343 réponses à ce sujet

[Arijharn]

Honestly, I think he partly wasn't thinking because he was too busy trying to resume his relationship with Kahlee :S I shouldn't think that because Anderson is supposed to be a bad ass, but he did not think this through, that much is obvious...

[Paladin Latham]

Cerberus is lame and evil, they exibit classic evil villian tropes. Whatever their goals, Anderson was justified in everything he did.

[Zulu_DFA]

Arijharn wrote...

Honestly, I think he partly wasn't thinking because he was too busy trying to resume his relationship with Kahlee :S I shouldn't think that because Anderson is supposed to be a bad ass, but he did not think this through, that much is obvious...

Yeah, Kahlee is sort of femme fatale. First she brought Grayson to disaster, now Anderson.

It's pretty obvious, though, that this particular jumping to hasty decision has been made easy by Anderson's being sick with the Alliance long enough. Which does not excuse in the slightest his "inappropriate diplomatic relations" with our Turian counterparts.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 30 septembre 2010 - 11:07 .

[fongiel24]

Paladin Latham wrote...

Cerberus is lame and evil, they exibit classic evil villian tropes. Whatever their goals, Anderson was justified in everything he did.

Except that what Anderson did to try and take out Cerberus ended up being ineffectual since he was unable to strike a mortal blow and the collateral damage of his actions created a "political sh*tstorm" of such proportions that it will have the turian, Alliance, and possibly other Council diplomatic corps handing out shovels from now until hell freezes over just to avoid a war.

Modifié par fongiel24, 30 septembre 2010 - 11:13 .

[Mox Ruuga]

It will be interesting to see if Drew and the other writers thought this through, or if Anderson's hero karma will simply shine through and this plot development acts as a deus ex machina to remove Cerberus from the picture without the realistic consequences people have already listed here.

[_purifico_]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

_purifico_ wrote...

jbblue05 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I wonder how many of the Cerberus apologists either didn't play ME1 or skipped a certain set of the UNC missions...

Your point?

How many Cerberus haters believe the first thing they hear about Cerberus and don't look deeper into the story?

Enlighten me, please =) What IS the deeper story behind Cerberus and TIM? Because I obviously don't understand it, unlike you.

http://social.biowar...5/index/1600890

Happy enlightennings!

That is an interesting theory, I give you that. However there is no evidence to it, just speculations. Also, if you think that the fact that Cerberus is still part of the Alliance and "looks out" for humanity justifies the atrocities it commits on daily basis I'm feeling very sorry for your immortal soul.

Cerberus is basicly a space **** party and TIM is a space Hitler. One of their basic beliefs (not unlike Cerberus') was the thought that the german nation was badly mistreated after they started WWI. Their other belief (also not unlike Cerberus') was that german nation must dominate over all others. Does this ring a bell?
I don't even know why I am telling you this because i'm sure you know all of this already. However if you know this and are still convinced that the fate of Cerberus is something to ponder then there is nothing to talk about. You see my point, I see yours, we are just two very different people who do things differently. Good day to you, sir, and all you fellow space ****s.

Edit: Wow... N A Z I is censored. No words. I just have no words...

Modifié par _purifico_, 30 septembre 2010 - 11:24 .

[Barquiel]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Here's my take on it:

No matter how justified Anderson thought his actions were, there will be a big political backlash. As a comparison: imagine that your country's representative at the UN were responsible for allowing a neighbouring superpower military operations in your country, including the arrest and possible shooting of high-ranking officials and politicians, including but not limited to those of an extremist political movement.

 

That depends!

Imagine chancellor Adenauer asks Harry Truman to arrest some former NDSAP officials who want to overthrow Germany's elected government.  In order to do so, they infiltrated political parties, the Bundeswehr, Bundesgrenzschutz...He can't ask his own forces.

betrayal?

Modifié par Barquiel, 30 septembre 2010 - 11:40 .

[GodWood]

Mox Ruuga wrote...
It will be interesting to see if Drew and the other writers thought this through, or if Anderson's hero karma will simply shine through and this plot development acts as a deus ex machina to remove Cerberus from the picture without the realistic consequences people have already listed here.

I do suspect this will be the case.
But I hope its not..

[Mox Ruuga]

Barquiel wrote...

That depends!

Imagine chancellor Adenauer asks Harry Truman to arrest some former NDSAP officials who want to overthrow Germany's elected government.  In order to do so, they infiltrated political parties, the Bundeswehr, Bundesgrenzschutz...He can't ask his own forces.

betrayal?

Not a good comparison.

The political dynamics between the Hierarchy and the Alliance are completely different.

It would be more like Adenauer asking Khruschev or the East German government in to do the purge.

Which would be treason, yes.

[Mox Ruuga]

GodWood wrote...

Mox Ruuga wrote...
It will be interesting to see if Drew and the other writers thought this through, or if Anderson's hero karma will simply shine through and this plot development acts as a deus ex machina to remove Cerberus from the picture without the realistic consequences people have already listed here.

I do suspect this will be the case.
But I hope its not..

Yeah. Unfortunately, given the way a certain Turian was air quoting in ME2 about certain apocalyptic fleet of AI dreadnoughts, I don't expect much realism here.

[Barquiel]

Well, the relations between humans and turians are not bad if Shep saved the council (new compensation payments).
Do you think it would be better if Anderson would have asked the asari government or the salarians?
I have not the faintest idea

[Zulu_DFA]

_purifico_ wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

_purifico_ wrote...

jbblue05 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I wonder how many of the Cerberus apologists either didn't play ME1 or skipped a certain set of the UNC missions...

Your point?

How many Cerberus haters believe the first thing they hear about Cerberus and don't look deeper into the story?

Enlighten me, please =) What IS the deeper story behind Cerberus and TIM? Because I obviously don't understand it, unlike you.

http://social.biowar...5/index/1600890

Happy enlightennings!

That is an interesting theory, I give you that. However there is no evidence to it, just speculations. Also, if you think that the fact that Cerberus is still part of the Alliance and "looks out" for humanity justifies the atrocities it commits on daily basis I'm feeling very sorry for your immortal soul.

Cerberus is basicly a space **** party and TIM is a space Hitler. One of their basic beliefs (not unlike Cerberus') was the thought that the german nation was badly mistreated after they started WWI. Their other belief (also not unlike Cerberus') was that german nation must dominate over all others. Does this ring a bell?
I don't even know why I am telling you this because i'm sure you know all of this already. However if you know this and are still convinced that the fate of Cerberus is something to ponder then there is nothing to talk about. You see my point, I see yours, we are just two very different people who do things differently. Good day to you, sir, and all you fellow space ****s.

Edit: Wow... N A Z I is censored. No words. I just have no words...

First, I don't think I have an immortal soul.

Secondly, bringing up this space Hitler thing was pointless, because anyone could be it, even the Rachni queen.

And lastly, on topic now, I never suggested that Cerberus' (former) affiliation with the Alliance makes them any better. It only means that the Alliance is (maybe formerly, but nothing suggests that, and Anderson doesn't think that) just as bad.

Maybe Anderson did realize that, for his whole life, he'd been working for the bad guys. Well, good for him, but it doesn't cancel the fact that he betrayed these bad Alliance guys. Udina, Hackett, the "brass", "private contributors" to Cerberus, some committee chairmen that must be taken hostage before they start doing their job, you call it. They'd been all on a grand power trip, and messing up Cerberus was about the last thing they wanted, rogue or not. Anderson rocked the boat, despite the fact that he'd been dished his share of spoils for previously making it sail. Praise him as much as you want, but he'll be a traitor until the Alliance went down in flames, and after that he'd be a "traitor to the Alliance". But with a bottle of vodka he'll manage to live with that, I suppose.

Barquiel wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Here's my take on it:

No matter how justified Anderson thought his actions were, there will be a big political backlash. As a comparison: imagine that your country's representative at the UN were responsible for allowing a neighbouring superpower military operations in your country, including the arrest and possible shooting of high-ranking officials and politicians, including but not limited to those of an extremist political movement.

 

That depends!

Imagine chancellor Adenauer asks Harry Truman to arrest some former NDSAP officials who want to overthrow Germany's elected government.  In order to do so, they infiltrated political parties, the Bundeswehr, Bundesgrenzschutz...He can't ask his own forces.

betrayal?

Not exactly, because as a conquered nation after the WWII Germany wasn't exercising much sovereignty, and chancellor Adenauer was where he was because the US was OK with that in the first place. Even now, the nations that lost WWII, and the Cold War have constitutions that declare the so called "international law" to have prevalence in their national legal systems. Unlike the United States, that don't even recognize "international law" as applicable to US citizens.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 30 septembre 2010 - 12:03 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

One cannot be a traitor against evil.

[GodWood]

Modifié par GodWood, 30 septembre 2010 - 01:20 .

[Whatever42]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

One cannot be a traitor against evil.

When the Reapers are harvesting Earth, we should revisit this question.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
Because even if you can't slap high treason on him legally or morally, Anderson is still political traitor to the Alliance. Compare him to Kasumi's boyfriend. That guy wasn't such an honored officer in the Alliance as Anderson, but still chose to die rather than divulge its dirty secrets.

Exposing the wrong-doing of your government is not treason.

No?

Maybe in your country...

But in the Systems Alliance it causes death "of natural causes".

That doesn't make it treason, that makes it something that someone will kill you for. 

It's not treason unless you're convicted of treason.  Treason has a legal definition, in law, and unless you're convicted of treason, you're not a traitor. 

Oh my, have you even read the what you quoted?

All right, I repeat. Despite the fact, that legally and in some moral systems Anderson may remain clean, he is still a traitor to the political entity called the Systems Alliance. You need to wake up and understand, in the world of big politics where Anderson virtually exists, "fighting the good fight" is almost always the worst (& morally too) thing to do. And, when it comes to big politics, all things "legal" have bearing only limited to PR.

I did read it.

That is the same kind of thinking that lets governments in the real world self-justify torture and abuse on a daily basis.  It's the same kind of thinking that gave us waterboarding and extraordinary rendition.  It looks good in fiction, when TIM or Jack Bower are "saving the world", but it's a load of crap in the real world, and ends up doing far more harm than any good it supposedly accomplishes.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 30 septembre 2010 - 01:48 .

[Whatever42]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

That is the same kind of thinking that lets governments in the real world self-justify torture and abuse on a daily basis.  It's the same kind of thinking that gave us waterboarding and extraordinary rendition.  It looks good in fiction, when TIM or Jack Bower are "saving the world", but it's a load of crap in the real world, and ends up doing far more harm than any good it supposedly accomplishes.

No Cerberus = no reborn Shepard = continuing collector raids = millions of more deaths = new Reaper in galaxy = one giant leap towards extinction of all advanced life in the galaxy. This is undeniable. We just played that game.

If Anderson would have done this only a year earlier, he would have been responsibles for at least millions, probably billions or even trillions of deaths. Yes, that's "more harm than good" /sarcasm. Who knows what the future ramifications will be? If Anderson was ignorant of the Reapers, you may have a point. However, he wasn't ignorant, he simply didn't care.

Of course, the alliance is ignorant and will think he is a traitor for other discussed reasons. However, we should all recognize that Anderson is now the enemy, if just through his pure selfish stupidity.

[Killjoy Cutter]

"The enemy of Cerberus is the enemy of humanity."



Sure, whatever. This thread is making me physically ill. This kind of thinking takes place in thereal world, and has real-world impact, and real people have to live with the consequences.

[Killjoy Cutter]

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. "
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

[Mox Ruuga]

"Those who 'abjure' violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf."

- George Orwell, Notes on Nationalism

[GodWood]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Sure, whatever. This thread is making me physically ill.

Umm, why?

[Killjoy Cutter]

Mox Ruuga wrote...

"Those who 'abjure' violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf."

- George Orwell, Notes on Nationalism

Orwell wasn't talking about torture, using people as guinea pigs without their consent, assassinating people to cover your crimes, etc.  Orwell spent most of his life trying to fight, by actions or by the written word, the kinds of regimes that do the things that people are trying to justify in this thread. 

Orwell is talking about war, and self-defense.  He's talking about people who argue against all use of force, from the safety provided by the willingness to use force in defense.

[Killjoy Cutter]

GodWood wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
Sure, whatever. This thread is making me physically ill.

Umm, why?

You cut the answer to your question in quoting my post.   Go back and read it again.

[Asheer_Khan]

I wonder if any pro cerberus fanatic can answer me at simple question...



What difference is between heads of Teltin facility and Mengele and his "medical" team from Aushwitz (taking aside fact that Himmler wasn't clever in off to call Aushwitz rogue facility as tim do with Pragia) ?