Probably none. People have been screwing each other for so long now.

Mexico losing the war meant that the Mexican government lost the right to govern the land, not the private property owners lost the right to the land that they owned within the territory. And the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was supposed to guarantee that.

Did the US ever actually keep to the terms of ANY treaty involving land out west?

Did the US ever actually keep to the terms of ANY treaty involving land out west?

I think we did actually pay for the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska.

We paid for California too. Of course, they struck gold two years later, so it was a bargain.

Why would we do that?

Treaties are to end the war. If it cuts into profits, well, why honor when the war is over anyway?

I'm reading more about Mexican history now. So they declared a Mexican Empire, then basically started recruiting among the noble houses of Europe to find an emperor? And an Austrian guy got the job? Then he and his wife adopted the grandsons of the guy who had briefly been emperor a few decades earlier, the previous time they tried declaring a Mexican Empire. And even though neither of these people was actually emperor for very long, there are still pretenders to the throne, a guy who can say that, if the Mexican Empire is ever restored, he's the emperor. The current pretender is named Maximiliano Gustav Richard Albrecht Agustin von Götzen-Itúrbide, and he was born in Romania and lives in Australia.

(I'm kind of fascinated by people who still keep track of who should be heir to a throne that hasn't existed for generations. When my family was in Italy, we went to a restaurant owned by some Hapsburgs. One of them told us all about the places that he should be prince of.)

Maximiliano Gustav Richard Albrecht Agustin von Götzen-Itúrbide

What a name! I want that name! Mine is obviously NOT difficult enough to pronounce or spell, judge's statement or no!

Cool. One of those princes adopted by the Austrian emperor and his wife later renounced his claim to the throne, went back to Mexico, criticized the government enough that he got exiled, and then spent the rest of his life as a professor of French and Spanish at Georgetown. (And his mother, who had the rather boring name of Alice Green, was the granddaughter of a US Revolutionary War general.)

(I'm kind of fascinated by people who still keep track of who should be heir to a throne that hasn't existed for generations. When my family was in Italy, we went to a restaurant owned by some Hapsburgs. One of them told us all about the places that he should be prince of.)

One of my friends had a professor who expected students to stand when he entered the room because he was the non-landed prince of somethingorother.

I wish I could remember which school.

Steven Brust (who is a Trotskyite) enjoys laying claim to be the rightful ruler of Hungary. Well, it used to be one of his hobbies; Texas Hold-em and the marriage between himself, Reesa and Kit seem to take up his time these days, not to mention that pesky writing.

One of my friends had a professor who expected students to stand when he entered the room because he was the non-landed prince of somethingorother.

That is hysterical.

If family legend is to be believed, my ancestors were very minor Austrian nobility, back when, for a while, the Emperor had the power to make anybody a noble whenever he felt like it. All the supporting facts of the story check out -- the Emperor did in fact have that power during the period in question, he did visit the right part of the Empire at the right time, and the ancestors in the story were innkeepers, which was a pretty popular occupation for Jews at the time and I know that, about two or three generations later, most of the family were innkeepers -- but I seriously doubt that it's true. My best guess is that there's some bit of truth somewhere in the story, but somewhere along the retelling, something like "The Emperor ate at our inn and said he liked it" became "The Emperor liked our inn so much that he made us nobility."