Moiaussi wrote...
All we know of the contract is that they armed him, and that Cerberus benefitted from the assassinations.
And it's still inconclusive, since all Cerberus monitoring devices were removed. Why would a black ops organisation remove monitoring devices from an ongoing project? Why not wait until after, there is still some time afterall between the police or whatever acting (may not be much, but Cerberus could also infiltrate that too, even if it was to surreptiously remove evidence from evidence bags for example)
Moi wrote...
Your definition of 'moderate' is that they only killed someone in the Terra Firma party? Besides the presidents, I didn't realize Pope Clement was a Terra Firma member..... I suspect neither did he. Are you sure you are reading from the right program?
There is a seperation between church and state, at least where I live (lobby groups don't count, for the simple fact that it isn't in a position to influence end decisions any more than any other lobby group. Thereotically speaking at least.) Furthermore, I would imagine that assassinations are kinda the forte of black ops sort of organisations though, so I hardly see what makes Cerberus more 'evil' in light of this than say any other organisation.
My definition of 'moderate' is because politically speaking (as in, directly intervening with democratic due process) they have only touched Terra Firma, which is a bit of a minnow. If the parliament was two-party preferred like many democracies (Australia, the US and Britain immediately springing to mind) then the damage could be a bit larger.
Moi wrote...
No clue where you are going here.... the whole point of technology is to compensate for the limitations of our bodies. Regardless, there is no question of Humans suddenly losing the ability to fly starships, armed or otherwise, so in what way are humans at risk of that fate?
Other than the Reaper-war I don't see a credible threat, but that doesn't mean there wont ever
be one. The nature of unforseen threats is that they're unforseen. I think TIM is wary of shadows to be honest, he probably has the most to fear of them.
Moi wrote...
The Turians are only supposed to do whatever the contract with them requires that they do. It seems exceedingly unlikely that the Volus are paying for the availability of the entire Turian fleet. What that has to do with the fact that the Volus could design ships they could fly and/or fight from is anybody's guess. And the degree of dependance on the part of the Turians is based primarily on Volus skill rather than raw dollars. The Volus pay in part by way of accounting/economic consulting, compensating for a Turian lack of interest in that field. It is a typical 'gains from trade' arrangement, to the mutual benefit of both races.
Right, and what if the Turian's aren't able to fulfill those contractual obligations (like the incident of the asteriod slamming into a volus colony world?) It leaves the volus up the creek imo. Anyway, this is getting wildly off-track, so to rein in the post bloat, if you want I suggest we continue this part in PM or something.
Moi wrote...
The details are worked out by trained negotiators , but limits on acceptable trade terms, as well as final approval still rest in the hands of politicians. It is a false assumption that the best economic choices for a country are also the popular or politicly feasable ones.
Yep. I wasn't and never have assumed that. My whole point was that the volus is stuck in a place and TIM wouldn't want to see humanity put into that place or similar. Obviously we can agree to disagree here (amongst other things I'm sure).
Moi wrote...
It speaks to the what the Council respond to in terms of negotiations. The Council have a paranoid fear that the Terminus systems, who in the blitz were fought off by a small garrison and civilians. constitutes some sort of major threat.
Once again I feel we're digressing a bit, but you still haven't really answered the point. They feared Terminus System attack on Eden Prime because of the Prothean beacon more than anything else I think. However, they still didn't really exercise due process imo (but that's because I'm not sure what the actual responsibilities of the Council are in regards to it's members. Considering the Council obviously values trade and taxes accordingly while at the Citadel, and that sooner or later massive trade comes to the Citadel, I would think it would make sense that individual member nations would want some degree of safety, and it seems to me that the Citadel would be the ones who'd supply it. I'd imagine that things sort of snowballed from there).
Moi wrote...
The Terminus pirates aren't all Batarian. The Blitz included Batarians, but was led by a human pirate.
I never said they were all batarians. As an aside though, I think it was a confirmed bug that Elias Haliat (or whatever his name is, the 'human') was supposed to be a Turian (Haliat incidentally being the same name as the Turian weapon manufacturer, although I'm not sure if that's supposed to be connected).
Moi wrote...
We don't have Krogan reproductive rates. Apples and oranges. Per Wrex, who has first hand knowledge, the Krogan could do fine if they stopped running off to fight whereever all the time. Indeed, if Wrex takes over in ME2, he has the population stable and growing, and is successful in reuniting the clans. Also it is reasonable to conclude that the V2 run took into account changes to Krogan society, so was likely at least a little less agressive.
It's not apples and oranges, it's still a 1:1000 ratio mate. You still didn't really have an answer either to the point that perhaps the Krogan should try to work out their own solution to a population explosion either.
Moi wrote...
Btw. we do have a similar program on Earth. China has had a law limiting reproduction to 2 per family for a while now, and it is considered oppressive by some, but it isn't considered genocide by anyone.
/facepalm. This
is Sparta! apples and oranges. I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your post because you thought to compare the china and the salarian genophage.
China doesn't kill the children that are beyond the
one per family rule (not to say that they aren't consequences; but they're usually fiscal)
1) The one per family rule can be exempted in certain circumstances (eg rural families, parents who have no siblings themselves etc, etc)
2) No one
deployed a weapon in China to enforce it.
3) No one
deployed a weapon in China to ensure it continued.
And, in further proof that you have absolutely no freaking idea of what you're talking about and certainly didn't do your due dilligence, a simple search garned this:
Wikipedia wrote.
'Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute announced that the One child policy is "an ongoing genocide." He argued that free market capitalism will solve the overpopulation and overconsumption problems of developing nations.'
SRC:
http://www.cato.org/...php?pub_id=5457But one more point though because you've sorta mantra'd it. I don't consider birth control in and of itself as 'genocide.' I view that a weapon mass deployed in order to stymie a species ability to reproduce in 'natural' numbers to be genocide (because it's a
deliberate action, an action that had an anticipated and desired result), because it's removing individuals from what would have been there under usual circumstances.
Retour en haut
