406 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

I think you are severely underestimating the situation they were in. Their government was dead. Their leaders. It could have taken them months just to FIND all of the survivors, it could have taken longer than that to get them together establish some form of leaderhsip. Then they have to contend with the fact that they now have no resources, no base of operations, and the geth may be after them. You also need to consider that they have had fewer ships then that were even more overcrowded than they are now. Their first priority would have been to find more ships to disperse the population amongst the fleet. Their entire civilization had just been destroyed.

Their entire leadership cannot have been destroyed. If it had been, they would not have gotten anywhere near that many away and would not have gotten the migrant fleet together anywhere near so easily. They would much more likely have gone the way of the Krogan, disbursed across civilization.

Also they knew what they were about to do. At least some of the leadership would have been on a Geth -free ship somewhere. 'Hunting trip' or some such as cover. Give the Quarians at least some credit. 

Or unless Legion is a liar.

Right, I am sure that the Geth are entirely in league with the Reapers, and only helps blow up the larval reaper and heretics as some sort of deep deep cover.

We have had this discussion before too. Peace doesn't equal surrender, and the Geth don't gain much from suddenly being open.

That's all speculation. Dohlen (I think that's the name of the star Haestrom orbits) could be the geth's main source of fuel, or one of their main sources. Regardless, that is speculation.

It is speculation backed by sound logic. You don't send the entire fleet into foreign space just for a fueling trip, not when you are likely to be mistaken for a faction that was recently defeated pretty much utterly. Your opinion is just as speculative, but makes a lot less sense.

I never ignored or discounted that at all. In fact it was one of my main points. I suggest  you follow your own advice but throw in reading comprehension as well.

You can't even remember your own posts now? Or are you just twisting your own words to try to make some sense out of them?

I'm glad you are starting to see things from my perspective.

Show me where I suggest Quarian children be looked after by strange Geth, strange humans, or even strange Quarians. I said no such thing.

[The Big Nothing]

I'm with Mr. Quib Quib.

[Kavadas]

Here's the major flaw of your position, Moiaussi.

You use the "intended 'genocide' which never took place" as some type of justification for morally absolving the Geth from anything they did while simultaneously rebuffing the actual genocide of the Quarians as justification for anything they plan to do.

You decry the Quarians for not taking some peaceful route and freeing their "artificial slaves" but we mustn't forget that at the time the Quarians were on the Citadel Council and AIs were illegal.

Let's be clear, any race in that exact sme position would have reacted identically.  The Geth's sentience was an accident; one paid for with the blood of billions upon billions of Quarians.

Where's your sympathy for the butchered? 

The Geth chose to systematically exterminate the entire Quarian species.  They did not choose to simply destroy the Quarians' capacity to resist them.  This is probably the single most important detail that you overlook, or possibly ignore, when you defend the Geth.

Modifié par Kavadas, 10 septembre 2010 - 04:29 .

[Moiaussi]

Kavadas wrote...

Here's the major flaw of your position, Moiaussi.

You use the "intended 'genocide' which never took place" as some type of justification for morally absolving the Geth from anything they did while simultaneously rebuffing the actual genocide of the Quarians as justification for anything they plan to do.

You decry the Quarians for not taking some peaceful route and freeing their "artificial slaves" but we mustn't forget that at the time the Quarians were on the Citadel Council and AIs were illegal.

Let's be clear, any race in that exact sme position would have reacted identically.  The Geth's sentience was an accident; one paid for with the blood of billions upon billions of Quarians.

Where's your sympathy for the butchered? 

The Geth chose to systematically exterminate the entire Quarian species.  They did not choose to simply destroy the Quarians' capacity to resist them.  This is probably the single most important detail that you overlook, or possibly ignore, when you defend the Geth.

Look, read the bloody lore. The Quarians attempted to eliminate all Geth. What you are saying is that because the Geth survived to defend themselves, they were out of line defending themselves.

Against a race that can potentially design a code that can wipe out every member of your race, what does 'destroy the capacity to resist' really mean?

Destroy one copy of the code? It is data... how do you ensure every copy is destroyed?

That other races might have similarly paniced does not defend the Quarians. The fact that others commit crimes too is not a valid defence.

They also stopped with the Quarians. They did not treat 'all organic life' as enemies, despite Quarian fearmongering. The entire Geth civilization could have chosen to join the Heretics. If they had, Sovereign might well have been victorious. They did not.

Also, the 'Council told us to' arguement is not a defence either. Besides the fact the Council merely kicked their embassy off the Citadel, another nation telling you to kill all gypsies, or all christians, or all muslims, or all blacks, or all of any given race, creed, or ethnicity in no way justifies doing so.

[Spartas Husky]

Shandepared wrote...

Spartas Husky wrote...

Is not?, we "create" another specie, with limited thinking capacity, only for them to evolve on their own, and achieve higher intelligence than "we" wanted.

No, the quarians built machines. They did not create an intelligent species. The geth becoming sentient was an accident, and oversight in the way they were programmed. Once the quarians realized what the geth were becoming they became justifiably afraid and acted to defend themselves against a grave threat.

This would be like every car suddenly gaining a mind so governments and car manufacturers issue a recall and then the cars go a violent rampage.

They built machines, we engineer no sentinent species. Programmed or engineer for a specific purpose, and certain mental capacity, point is they evolved beyond their current programming into a sentinent race.

Like engineering, an organic race with very limited mental capacity, husks who follow orders, but by being together and speaking to one another beyond just being quiet at work, their minds evolved, and achieve sapiency, same thing.

Quarians became afraid, that is true, do I condone what they did, no, do I condone what the geth did in return no. They were both acting on instinct, just like I can't blame the geth for fighting for their freedom, I can't blame the quarians for being terrified about their mistake, and seeking to end the geth before the geth could possible enact "vengeance".... but, there was no fire, only fear, there was no smoking gun, just fear. Quarians acted based on fear, not reasonable conclussions, they did not try to reason with the geth before things got out of hand, they immiditately try to systematically erase them.

Do I blame them for trying to wipe, the geth, no, I blame them for not trying to negotiate first, if the geth showed violent or gengeful behaviour, while reasonable, it is natural for the quarians to defend themselves.

Is like nuclear weapons. We just dont vaporaize all enemies of the US, becuase we 'fear' they might vaporaize us, same deal. A way with the geth and their numbers was a huge risk, diplomacy needed to be at least attempted, they did not, they chose all or nothing.

They lost.

So again, do I blame the quarians for trying to defend themselves, no, do I blame the geth for trying to seek freedom no. But did the quarians tried to negotiate?, even if it was risky, they did not tried.

Is not a matter of "what if", in incredibly, dangerous scenarios, you need to act logically, not emotionally. While acting emotionally is natural, it usually leads to disasters.

ZehnWaters wrote...

Spartas Husky wrote...

Then
they try to seek freedom, and they are the bad guys ....why? because
they kill many for their freedom?, after many of their own were wiped
out when the "command" was sent to "decomittion" all "slaves" before
they could revolt?

Did the Quarians ever even get
the chance to start killing the Geth when they realized they were
sentient?  I don't remember them getting that chance.  They got the
order to kill them, but the Geth realized what was going on and started
killing first.  Both were acting out of fear.  The Quarians had no idea
what the Geth would do upon gaining sentience, their reaction was
understandable.

yes, the quarians, did kill the geth en mass. Tali afirms that.

The order was sent, it is impossible to think that no single geth was "decomissioned" before a powerful resistance could have been put by the geth. The Geth had no weapons, nor they had acess to it, so in the inniital uprising, they, logically were at a disadvantage, and lost huge numbers to the decomission order.

If is white, round and layed by a chicken, is not hard to imagine what the object is, you just know.

If the Slaves had no advance weapons beyond their hacking abilities and simple mining tools, alot of them would have died when the order was sent.

The geth did not started the killing first.

The "decomissioned" order, wasn't an olive branch if you have forgotten, is another word for "destroy every last geth mind" within quarian space. If you dont believe that to be genocide, then we got very different dictionaries, you and I.

The quarians, threw the first punch by sending the decomissioning order, instead of trying to talk, if talks quickly became hostile, then the quarians had all the reason to attack. They chose not to, not out of logical thinking, but out of fear.

Another thing. Is not a question about what is understandable or not, is about what is logical or what is right.
When it comes to tactical thinking, is not about what is right, is about what is logical.

The right thing to do would be not to have sent the decomissioning singla,they didn't do the right thing, they just acted out of fear. ANd when your in charge of nation, or people acting on emotions leads to catastrophes, your mixing civilian thinking, with leadership thinking.


The logical thing, is to force talks, they didn't.

The quarian military acted out of fear, not logically.

We today dont just nuke every enemy we have ecause "they might" destroy us... does it make sense to launch our nukes at our enemies to strike first???

If it doesn't make sense to you, then why doe sit make sense to strike first at a force, that rivals your own?.... just because of the "what if". tactically that is alot to gamble, on what if.

In the end, I dont blame the quarians, for attacking the geth, but the geth, gave no reason for it. Tali says it "what if the geth acted violently out of vengeance"?, same could be applied "we just nuked the planet, I mean, what if russia wanted revenge???"

What if, only applies to small scenarios, when it comes to the big picture that affects more people that can fit in a room, you rarely go by "what if", because "what if" on a large scale, is on the same level, as a possible suicide option for both sides.

[DarthCaine]

[Spartas Husky]

DarthCaine wrote...

for some reason, the dog gives me the creeps..... duno why, the cat feels just right on that picture.... maybe the is the type of dog... maybe one with different ears would be right.

Although maybe the ears are an icon of "long male hair" Id uno, still, that type of dog doesn't feel right .

funny though :innocent:

[casedawgz]

People can say all this in theory, but they would totally follow in the quarians' footsteps if a situation like this occurred in reality. Say tomorrow your microwave becomes self aware. Are you going to try and nurture its intellect and negotiate with it, or are you going to get freaked out and unplug it? Everyone here would do the latter, despite what they may say to the contrary.

[Kronner]

Quarians have no chance of ever beating the geth. Peace is far better option for them. If they are able to overcome their prejudice, they could go back to their homeworld without any war. Geth do not use the planet anyways, they actually take care of it. Like Legion said, quarians attacked 100% of the time when they believed victory was possible. If there is no peace option, I am gonna support geth for sure.

Modifié par Kronner, 10 septembre 2010 - 09:22 .

[Kavadas]

Moiaussi wrote...

Look, read the bloody lore. The Quarians attempted to eliminate all Geth. What you are saying is that because the Geth survived to defend themselves, they were out of line defending themselves.

No, but the Geth actively chose extermination of an entire race of people over simply defending themselves.  At some point in the war the tide turned and victory for the Geth was inevitable.  Did they relent?  Did they allow the Quarians to retreat off of their worlds?  Did they give any quarter?

No, they continued the systematic extermination of the entire Quarian species.  They chose extermination, genocide, et cetera, over simply repulsing the Quarians and defending themselves.

You understand the distinction I'm making here, don't you?  That genocide isn't (thankfully) necessary to prosecute and win a war?

Against a race that can potentially design a code that can wipe out every member of your race, what does 'destroy the capacity to resist' really mean?

Destroy one copy of the code? It is data... how do you ensure every copy is destroyed?

You're confused.  When I say "capactity to resist" I mean the Quarians' capacity to prosecute a war materielly.  Throughout human civilization, and Mass Effect's fictional galactic history, it's far more common to simply diminish an enemy's war capacity then it is to systematically exterminate entire civilizations.

Genocide is hard work.  It's harder than winning a war because it requires an incredible amount of resources to prosecute genocide after victory conditions are achieved.

The point I'm making, and that you absolutely will not acknowledge as a Geth apologetist, is that at some point the Geth could have safely abandoned their prosecution of the war without more needless bloodshed; they chose to be butchers.

They built concensus and that concensus was nothing less than whole sale extermination of an entire civilization's population.

But hey, keep defending their vacuous morality!

Rest of your posting isn't really worth responding to, TBH.

Anyways, this my last post on the subject.  My interest in continuing this discussion has evaporated.

Modifié par Kavadas, 10 septembre 2010 - 12:29 .

[Bruddajakka]

Peace. Because the last thing we need is to have the Quarrian's, and the Geth beating the hell out of each other when the Reapers come.

[Breakdown Boy]

Make love not war man!!! I'm with A. Quib-Quib!!!

[ZehnWaters]

Another thing people (and Geth) keep getting stuck on is the idea that the Quarians had the Geths as 'slaves'. They never had the Geth as slaves (at least, not on purpose) when they built them they weren't sentient. They weren't any more enslaved than our computers are 'enslaved'. Once they realized they had become sentient they *should* have sat down and had a discussion; that would have been logical (I never said it was *logical* to try to kill them, just *understandable*).

[Moiaussi]

[quote]Kavadas wrote...

No, but the Geth actively chose extermination of an entire race of people over simply defending themselves.  At some point in the war the tide turned and victory for the Geth was inevitable.  Did they relent?  Did they allow the Quarians to retreat off of their worlds?  Did they give any quarter?[/quote]

No, they continued the systematic extermination of the entire Quarian species.  They chose extermination, genocide, et cetera, over simply repulsing the Quarians and defending themselves.

You understand the distinction I'm making here, don't you?  That genocide isn't (thankfully) necessary to prosecute and win a war?[/quote]

Actually, we don't know. There is no way the Quarians had enough ships to get everyone off world and there is no indication in anything said in Codex or game that the Quarians ever stopped firing.

We also have no record of the war. We don't know the lengths the Quarians went to, the degree to which they considered collateral damage acceptable, etc. We do know that neither side gave quarter. The Quarians never really accepted the Geth as sentient, even centuries after the war.

[quote]You're confused.  When I say "capactity to resist" I mean the Quarians' capacity to prosecute a war materielly.  Throughout human civilization, and Mass Effect's fictional galactic history, it's far more common to simply diminish an enemy's war capacity then it is to systematically exterminate entire civilizations.

Genocide is hard work.  It's harder than winning a war because it requires an incredible amount of resources to prosecute genocide after victory conditions are achieved.[/quote]

You are thinking of genocide in a world where there are no tailored viruses capable of wiping out entire species cleanly and where you can tell who is holding the guns, or at least any given gun has a very limited killing capacity.

The Geth were up against an opponent capable of designing a very easily concielable WMD and not just willing to use it, but who actually attempted to use it. Even the Salarians didn't go that far against the Krogan. The genophage severely reduced Krogan reproductive levels, but not to a fatal degree. The Quarian attempt was meant to be 100% fatal to all Geth.

They also never acknowledged the Geth as sentient or 'alive' even long after the Geth drove them off world, let alone during the war. That makes peace negotiations a lot harder.

[quote]The point I'm making, and that you absolutely will not acknowledge as a Geth apologetist, is that at some point the Geth could have safely abandoned their prosecution of the war without more needless bloodshed; they chose to be butchers.[/quote]

You don't know that it wasn't neccessary. You also don't seem to comprehend the threat level or issues the Geth faced. I do agree that the Geth should have tried negotiation, but again, when those you  negotiate with consider you non-sentient and are unwilling to negotiate or cease fighting even at gunpoint, the rules are not the same.

By the way, it would be interesting if we do end up going to Geth space and find that there are Quarian survivors there, Quarian 'vichy' who did surrender. Not holding my breath on that one, but it is possible that the 'genocide' wasn't complete. It is not like the fleeing Quarians could go back to check for survivors.

[quote]They built concensus and that concensus was nothing less than whole sale extermination of an entire civilization's population.[/quote]

You are then conceding their sentience?

[quote]But hey, keep defending their vacuous morality!

Rest of your posting isn't really worth responding to, TBH.

Anyways, this my last post on the subject.  My interest in continuing this discussion has evaporated.

[/quote]

So you would condemn the Geth without discussion or negotiation beyond a couple posts? And you claim the higher morality?

[ZehnWaters]

Shandepared wrote...

ZehnWaters wrote...

Once they realized they had become sentient they *should* have sat down and had a discussion; that would have been logical (I never said it was *logical* to try to kill them, just *understandable*).

That's easy for you to say. You have the benefit of hindsight and it isn't YOUR civilization in danger, it's not YOUR wife, YOUR children, YOUR mother, YOUR friends, YOUR country, or YOUR species that might be annihilated if you don't ACT RIGHT NOW. So naturally you suggest a slow and thoughtful approach.

Oh, make no mistake, I'm on the side of the Quarians.  I just said it was *logical* and is what they *should* have done.  It's not what I (or most others) *would* have done.

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

ZehnWaters wrote...

Once they realized they had become sentient they *should* have sat down and had a discussion; that would have been logical (I never said it was *logical* to try to kill them, just *understandable*).

That's easy for you to say. You have the benefit of hindsight and it isn't YOUR civilization in danger, it's not YOUR wife, YOUR children, YOUR mother, YOUR friends, YOUR country, or YOUR species that might be annihilated if you don't ACT RIGHT NOW. So naturally you suggest a slow and thoughtful approach.

Are you still refusing to accept the concept of MAD is just as logical in ME as anywhere else? You still on this 'attack everyone and everything in sight, regardless of risks or costs, just in case' kick?

Better act RIGHT NOW, and declare war on all other nuclear powers then!

[inversevideo]

I'm feeling Deja Vu, Bhelen or Harrowmont?



I would have to go with Admiral Xen. Though there are also compelling reasons to back Korliss.

It all depends on the outcome of your actions during Legion's loyalty quest.



Xen does not want to retake the 'homeworld' at the expense of possibly getting into a space or ground war that cannot be won. Nor does Xen favor doing nothing to retake their planet. Xen would instead retake control of the Geth-runtimes to serve the Quarians. This is a course of action that negates any 'rights' the Geth have, as sentient beings, to self determination, but it might be a viable course for the Quarians.



On the other hand, if the 'Heretics' are re-written, to accept the Geth point of view (Legion's people), and respect all life, then Admiral Korliss may have the better plan. IF Korliss can convince the Geth to allow the Quarians to resettle their homeworld and live in peace, then there need not be any war, and both sides may gain by becoming strategic partners if not allies.

[ZehnWaters]

Moiaussi wrote...

]It is not like the fleeing Quarians could go back to check for survivors.

Exactly.

You are then conceding their sentience?

This was never in question.

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

You also don't seem to comprehend the threat level or issues the quarians faced.

I do, hence the arguement that MAD applied.

I don't think you understand how MAD works.

Do you? The Geth represented a major threat by way of numbers and integration into society. The Quarians represented a threat by way of the kill code (and ability to write same), and by way of potential Council support (the Geth couldn't have known for certain that the Council wouldn't intervene).

When you pull the trigger on an WMD, you toss MAD aside and force the other party's hand.

I say
probably because for all we know Legion is full of crap and the geth
would have just bided their time and then attacked when their position
was even stronger.

And I repeat my question regarding RL. The Soviet Union still has considerable nuclear capacity. Should the US launch first 'just in case?' Should Russia launch first 'just in case some US government might listen to your logic someday?

Thankfully, you are not in charge.

[Cheese Elemental]

Shandepared wrote...

ZehnWaters wrote...

Once they realized they had become sentient they *should* have sat down and had a discussion; that would have been logical (I never said it was *logical* to try to kill them, just *understandable*).

That's easy for you to say. You have the benefit of hindsight and it isn't YOUR civilization in danger, it's not YOUR wife, YOUR children, YOUR mother, YOUR friends, YOUR country, or YOUR species that might be annihilated if you don't ACT RIGHT NOW. So naturally you suggest a slow and thoughtful approach.

They weren't in clear and present danger. The quarians were the aggressors, and should have negotiated rather than attempt to eliminate the geth. Their reaction was understandable, but it wasn't the right one.