310 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

And tell the mothers of any Asari or Salarians who would have died trying to save them what? Taking so long to intervene was a bad decision, but don't pretend war is without cost.

The Council has never tried to save anybody but itself.

How many lives is saving someone else worth? That is a serious question, not rhetorical.

[CroGamer002]

Short answer?

No.

Long answer?

No, they're not.

[STG]

Saphra Deden wrote...

The Council are friendly because it benefits them but if it is us or them they'll save themselves. That goes for every other species out there.

Even with Destiny Ascension saved I still can't see them sending help to earth in ME3 tbh.

[Wulfram]

Saphra Deden wrote...

 The Council continually refusing to use their fleets to protect their allies undermines their control in the long run. It might be what allowed humanity to take over in the event of the Council's death.

How does 2 incidents in 2000 years become "continual"?

[Pwener2313]

Kill the council = Problem solved

[I will kill you both]

kill everybody = problem (s) solved by that reasoning...

[STG]

“Death solves all problems - no man, no problem.” - Stalin

;P

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

That is a serious question and also a complicated one.

What are you getting out of it? As Zulu has said the Council lending its weight keeps it legitimate. Empires are either expanding or declining. The Council continually refusing to use their fleets to protect their allies undermines their control in the long run. It might be what allowed humanity to take over in the event of the Council's death.

Nobody liked the Council enough to complain.

I don't hold it against the Council, necessarily, that they are self interested.

However I think we should remember that so we don't fall for their propaganda. Ashley Williams has it right. The Council are friendly because it benefits them but if it is us or them they'll save themselves. That goes for every other species out there.

That is the reason that humanity must remain strong and self sufficient. We shouldn't turn away allies, but we should not rely on them.

There is a word in there which does not apply. "Allies." There seems to be this mistaken impression among many that being an associate race is equivalent to being an ally. If you read the codex, all it really means is those races have a right to embassies, i.e. to formal diplomatic relations. It would be like calling Libya or North Korea 'allies' because we had an embassy there, or if you want a less controvertial country, China. We have embassies with every country on the planet (although Canada has shut down its Libyan embassy in protest atm) and there is UN recognition too. That doesn't make those countries allied.

Actual alliances are things that should never be entered into lightly, since they tend to get called upon.

That said, there are often very good reasons for intervention in some circumstances.... everything from goodwill to increased stability. That doesn't always make it wise. Russia's occupation of Afghanistan started as a request from Afghanistan, and the mission went bad. The US has likewise attempted to prop up some questionable regimes over the course of its history. Then there have been the more successful attempts.... such as the Balkans (which incidentally became trouble again when Russia pulled out), or the obvious examples of WWI and WWII.

The point is that it is never 'free' and it is always easy to ask others to lay down their lives and too easy to forget that they would have to, and to take for granted the times that they are willing to do so or the sacrifices made to do so.

[Wulfram]

Saphra Deden wrote...

They are associate races of the Council. In a sense they are more than allies. They are almost member states. What makes the Council really ****ty is that they restrict the military capacity of associate races but do not offer their own support as compensation.

The whole thing is a scam anyway.

Only Dreadnought building is limited, and Dreadnoughts are only really practical for the sort of full scale war which the council has effectively abolished.  For colonial defence against pirates raiders and whatnot, you're much better off with Frigates and Cruisers.

Plus, anyone who really wants to be a full council member and can't must suck, if humanity can get there in 30 years.

[Wulfram]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Only Dreadnought building is limited...

Those are what give a fleet its teeth. Without them your fleet isn't very impressive.

It's fine for anything except perhaps trying to take on the council races themselves.

Plus, humanity's experience makes it clear that if you build up to your limit and throw your weight around a bit, council membership isn't far off.

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

There is a word in there which does not apply. "Allies."

They are associate races of the Council. In a sense they are more than allies. They are almost member states. What makes the Council really ****ty is that they restrict the military capacity of associate races but do not offer their own support as compensation.

The whole thing is a scam anyway.

Semantics. The Council doesn't pretend they are allies. The Codex doesn't pretend they are allies. The UN only very loosely pretends members are allies. As for the restrictions on military capacity, how is that any different than the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which essentially states 'we can trust each other, cause we know you (and because you have the bomb already, meaning we have no choice), but don't anyone else dare develop or build them!' ?

There are also some similarities to the cuban missile crisis.

And keep in mind that the primary penalty of non-complance in the Council is loss of status. It doesn't mean that someone building too many DN's automaticly provokes war (for similar reasons to why countries such  as India or Pakistan didn't provoke war by becoming nuclear powers)

[Barquiel]

The purpose of the Treaty of Farixen is to prevent an arms race between Turians, Asari and Salarians...nothing more. Volus, Hanar and Elcor are the most powerful non-council races.

- Volus have no military forces of their own
- We know the Hanar have no dreadnoughts
- the Elcor military is described as small, I doubt they operate any dreadnoughts
The alliance could have built more dreadnought too. The council doesn't oppress the other races here.

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...
 As for the restrictions on military capacity, how is that any different than the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which essentially states 'we can trust each other, cause we know you (and because you have the bomb already, meaning we have no choice), but don't anyone else dare develop or build them!' ?

The United States has lent its support to said countries numerous times. The only ones it doesn't are countries that are actively hostile to the US.

"Actively hostile' defined as including 'pro communist,' irrespective of the country's politics otherwise. Don't tell me that the US has intervened in every crisis in the world since its inception. They only entered WWI due to attacks on US shipping and WWII due to Pearl.

Note I am not saying that to condemn the US. As you say, the US has done a lot of good in the world too. I am just pointing out that intervention should never be expected or taken for granted. It tends to have large economic costs to the country intervening. This is even more so now that we are not dealing with the post war situation when Europe was bombed out and Asia wasn't yet industrialized, meaning North America was essentially producing for the world, meaning jobs for everyone and great prosperity. We have gotten to a point in history where individual combat deaths are newsworthy and considered controvertial.

[Moiaussi]

Barquiel wrote...

The purpose of the Treaty of Farixen is to prevent an arms race between Turians, Asari and Salarians...nothing more. Volus, Hanar and Elcor are the most powerful non-council races.

- Volus have no military forces of their own
- We know the Hanar have no dreadnoughts
- the Elcor military is described as small, I doubt they operate any dreadnoughts
The alliance could have built more dreadnought too. The council doesn't oppress the other races here.

Actually the treaty does have an 'other races' category, which could be seen as oppressive. As of ME1, the Alliance didn't have all the DN's it was allowed under treaty though, so it is questionable just how oppressive the treaty really is rather than negotiated as a convenient scapegoat for politicians to feed to their respective society's warhawks. That includes DN's the Alliance had under planning or under construction btw.

It is not clear what the situation is like as of ME2. It is implied that the losses from the Citadel have not yet been replaced. If the DA goes down the Asari hand their responsibilites over to the Turians, effectively breaking the treaty.

[Biotic_Warlock]

Vigil in ME1 mentioned sovereign influencing the minds of people to cover it's existance... well, i think they 'may' have gotten to the council.

Why would they be 'so' against taking the possibility that the reapers exist.
If they wanted logical solutions they would 'consider' the reapers as a 'possible' thead.

[gwanko vera]

but, biotic_warlock, if they acknowledge that the Reaper threat might actually exist then it would cause a panic in the galactic community. that said if the council had any foresight, they would set an increase in the military might of all council races and encourage a build up from the "allied" races. my personal idea would be a secret colony at the edge of know space, with one of the quantum communicators in one of the ships. that way they could get news from the citadel and hopefully stay secret till after a the Reaper invasion is over, or at the very least be a secret research planet for the council.

[88mphSlayer]

there is no point to using the council in the Mass Effect universe, they might not have come off so obviously nefarious like Cerberus but they're far more of a threat to galactic survival than any secret organization could ever possibly be, and really they're a bad government in general, it's pretty obvious even in Mass Effect 1 that the council - by concentrating power - really governs nothing

even if you're paragon there's no reason not to discard the council as soon as possible

[Ramirez Wolfen]

They really aren't "good," but not "bad" either. But you must admit that the asari councilor is sexy!

[DPSSOC]

Wulfram wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

 The Council continually refusing to use their fleets to protect their allies undermines their control in the long run. It might be what allowed humanity to take over in the event of the Council's death.

How does 2 incidents in 2000 years become "continual"?

I think Saphra was referring to instances like pirate raids in the Attican Traverse and Skyllian Verge.  For example the Council has done nothing against the Batarian attacks on human colonies (and I somehow doubt we're the only ones they pick on), not even making a symbolic gesture.  They also didn't step in when the Krogan started pushing until an Asari world was taken (or that's the impression I got from the Codex could just be that was the straw that broke the camel's back).  These are the kind of disputes the Council should be stepping in to mediate (anything involving more than 1 species), beause they've stipped associates of the ability to be pro-active against them.

Barquiel wrote...

The purpose of the Treaty of Farixen is to prevent an arms race between Turians, Asari and Salarians...nothing more.

 
I'd have to disagree because if that were the only reason for it it wouldn't include associate races, just the big 3.  The treaty stands to prevent any associate race from being able to challenge that Council races; simple as that.  This was most likely in response to the Krogan Rebellions; with the treaty, long before anyone has the capacity to pose the threat the Krogan did the Council can easily crush them with a combined fleet of 11 Dreadnoughts to every 1.

[Moiaussi]

DPSSOC wrote...

I think Saphra was referring to instances like pirate raids in the Attican Traverse and Skyllian Verge.  For example the Council has done nothing against the Batarian attacks on human colonies (and I somehow doubt we're the only ones they pick on), not even making a symbolic gesture.  They also didn't step in when the Krogan started pushing until an Asari world was taken (or that's the impression I got from the Codex could just be that was the straw that broke the camel's back).  These are the kind of disputes the Council should be stepping in to mediate (anything involving more than 1 species), beause they've stipped associates of the ability to be pro-active against them.

How far outside their own borders should a city, nation or empire be reasonably expected to police? To me, the Council position is simple. If other races wish to expand, they can man up and police their own colonies. The other races, humanity included, seem to expect to be allowed to settle within council protection, the equivalent of Mexico asking politely not only to annex Nevada or New Mexico, but to expect the US to continue to police said territories in addition. Expansionism isn't something the Council owes anyone.

The Humans or Volus or Elcor or even the Quarians could just head away from Council space and settle there, but that means paying the costs in ships, manpower, etc to do so themselves instead of acting like the Council owes them such duties.

The Alliance is barely into space, yet they want more territory. Alliance colonies have small populations, less than those of any given major Earth city. The worlds aren't even surveyed properly yet. There shouldn't be minerals for the Normandy to tag. That work should have been done before colonies were even landed. And yet the Alliance whines for more.

Meanwhile their military is undermanned compared to other major powers and they haven't even built all the ships they are allowed to under treaty.

Not saying that an agressive approach is neccessarily a bad thing, just putting it all in perspective.

I'd have to disagree because if that were the only reason for it it wouldn't include associate races, just the big 3.  The treaty stands to prevent any associate race from being able to challenge that Council races; simple as that.  This was most likely in response to the Krogan Rebellions; with the treaty, long before anyone has the capacity to pose the threat the Krogan did the Council can easily crush them with a combined fleet of 11 Dreadnoughts to every 1.

1) Look up the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that exists today in RL.

2) That might be a relevant limit if the Alliance was at the limit. They aren't and hadn't even made plans to build to the limit as of ME1. As of ME2, they are still replacing losses from the Citadel War. How can something be considered oppressive it if is more generous than the parties it covers actually want or need? And frankly, why should the Council advocate other empires have equal or even anywhere near equal military power? How would that be even remotely in their best interests in peacetime? Post Citadel War, all bets there should have been off, but again, how many DN's can the other 'oppressed' empires actually afford?

The Volus don't even have their own... they hire Turian ships which presumably count under Turian limits.

[MajorStranger]

Politics ain't about good or bad. It's about interest of the people you represent. Their actions are justifiable, but they should be viewed as moral choice.