301 réponses à ce sujet

[GuardianAngel470]

ReconTeam wrote...

In my opinion, yes. I would imagine there is some sort of Citadel intelligence organization that works with the Spectres, but the members of that aren't Spectres themselves.

Like Kirihe's team? That was pretty much exactly what you are talking aboutt and, last time I checked, Kaidan couldn't fight through an army of geth on his own.

Neither could Ashley.

[General User]

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

Spectre's are like the Delta Force or Navy Seals or more accurately, CIA paramilitary of the galaxy. They may have other skills to enable them to succeed, but combat skills are their primary asset.

Why create a Special Forces unit that will be deployed in hot zones if they aren't combat experts that could handle themselves should something go wrong?

As I see it, SPECTREs differ from modern military special forces in four key ways:

First, they differ greatly in terms of what kinds of assignments they are given.  SPECTREs are often given broad goals vice specific missions.  It's the difference between, "stop Saren" and "take out Saren's base on Virmire."

Second, SPECTREs are assigned to remove the Council's domestic political opponents and potential sources of mere embarrassment.  This is very important.  I think Admiral Adama put it best: “There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.”  Modern militaries (at least in the West) understand and exercise this distinction, the Council and the SPECTREs do not. 

Third, SPECTREs are accountable to the Council only and the Council directly. There is no chain of command for them to follow.  No body of law, civil or military, under which they might be tried.

Fourth, SPECTREs aren’t expected to complete their assignments in any particular way.  Modern special forces units (again, at least in the West) often have codes of honor or ethics above and beyond the law, that guide their behavior and conduct.  SPECTREs are the ultimate 'ends justify the means' group.  As long as they get results, the Council considers however that particular SPECTRE goes about it to be kosher.


So it terms of ‘what they do’, ‘where they do it’, ‘who they do it for’, and ‘how they do it’, SPECTREs differ from modern military special forces. Those differences are sufficient to render expert combat skills no longer prerequisite. 

Modifié par General User, 18 mai 2011 - 02:36 .

[Ship.wreck_]

General User wrote...
As I see it, SPECTREs differ from modern military special forces in four key ways:

First, they differ greatly in terms of what kinds of assignments they are given.  SPECTREs are often given broad goals vice specific missions.  It's the difference between, "stop Saren" and "take out Saren's base on Virmire."

Stop that. How many times do I have to cite this example: SEALS - find and kill Osama Bin Laden
SPECTRE (Shepard) - find and kill Saren.

Second, SPECTREs are assigned to remove the Council's domestic political opponents and potential sources of mere embarrassment.  This is very important.  I think Admiral Adama put it best: “There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.”  Modern militaries (at least in the West) understand and exercise this distinction, the Council and the SPECTREs do not.

There is some substance to you basic point that the military should not be the police. But this is not by any means necessarily the case. Perfect example: Egypt. Mubarak simply used the police to silence his opposition. When the people got fed up with it, the military didn't even hesitate to back the people rather than their commander in chief and actually engaged Mubarak's police forces in combat on behalf of the people, in order to protect them from the state. And now that the dictator has been ousted and power left in the hands of the military, instead of some general just seizing power for himself, they are organizing a transition of power to a democratic system under the advisement of civilian scholars. Militaries are not some shady bad guy just waiting for the system to loosen its grip on their leash. They were designed to protect the PEOPLE from the enemies of the state, and while some famously don't live up to this ideal, many will uphold it, even whent the enemy of the state (and by extension the people) is the Head of State.

Also, I didn't play the dlc's so I may have missed something but when did any member of the council say, "Hey Spectre, go off that guy so he doesn't run against me in the next election." and why would any Spectre listen?

Third, SPECTREs are accountable to the Council only and the Council directly. There is no chain of command for them to follow.  No body of law, civil or military, under which they might be tried.

Unless of course you're Shepard, or so I hear. Otherwise, true.

Fourth, SPECTREs aren’t expected to complete their assignments in any particular way.  Modern special forces units (again, at least in the West) often have codes of honor or ethics above and beyond the law, that guide their behavior and conduct.  SPECTREs are the ultimate 'ends justify the means' group.  As long as they get results, the Council considers however that particular SPECTRE goes about it to be kosher.

No they don't. There is no enforced code of ethics above and beyond the law for any military unit. They don't intentionally murder civilians (and other WAR CRIMES) because it's agains the LAW for them to do so. This "code of ethics" you're refering to is called the Geneva Conventions and it is the law of warfare. If a special forces fighter chooses not to do things that he could technically get away with legally if it came to a military tribunal: It's not some enforced code of ethics he's subject to above the law, it's his personall choice to be... gooder than is legally required.

The DIFFERENCE is that Spectres aren't subject ot any law, while sof ARE. So if a Spectre decides to commit ANY war crime that's his own personall code of ethics; while if a SOF does the same, it may be ethics, but either way it's LEGALLY enforced.

So it terms of ‘what they do’, ‘where they do it’, ‘who they do it for’, and ‘how they do it’, SPECTREs differ from modern military special forces. Those differences are sufficient to render expert combat skills no longer prerequisite. 

Not even close dude. They do things differently than our SOF, but then again so do Russian SOF, but that doesn't make the russian SOF no-combatant, and likewise it doesn't make Spectres non-combatant. From EVERYTHING we've seen the nature of Spectre's missions are always extremely dangerous AND extremely sensitive, and as such they need combat expetise in order to accomplish them, along with a high level of intelligence and tact.

Again your comparison of your hypothetical unicorn negotiator Spectre to a modern day over-empowered beurocrat was nothing short of ridiculous. Spectre's may or may not employ a small crew for support as in Shepard's Normandy crew, but to say that that's a far cry from the full support of Homeland Security, the NSA, CIA, FBI, Men in Black etc. etc which you envoked in your broken example, would be the understatement of the decade. Spectre's DO NOT have that KIND or that MUCH support, they need to be able to get any job they undertake done themselves, with a small combat squad at best.

Also see my post on the previous page regarding the nature of the term SPECTRE and why it would never be applied to a non-combatant.

If al lthat is not enough to convince you, it's become appearant to me that you are not open to logic or reasoning, and that you simply will continue to defend this ludicrous postion that Spectres can be non-combatant until BioWare its self steps out of your computer screen slaps you across the face (lightly) and says, "Listen, kid, Spectres are wariors! Period. Now, stop it."

So if that's the case: Until ME3 comes out and we clearly see that there still are not exemples, references too, or even mentions of non-combatant Spectres, I'm just gonna give up on you entirely.

PS: My challenge stands, you think Spectre's are non-combatant: PROVE IT. Any example, reference to, or mention of any non-combatant ANYWHERE in the cannon ME universe (That's the games, not some random comic written by some random fanboy... who may or may not have been you).

Also someone was discussing the tv show about a Hanar Spectre, and how it was a joke. EXACTLY, it's hilarious because Hanar can't fight like that, and ALL Spectre's have to be able to fight! If there were such thing as non-combatant negotiator Spectres the fictional Hanar Spectre would be depicted as one of them and references to / advertisement of the show WOULDN'T be a joke! That's just more proof that Spectre's are combat experts!

[General User]

Ship.wreck wrote...
Stop that. How many times do I have to cite this example: SEALS - find and kill Osama Bin Laden
SPECTRE (Shepard) - find and kill Saren.

Cite it as many times as you wish, it won’t make the comparison pertinent.
 
“Kill ‘Terrorist X’” is not a SPECTRE assignment, that's a job for an N7 team. 
“Stop terrorism in ‘Region X’” or “Neutralize ‘Terrorist Faction X’” are SPECTRE assigments. Killing Terrorist X is just one way to achieve those ends.  And even if the SPECTRE did decide to use that option, there is no reason they would have to do it personally.

There is some substance to you basic point that the military should not be the police. But this is not by any means necessarily the case. Perfect example: Egypt. Mubarak simply used the police to silence his opposition. When the people got fed up with it, the military didn't even hesitate to back the people rather than their commander in chief and actually engaged Mubarak's police forces in combat on behalf of the people, in order to protect them from the state. And now that the dictator has been ousted and power left in the hands of the military, instead of some general just seizing power for himself, they are organizing a transition of power to a democratic system under the advisement of civilian scholars. Militaries are not some shady bad guy just waiting for the system to loosen its grip on their leash. They were designed to protect the PEOPLE from the enemies of the state, and while some famously don't live up to this ideal, many will uphold it, even whent the enemy of the state (and by extension the people) is the Head of State.

Hence the caveat “at least in the West.”

Also, I didn't play the dlc's so I may have missed something but when did any member of the council say, "Hey Spectre, go off that guy so he doesn't run against me in the next election." and why would any Spectre listen?

Political oppoents in the sense of "those who oppose our political agenda" not "those running against us for office."  I don't think most of the Councilors are even elected.

In the Tela Vasir Story line form the Cerberus Daily News, a SPECTRE is assigned to prevent the release of economic reports embarrassing to the Council. She does this by killing half the group’s members and arresting the other half.

She did it for the same reason all fanatics do horrific things: they think they are making the world (or galaxy) a better place.

Unless of course you're Shepard, or so I hear. Otherwise, true.

If you’re referring to Admiral Hackett in ME1, those missions are optional, Shepard can say “no” and there’s nothing the Admiral can do about it.

No they don't. There is no enforced code of ethics above and beyond the law for any military unit. They don't intentionally murder civilians (and other WAR CRIMES) because it's agains the LAW for them to do so. This "code of ethics" you're refering to is called the Geneva Conventions and it is the law of warfare. If a special forces fighter chooses not to do things that he could technically get away with legally if it came to a military tribunal: It's not some enforced code of ethics he's subject to above the law, it's his personall choice to be... gooder than is legally required.

I'm sorry for confusing you.  I didn't mean that the superior code of honor military special forces hold themselves to was somehow a system of law, rather that it was a superior standard of behavior and conduct mostly (but not exclusively) on the battlefield.  Again, do note the caveat "at least in the West."  

The DIFFERENCE is that Spectres aren't subject ot any law, while sof ARE. So if a Spectre decides to commit ANY war crime that's his own personall code of ethics; while if a SOF does the same, it may be ethics, but either way it's LEGALLY enforced.

So they ARE different!

"I'll take what I can get with you, [Ship.wreck]." - Shepard to Jack, ME2

Not even close dude. They do things differently than our SOF, but then again so do Russian SOF, but that doesn't make the russian SOF no-combatant, and likewise it doesn't make Spectres non-combatant. From EVERYTHING we've seen the nature of Spectre's missions are always extremely dangerous AND extremely sensitive, and as such they need combat expetise in order to accomplish them, along with a high level of intelligence and tact.

Again your comparison of your hypothetical unicorn negotiator Spectre to a modern day over-empowered beurocrat was nothing short of ridiculous. Spectre's may or may not employ a small crew for support as in Shepard's Normandy crew, but to say that that's a far cry from the full support of Homeland Security, the NSA, CIA, FBI, Men in Black etc. etc which you envoked in your broken example, would be the understatement of the decade. Spectre's DO NOT have that KIND or that MUCH support, they need to be able to get any job they undertake done themselves, with a small combat squad at best.

You seem to be fixated on the idea that SPECTREs "need to be able to get any job they undertake done themselves" as in they need to be physically present when the job gets done.  Do you actually believe that?  And if so,  may I ask why?

Also see my post on the previous page regarding the nature of the term SPECTRE and why it would never be applied to a non-combatant.

"You were serious about that?!?" - Joe Pesci, My Cousin Vinny

If al lthat is not enough to convince you, it's become appearant to me that you are not open to logic or reasoning, and that you simply will continue to defend this ludicrous postion that Spectres can be non-combatant until BioWare its self steps out of your computer screen slaps you across the face (lightly) and says, "Listen, kid, Spectres are wariors! Period. Now, stop it."

So if that's the case: Until ME3 comes out and we clearly see that there still are not exemples, references too, or even mentions of non-combatant Spectres, I'm just gonna give up on you entirely.

PS: My challenge stands, you think Spectre's are non-combatant: PROVE IT. Any example, reference to, or mention of any non-combatant ANYWHERE in the cannon ME universe (That's the games, not some random comic written by some random fanboy... who may or may not have been you).

Is there any chance the codex will do? I'm gonna go WAAAAY out on a limb and guess the answer will be: "no." 

But what can I say?  I have faith in humanity:
"Some [SPECTREs] are empathetic peacekeepers, resolving disputes through diplomacy."
 

Modifié par General User, 19 mai 2011 - 03:56 .

[corporal doody]

from Mass Effect 2 codex

Spectres are agents from the  Office of Special Tactics and Reconnaissance and answer only to the Citadel Council. They are elite military operatives, granted the authority to deal with threats to peace and stability in whatever way they deem necessary.
They operate independently or in groups of two or three. Some are empathetic peacekeepers, resolving disputes through diplomacy. Others are cold-blooded assassins, ruthlessly dispatching problem individuals. All get the job done, one way or another, often operating outside the bounds of galactic law.
The Spectres were founded afer the salarians joined the Council. For many years, they operated in secrecy as back-room "problem-solvers."  Only after the Krogan Rebellion did their activities become publicized. Assignment of a Spectre is less contentious than a military deployment but makes it clear the Council is concerned about a situation.

[General User]

^ Exactly

There's no set mold or form a SPECTRE has to take.

They are problem-solvers, first and foremost how they get results is infinitely less important than the fact that the do get results. Personally being a combat expert is just one way to do that.

Modifié par General User, 19 mai 2011 - 02:21 .

[InvincibleHero]

The way I see it they are basically a comando a one man army and above all a leader. The best leader leads by example. They have to be able to survive combat because they can't avoid it all. So maybe they don't have to be the best and there could be a ghost type assassin that avoids combat stealths and gets missions done and remains unknown to the galaxy at large. Though that would also imply some level of combat proficiency. I think biotic or combat leader is what they look for exclusively.

Any one could build a team and take on problems. A spectre has to stand on their own if need be.

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

Cite it as many times as you wish, it won’t make the comparison pertinent.
 
“Kill ‘Terrorist X’” is not a SPECTRE assignment, that's a job for an N7 team. 
“Stop terrorism in ‘Region X’” or “Neutralize ‘Terrorist Faction X’” are SPECTRE assigments. Killing Terrorist X is just one way to achieve those ends.  And even if the SPECTRE did decide to use that option, there is no reason they would have to do it personally.

"FIND and kill" is a lot tougher a task than 'here is all the intel on your target's current wearabouts, take him down."

Of course there are multiple ways to fight terrorism. I don't think that it is likely any brilliant economists or socialogists are likely to be appointed as Spectres unless they coincidentally happen to have significant combat skills.

In the Tela Vasir Story line form the Cerberus Daily News, a SPECTRE is assigned to prevent the release of economic reports embarrassing to the Council. She does this by killing half the group’s members and arresting the other half.

She did it for the same reason all fanatics do horrific things: they think they are making the world (or galaxy) a better place.

You are conveniently leaving out the fact that it wasn't merely 'economic reports embarrassing to the Council' but data stolen from the Council by a pro-Volus group. The equivalent would be if China was upset over the US not publishing internal treasury board documents (which are NOT public for very legitimate reasons) so they broke into the Treasury Building and stole the information.

You are basicly implying that espionage should go unpunished.

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
"FIND and kill" is a lot tougher a task than 'here is all the intel on your target's current wearabouts, take him down."

Of course there are multiple ways to fight terrorism. I don't think that it is likely any brilliant economists or socialogists are likely to be appointed as Spectres unless they coincidentally happen to have significant combat skills.

Why not?  Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner once wrote something to the effect of "An economist can solve any problem.  The solution may be expensive, or impractical, or involve gross violations of human rights, But rest assured, the orignal problem will  be solved."

SPECTREs have the perogative to be expensive, impractical and violate rights.

You are conveniently leaving out the fact that it wasn't merely 'economic reports embarrassing to the Council' but data stolen from the Council by a pro-Volus group. The equivalent would be if China was upset over the US not publishing internal treasury board documents (which are NOT public for very legitimate reasons) so they broke into the Treasury Building and stole the information.

You are basicly implying that espionage should go unpunished.

China is a foreign power and potential adversary of the US, the volus clans are clients of the Turian Hierarchy and members in good standing of the Citadel system.

Volus alleged criminals are just that: alleged criminals, not spies or enemies.  As you demostrate here, when the military and police are combined people quickly lose the ability to tell the difference (which was my point to begin with).

Modifié par General User, 19 mai 2011 - 11:04 .

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

Why not?  Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner once wrote something to the effect of "An economist can solve any problem.  The solution may be expensive, or impractical, or involve gross violations of human rights, But rest assured, the orignal problem will  be solved."

SPECTREs have the perogative to be expensive, impractical and violate rights.

I agree completely as to the power of economics, but finding a solution isn't sufficient. You need to be able to implement it, and that is where it gets tricky. Being (mostly) 'above the law' doesn't mean people will obey you simply because you ask them to surrender or to change their lifestyles radically. The agent with a solid understanding of economics will understand that force often has very high utility, even if it isn't even actually exercised. Spectres being combat experts on top of other skills is good economics, and someone economics expertise but without combat skills to back that up can almost always serve better in other roles, such as finance minister or councellor.

China is a foreign power and potential adversary of the US, the volus clans are clients of the Turian Hierarchy and members in good standing of the Citadel system.

Volus alleged criminals are just that: alleged criminals, not spies or enemies.  As you demostrate here, when the military and police are combined people quickly lose the ability to tell the difference (which was my point to begin with).

Clients of the Turian Heiarchy does not equal citizens. The Volus hire the Turians, they aren't slaves or citizens of the Turians. What you are saying now is that if a family member of one of your customers robs your store they shouldn't be prosecuted because they are a relation of your customer.

Even if it had been a Turian group who had taken the information though, so what? Do you feel that being a US citizen entitles you to break in to US government buildings and steal whatever information you want?

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
I agree completely as to the power of economics, but finding a solution isn't sufficient. You need to be able to implement it, and that is where it gets tricky. Being (mostly) 'above the law' doesn't mean people will obey you simply because you ask them to surrender or to change their lifestyles radically. The agent with a solid understanding of economics will understand that force often has very high utility, even if it isn't even actually exercised. Spectres being combat experts on top of other skills is good economics, and someone economics expertise but without combat skills to back that up can almost always serve better in other roles, such as finance minister or councellor.

And, on the flip side, someone with expert combat skills might better serve as an N7 Team leader, or an STG officer, or an asari or turian soldier. 

My point is that have any particular skill set does not a SPECTRE make. Having the je ne sais quoi  that allows one to achieve results, does.

 Clients of the Turian Heiarchy does not equal citizens.

But it does equal lawful residents. 

 The Volus hire the Turians, they aren't slaves or citizens of the Turians. What you are saying now is that if a family member of one of your customers robs your store they shouldn't be prosecuted because they are a relation of your customer. 

Prosecuted? Criminals are prosecuted, enemies are destroyed. Let me ask point blank; how do you characterize the members of ‘TruthHax’? 

Please note that the term ‘client state’ is a term referring to any state that is subordinate to another, more powerful state. It does not necessarily refer to anyone ‘hiring’ anyone else (like a business client or customer).

 Even if it had been a Turian group who had taken the information though, so what? Do you feel that being a US citizen entitles you to break in to US government buildings and steal whatever information you want?

Man 1: “This product will be more popular if we add this feature.”
Man2: “So you’re saying NO ONE will buy this product without that feature?!?”
M1: “That’s not what I said at all. Stop changing everything I say into a bizarre absolute!”
M2: “Oh, so I change EVERYTHING you say?!?”
-Scott Adams

When you grossly and absurdly mischaracterize another’s position through bizarre rhetorical questions you make it very difficult to keep the conversation constructive.


Generous chap that I am, I'll give you benefit of the doubt... I never said anything about not punishing criminals. My point was, and remains, that a society where the military an police are one is almost always a society that cannot tell the difference between criminals and enemies. 

In such a society (like the Citadel Council), theft from the government would be treated as the act of an enemy, hence the assignment of a SPECTRE to the TruthHax case.  While in a free society (like the US(ish)) theft from the government would be treated as just that: theft.  Those responsible would be dealt with by the civil authorities, ie the police and the justice system.

Modifié par General User, 19 mai 2011 - 09:08 .

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

And, on the flip side, someone with expert combat skills might better serve as an N7 Team leader, or an STG officer, or an asari or turian soldier. 

My point is that have any particular skill set does not a SPECTRE make. Having the je ne sais quoi  that allows one to achieve results, does.

You refer to N7's etc as if they are completely different in purpose. Spectres are Council operatives, drawn from the proverbial 'best of the best.'  N7's answer to the Alliance, STG's to the Salarians, Asari commandos to the Asari, and they all are expected to 'get results.' There is likely a Turian counterpart, but given the Turian belief in 'honour' it may be that the Turians really don't have any covert ops branch. If they do have one, it doesn't seem to have been mentioned so far.

There are no skills that you attribute to Spectres that wouldn't be just as useful to any of the other branches you list.

But it does equal lawful residents. 

No, it does not. For example, here in Canada, we have the RCMP, which are a federal agency roughly equivalent to the American FBI. Most cities in Canada have their own local law enforcement, but instead of having their own police force, some contract local law enforcement out to the RCMP. That doesn't mean that those communities are some sort of 'federal protectorates' without municipal or provincial law. All it means is that they contract out those services. They can end that contract at any time (presumably with some warning), it is simply a labour contract. Some communities do so, feeling that they have become large enough to handle such services 'in house.'

Prosecuted? Criminals are prosecuted, enemies are destroyed. Let me ask point blank; how do you characterize the members of ‘TruthHax’? 

Please note that the term ‘client state’ is a term referring to any state that is subordinate to another, more powerful state. It does not necessarily refer to anyone ‘hiring’ anyone else (like a business client or customer).

The general membership are just people, likely Volus citizens. The specific members of TruthHax who stole information from the Council, though are criminals. They stole information. Just because you think they had a right to said information doesn't mean they did. It certainly doesn't mean that breaking and entering (or hacking) was the right way to enforce any rights they may have had.

And in this case the Volus literally do simply hire the Turians. The Turians don't govern them. If the Turians governed the Volus, the Volus wouldn't have an embassy, they would be represented by the Turians.

Man 1: “This product will be more popular if we add this feature.”
Man2: “So you’re saying NO ONE will buy this product without that feature?!?”
M1: “That’s not what I said at all. Stop changing everything I say into a bizarre absolute!”
M2: “Oh, so I change EVERYTHING you say?!?”
-Scott Adams

When you grossly and absurdly mischaracterize another’s position through bizarre rhetorical questions you make it very difficult to keep the conversation constructive.

Generous chap that I am, I'll give you benefit of the doubt... I never said anything about not punishing criminals. My point was, and remains, that a society where the military an police are one is almost always a society that cannot tell the difference between criminals and enemies. 

In such a society (like the Citadel Council), theft from the government would be treated as the act of an enemy, hence the assignment of a SPECTRE to the TruthHax case.  While in a free society (like the US(ish)) theft from the government would be treated as just that: theft.  Those responsible would be dealt with by the civil authorities, ie the police and the justice system.

I know you didn't say anything about punishing criminals. I was pointing out that you were reading things into that news report that weren't there. You seemed to be seeing what you wanted to see, namely that the Volus group  was punished simply for embarassing the Council. You weren't paying attention to the entire story (which actually includes a couple earlier Cerberus News stories), which tell us that the information was stolen.

And what do you think 'arrested' means? That they were just tossed in a bag and dropped in the river? Arrested normally means 'subjected to due process.' And in a matter such as theft of information from the federal government, it wouldn't normally be 'the police' making the arrest. It would be the FBI's jurisdiciton if domestic, or the CIA if international. It would still end up in front of civilian courts but it wouldn't be just 'a police matter.'

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
You refer to N7's etc as if they are completely different in purpose.

That is indeed my contention.

Moiaussi wrote...
Spectres are Council operatives, drawn from the proverbial 'best of the best.'  N7's answer to the Alliance, STG's to the Salarians, Asari commandos to the Asari, and they all are expected to 'get results.' There is likely a Turian counterpart, but given the Turian belief in 'honour' it may be that the Turians really don't have any covert ops branch. If they do have one, it doesn't seem to have been mentioned so far.

The only mention of turian covert ops I remember is the team that "acquired" Sovereign’s main gun.

Regardless, those groups they are all expected to be the best at their jobs. But their jobs are just narrower than a SPECTRE’s.

Moiaussi wrote...
There are no skills that you attribute to Spectres that wouldn't be just as useful to any of the other branches you list.

Correction, there are no skills I can attribute to a SPECTRE that wouldn’t also be useful to any of the other branches I list. That’s an important distinction, again because a SPECTRE’s job is much broader.

Moiaussi wrote...
No, it does not. For example, here in Canada, we have the RCMP, which are a federal agency roughly equivalent to the American FBI. Most cities in Canada have their own local law enforcement, but instead of having their own police force, some contract local law enforcement out to the RCMP. That doesn't mean that those communities are some sort of 'federal protectorates' without municipal or provincial law. All it means is that they contract out those services. They can end that contract at any time (presumably with some warning), it is simply a labour contract. Some communities do so, feeling that they have become large enough to handle such services 'in house.'

What are you talking about? Lawful residents are entitled to almost all the same legal protections as citizens. Federalism and various policing structures have nothing to do with it.

Moiaussi wrote...
The general membership are just people, likely Volus citizens. The specific members of TruthHax who stole information from the Council, though are criminals. They stole information

And as criminals, shouldn't they be subject to civil law and civil law enforcement?

Moiaussi wrote...
Just because you think they had a right to said information doesn't mean they did. It certainly doesn't mean that breaking and entering (or hacking) was the right way to enforce any rights they may have had.

I agree.

Moiaussi wrote...
And in this case the Volus literally do simply hire the Turians. The Turians don't govern them. If the Turians governed the Volus, the Volus wouldn't have an embassy, they would be represented by the Turians.

This sounds... plausible.  Of course, if that were the case, it would mean that volus citizens would be entitled to legal protections in their own right, not just as clients of the turians.

Moiaussi wrote...
You seemed to be seeing what you wanted to see, namely that the Volus group  was punished simply for embarassing the Council.

You aren't far wrong.  My contention is that the an 'elite military operative' was assigned to the TruthHax case (who subsequently killed several TruthHax members) simply for embarrassing the Council.

Moiaussi wrote...
And what do you think 'arrested' means? That they were just tossed in a bag and dropped in the river? Arrested normally means 'subjected to due process.'

When the circumstances of your 'arrest' include a direct agent of the highest levels of government "purchasing" information from a ruthless criminal, and killing half you compatriots, all to prevent you from embarrassing those in power, due process has already gone out the window.

 

Moiaussi wrote...
And in a matter such as theft of information from the federal government, it wouldn't normally be 'the police' making the arrest. It would be the FBI's jurisdiciton if domestic, or the CIA if international. It would still end up in front of civilian courts but it wouldn't be just 'a police matter.'

The term ‘police’ can be used to refer to any law enforcement agency. The FBI is a law enforcement agency (a federal police force), the CIA is not. You’re confusing criminals and enemies again.
 

Modifié par General User, 20 mai 2011 - 12:38 .

[Moiaussi]

[quote]General User wrote...

That is indeed my contention.

The only mention of turian covert ops I remember is the team that "acquired" Sovereign’s main gun.

Regardless, those groups they are all expected to be the best at their jobs. But their jobs are just narrower than a SPECTRE’s.

Correction, there are no skills I can attribute to a SPECTRE that wouldn’t also be useful to any of the other branches I list. That’s an important distinction, again because a SPECTRE’s job is much broader.
[/quote]

Where are you getting all these job descriptions from? How do the N7 missions in ME1 or ME2 differ at all from the Spectre missions in terms of needed skill set?

Compare with other fictional agents such as Jim Phelps or James Bond, Napoleon Solo, or even John Steed or Maxwell Smart. They all have a much larger skill set than merely being 'skilled combatants,' and those are all Earth based agents. All of them have had to talk their way out of situations or find innovative non-conventional solutions. McGyver is based entirely around non-conventional solutions. He is still a highly skilled combatant in addition. 


[quote]What are you talking about? Lawful residents are entitled to almost all the same legal protections as citizens. Federalism and various policing structures have nothing to do with it.[/quote]

You aren't listening. You are confusing the means of enforcement with the actual governance. Volus are VOLUS citizens who hire the Turians to provide policing. They are not Turian or Council citizens.


[quote]And as criminals, shouldn't they be subject to civil law and civil law enforcement?[/quote]


In this case the crime was committed against the Council on Council soil. It is the equivalent of a federal crime. That means that a federal agency handles it. Spectres are not 'military.' They answer to the Council, not to a military branch.

[/quote]
[quote]This sounds... plausible.  Of course, if that were the case, it would mean that volus citizens would be entitled to legal protections in their own right, not just as clients of the turians.[/quote]

And they are entitled to rights. They have rights or else they would simply have all been shot rather than arrested. "Rights' doesn't mean you have the right not to be accused or arrested.


[quote]You aren't far wrong.  My contention is that the an 'elite military operative' was assigned to the TruthHax case (who subsequently killed several TruthHax members) simply for embarrassing the Council.[/quote]

The Spectres answer directly to the Council though, to the equivalent of congress or parliament. They are paramilitary, not military, just as all branches of law enforcement other than JAG are.


[quote]When the circumstances of your 'arrest' include a direct agent of the highest levels of government "purchasing" information from a ruthless criminal, and killing half you compatriots, all to prevent you from embarrassing those in power, due process has already gone out the window.[/quote]

Just because Tela Vasir had 'crossed the line' doesn't mean that all her actions were themselves corrupt. There was no indication in ME1 that the Shadow Broker was a 'ruthless criminal' and indeed we learned later that the holder of that position changed without anyone realizing it at the time. Futher, we don't even know that the Council were aware of her operations. If they were, why not simply contact Shepard and formally ask him to back off? Shepard may well have still been a Spectre.

At any rate, blowing up Illium apartment buildings is not likely something the Council would order or approve. They are too paranoid of political fallout for that.


[quote]The term ‘police’ can be used to refer to any law enforcement agency. The FBI is a law enforcement agency (a federal police force), the CIA is not. You’re confusing criminals and enemies again. [/quote]

I stand corrected. My excuse is that up here in Canada it is only relatively recently that we separated intelligence gathering (CSIS) from the federal law enforcement (RCMP). There is a lot we don't know though. It may be that there was something about that particular agency that rated a higher threat rating. It may also be that they were based somewhere in Terminus or something where it would be deemed unwise to send C-Sec.

Or it may also be that Tela was literally in the neighborhood and wasn't asked to deal with them at all. It isn't like Shepard doesn't intervene in everything he stumbles across.....

Modifié par Moiaussi, 20 mai 2011 - 02:17 .

[REgentleman]

This has probably been said before somewhat, but: while everybody in the military undergoes some form of physical training, the military employs its own as engineers and medics, too. Just because somebody COULD kill me with a straw doesn't mean that's necessarily their job description or how they solve problems. Even in the case that the SPECTRES do draw recruits exclusively from the galaxy's various military organizations, that doesn't mean that they necessarily have to draw them from a particular kind of specialized commando unit.

The easy answer: it hasn't been spelled out conclusively, and SPECTREs having varied methods provides more interesting story/gameplay/universe options to develop. Bring on the volus SPECTREs, Bioware! (imo)

[Moiaussi]

REgentleman wrote...

Bring on the volus SPECTREs, Bioware! (imo)

I keep waiting to see a Volus who is good at combat. Sure they aren't naturally physically tough but that is what tech is for. If a YMIR mech can make us work to take it down, so can a Volus in a similarly tricked out battlesuit.

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
Where are you getting all these job descriptions from? How do the N7 missions in ME1 or ME2 differ at all from the Spectre missions in terms of needed skill set?

The way Shepard does them, they don’t. My point is that there are other ways to get things done besides Shepard's way. The most significant difference between N7-type missions and SpecTRe missions is scope.

Moiaussi wrote...
Compare with other fictional agents such as Jim Phelps or James Bond, Napoleon Solo, or even John Steed or Maxwell Smart. They all have a much larger skill set than merely being 'skilled combatants,' and those are all Earth based agents. All of them have had to talk their way out of situations or find innovative non-conventional solutions. McGyver is based entirely around non-conventional solutions. He is still a highly skilled combatant in addition. 

It’s like Dean said, there’s a difference between being able to handle combat and being able to participate in it. A SpecTRe needs to be able to do the first, but not necessarily the second. Also the first does not require said SpecTRe to be physically present at all.

Also, MacGyver never used guns (except in the pilot, before the character was established), that was kinda his thing. 

Moiaussi wrote...
You aren't listening. You are confusing the means of enforcement with the actual governance. Volus are VOLUS citizens who hire the Turians to provide policing. They are not Turian or Council citizens.

I understood what you were saying, I just think it a non-sequitur. 

We were talking about the rights and protections of lawful residents vs. the rights and protections of citizens, and discussing which category the volus might fall into. My position was that it doesn’t matter, since the two are largely identical (in the criminal justice system anyway), your position was… the RCMP provides police services to rural areas of Canada? 

Perhaps you could rephrase, or (preferably) start over without the RCMP reference?

Moiaussi wrote...
In this case the crime was committed against the Council on Council soil. It is the equivalent of a federal crime. That means that a federal agency handles it. Spectres are not 'military.' They answer to the Council, not to a military branch.

You're partly correct, SpecTRes are not a military branch.  They are also not a law enforcement agency.  They are direct agents for the Council who handle any matter the Council has an interest in.  That was my whole point to begin with, that the Council does not draw a distinction between civil and military matters and will freely assign a SpecTRe to either.

Moiaussi wrote...
And they are entitled to rights. They have rights or else they would simply have all been shot rather than arrested. "Rights' doesn't mean you have the right not to be accused or arrested.

That's just it, they weren't accused and arrested, they were identified and neutralized.

Moiaussi wrote...
The Spectres answer directly to the Council though,

Was this ever in dispute?

Moiaussi wrote...
[The Council is] the equivalent of congress or parliament.

In what way?

Moiaussi wrote...
They are paramilitary, not military, just as all branches of law enforcement other than JAG are.

(as always “at least in the West”)

Some police organizations are organized along military lines (like the RCMP), others are not (like the FBI).  Even of those that are don't fit the definition of 'paramilitary' since they do not "operate as, in place of, or as a supplement to a regular military force."  A law enforcement agency serves an entirely different purpose than a military.

And the JAG corps is an exclusively military division, they enforce and practice military law.

Paramilitary is indeed an adequate category to place SpecTRes into, if you're willing to write the 'para' in all caps and bold with underline like this: the SpecTRes are a PARAmilitary organization.  But calling them 'direct agents or operatives of the Council' is far more accurate.

Moiaussi wrote...
Just because Tela Vasir had 'crossed the line' doesn't mean that all her actions were themselves corrupt. 

It not that I think of Vasir as corrupt, as much as I think of her as the product of a corrupt system. The Council is the disease, Vasir is the symptom.

Moiaussi wrote...
Futher, we don't even know that the Council were aware of her operations. If they were, why not simply contact Shepard and formally ask him to back off? Shepard may well have still been a Spectre.

At any rate, blowing up Illium apartment buildings is not likely something the Council would order or approve. They are too paranoid of political fallout for that.

T’was my impression that Vasir was on Illium on Shadow Broker business, not Council business, at least not directly. That Vasir “paid” for the information she got from the Shadow Broker for her SpecTRe missions by using her SpecTRe status to assassinate people (like Liara T’Soni) for the Broker. And that the Council had been turning a blind eye as long as she got results for them and "kept their names out of the papers."

Modifié par General User, 20 mai 2011 - 01:12 .

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

The way Shepard does them, they don’t. My point is that there are other ways to get things done besides Shepard's way. The most significant difference between N7-type missions and SpecTRe missions is scope.

Proof? Shepard was trained as an N7 and transferred directly to the Spectres with no additional training. Doesn't that suggest similar scope?

It’s like Dean said, there’s a difference between being able to handle combat and being able to participate in it. A SpecTRe needs to be able to do the first, but not necessarily the second. Also the first does not require said SpecTRe to be physically present at all.

Also, MacGyver never used guns (except in the pilot, before the character was established), that was kinda his thing.

You are evading my point. All of the agents I listed are capable of using pure force. They choose not to when they can get the mission done without needing to do so. The fact that McGyver usually figures out a way to win without using conventional weapons doesn't change the fact that he is trained in doing so and 'McGyvers' a makeshift weapon when he needs one.

Bond is a particularly good example, breaking a considerable number of laws in the line of duty. What do you think 'Licensed to Kill" means in the context of a 00 agent? Conventional law enforcement can kill in the line of duty too, so it doesn't simply mean the usual right of law enforcement to use deadly force. 

I understood what you were saying, I just think it a non-sequitur. 

We were talking about the rights and protections of lawful residents vs. the rights and protections of citizens, and discussing which category the volus might fall into. My position was that it doesn’t matter, since the two are largely identical (in the criminal justice system anyway), your position was… the RCMP provides police services to rural areas of Canada? 

Perhaps you could rephrase, or (preferably) start over without the RCMP reference?

My point was that the Volus aren't Turian residents either. They are Volus citizens and Volus residents who hire the Turians for Naval duties.

I understand how the RCMP example is confusing you so I will leave it out, but I stand by it and can explain it more if you would like.  

You're partly correct, SpecTRes are not a military branch.  They are also not a law enforcement agency.  They are direct agents for the Council who handle any matter the Council has an interest in.  That was my whole point to begin with, that the Council does not draw a distinction between civil and military matters and will freely assign a SpecTRe to either.

That one agency covers both matters doesn't mean your example was treated as military. Regardless of whether you agree that N7s and Spectres have similar training and skill sets, can we agree that Spectres have a higher degree of training and expected competence than C-Sec officers?

That's just it, they weren't accused and arrested, they were identified and neutralized.

Were we readiing the same article? Some of them were killed and the rest were arrested. There are a total of three related articles.

Moiaussi wrote...
[The Council is] the equivalent of congress or parliament.

In what way?

Although we don't see it, it is innane to assume that Councellors just magically appoint themselves. How were the first appointed? The Salarian Councellor was likely appointed by their current leader (Monarchy) but the Turian Councellor would have been appointed by having the best applicable resume (meritocracy) and the Asari and Alliance Councellors by popular vote. Shepard doesn't choose per se at the end of ME1. Whan Shep asks why he is being asked, the answer is 'your endorsement will go a long ways.' Many assume that the endorsement is offering the Council his opinion but given the Alliance is a democracy it seems much more likely that Shepard endorsed a candidate in an Alliance election. Since the Alliance had already been trying for Council membership it is a safe bet that they already had Udina picked out as a front runner at a minimum. 

(as always “at least in the West”)

Some police organizations are organized along military lines (like the RCMP), others are not (like the FBI).  Even of those that are don't fit the definition of 'paramilitary' since they do not "operate as, in place of, or as a supplement to a regular military force."  A law enforcement agency serves an entirely different purpose than a military.

And the JAG corps is an exclusively military division, they enforce and practice military law.

Paramilitary is indeed an adequate category to place SpecTRes into, if you're willing to write the 'para' in all caps and bold with underline like this: the SpecTRes are a PARAmilitary organization.  But calling them 'direct agents or operatives of the Council' is far more accurate.

The RCMP has always been civilian law enforcement. Where are you getting your information from? As for 'paramilitary', in what way does a typical SWAT team (or equivalent) act in a different way to military? Waco was an FBI operation wasn't it? Up here we have had our equivalents.

It not that I think of Vasir as corrupt, as much as I think of her as the product of a corrupt system. The Council is the disease, Vasir is the symptom.

A flawed system is more likely to result in corruption, but there is no evidence of complicity on the Council's part. There is evidence of negligence but that is not normally considered corruption. That might be a bit of a semantic arguement though.

T’was my impression that Vasir was on Illium on Shadow Broker business, not Council business, at least not directly. That Vasir “paid” for the information she got from the Shadow Broker for her SpecTRe missions by using her SpecTRe status to assassinate people (like Liara T’Soni) for the Broker. And that the Council had been turning a blind eye as long as she got results for them and "kept their names out of the papers."

We don't know that the Council even knew though. There is a difference between turning a blind eye and being too trusting or being misled. The Spectre program really needed a separate director and much better oversight, and since the results of the mission against the Volus were reported (even if just by Cerberus), the Council weren't really 'kept out of the news' were they?

Modifié par Moiaussi, 20 mai 2011 - 06:27 .

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
Proof? Shepard was trained as an N7 and transferred directly to the Spectres with no additional training. Doesn't that suggest similar scope?

That truth suggests to me that N7-type skills are easily applicable to SpecTRe work.  But, then again, so are many skill sets.

TIM is good proof of concept. He defeated the Collectors by making alliances and using (or abusing, if you prefer) intelligence. He never left his office.

Moiaussi wrote...
You are evading my point. All of the agents I listed are capable of using pure force. They choose not to when they can get the mission done without needing to do so.

All of the agents you list (even MacGyver in a way) are indeed capable of using pure force.  I'm asking you to envision someone who is not capable in that regard.  Someone, ironically, very much like the Councilors themselves.  Someone who sends other out to do his fighting for him. 

Moiaussi wrote...
Bond is a particularly good example, breaking a considerable number of laws in the line of duty. What do you think 'Licensed to Kill" means in the context of a 00 agent? Conventional law enforcement can kill in the line of duty too, so it doesn't simply mean the usual right of law enforcement to use deadly force. 

Honestly, if the SpecTRes worked for Her Majesty, I would probably not object to them so much. But SpecTRes do not use their powers to defend Truth, Justice, and the British Way, rather they use them to prop up a racist oligarchy

Moiaussi wrote...
My point was that the Volus aren't Turian residents either. They are Volus citizens and Volus residents who hire the Turians for Naval duties.

It is my contention that as volus citizens and/or residents volus are entitled to the same legal rights and protections that other Citadel members enjoy.

Moiaussi wrote...
That one agency covers both matters doesn't mean your example was treated as military.

Of course it doesn't.  It does mean that the SpecTRe's don't recognize the difference.

Moiaussi wrote...
Regardless of whether you agree that N7s and Spectres have similar training and skill sets, can we agree that Spectres have a higher degree of training and expected competence than C-Sec officers?

Expected competence, sure.  But why would a SpecTRe who spent half a career in the military (ie an N7) have any training or experience in law enforcement?

Moiaussi wrote...
Although we don't see it, it is innane to assume that Councellors just magically appoint themselves.*snip*

I don't know of any congress or parliament worthy of the name that apportions it's seats by race, or has a grand total of four voting seats to "represent" trillions.  Also the Council enjoys not only legislative powers, but executive and judicial powers as well.  Separation of powers is a big deal!

Moiaussi wrote...
The RCMP has always been civilian law enforcement. Where are you getting your information from? As for 'paramilitary', in what way does a typical SWAT team (or equivalent) act in a different way to military? Waco was an FBI operation wasn't it? Up here we have had our equivalents.

I described the RCMP   as a “police organization… organized along military lines” by which I mean they have a military-style rank structure and wear uniforms.  As opposed to the FBI, which does neither. As such the RCMP does fit a very loose, inflammatory, but not entirely inaccurate definition of “paramilitary.” 

SWAT teams and militaries differ to varying degrees in terms of abilities, armament, equipment, objectives, organization, purpose, procedures, resources, size, tactics, and techniques. 

Moiaussi wrote...
A flawed system is more likely to result in corruption, but there is no evidence of complicity on the Council's part. There is evidence of negligence but that is not normally considered corruption. That might be a bit of a semantic arguement though.

Semantics aren't always a bad thing.  I would argue that a malignant cancer, no matter it's source, still needs to be removed.

Moiaussi wrote...
We don't know that the Council even knew though. There is a difference between turning a blind eye and being too trusting or being misled. The Spectre program really needed a separate director and much better oversight, and since the results of the mission against the Volus were reported (even if just by Cerberus), the Council weren't really 'kept out of the news' were they?

I was referring to the people Vasir killed for the Broker.
 

Modifié par General User, 20 mai 2011 - 08:01 .

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

That truth suggests to me that N7-type skills are easily applicable to SpecTRe work.  But, then again, so are many skill sets.

TIM is good proof of concept. He defeated the Collectors by making alliances and using (or abusing, if you prefer) intelligence. He never left his office.

Wow, you do realize the difference between desk jobs and field agents, don't you? The president of the US in the capacity of 'commader in chief' defeated Germany in WWII without ever having to fire a shot. Does that make the President of the US a great soldier or field agent?

All of the agents you list (even MacGyver in a way) are indeed capable of using pure force.  I'm asking you to envision someone who is not capable in that regard.  Someone, ironically, very much like the Councilors themselves.  Someone who sends other out to do his fighting for him.

Someone who sends others out is a Director. The Collectors were a conventional armed force. I am starting to think you are just trolling.

As for agents who don't use pure force, the only one I can think of is The Doctor, but he has more knowledge that anyone around him coupled with a time machine and being serial immortality. And even he has resorted to direct force on occassion. So has Sherlock Holmes, btw.

Do you have any counter-examples who are actual field agents?

Honestly, if the SpecTRes worked for Her Majesty, I would probably not object to them so much. But SpecTRes do not use their powers to defend Truth, Justice, and the British Way, rather they use them to prop up a racist oligarchy

You figure that there should be forced mass migrations to ensure a better racial mix among empires? It isn't deliberate racism. And do you really want to try to compare the Council's actions to some of the actions of the British Empire? They were relatively enlightened by the time of Bond but if you are comparing histories, the Brits don't come out all that rosy.

Besides, whether you agree with the Council or not has nothing to do with the topic. Preferring non-combatant spectres simply because you don't like the government the work for isn't much of an arguement.

It is my contention that as volus citizens and/or residents volus are entitled to the same legal rights and protections that other Citadel members enjoy.

And what rights do you claim were violated?

Of course it doesn't.  It does mean that the SpecTRe's don't recognize the difference.

Proof? Sounds more like blind supposition to you.

Expected competence, sure.  But why would a SpecTRe who spent half a career in the military (ie an N7) have any training or experience in law enforcement?

As opposed to Garrus, who was recruited as a potential Spectre from C-Sec? I still think that Spectres would normally go through a training course that Shepard bypassed due to circumstance. Even if they are consdered 'above the law' it is still important for them to know the law, just as it is important for them to know how to fight.

I don't know of any congress or parliament worthy of the name that apportions it's seats by race, or has a grand total of four voting seats to "represent" trillions.  Also the Council enjoys not only legislative powers, but executive and judicial powers as well.  Separation of powers is a big deal!

We don't really know the full structure. It isn't like we see the political side other than the Council itself. The US for example has one person representing millions. That one man is subject to congress and the senate, but nevertheless is considered 'the leader.' In Canada, while the Prime Minister answers to parliament, in practice if the PM has a majority they have pretty much carte blanche subject to the constitution. The party members will vote with them or get tossed. There is no separate executive branch in Canada.

The Council also has a separate Judicial branch. If it didn't, then everyone would answer strictly to the council rather than just spectres. Again, you are making assumptions that what we see is the only system there is despite that what we see is only the system that applies to Spectres and despite the fact we are told that spectres are a special case.
 

I described the RCMP   as a “police organization… organized along military lines” by which I mean they have a military-style rank structure and wear uniforms.  As opposed to the FBI, which does neither. As such the RCMP does fit a very loose, inflammatory, but not entirely inaccurate definition of “paramilitary.” 

SWAT teams and militaries differ to varying degrees in terms of abilities, armament, equipment, objectives, organization, purpose, procedures, resources, size, tactics, and techniques. 

What are you talking about? Even municipal police have seargents, captains, etc. The rank structure isn't identical to any given military branch, but rank stuctures aren't identical between airforce/army/navy either.

Paramilitary does not mean 'identical to military.' It just means 'similar to.' They don't need to have identical resources or size any more than the luxembourg army has to have similar resoruces or size to the US army to be considered an army.

Semantics aren't always a bad thing.  I would argue that a malignant cancer, no matter it's source, still needs to be removed.

I agree with you in principle, but disagree with your implication that the Spectre program consists entirely of cancerous tissue. Cutting out the tumours and introducing lifestyle changes to mitigate the risks is the normal proceedure. Shooting the patient when there are viable treatment options is not.

I was referring to the people Vasir killed for the Broker.
 

And they were killed for the Broker, not directly for the Council, and we don't know that the Council would have approved if Shepard (and Illuim police)  had the chance to present the evidence. Not only is it a lot easier to trace the explosion to her than to Shepard but she publicly took a hostage and threatened Shepard. If she got away with it it would only have been with the Shadow Broker manipulating evidence.

Modifié par Moiaussi, 20 mai 2011 - 10:05 .

[General User]

Moiaussi wrote...
Wow, you do realize the difference between desk jobs and field agents, don't you? The president of the US in the capacity of 'commader in chief' defeated Germany in WWII without ever having to fire a shot. Does that make the President of the US a great soldier or field agent?

It makes him a leader.

Moiaussi wrote...
Do you have any counter-examples who are actual field agents?

Anna Chapman.  (was gonna go with the Rosenbergs, but... you know)

Moiaussi wrote...
Besides, whether you agree with the Council or not has nothing to do with the topic. Preferring non-combatant spectres simply because you don't like the government the work for isn't much of an arguement.

When did I say that I preferred non-combat SpecTRes because I don't like the Council?  When did I say I prefered non-combat SpecTRe's at all?

Moiaussi wrote...
And what rights do you claim were violated?

Take your pick. The rights to protection form unwarranted search and seizure, the right to be indicted by a Grand Jury for a capital or infamous crime, the right to a speedy and public jury trial, and the right to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment.

Moiaussi wrote...
Proof? Sounds more like blind supposition to you.

Nope.  It's reasoned supposition.

Moiaussi wrote...
As opposed to Garrus, who was recruited as a potential Spectre from C-Sec? I still think that Spectres would normally go through a training course that Shepard bypassed due to circumstance. Even if they are consdered 'above the law' it is still important for them to know the law, just as it is important for them to know how to fight

The only thing we know about SpecTRe training is that it works on something of an apprentice system. What the actual training consists of is an open question.

Moiaussi wrote...
The Council also has a separate Judicial branch. If it didn't, then everyone would answer strictly to the council rather than just spectres.

Again, you are making assumptions that what we see is the only system there is despite that what we see is only the system that applies to Spectres and despite the fact we are told that spectres are a special case.

Assumption on undefined matters is a two way street.  I based my assumption, that the Council has no independent judiciary, on the fact that the Council is mentioned as being the ruling authority on everything from consumer products, to Prothean relics, to colonization disputes, to WMDs.  What did you base yours on?

The fact that legal matters aren't settled by the Council in the same way they handle SpecTRe assignments, (ie directly) in no way indicates an independent judicary.  Any judiciary the Council has, independent or otherwise would have to have lower courts.  The Council's jurisdiction is just too big.

Moiaussi wrote...
What are you talking about? Even municipal police have seargents, captains, etc. The rank structure isn't identical to any given military branch, but rank stuctures aren't identical between airforce/army/navy either.

Paramilitary does not mean 'identical to military.' It just means 'similar to.' They don't need to have identical resources or size any more than the luxembourg army has to have similar resoruces or size to the US army to be considered an army.

When did I say they were identical?  How on Earth did you read “identical to any given military branch” when I wrote “they have a military-style rank structure”? 

And why are you comparing the army of a very small country with the army of a very large one?  We’re (at least I am) discussing the differences between the police and the military. You should be comparing the police and military of the same country.

Moiaussi wrote...
I agree with you in principle, but disagree with your implication that the Spectre program consists entirely of cancerous tissue. Cutting out the tumours and introducing lifestyle changes to mitigate the risks is the normal proceedure. Shooting the patient when there are viable treatment options is not.

Who’s the patient and who’s the cancer in your eyes? I would say the cancer is the Council, and the patient would be the Galactic Society.

Modifié par General User, 21 mai 2011 - 05:23 .

[lolwut666]

I always thought spectres are supposed to be good at everything.

If you have someone who is very good at stealth and persuasion, for example, he'd be a spy. If you have someone who is really good at combat, he'd be a soldier. If you have someone who is good at all of that, he'd be a spectre.

There are probably some spectres who excel in some areas more than others, but I think they're all very capable at everything.

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...
Wow, you do realize the difference between desk jobs and field agents, don't you? The president of the US in the capacity of 'commader in chief' defeated Germany in WWII without ever having to fire a shot. Does that make the President of the US a great soldier or field agent?

It makes him a leader.

And that differs from TIM how, exactly?

Anna Chapman.  (was gonna go with the Rosenbergs, but... you know)

Who near as we can tell was caught before actually accomplishing anything. Regardless, if the Spectres were only sent to infiltrate/gather intel on office work you might have a point, however that would radically limit their scope. It is easy to find examples that suit your arguement if you cherry pick specific mission types.

When did I say that I preferred non-combat SpecTRes because I don't like the Council?  When did I say I prefered non-combat SpecTRe's at all?

Pardon for any misunderstanding on my part, but I was taking your comments on Tela Vasir's actions against the Volus group in the context of the OP's question. If you felt it was completely irrelevant, why did you go down that route?

Take your pick. The rights to protection form unwarranted search and seizure, the right to be indicted by a Grand Jury for a capital or infamous crime, the right to a speedy and public jury trial, and the right to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment.

Unwarranted search and seizure only applies if the intrusion is 'unwarranted.' There is no evidence that Tela was randomly searching Volus homes and she did recover the information. The surviving Volus were arrested and there is no reason to believe they weren't brought to trial, and there was no mention of torture, so no indication of cruel or unusual punishment. If they resisted, being shot is not 'cruel or unusual' and given the number of other groups who inexplicably try to shoot Shepard on sight, even when simple negotiation would have defused the situation, it seems quite believable that happened in this case.

Nope.  It's reasoned supposition.

Then when I ask for proof, why can't you provide it? Or at least provide your reasoning? Simply making a statement is just making a statement. Explain why you feel that your opinion is valid.

The only thing we know about SpecTRe training is that it works on something of an apprentice system. What the actual training consists of is an open question.

We know that Garrus went directly from C-Sec into a 'spectre candidacy program.' He dropped his application, but the point is that there is evidence that candidates from law enforcement are quite welcome and are given the chance to be 'brought up to speed' on all other needed skills. It is reasonable to conclude that recruits from other backgrounds normally go through similar prep courses.

Assumption on undefined matters is a two way street.  I based my assumption, that the Council has no independent judiciary, on the fact that the Council is mentioned as being the ruling authority on everything from consumer products, to Prothean relics, to colonization disputes, to WMDs.  What did you base yours on?

The fact that legal matters aren't settled by the Council in the same way they handle SpecTRe assignments, (ie directly) in no way indicates an independent judicary.  Any judiciary the Council has, independent or otherwise would have to have lower courts.  The Council's jurisdiction is just too big.

Mine is based on the Council handling treaty rights and the vast majority of arrests being handled by C-sec, as well as Shepard constantly having options to say 'we can bring him back for a proper trial.' Also there is no way that the Council handles every trial in Council space. It is literally impossible. There isn't enough time for a three person panel to hear that many cases.

When did I say they were identical?  How on Earth did you read “identical to any given military branch” when I wrote “they have a military-style rank structure”? 

And why are you comparing the army of a very small country with the army of a very large one?  We’re (at least I am) discussing the differences between the police and the military. You should be comparing the police and military of the same country.

And my counter was that police also have 'miltary style rank structures.' They simply do. As far as operations and scale, SWAT teams operate very similar to military units of similar scale. Small unit tactics are small unit tactics. They are likely to have greater concerns regarding collateral damage, but that doesn't change their basic operations. 

Who’s the patient and who’s the cancer in your eyes? I would say the cancer is the Council, and the patient would be the Galactic Society.

I agree on the patient but disagree that the Council itself is cancerous. Assuming that Councellors are elected/appointed for each empire under the same system that empire uses for its domestic politicians, what would you replace the Council with?

[General User]

@Moiaussi

As has been brought to my attention your posts are so full reducto ad absurdums, strawmen, and introduced tangents, along with ridiculous analogies, bizarre rhetoricals, just plain argumentativeness, that pointing them all out is wearying, addressing them is beneath me. That’s quite apart from the fact that some of your ideas are so… “unusual” that I honestly can’t tell if you’re serious about some of them or not.

If, however, you want to discuss the issues raised by our favorite video game, I am of course more than happy to do so (it’s why I’m here afterall). However, in the interests of clarity and civility, as well as the hope that you do indeed want to discuss those issues, I need to beg of you a favor and ask that you clearly state your position on the matters we’ve been discussing as you see them. If you wish to know mine, I invite you to read the second post on page 12 of this thread.

Cheers

Modifié par General User, 21 mai 2011 - 03:36 .

[Moiaussi]

General User wrote...

@Moiaussi

As has been brought to my attention your posts are so full reducto ad absurdums, strawmen, and introduced tangents, along with ridiculous analogies, bizarre rhetoricals, just plain argumentativeness, that pointing them all out is wearying, addressing them is beneath me. That’s quite apart from the fact that some of your ideas are so… “unusual” that I honestly can’t tell if you’re serious about some of them or not.

If, however, you want to discuss the issues raised by our favorite video game, I am of course more than happy to do so (it’s why I’m here afterall). However, in the interests of clarity and civility, as well as the hope that you do indeed want to discuss those issues, I need to beg of you a favor and ask that you clearly state your position on the matters we’ve been discussing as you see them. If you wish to know mine, I invite you to read the second post on page 12 of this thread.

Cheers

My position is that Spectres are expected to be able to handle a wide range of missions. The examples of exceptions all assume Spectre duties only cover a subset (i.e. only missions where combat is reasonably guaranteed not to be an element).

"As has been brought to your attention", though? Passive agressive much? My reasoning process is more associative than most so I admit my analogies can sometimes be hard to follow. That doesn't mean they aren't valid.