More recently I've had newcomer
out-of-staters moaning about how
Texas was stolen and the States
sent an army in and how the settlers
just stole whatever they wanted.
I always have to repeat about how
the settlers in Austin's colony had
to make an application and be vetted
and approved and agree to become
a loyal mexican citizen and convert
to catholicism, and learn spanish and
agree to develop their allotment toward
agriculture and productivity and agree
to the laws of mexico, and other
rules, etc.
Then AFTER THEY PAID for their
allotted lands they were allowed to
settle and develop it.
There's some misconception that
a bunch of unruly whites crossed the
river into Texas and parked their wagon
wherever they felt like it and built
a cabin and squatted.
Only after the mexican government had
broken the constitution of 1824, and
Stephen Austin had traveled to mexico
to plead his case and was imprisoned
and tortured did revolution start fomenting.
All of this stolen lands business needs
to be disputed whenever you hear it
We can look over world history, and we likely won't find a land that has not been conquered and conquered again, at least several times. Some birdbrains try to pick out one particular invasion, so they can condemn the invaders.
For Example, Jolly Olde England ..
A) About 2400BC the Bell Beaker neolithic culture arrived in what is the England of today..superceding an earlier, mesolithic culture that crossed via Doggerland.
B) Then, along came the Roman "colonisers" in 43 AD, only to leave around 400 AD, to be followed by a series of colonizers.
C) Next the Anglo Saxons..came in, from Germany, Netherlands and Denmark, and took over (circa 450 AD)
D) Starting in about 790 AD, the Vikings gained some incursions into the edges of the whole island, while the Anglo Saxons still held the bulk of the land.
E) Then in 1066, King William crossed the channel, and kicked King Harold's butt at Hastings..and the Normans took over.
F) In 1495, King Henry VII won the epic battle at Boswick Field, setting up the Tudors, to carry until now.
If I were one of the history revisionists that are common today, I could pick just one of the above conquerers, and call them "dirty colonisers" !
..But being honest, which would I choose..the Romans, Vikings, Angles or Normans?
I guess if I were one of the new revisionist historians, I would choose which ever one I held a grudge against.. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scotland was a separate story...the Celts and Picts..being confronted and invaded by the Romans, Danes, England and others but never fully conquered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GowMI4wvmU4 
