots to over throw Mexican rule and Mexico sent reinforcements to tighten its grip as it also fought to keep control over Texas. In fact a number of Mexican territories revolted over the despotism of Mexico City and Santa Anna. The year before the war with the US over Texas, Mexico sent their own appointed Governor to CA with a small army to install him, but they were defeated in battle by Pia Pico who became the new Governor. Vallejo became an early state senator, Pico established the CA Republican Party. Notice that the only revolt came in Los AngelesCa was a Spanish possession for 300 years and has been an American state nearing 200. Mexico had it under its thumb for 20 odd years CA never really belonged to Mexico in the grand scheme of things.
reply
evanneal4936
To all the people falsely claiming that the land wasn't conquered or otherwise occupied by force illegally.
Imagine if someone stole your car overnight but left money in your mailbox that was less then the value of the vehicle (for the sake of the example, lets say you own a $50, 000 car but they leave $5, 000) that means they didn't steal the car they bought it from you and the court should not let you get it back because by accepting the money, even against your will, you forfeit rights to the car and it gets put in their name. lets also say they came back the next morning and made you sign away the title at gunpoint.
That's what happened to Mexico. Hopefully, this analogy helps with the confusion. Is it still stealing your car if you were forced at gunpoint to sign away the title Is it still stealing the car if they put a small meaningless amount of money in the mailbox Simply absurd that people believe it wasn't taken by force.
reply
To all the people falsely claiming that the land wasn't conquered or otherwise occupied by force illegally.
Imagine if someone stole your car overnight but left money in your mailbox that was less then the value of the vehicle (for the sake of the example, lets say you own a $50, 000 car but they leave $5, 000) that means they didn't steal the car they bought it from you and the court should not let you get it back because by accepting the money, even against your will, you forfeit rights to the car and it gets put in their name. lets also say they came back the next morning and made you sign away the title at gunpoint.
That's what happened to Mexico. Hopefully, this analogy helps with the confusion. Is it still stealing your car if you were forced at gunpoint to sign away the title Is it still stealing the car if they put a small meaningless amount of money in the mailbox Simply absurd that people believe it wasn't taken by force.
reply
sinjin6219
The US paid Mexico $15 million ($600 million in 2025) for the land as stipulated by the Treaty of Hildago. So no, the land wasn't conquered, and it wasn't stolen from Mexico. IT WAS PURCHASED. As RAW LAND. No improvements.
If Mexico wants it back, they will have to pay the fair market value of the land with all improvements, including transportation infrastructure (roads, railroads, bridges, airports, locks and dams, harbor facilities, etc, utilities infrastructure (gas and oil facilities and pipelines, hydro power facilities, nuclear power facilties, transmission lines, etc, all buildings (public and private [for those displaced US citizens], and any other improvements. Additionally, they would have to pay all relocation expenses incurred by millions of displaced US citizens.
I don't believe Mexico has enough money to buy it back.
reply
The US paid Mexico $15 million ($600 million in 2025) for the land as stipulated by the Treaty of Hildago. So no, the land wasn't conquered, and it wasn't stolen from Mexico. IT WAS PURCHASED. As RAW LAND. No improvements.
If Mexico wants it back, they will have to pay the fair market value of the land with all improvements, including transportation infrastructure (roads, railroads, bridges, airports, locks and dams, harbor facilities, etc, utilities infrastructure (gas and oil facilities and pipelines, hydro power facilities, nuclear power facilties, transmission lines, etc, all buildings (public and private [for those displaced US citizens], and any other improvements. Additionally, they would have to pay all relocation expenses incurred by millions of displaced US citizens.
I don't believe Mexico has enough money to buy it back.
reply
SouthernGentleman
The self appointed dictator Antonio who abolished the Mexican constitution attacked Texas after he signed a peace treaty to recognize its sovereignty. Simple.
USA doesn’t like being attacked.
Boston massacre
Kidnapped sailors
Texas attacked
Uss Maine blows up
Lusitania sunk
Pearl Harbor
Korea ally attacked
Vietnam ally attacked
American students kidnapped
Kuwait invaded
9/11.
Cartels.
reply
The self appointed dictator Antonio who abolished the Mexican constitution attacked Texas after he signed a peace treaty to recognize its sovereignty. Simple.
USA doesn’t like being attacked.
Boston massacre
Kidnapped sailors
Texas attacked
Uss Maine blows up
Lusitania sunk
Pearl Harbor
Korea ally attacked
Vietnam ally attacked
American students kidnapped
Kuwait invaded
9/11.
Cartels.
reply
turdferguson2839
In reality, mexico/spain never owned anything above the Rio grande because the American indian tribes controlled that area. The Comanche would actually cross the rio grande to raid and capture mexicans to use as slaves or wives and the mexican military was afraid to fight the indians, which is why mexico invited Europeans to move into texas. Mexico never had the ability to control or govern its land and thats still the case today.
reply
In reality, mexico/spain never owned anything above the Rio grande because the American indian tribes controlled that area. The Comanche would actually cross the rio grande to raid and capture mexicans to use as slaves or wives and the mexican military was afraid to fight the indians, which is why mexico invited Europeans to move into texas. Mexico never had the ability to control or govern its land and thats still the case today.
reply
SIOUXNDN_605
I don’t like how they put Nakota to the northeast of Fort Laramie as the 3 groups (Dakhota or Yankton Sioux, but considered a dialect of Santee Dakota, Assiniboine which is already on the map, and Stoney) only lived along the Missouri River, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Alberta clearly someone doesn’t know their indigenous nations
reply
I don’t like how they put Nakota to the northeast of Fort Laramie as the 3 groups (Dakhota or Yankton Sioux, but considered a dialect of Santee Dakota, Assiniboine which is already on the map, and Stoney) only lived along the Missouri River, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Alberta clearly someone doesn’t know their indigenous nations
reply
cjo2062
Where is your research details on the west coast Native Americans part of the war Don’t sugarcoat the atrocities of these annexations, the group names should be Californios Colonizing Settlers, American Colonizing Settlers, & Mexican Colonizing Settlers.
reply
Where is your research details on the west coast Native Americans part of the war Don’t sugarcoat the atrocities of these annexations, the group names should be Californios Colonizing Settlers, American Colonizing Settlers, & Mexican Colonizing Settlers.
reply
knowledgia
The Hispanic population in the united states has grown from 100, 000 in the year 1850, which represented less than 1% of the total us population to over 60, 000, 000 today which represents for more than 20% of the total US population.
reply
The Hispanic population in the united states has grown from 100, 000 in the year 1850, which represented less than 1% of the total us population to over 60, 000, 000 today which represents for more than 20% of the total US population.
reply
HazMat1012
Don't forget Kit Carson made the walk from San Pasqual to San Diego to inform troops about the battle. He had to do it in the dark with a Native American scout through enemy lines. And it was a 30-mile march.
reply
Don't forget Kit Carson made the walk from San Pasqual to San Diego to inform troops about the battle. He had to do it in the dark with a Native American scout through enemy lines. And it was a 30-mile march.
reply
Bearfacts01
It was CALLED A WAR THAT USA WON! Hello ---ever heard of the Mexican-American war Ever HEAR OF THAT
USA didn't annex anything we won it in a war!
reply
It was CALLED A WAR THAT USA WON! Hello ---ever heard of the Mexican-American war Ever HEAR OF THAT
USA didn't annex anything we won it in a war!
reply
AngelofDeath-Y2K
Mexico lost territory simply due to lack of high morale and a corrupt government they weren't willing to die for. i look at it as honorable.
reply
Mexico lost territory simply due to lack of high morale and a corrupt government they weren't willing to die for. i look at it as honorable.
reply
Anaris10
The Indian Problem reminds me of the Jewish Problem, Mexico and America were BOTH invaders. Miwoks like me and others will never forget.
reply
The Indian Problem reminds me of the Jewish Problem, Mexico and America were BOTH invaders. Miwoks like me and others will never forget.
reply
PIBnurse
At this point due to demo changes, Spanish should be an official language of the US, as it already an unofficial language.
reply
At this point due to demo changes, Spanish should be an official language of the US, as it already an unofficial language.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
12:21
