281 réponses à ce sujet

[Arijharn]

I can buy that Cerberus has perhaps done 'terrorist' activities, but so far no activities attributed to them have been terrorism.



This isn't me not buying the 'lore,' this is me buying the standard definition of terrorism as defined by the Oxford English dictionary or from FBI or US Military.

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

The one terrorist act I can think of in relation to Cerberus is the attempt to hijack a ship and steal the antimatter onboard.

If I recall correctly that was a military vessel, and if so I'm pretty damn sure that it can't be inferred as a terrorist attack for that reason. If it was say a luxury cruise liner and Cerberus issued commands such as 'Free Illusive Man from prison or we'll detonate this over Canada!' then that would be Terrorism.

[Saremei]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
The one terrorist act I can think of in relation to Cerberus is the attempt to hijack a ship and steal the antimatter onboard.

If you call failed robbery terrorism, the word has no real meaning.

Well considering that Cerberus hasn't blown up a bus of Asari children, the actual label of terrorism fails as well.  Torture and forced experimentation are not terrorist acts. 

Terrorism is not inflicted upon the individuals, it is instead inflicted upon the masses.

Modifié par Saremei, 26 octobre 2010 - 12:04 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...
The one terrorist act I can think of in relation to Cerberus is the attempt to hijack a ship and steal the antimatter onboard.

If you call failed robbery terrorism, the word has no real meaning.

So... you're going to ignore the hijacking part and focus on the attempted theft?  

(Never mind that stealing antimatter would have the same affect on the public as someone stealing a nuclear device would have in real life if the theft hit the media (not even using it, just the public knowing that it's out there).) 

Although, someone else says it was a miltary vessel, which might take the hijacking back out of the definition of terrorism if that is in fact the case.  Not sure, though... would the bombing of the USS Cole count as terrorism?  (Men in civilian clothes using a small boat full of explosives to attack a destroyer during peacetime in a neutral port.)

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 26 octobre 2010 - 12:43 .

[Arijharn]

Regards to the USS Cole bombing and subsequent investigation as shown on Wikipedia (I didn't bother searching for a more 'official' report because I doubt one is available for public scrutiny)

Wikipedia wrote...

President Bill Clinton declared, "If, as it now appears, this was an act of terrorism, it was a despicable and cowardly act. We will find out who was responsible and hold them accountable". Some critics have pointed out that, under U.S. law, an attack against a military target does not meet the legal definition of terrorism[25] (see: 22 USC § 2656f(d)(2)).

The footnote [25] links too: http://fs.huntingdon...rorismNotes.htm

and, if you're really keen, the USC is here: http://www4.law.corn...-f000-.html#d_2

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Plenty of people have an open remorse for the Paragon line at the Collector Base. I happen to be bewildered by the Renegade.


What rule, exactly, are we throwing out the window?


Is this about working/excavating/researching on what could be called a burial site/mass grave? That's a Citadel rule, but the victims are already dead. That's hardly a huge rule or moral quandry.

Is it committing genocide of the Collector race? We do that regardless (score one for the good guys!), and I doubt anyone is going to argue against it as unjust or wrong to do.

Is it collecting/utilizing Reaper technology? We have, as a galaxy, already embraced a multi-species competition to steal away as much of Sovereign for our own advantages as possible. The Turians stole away the Thannix, for example. Reaper tech, in and of itself, is not a crime, or if it is it's one that has paid handsome dividends for the benefit of the galaxy.

Is it giving technology to Cerberus? We've been doing that all game, for everything from a primary income source to sharing tech so we can reap the benefits as well to gathering top-of-the-line ship technologies onto a Cerberus vessel when the organization would gain the blueprints and knowledge if they lacked it already. The Base is a matter of degree, not intent.

Is it the idea of taking and studying someone own tech to use against them? We, the Alliance, the Council, everyone has done this so many times: even heat sinks are a Geth innovation we now use against them as well. This was even a minor sidequest in ME1, about studying a dead marine's body, and you could have both Paragon or Renegade persuasion to keep thebody for study. (And, in bugged hidden dialogue, new weapons were even developped.) 



What great, horrific rule is keeping the base breaking that Shepard has not already done?

To sum it up, morality, ethics. The complex answer, all of what you stated basically.
It's more of a symbolic message for some kind of renegade manifest than something related to the situation. He basically said he'll do everything possible to stop the reapers. Give unlimited power to cerberus, use reaper technology on them if possible, study what the colonists have become, etc.

[OBakaSama]

I personally interpret that line as meaning Shepard is acting in a way which is contrary to his/her usual code of personal conduct, as such I've never had a problem with that line.

If we fashion the additional scenario of considering the Paragon dialogue in the final conversation with TIM, Shepard says something like "I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to defeat the Reapers." That is, of course, a (counterfactual) meta-gaming consideration.

[Jebel Krong]

as a renegade spctre (but a non-racist, sensible one) I choose which rules i want to follow.