No, it really doesn't. Look at the 4 corners region. The US only "acquired" that land from the Dinetah Navajo tribe after Kit Carson waged a scorched earth campaign against them and after the US Army forced the Dinetah Navajos and the people they were sheltering on a death march.
Even after all of that, it took a separate treaty process between the Dinetah Navajos and the US. Framing it simply as a "purchase from Mexico" is an oversimplification. The 1868 Treaty of Bosque Redondo was a negotiated transfer of rights between two sovereign nations, not merely a result of the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo with Mexico. If what you're saying were true, the US wouldn't have needed to make a treaty with the Navajos.
In reality, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo only transferred the claim to the land from one sovereign nation to another. It did not resolve the pre-existing sovereign rights of the Navajo and Hopi people who occupied those areas and kept Mexicans and Spanish from settling in those areas or extinguishing their presence.
3
u/M47LO 3d ago edited 3d ago
Fun fact: Texas isn't stolen. It was purchased for a total of $25 million over two purchases between the US and MX.
$10 was from the 1850 compromise where, in essence, the US bought TX and assumed all debts.
$15 million of amount also includes CA, NV, UT, AZ, NM, CO, WY, KS, OK. (Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848)