701 réponses à ce sujet

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Andorfiend wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

I haven't really done any in depth research, but you're incredibly naive if you think that the allies didn't actually take on board information gained by the ****'s in their horrific experiments. How long a naked average male can survive in ice cold water is actually pretty damn useful to know in regards to when the best times to maximise search and rescue attempts etc happens.

Of course they did. It's a matter of public record. Nor do I have a problem with salvaging whatever tiny shreds of good that could be saved from that cesspool of madness and horror.

Arijharn wrote...
But you know, that aspect of our history is pretty irrelevant in regards to Cerberus. Okay, I get it, you don't like their methods, but what would be the 'correct' methods then? Can people really trust any other species to stay our mutual allies for the rest of your time together (and by time, I mean as long as galactic civilisation exists). I think everyone likes the idea of peace and all, but we don't lead a peaceful existence... just look at the world news. It would require a massive event that is far beyond human control (or any species control in the ME universe, because they are all just humans with different skin tone...) to get people to play nice, and the Reapers don't represent that 'massive event.'

Of course not! Where have I ever proposed unilateral disarmament or any other such nonsense? Of course the Alliance has to maintain a solid military. That's why it would be nice if Cerberus would stop killing Alliance military personel and diverting billions of credits worth of cash and materiel that might be used to help keep us safe. Humans are very much the underdogs in the galactic scheme of things. Any one of the Asari, Salarians or Turians could kick our asses with half their strength and all three of them together could do it without blinking. That's one of the many reasons TIM would (if he actually gave a fart in a space suit about anyone but himself) be thinking long term and making nice to the dangerous aliens while we build ourselves up to the point where they can't wipe us out in a brisk afternoon. Instead he is doing his level best to hamper the long term expansion of humanity while kicking every alien he can find in the nuts.

nope, nope, nope.... humanity is strong... there was an ambassador in redemption that was able to strong arm the council to give puny sanctions even after humans were found out experimenting with AI... 

the ambassador's realization "they fear us...."

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Andorfiend wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

Wait, what? You're against the holocaust as every normal person would be but you don't see the difference between atomic weapon deployment and regular carpet bombing? I'm sorry, but are you a... no wait, I'll rephrase it: What the hell is wrong with you?

What about the extended period of radiation poisoning/sickness? Cancers? Psychological Trauma? 

If you can't tell the difference between atomic weapon effects and carpet bombing, then you really have no place to support any opinion in my mind, because you're just an idiot. 

I didn't say carpet bombing, I said firebombing. A single tokyo raid is estimated to have killed more people, and wounded far more people than either of the atomic bomb blasts. And they were many raids. Is getting burned to death better than dying in an atomic blast? I haven't done either one, but I know which one I'd pick.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Nagasaki in particular) were not abominable acts. But they were not extraordinarily abominable acts by the standards of that war. Nor do I think they even compare to the Holocaust. KIlling civillians in war is horrid. Murdering your own civillians and millions of others becuase of a sick fantasy of persecution and imagined history is madness. Do you disagree? Or do you really think Hiroshima was just as bad as Auschwitz?

nukes good... camps bad = mainly because they are inefficient at what they do...

to the victor goes the spoils... including the interpretation of history.

war is bad and evil, whatever side you are on.... but war is inevitable... and to borrow fallout... war never changes.

check the history channel's analysis on BATTLE BC of the israelites conquest of the promised land during moses time.. absolutely f*cking awesome... it was an extermination campaign and a police state rolled into one.

Modifié par Mycrus Ironfist, 01 avril 2010 - 12:01 .

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

It's better than a Marie Antoinette-Reaper.
"Let them eat cake!"

I'm not sure everybody digs you point. Some people here would seem to think it's swell to be a Marie Antoinette-Reaper. They like cakes. Especially the free ones.

don't act too smug... your are not the only one that gets it.

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Internet Kraken wrote...

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Internet Kraken wrote...

You know I've been thinking, how can anyone really think TIM is pro humanity when he does so many things that are to the detriment of humans? He let thresher maws attack a squad of alliance soldiers. He bought bioitic children from batarian slavers, and in doing so he supports their continued attacks against human colonies. He's pro Cerberus, not pro humanity.

humanity as in humanity in general and not the individual...

the individual human can be replaced... well maybe except for shepard

That kind of reasoning can only get you so far. You can't be pro humanity, or at least claim that it is your top priority, if you are activley supporting one of humanities biggest enemies.

you can't be open minded when you brand any group "humanties biggest enemies"

[Mycrus Ironfist]

LuckyIronAxe wrote...

Everyone wants to be the ones on top of the food chain, it's instinct. Just so happens that in the ME universe that Humans are gunning hardest for this, they have the Eye of the Tiger, the Edge!

i never did like the "Edge" from DA:O

[Zulu_DFA]

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

It's better than a Marie Antoinette-Reaper.
"Let them eat cake!"

I'm not sure everybody digs you point. Some people here would seem to think it's swell to be a Marie Antoinette-Reaper. They like cakes. Especially the free ones.

don't act too smug... your are not the only one that gets it.

I know, I know, "a hole  in my head"... I dont' want it.

[stops acting so smug]

[Andorfiend]

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

Wait, what? You're against the holocaust as every normal person would be but you don't see the difference between atomic weapon deployment and regular carpet bombing? I'm sorry, but are you a... no wait, I'll rephrase it: What the hell is wrong with you?

What about the extended period of radiation poisoning/sickness? Cancers? Psychological Trauma? 

If you can't tell the difference between atomic weapon effects and carpet bombing, then you really have no place to support any opinion in my mind, because you're just an idiot. 

I didn't say carpet bombing, I said firebombing. A single tokyo raid is estimated to have killed more people, and wounded far more people than either of the atomic bomb blasts. And they were many raids. Is getting burned to death better than dying in an atomic blast? I haven't done either one, but I know which one I'd pick.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Nagasaki in particular) were not abominable acts. But they were not extraordinarily abominable acts by the standards of that war. Nor do I think they even compare to the Holocaust. KIlling civillians in war is horrid. Murdering your own civillians and millions of others becuase of a sick fantasy of persecution and imagined history is madness. Do you disagree? Or do you really think Hiroshima was just as bad as Auschwitz?

nukes good... camps bad = mainly because they are inefficient at what they do...

to the victor goes the spoils... including the interpretation of history.

I may be misunderstanding you. I pray I am. Are you telling me the only thing you find wrong with Auschwitz and Buchenwald and the systematic murder of 11+ million people many of whom were Germany's own civillians was that is was inefficient?

Modifié par Andorfiend, 01 avril 2010 - 01:18 .

[Spartas Husky]

"slurps drink" "eats popcorn"....come on pull some hairs, throw a tissue just used on a sneeze. Movie getting dull.

[Andorfiend]

Spartas Husky wrote...

"slurps drink" "eats popcorn"....come on pull some hairs, throw a tissue just used on a sneeze. Movie getting dull.

Bite me.

On topic I do have to hand it to Bioware for creating a character I hate so passionately. Althought that's mostly because he echoes several extremely dangerous people in real life. And the fact that even though he is over the top, cartoony, James Bond super villain EVIL there are still people who fall for for his BS. *facepalm*

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Andorfiend wrote...

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

Wait, what? You're against the holocaust as every normal person would be but you don't see the difference between atomic weapon deployment and regular carpet bombing? I'm sorry, but are you a... no wait, I'll rephrase it: What the hell is wrong with you?

What about the extended period of radiation poisoning/sickness? Cancers? Psychological Trauma? 

If you can't tell the difference between atomic weapon effects and carpet bombing, then you really have no place to support any opinion in my mind, because you're just an idiot. 

I didn't say carpet bombing, I said firebombing. A single tokyo raid is estimated to have killed more people, and wounded far more people than either of the atomic bomb blasts. And they were many raids. Is getting burned to death better than dying in an atomic blast? I haven't done either one, but I know which one I'd pick.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Nagasaki in particular) were not abominable acts. But they were not extraordinarily abominable acts by the standards of that war. Nor do I think they even compare to the Holocaust. KIlling civillians in war is horrid. Murdering your own civillians and millions of others becuase of a sick fantasy of persecution and imagined history is madness. Do you disagree? Or do you really think Hiroshima was just as bad as Auschwitz?

nukes good... camps bad = mainly because they are inefficient at what they do...

to the victor goes the spoils... including the interpretation of history.

I may be misunderstanding you. I pray I am. Are you telling me the only thing you find wrong with Auschwitz and Buchenwald and the systematic murder of 11+ million people many of whom were Germany's own civillians was that is was inefficient?

what i mean to say is that you kill 1 or 1 billion its both bad...

cerberus killed, council did genocide on 2 entire species

yet people seem to think that cerberus bad... and council good?

or back to my analogy... atomics killed people... camp killed people... why atomics good and camp bad??

[Zulu_DFA]

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...
atomics killed people... camp killed people... why atomics good and camp bad??

Because atomics are ours and camp were theirs. And we won. Simple.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 01 avril 2010 - 01:51 .

[Halmiriliath]

Arijharn wrote...

Of course, you could never truly prepare for unforseen threats (that is why, after all, they're unseen), but I think from a purely pragmatic approach, you could look at where the general strengths of each species lie and try to combine those traits to make something more robust. At least, that's what I'd do. Biotics for example, in the universe, is a relatively new development (at least to humanity) and it would make sense (at least, to me) to wanting to understand it, find our limitations and work to overcome them as soon as possible. Could this be a dead end, could this have no effect on whatever the unforseen threat could be? Possibly, but a Biotic with combat training would still be more capable than the same soldier standing side by side, but without biotic capabilities. I would think that it would be better to focus on gaining ever powerful Biotic capabilities than simply ignoring it (because the unforseen threat could just as likely be a violent uprising of a species they already know about as it is from any external threat).

As for the Akuze incident, perhaps it was reasoned that the marines would have the best chances of surviving? Perhaps Cerberus only became aware of the Thresher Maws existence after the initial colony was destroyed? Who knows. Corporal Toombs testimony can not be fully trusted as the only (or to rephrase: the entire) truth, as such our perceptions of the event are as clouded as his.

I had just posted a lengthy response to this, only for the system to log me out after attempting to post it (think happy thoughts, think happy thoughts...) so let me try again:

Fair points again, and I agree about the need to understand biotics. My issue here, however, is the way they go about developing these technologies, which - through the course of playing both games - has reminded me of those nasty scenes in Distict 9 such as this, where we see faceless, emotionally detached (i.e. not giving two ****s about their subjects) organisations experimenting on live, sapient creatures with little regard for ethics and the personal feelings of the families and friends of their subjects. My point about Akuze was that if they were willing to sacrifice humans in order to achieve 'advancement', where does it stop? Do they start dragging in societies 'undesirables' in gradually increasing numbers off the street to use as lab rats for the next big technology that will be humanity's salvation? In these situations, the means of acquiring this technology are anathema to me, and makes the benefits irrelevant when I consider the cost it took to get them.  

Another point: co-operation and a limited willingness to trust the 'other' without being hindered by cynicism has proven remarkably effective in advancing humanity in the Mass Effect universe. Saving the Council (and being a bloody icon at the same time...) earns us respect and a seat on the Council, with the reactionary rhetoric of a vocal minority against these 'upstarts' on the Citadel in Mass Effect 2 being unrepresentative of broader opinion. On a smaller scale, saving the Batarian and sparing those Batarians holding the doctor's assistant hostage when recruiting Mordin Solus sees an immediate alteration of their perception of humanity as uncooperative, self-obsessed blights on galactic purity (you sir! You are a blight!). If humanity continued down this path of limited goodwill, then their eventual entrenchment into the galactic community as a permanent fixture and a force to be reckoned with would be much more peaceful than if the political course of humanity was charted by cynical, self-aggrandising groups like Cerberus that don't even seem to trust their own shadows at times.

Modifié par Halmiriliath, 01 avril 2010 - 01:58 .

[Spartas Husky]

Andorfiend wrote...

Spartas Husky wrote...

"slurps drink" "eats popcorn"....come on pull some hairs, throw a tissue just used on a sneeze. Movie getting dull.

Bite me.

On topic I do have to hand it to Bioware for creating a character I hate so passionately.

Soooo true. Few characters are divise, some are but not so much. Whoever did TIM, made a very good story. bravo to him....and

Since I am praicing the woman or man that did TIM. hopefully they'll thank my faness by giving me a Dragon armor code

ANd yes I am being selfish...isn't that we are all about :wizard::ph34r:

[Destructo-Bot]

Hitler exterminating the Jews in camps was an act of aggression, the bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki was an act of self-defense after Japan attacked America. A country that starts a war of aggression shouldn't be surprised when their target takes drastic steps to defend itself.

A mugger can't call foul when he pulls a knife and stabs a mark and they pull a gun and shoot him.

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 01 avril 2010 - 02:23 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Destructo-Bot wrote...

Hitler exterminating the Jews in camps was an act of aggression, the bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki was an act of self-defense after Japan attacked America. A country that starts a war of aggression shouldn't be surprised when their target takes drastic steps to defend itself.

A mugger can't call foul when he pulls a knife and stabs a mark and they pull a gun and shoot him.

Yes! Those damn Japs...Kill 'em all! Let God sort 'em out!

[Andorfiend]

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...
I may be misunderstanding you. I pray I am. Are you telling me the only thing you find wrong with Auschwitz and Buchenwald and the systematic murder of 11+ million people many of whom were Germany's own civillians was that is was inefficient?

what i mean to say is that you kill 1 or 1 billion its both bad...

cerberus killed, council did genocide on 2 entire species

yet people seem to think that cerberus bad... and council good?

or back to my analogy... atomics killed people... camp killed people... why atomics good and camp bad??

I don't recall saying the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were good. They were however legitimate acts of war differing only in scale from the bombings of London or Dresden or Berlin and not even differing in scale from the fire bombing of Tokyo.

The Holocaust was not an act of war. It was an act of murder perpetrated on civilians who were in their own or in already conquered territory. It began before the war started.

Do you truely draw no distinction between unjustified murder and killing during wartime? Is a man who murders children for fun morally equivilent to the policeman who guns him down?

In game the Council has only committed genocide once. In that case the Rachni were the aggressors (even if controlled by Sovereign) and did not respond to attempts to communicate. Even with that however there is no evidence that the Council intended the total genocide of the Rachni, merely that they failed to restrain the Krogan. A reprehensible act like the sack of Magdeburg but lacking the moral component of intent.

The Krogan were also aggressors engaged in total warfare on the Council races and winning as well. However this time the council managed to achieve containment of the Krogan and even reabsorbed them back into the council races. While the genophage is horrific I do see it as preferable to total genocide. Where there is life there is hope. Death is forever. (Barring plot ressurection.)

Savvy? Both time the Council acted defensively against a foe engaged in a war of extermination. Cerberus however routinely murders and tortures their fellow humans for no discernable benefit. Not until the Collectors show up does Cerberus actually have a foe that threatens humanity and TIM is pretty much more a hazard to Shepard and the anti-collector effort than the Collectors themselves were.

As it happens I saw a fortune cookie today that said "You are what you do, not what you say." Look at TIMs actions.

[Chuck_Vu]

Dear Cerberus,



First, your intentions mean nothing. It's the actions and the consequences that people remember. Have some foresight. The "I didn't mean for it to happen this way" is worthless.



Second, use informed volunteers for your little experiments. It's far easier to spin on the PR side then using uninformed victims. And if you can't find informed volunteers... Stop.... Take a step back.... What you are doing is probally not worth the cost and the "cost" may not be financial.



Third, if a experiment goes awry or fails, own up to it and take responsibility for the fallout. Do not discard and forget. That is where they come back and really disrupt what you are doing when you are on the brink of success.



Thank you,



Commander Shepard.



P.S. I am really tired of cleaning up your screw ups.

[Destructo-Bot]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Destructo-Bot wrote...

Hitler exterminating the Jews in camps was an act of aggression, the bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki was an act of self-defense after Japan attacked America. A country that starts a war of aggression shouldn't be surprised when their target takes drastic steps to defend itself.

A mugger can't call foul when he pulls a knife and stabs a mark and they pull a gun and shoot him.

Yes! Those damn Japs...Kill 'em all! Let God sort 'em out!

Plea to emotion, no rebuttal. Completely misses the thrust of the post quoted. Acts in self-defense are very different from acts borne of aggression. The nuclear bombings were horrible but justifiable, the holocaust cannot be justified by any rational and compassionate being.

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 01 avril 2010 - 03:16 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Destructo-Bot wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Destructo-Bot wrote...

Hitler exterminating the Jews in camps was an act of aggression, the bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki was an act of self-defense after Japan attacked America. A country that starts a war of aggression shouldn't be surprised when their target takes drastic steps to defend itself.

A mugger can't call foul when he pulls a knife and stabs a mark and they pull a gun and shoot him.

Yes! Those damn Japs...Kill 'em all! Let God sort 'em out!

Plea to emotion, no rebuttal. Completely misses the thrust of the post quote.

Now, I am upset.

Acts in self-defense are very different from acts borne of aggression. The nuclear bombings were horrible but justifiable,

Citizens of Hiroshima disagree? No. They don't disagree. They are too dead to disagree.

the holocaust cannot be justified by any rational and compassionate being.

Of course not. Even Hitler understood that eventually, and took poison.

[Mycrus Ironfist]

Andorfiend wrote...

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...
I may be misunderstanding you. I pray I am. Are you telling me the only thing you find wrong with Auschwitz and Buchenwald and the systematic murder of 11+ million people many of whom were Germany's own civillians was that is was inefficient?

what i mean to say is that you kill 1 or 1 billion its both bad...

cerberus killed, council did genocide on 2 entire species

yet people seem to think that cerberus bad... and council good?

or back to my analogy... atomics killed people... camp killed people... why atomics good and camp bad??

I don't recall saying the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were good. They were however legitimate acts of war differing only in scale from the bombings of London or Dresden or Berlin and not even differing in scale from the fire bombing of Tokyo.

The Holocaust was not an act of war. It was an act of murder perpetrated on civilians who were in their own or in already conquered territory. It began before the war started.

Do you truely draw no distinction between unjustified murder and killing during wartime? Is a man who murders children for fun morally equivilent to the policeman who guns him down?

In game the Council has only committed genocide once. In that case the Rachni were the aggressors (even if controlled by Sovereign) and did not respond to attempts to communicate. Even with that however there is no evidence that the Council intended the total genocide of the Rachni, merely that they failed to restrain the Krogan. A reprehensible act like the sack of Magdeburg but lacking the moral component of intent.

The Krogan were also aggressors engaged in total warfare on the Council races and winning as well. However this time the council managed to achieve containment of the Krogan and even reabsorbed them back into the council races. While the genophage is horrific I do see it as preferable to total genocide. Where there is life there is hope. Death is forever. (Barring plot ressurection.)

Savvy? Both time the Council acted defensively against a foe engaged in a war of extermination. Cerberus however routinely murders and tortures their fellow humans for no discernable benefit. Not until the Collectors show up does Cerberus actually have a foe that threatens humanity and TIM is pretty much more a hazard to Shepard and the anti-collector effort than the Collectors themselves were.

As it happens I saw a fortune cookie today that said "You are what you do, not what you say." Look at TIMs actions.

btw them jews have a saying "save one, save the world entire"... or something like that... at least that's what the movie schindler's list said.

taken in the opposite, kill one, kill the whole world....

i'm not condoning atomics or the camps... both are bad... really bad...

but i do agree with atomics & the nuclear peace that followed...

so for me atomics / nukes = cerberus...  we may get remembrance days every now and then, but even you agree that it was needed at that time.

go cerberus!

[Andorfiend]

Mycrus Ironfist wrote...
btw them jews have a saying "save one, save the world entire"... or something like that... at least that's what the movie schindler's list said.

taken in the opposite, kill one, kill the whole world....

i'm not condoning atomics or the camps... both are bad... really bad...

but i do agree with atomics & the nuclear peace that followed...

so for me atomics / nukes = cerberus...  we may get remembrance days every now and then, but even you agree that it was needed at that time.

go cerberus!

We jews also say "Never again." Perhaps that's why I get my hackles up when I see someone performing lethal medical experiments on children.

Frankly your position makes even less sense now. You claimed the camps and the bombs were equivilent evil but now you claim that atomic bombings achieved good by forestalling a war between the super powers.

So what good came out of the camps exactly to make them morally equivilent?

And what act by Cerberus to you think was a parallel to the atomic bombings? Because all I see the the senseless and useless murder of children and entire colonies.

[Destructo-Bot]

And when you are so mustache-twirlingly evil someone like Shepard (or one of the victims/relatives/friends out for revenge) is going to come to shut you down permanently. You can't help your species when your headquarters is a smoking ruin and your leaders are all dead or incarcerated. And the galaxy won't help you because you've made so many enemies...

There are more than enough reasons not to be morally and ethically bankrupt, Cerberus is short-sighted and just plain evil. Anyone trying to defend them makes my brain hurt. The organization has all the reasoning abilities of a 3 year old.

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 01 avril 2010 - 08:43 .

[Ahglock]

Destructo-Bot wrote...

And when you are so mustache-twirlingly evil someone like Shepard (or one of the victims/relatives/friends out for revenge) is going to come to shut you down permanently. You can't help your species when your headquarters is a smoking ruin and your leaders are all dead or incarcerated. And the galaxy won't help you because you've made so many enemies...

There are more than enough reasons not to be morally and ethically bankrupt, Cerberus is short-sighted and just plain evil. Anyone trying to defend them makes my brain hurt. The organization has all the reasoning abilities of a 3 year old.

I suspect most of them are just being trolls, so I would ignore them. 

[Hellebore5000]

Destructo-Bot wrote...

And when you are so mustache-twirlingly evil someone like Shepard (or one of the victims/relatives/friends out for revenge) is going to come to shut you down permanently. You can't help your species when your headquarters is a smoking ruin and your leaders are all dead or incarcerated. And the galaxy won't help you because you've made so many enemies...

There are more than enough reasons not to be morally and ethically bankrupt, Cerberus is short-sighted and just plain evil. Anyone trying to defend them makes my brain hurt. The organization has all the reasoning abilities of a 3 year old.

< clap clap clap>  I was amazed to see so many people here defending them honestly. Kinda scary.

[Spartas Husky]

......

(falls asleep while watching the movie.....-_-)

(popcorns fall out of hands)