100 réponses à ce sujet

[CaptainZaysh]

Ian: your moral reasoning is deeply flawed since it assigns the geth no responsibility for their actions, whatever those actions may be. You have admitted that even if the geth had gone the final step and intentionally wiped out the quarian species you would not consider them to have committed genocide. Absolving them of any guilt - regardless of what atrocities they commit - is the path to fanaticism.

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Because my dim-witted friend, the Geth never deliberately tried to wipe out anyone.  That was not the intent of their "morning war".  Their only intent was to survive.  It was Quarian intransigence that pushed the Quarians to the brink of extinction.  Just because species A wipes out species B does NOT ipso facto make it genocide.  The intent has to be there to wipe out the species and the Geth never had that intent.

-Polaris

I guess you could say Srebrenica, Rwanda or even Holocaust were not genocide...

Absolutely they were and were judged as such by the ICC.  In all cases you had a group that deliberately and with aforethought tried to eliminate a race and/or nationality from existance either in whole or in part.

There is NO EVIDENCE that the Geth tried to eliminate the Quarians simply becaus they were Quarian.  The Quarians created a situation that caused most of their race to die and did so on their own volution.  When the Geth were given the opportunity to wipe out the Quarians (at the end of the war by following the Quarians to finish them off), they declined.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Ian: your moral reasoning is deeply flawed since it assigns the geth no responsibility for their actions, whatever those actions may be. You have admitted that even if the geth had gone the final step and intentionally wiped out the quarian species you would not consider them to have committed genocide. Absolving them of any guilt - regardless of what atrocities they commit - is the path to fanaticism.

My moral reasoning is just fine.  I know the definition of genocide and you clearly do not.  The Geth NEVER INTENDED to wipe out the Quarians.  That was never on their agenda.  As such they are not guilty of genocide. Period.

The reverse, sadly, is not true.

-Polaris

Edit:  Saying the Geth were not guilty of Genocide (which is a simple fact of the matter as presented in the game) does not absolve the Geth of all guilt.  However, it does point the finger at the Quarians as the primary responsible party (which is also a fact).

Modifié par IanPolaris, 12 août 2010 - 06:08 .

[Mr. niceguy15]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Because my dim-witted friend, the Geth never deliberately tried to wipe out anyone.  That was not the intent of their "morning war".  Their only intent was to survive.  It was Quarian intransigence that pushed the Quarians to the brink of extinction.  Just because species A wipes out species B does NOT ipso facto make it genocide.  The intent has to be there to wipe out the species and the Geth never had that intent.

-Polaris

I guess you could say Srebrenica, Rwanda or even Holocaust were not genocide...

OK, this is how I see it: The nahzee's (quarians) used the people at the concentration camp's (geth) for cheap labour. Then one day the prisoner's get guns. A riot unfolds, where most of the guard's get killed. Put this in context with Mass Effect. Would you say that the prisoner's just committed genocide? No, they just did it in self-defence. They guards were trying to kill them, so they were just defending themselves.


- A nice guy.

Modifié par Mr. niceguy15, 12 août 2010 - 06:38 .

[uzivatel]

Mr. niceguy15 wrote...

OK, this is how I see it: The nahzee's (quarians) used the people at the concentration camp's (geth) for cheap labour. Then one day the prisoner's get guns. A riot unfolds, where most of the guard's get killed. Put this in context with Mass Effect. Would you say that the prisoner's just committed genocide? No, they just did it in self-defence. They guards were trying to kill them, so they were just defending themselves.


- A nice guy.

Its not just the guards, its not even just the soldiers, its billions of civilians - men, women, children - everyone.

IanPolaris wrote...

Absolutely they were and were judged as such by the ICC.  In all cases you had a group that deliberately and with aforethought tried to eliminate a race and/or nationality from existance either in whole or in part.

There is NO EVIDENCE that the Geth tried to eliminate the Quarians simply becaus they were Quarian.  The Quarians created a situation that caused most of their race to die and did so on their own volution.  When the Geth were given the opportunity to wipe out the Quarians (at the end of the war by following the Quarians to finish them off), they declined.

-Polaris

Its not like, say, the Hutu militia followed the Tutsi into neighbouring countries. Not genocide then?

Modifié par uzivatel, 13 août 2010 - 12:06 .

[ExtremeOne]

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

[Some Geth]

ExtremeOne wrote...

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

Do you have any good posts at all .

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...

Mr. niceguy15 wrote...

OK, this is how I see it: The nahzee's (quarians) used the people at the concentration camp's (geth) for cheap labour. Then one day the prisoner's get guns. A riot unfolds, where most of the guard's get killed. Put this in context with Mass Effect. Would you say that the prisoner's just committed genocide? No, they just did it in self-defence. They guards were trying to kill them, so they were just defending themselves.


- A nice guy.

Its not just the guards, its not even just the soldiers, its billions of civilians - men, women, children - everyone.

In a nuclear war, billions of people, men, women, everyone would die.  Still doesn't make it genocide.   In order to qualify as genocide the INTENT to wipe out a national/racial group in whole or in part must exist.  That clearly is shown not to be the case on the part of the Geth.  The massive Quarian casualties are a side effect of the war.

IanPolaris wrote...

Absolutely they were and were judged as such by the ICC.  In all cases you had a group that deliberately and with aforethought tried to eliminate a race and/or nationality from existance either in whole or in part.

There is NO EVIDENCE that the Geth tried to eliminate the Quarians simply becaus they were Quarian.  The Quarians created a situation that caused most of their race to die and did so on their own volution.  When the Geth were given the opportunity to wipe out the Quarians (at the end of the war by following the Quarians to finish them off), they declined.

-Polaris

Its not like, say, the Hutu militia followed the Tutsi into neighbouring countries. Not genocide then?

The Hutu militia targeted and destroyed Tutsi tribesmen just for being Tutsi.  That makes it genocide under international law.  The Geth did NOT targert the Quarians just for being Quarians.  The Geth targeted those that were trying to destroy the Geth and stopped targeting them when the Quarians retreated.

Big difference.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Also in the case of the Hutu militia, Rwanda had neighboring african nations (like Camaroon) who's armed forces and central governments were NOT running jokes (by african standards at least).  That's a big negative incentive to go outside your own national bounds.  Such constraints did not apply to the Geth at the end of the morning war (no one in the Terminus system would have had a prayer of standing up to the Geth even if they had been interested in helping the Quarians which they were not).  The Geth let the Quarians get away anyway.  Why?  Legion answers that.  It's because the annihilation of the Quarians was never the Geth intent in the first place.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 13 août 2010 - 02:31 .

[uzivatel]

IanPolaris wrote...

In a nuclear war, billions of people, men, women, everyone would die.  Still doesn't make it genocide.   In order to qualify as genocide the INTENT to wipe out a national/racial group in whole or in part must exist.  That clearly is shown not to be the case on the part of the Geth.  The massive Quarian casualties are a side effect of the war.

Thats one of the goals of full-scale nuclear war - to annihilate the other side completely.

IanPolaris wrote...

The Hutu militia targeted and destroyed Tutsi tribesmen just for being Tutsi.  That makes it genocide under international law.  The Geth did NOT targert the Quarians just for being Quarians.  The Geth targeted those that were trying to destroy the Geth and stopped targeting them when the Quarians retreated.

Big difference.

-Polaris

Civilians including children were trying to destroy them? Right, and many of the Hutu believed the Tutsi want to enslave them. Makes it completely fine...
Hell, most of the victims in Srebrenica were men between 15 and 65 - potential combatants. As such Srebrenica massacre was more like act of self defense, right?

IanPolaris wrote...

Edit PS:  Also in the case of the Hutu militia, Rwanda had neighboring african nations (like Camaroon) who's armed forces and central governments were NOT running jokes (by african standards at least).  That's a big negative incentive to go outside your own national bounds.  Such constraints did not apply to the Geth at the end of the morning war (no one in the Terminus system would have had a prayer of standing up to the Geth even if they had been interested in helping the Quarians which they were not).  The Geth let the Quarians get away anyway.  Why?  Legion answers that.  It's because the annihilation of the Quarians was never the Geth intent in the first place.

And as such it was never planed to be genocide, because they knew they wont be able to follow all the Tutsi anyway. They just planed to cleanse the from certain area and thats it. Just like the Geth with the Quarians - they pretty much killed every one in the Quarian space (including other organic life forms), but did not follow to the Citadel space ... to avoid war and because the cleansing was finished.

Modifié par uzivatel, 13 août 2010 - 07:36 .

[Mr. niceguy15]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

In a nuclear war, billions of people, men, women, everyone would die.  Still doesn't make it genocide.   In order to qualify as genocide the INTENT to wipe out a national/racial group in whole or in part must exist.  That clearly is shown not to be the case on the part of the Geth.  The massive Quarian casualties are a side effect of the war.

Thats one of the goals of full-scale nuclear war - to annihilate the other side completely.

IanPolaris wrote...

The Hutu militia targeted and destroyed Tutsi tribesmen just for being Tutsi.  That makes it genocide under international law.  The Geth did NOT targert the Quarians just for being Quarians.  The Geth targeted those that were trying to destroy the Geth and stopped targeting them when the Quarians retreated.

Big difference.

-Polaris

Civilians including children were trying to destroy them? Right, and many of the Hutu believed the Tutsi want to enslave them. Makes it completely fine...
Hell, most of the victims in Srebrenica were men between 15 and 65 - potential combatants. As such Srebrenica massacre was more like act of self defense, right?

IanPolaris wrote...

Edit PS:  Also in the case of the Hutu militia, Rwanda had neighboring african nations (like Camaroon) who's armed forces and central governments were NOT running jokes (by african standards at least).  That's a big negative incentive to go outside your own national bounds.  Such constraints did not apply to the Geth at the end of the morning war (no one in the Terminus system would have had a prayer of standing up to the Geth even if they had been interested in helping the Quarians which they were not).  The Geth let the Quarians get away anyway.  Why?  Legion answers that.  It's because the annihilation of the Quarians was never the Geth intent in the first place.

And as such it was never planed to be genocide, because they knew they wont be able to follow all the Tutsi anyway. They just planed to cleanse the from certain area and thats it. Just like the Geth with the Quarians - they pretty much killed every one in the Quarian space (including other organic life forms), but did not follow to the Citadel space ... to avoid war and because the cleansing was finished.

OK, let's just stop before we turn this thread into something we don't, and a mod has to lock it
This is what Legion has to say, listen to him:

I think the Rachni might be a winning card for paragon Shepard, but I have a hunch that we might meet another lifeform in ME3 that will help us alot


- A nice guy.

[IanPolaris]

[quote]uzivatel wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

In a nuclear war, billions of people, men, women, everyone would die.  Still doesn't make it genocide.   In order to qualify as genocide the INTENT to wipe out a national/racial group in whole or in part must exist.  That clearly is shown not to be the case on the part of the Geth.  The massive Quarian casualties are a side effect of the war.[/quote]
Thats one of the goals of full-scale nuclear war - to annihilate the other side completely.
[/quote]

I used to work for the USAF including nuclear weapons clearence.  What you say is not the goal of nuclear war.  It never was in the case of the USA and the best intelligence suggests (later confirmed by declas KGB files) it was never the case for the CCCP either.  The goal of a nuclear war is to so completely cripple a nation's military and economic ability to fight that either an immediate peace on your term or a victory by your soldiers in the field is the only outcome.  This of course greatly simplifies 'nuclear war' since there were many kinds.  "Tactical Nuclear War" was the one most commonly considered generally as a way to break a conventional war stalemate or to reverse the trend of a conventional war (generally assumed in Europe but that wasn't a requirement...we nearly had tactical nuclear wars in Korea more than once).

The point is at no point is the goal of nuclear war in responsible nations genocide.  It is for precisely that reason why most nations want to keep nuclear wars out of the hands of people like Iran and such for fear they will fall into hands of people that DO want to use them for genocide.

It was the fact that a general (or global) nuclear war would eliminate all or nearly all the population of both sides that helped prevent it from happening.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

The Hutu militia targeted and destroyed Tutsi tribesmen just for being Tutsi.  That makes it genocide under international law.  The Geth did NOT targert the Quarians just for being Quarians.  The Geth targeted those that were trying to destroy the Geth and stopped targeting them when the Quarians retreated.

Big difference.

-Polaris[/quote]
Civilians including children were trying to destroy them? Right, and many of the Hutu believed the Tutsi want to enslave them. Makes it completely fine...
Hell, most of the victims in Srebrenica were men between 15 and 65 - potential combatants. As such Srebrenica massacre was more like act of self defense, right?
[/quote]

The intent was to wipe out a selected population just because they were of a particular ethnicity either in whole or in part.  It's this intent that makes it genocide, not the result.  Read your international law.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

Edit PS:  Also in the case of the Hutu militia, Rwanda had neighboring african nations (like Camaroon) who's armed forces and central governments were NOT running jokes (by african standards at least).  That's a big negative incentive to go outside your own national bounds.  Such constraints did not apply to the Geth at the end of the morning war (no one in the Terminus system would have had a prayer of standing up to the Geth even if they had been interested in helping the Quarians which they were not).  The Geth let the Quarians get away anyway.  Why?  Legion answers that.  It's because the annihilation of the Quarians was never the Geth intent in the first place.[/quote]
And as such it was never planed to be genocide, because they knew they wont be able to follow all the Tutsi anyway. They just planed to cleanse the from certain area and thats it. Just like the Geth with the Quarians - they pretty much killed every one in the Quarian space (including other organic life forms), but did not follow to the Citadel space ... to avoid war and because the cleansing was finished.[/quote]
[/quote]

Nope.  You lose again.  The Hutu wanted to reduce the Tutsi population in whole or in part DELIBERATELY just for being Tutsi.  This was done deliberately and thus becomes genocide.  By contrast the Geth NEVER intended to wipe out the Quarians.  Billions and billions of Quarians died, but they did so as a side effect of a war that the Quarians started and the Geth had to fight for simple survival.  Thus on the charge of genocide, the Quarians are guilty but the Geth are not.  Period.

I know what you and your cohort are trying to do.  You're trying to "make me admit" that genocide is sometimes OK so you can lamblast me for that later.  I am emphatically not saying that Genocide is ever OK, but that killing....sometimes even by the carload lots is not always genocide, and emphatically not when the only intent was self defense.  Such is the case with the Geth.

Just because billions die in a war does not make the war genocidal.  The intent must be there.

-Polaris

[uzivatel]

IanPolaris wrote...

I used to work for the USAF including nuclear weapons clearence.

IanPolaris wrote...

Billions and billions of Quarians died, but they did so as a side effect of a war that the Quarians started and the Geth had to fight for simple survival.

You just made me wonder about few things

Anyway, I think this is the core problem. The Geth IMO did not have to kill all those billions for simple survival - they went far beyond that.

IanPolaris wrote...

The intent was to wipe out a selected population just because they were of a particular ethnicity either in whole or in part.  It's this intent that makes it genocide, not the result.  Read your international law.

How do you kill billions of certain species without an intent to destroy them in whole or in part is beyond my understanding.

Modifié par uzivatel, 13 août 2010 - 05:00 .

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I used to work for the USAF including nuclear weapons clearence.

IanPolaris wrote...

Billions and billions of Quarians died, but they did so as a side effect of a war that the Quarians started and the Geth had to fight for simple survival.

You just made me wonder about few things

Anyway, I think this is the core problem. The Geth IMO did not have to kill all those billions for simple survival - they went far beyond that.

How do you know this?  Assuming that both sides used total war including nuclear war (and this is implied), then billions and billions would die as a simple side effect of the war. 

Basically, you have NO data to support this charge, and the game does give us direct information that tells us the Geth never intended to destroy the Quarians.

When you lose all your planets in total war, the death toll will be catastrophic.  Still doesn't make it genocide.

IanPolaris wrote...

The intent was to wipe out a selected population just because they were of a particular ethnicity either in whole or in part.  It's this intent that makes it genocide, not the result.  Read your international law.

How do you kill billions of certain species without an intent to destroy them in whole or in part is beyond my understanding.

A global thermonuclear war would be a classic exmple of how.  Many times the USA and CCCP came very close to a full out exchange.  In such an exchange billions of people would have died and the populations of both nations likely would have been nearly exterminated.  That doesn't mean the intend of the war was extermination.....just the side effect of it.

Likewise if you bomb a city with an Aircraft factory in it, and kill the civilians inside, you aren't deliberately targeting civilians.  You are destroying a military target that has civilians around it.  That is NOT a war crime.

It's the intent that matters.

-Polaris

[uzivatel]

IanPolaris wrote...


How do you know this?  Assuming that both sides used total war including nuclear war (and this is implied), then billions and billions would die as a simple side effect of the war. 

Basically, you have NO data to support this charge, and the game does give us direct information that tells us the Geth never intended to destroy the Quarians.

When you lose all your planets in total war, the death toll will be catastrophic.  Still doesn't make it genocide.

You make it sound like every Quarian planet was fortress world that had to be nuked into oblivion. Seriously, how likely is that?

I do realize carpet bombing of urban areas with incendiary bombs was considered just fine only few decades ago, but even then the casualties were nowhere as high.

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...
You make it sound like every Quarian planet was fortress world that had to be nuked into oblivion. Seriously, how likely is that?

When the morning war started, the Geth were completely integrated into the Quarian economy.  When the order came down to deactivate them, it would have provoked a defensive response in parts of the Quarian economy that likely had the highest population densities.

In classic urban warfare (see Falluja (sp?)), civilian casualties are very high and without a place to go (and the Quarians never planned that far ahead) in an urban warfare environment, civilian casualties can be near total in fact.

I do realize carpet bombing of urban areas with incendiary bombs was considered just fine only few decades ago, but even then the casualties were nowhere as high.

Urban war on the ground especially with air support is far more destructive to the civilian population than any carpet bombing.

The point is YOU DON'T KNOW how the morning war was fought precisely.  You point to the Quarian casualty rate and scream "genocide" when as I've pointed out, you have zero evidence of intent.  I on the other hand can point out several instances where the Geth never intended on destroying the Quarians as a people and passed up opportunities to do so.  The same can not be said of the Quarians.....

The Quarians are guilty of genocide (at least the attempt) not the Geth.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[double post--deleted]

Modifié par IanPolaris, 13 août 2010 - 08:24 .

[ExtremeOne]

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

Do you have any good posts at all .

 


there is different between choices in a game and babysitting.  

[Some Geth]

ExtremeOne wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

Do you have any good posts at all .

 


there is different between choices in a game and babysitting.  

And?Do you have any good posts?

[ExtremeOne]

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

Do you have any good posts at all .

 


there is different between choices in a game and babysitting.  

And?Do you have any good posts?

 


oh I guess you can not handle the truth about ME 2 and its flaws well replay the game and you will  see that Shepard basically is a babysitter for part of the game always having to be in the middle of a bunch of stupid arguments. 

[Some Geth]

ExtremeOne wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Some Geth wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

Maybe EA should have left player choice out of ME all together because all i see is people fighiting over stupid choices in a video game

Do you have any good posts at all .

 


there is different between choices in a game and babysitting.  

And?Do you have any good posts?

 


oh I guess you can not handle the truth about ME 2 and its flaws well replay the game and you will  see that Shepard basically is a babysitter for part of the game always having to be in the middle of a bunch of stupid arguments. 

But do you have any good posts?<_<

[uzivatel]

IanPolaris wrote...

When the morning war started, the Geth were completely integrated into the Quarian economy.  When the order came down to deactivate them, it would have provoked a defensive response in parts of the Quarian economy that likely had the highest population densities.

In classic urban warfare (see Falluja (sp?)), civilian casualties are very high and without a place to go (and the Quarians never planned that far ahead) in an urban warfare environment, civilian casualties can be near total in fact.

Urban war on the ground especially with air support is far more destructive to the civilian population than any carpet bombing.

I dont remember civilian casualties in Fallujah, Sarajevo or Grozny to anywhere near 90 percent (not to mention more than 99 percent).
Even some of the bloodies battles like the battle of Stalingrad or siege of Leningrad had lower casualty rate among the civilians.

IanPolaris wrote...

The point is YOU DON'T KNOW how the morning war was fought precisely.  You point to the Quarian casualty rate and scream "genocide" when as I've pointed out, you have zero evidence of intent.  I on the other hand can point out several instances where the Geth never intended on destroying the Quarians as a people and passed up opportunities to do so.  The same can not be said of the Quarians.....

The Quarians are guilty of genocide (at least the attempt) not the Geth.

Your evidence is based on the same speculations. We do not know because BioWare did not tell us and I doubt they ever will.
I am basing my estimates on certain 20th century events, you are probably doing the same.

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

When the morning war started, the Geth were completely integrated into the Quarian economy.  When the order came down to deactivate them, it would have provoked a defensive response in parts of the Quarian economy that likely had the highest population densities.

In classic urban warfare (see Falluja (sp?)), civilian casualties are very high and without a place to go (and the Quarians never planned that far ahead) in an urban warfare environment, civilian casualties can be near total in fact.

Urban war on the ground especially with air support is far more destructive to the civilian population than any carpet bombing.

I dont remember civilian casualties in Fallujah, Sarajevo or Grozny to anywhere near 90 percent (not to mention more than 99 percent).
Even some of the bloodies battles like the battle of Stalingrad or siege of Leningrad had lower casualty rate among the civilians.

I never said Urban Warfare had a 99% casualty rate.  I said it was more destructive than carpet bombing, and this is true because urban soldiers can get to places that bombs can not.

It's also beside the point.  You have NO EVIDENCE that the Geth killed 99% of the Quarian population, only that 99% of the Quarians died during the Morning War.  Well guess what?  That tends to happen in total war when you lose all your living space.  Who is to blame for that?  Ultimately the Quarians are.

IanPolaris wrote...

The point is YOU DON'T KNOW how the morning war was fought precisely.  You point to the Quarian casualty rate and scream "genocide" when as I've pointed out, you have zero evidence of intent.  I on the other hand can point out several instances where the Geth never intended on destroying the Quarians as a people and passed up opportunities to do so.  The same can not be said of the Quarians.....

The Quarians are guilty of genocide (at least the attempt) not the Geth.

Your evidence is based on the same speculations. We do not know because BioWare did not tell us and I doubt they ever will.
I am basing my estimates on certain 20th century events, you are probably doing the same.

True but here is the big difference.  I am not making the positive case.  You are.  You are attempting to prove the Geth had the intent to wipe out the Quarian people (that is what Genocide means) and you lack the evidence to prove your case.  I on the other hand merely have to point out that the Geth themselves (through legion) directly contradict this and the Quarians themselves admit the Geth could have followed them through the Veil and did not (and the Quarians wondered why...probably because had the roles been reversed they would have).  The difference.  The Quarians really were and are committed to genocide against the Geth and the reverse is not true.

The fact you have no evidence for how the morning war was fought means you can't make the case for genocide.  The fact I don't either is irrelevant since I am not making a positive assertion.

-Polaris

[uzivatel]

IanPolaris wrote...

It's also beside the point.  You have NO EVIDENCE that the Geth killed 99% of the Quarian population, only that 99% of the Quarians died during the Morning War.  Well guess what?  That tends to happen in total war when you lose all your living space.  Who is to blame for that?  Ultimately the Quarians are.

Mass suicide maybe?

IanPolaris wrote...

True but here is the big difference.  I am not making the positive case.  You are.  You are attempting to prove the Geth had the intent to wipe out the Quarian people (that is what Genocide means) and you lack the evidence to prove your case.  I on the other hand merely have to point out that the Geth themselves (through legion) directly contradict this and the Quarians themselves admit the Geth could have followed them through the Veil and did not (and the Quarians wondered why...probably because had the roles been reversed they would have).  The difference.  The Quarians really were and are committed to genocide against the Geth and the reverse is not true.

The fact you have no evidence for how the morning war was fought means you can't make the case for genocide.  The fact I don't either is irrelevant since I am not making a positive assertion.

You do not stop there, you are actually claiming the Geth did all in self-defense. That would be fine if this was courtroom and you were Geth lawyer, but this is internet forum and all claims are the same. 
Legion is Geth, he is about as biased as Quarians.

Again, many cases of 20th century acts that are considered genocide could not expect to wipe out every last person of certain group because of minorities living in other countries and such. Then again the definition of genocide speaks about destroying in whole or in part.

[scotchtape622]

One possible ally that people often forget about are the Terminus systems, specifically the Batarians. I think it would be cool to try and recruit such an anti human government.

[IanPolaris]

uzivatel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

It's also beside the point.  You have NO EVIDENCE that the Geth killed 99% of the Quarian population, only that 99% of the Quarians died during the Morning War.  Well guess what?  That tends to happen in total war when you lose all your living space.  Who is to blame for that?  Ultimately the Quarians are.

Mass suicide maybe?

Suicide?  No.  Self inflicted extinction?  Definately.  The Quarians did this to themselves.  BOTH the Quarians and Geth make that perfectly clear.

IanPolaris wrote...

True but here is the big difference.  I am not making the positive case.  You are.  You are attempting to prove the Geth had the intent to wipe out the Quarian people (that is what Genocide means) and you lack the evidence to prove your case.  I on the other hand merely have to point out that the Geth themselves (through legion) directly contradict this and the Quarians themselves admit the Geth could have followed them through the Veil and did not (and the Quarians wondered why...probably because had the roles been reversed they would have).  The difference.  The Quarians really were and are committed to genocide against the Geth and the reverse is not true.

The fact you have no evidence for how the morning war was fought means you can't make the case for genocide.  The fact I don't either is irrelevant since I am not making a positive assertion.

You do not stop there, you are actually claiming the Geth did all in self-defense. That would be fine if this was courtroom and you were Geth lawyer, but this is internet forum and all claims are the same. 
Legion is Geth, he is about as biased as Quarians.

I am not required to show that the Geth acted in self-defense.  However, the facts of the matter from BOTH the Quarian and Geth side make it eminately clear that the Geth did in fact act in self-defense.  As for Legion, his story is actually the same as the Quarians (look at that You-Tube Link for Legion's conversaion) without the emotional context.  In both cases the Quarians attempted genocide and the Geth resisted.  Even Tali when you first talk to her in ME1 admits this.

Again, many cases of 20th century acts that are considered genocide could not expect to wipe out every last person of certain group because of minorities living in other countries and such. Then again the definition of genocide speaks about destroying in whole or in part.

Yes, but the specific intent to wipe out a nationality/race simply because they are that nationality/race must be present for it to be genocide.  Internatinal law and War Crimes law is very specific on that point.  At NO POINT did the Geth intend to wipe out the Quarians just because they were Quarians.  They were acting in self defense.  Even the Quarians agree the Geth were acting in self-defense.

-Polaris