183 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

And there is no evidence other than rampant speculation on the part of a few posters here that Cerberus is still part of the Alliance.

That has nothing to do with this. Anderson took classified intel pertaining to the Alliance and gave it to a foreign government. This government then used that information to arrest Alliance personnel. This greatly compromised Alliance security (more-so than it already was), it violated Alliance sovereignty, and it most surely hurt relations with the turians.

It was treasonous and it was stupid.

The intel pertained to CERBERUS, not the Alliance. Cerberus is considered a terrorist organization by the Alliance as well as the Council.

You are arguing in circles, saying 'it doesn't matter if Cerberus isn't part of the Alliance cause any information on Cerberus pertains to the Alliance.

[Seboist]

Moiaussi wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Anderson used foreign agents to capture and kill humans. He should be lynched for that.

So tell me.... who is committing treason? Shepard when he kills human mercs or the mercs who opened fire first? I take it you consider having non-humans on Shepard's team is 'treason', even though without Mordin they would have had no chance against the collector's swarms?

Are you seriously trying to claim that if a non-human C-sec member executes an Alliance warrant on a human that it is an act of treason, regardless of what that human might have done?

Shepard isn't the one scheming at arrest and kill members of the Alliance and other human groups at the behest of an alien government, so no.If Cerberus is to be dealt with it's by the Alliance and for human interests.

I look forward to lynching Anderson from the tallest redwood in California in ME3.

[Gabey5]

Cerberus is a rouge group with no accountability... they were dealt a blow by anderson and as they stagger Shepard will end them once and for all

[Moiaussi]

Seboist wrote...

Shepard isn't the one scheming at arrest and kill members of the Alliance and other human groups at the behest of an alien government, so no.If Cerberus is to be dealt with it's by the Alliance and for human interests.

I look forward to lynching Anderson from the tallest redwood in California in ME3.

You seem to be completely ignoring the fact that that the Alliance considers Cerberus 'illegal.' TIM outright says to himself in Ascension that Cerberus is not part of the Alliance and is involved in activities the Alliance considers criminal unethical and amoral.

When there is corruption in law enforcement, standard proceedure is to bring in outsiders to investigate. Quite often it is another precinct.

Basicly your arguement still seems to be that it is somehow treasonous to arrest or kill traitors. And lest you forget, THE ALLIANCE IS PART OF THE COUNCIL. So bringing in Council law enforcement is not any more traitorous than bringing in a different precinct.

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

The intel pertained to CERBERUS, not the Alliance.

It pertained to both because it implicated high ranking members of the Alliance. Thus giving it to a foreign power comrpomised the Alliance.

This **** isn't hard to understand, Moiaussi. So either you are deliberately missing the point or you're just an idiot. Which is it?

It involved high ranking traitors to the alliance. That you don't consider them traitors is obvious. That you consider a risk of embarrassment to be a greater threat than high level infiltration is obvious.

You really figure that calling in foreign troops to aid with enforcement is a greater risk to sovereignty than allowing a hostile agency free run of your higher level operations? Wow..... just..... wow....

[khordlambert]

Moiaussi wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Shepard isn't the one scheming at arrest and kill members of the Alliance and other human groups at the behest of an alien government, so no.If Cerberus is to be dealt with it's by the Alliance and for human interests.

I look forward to lynching Anderson from the tallest redwood in California in ME3.

You seem to be completely ignoring the fact that that the Alliance considers Cerberus 'illegal.' TIM outright says to himself in Ascension that Cerberus is not part of the Alliance and is involved in activities the Alliance considers criminal unethical and amoral.

When there is corruption in law enforcement, standard proceedure is to bring in outsiders to investigate. Quite often it is another precinct.

Basicly your arguement still seems to be that it is somehow treasonous to arrest or kill traitors. And lest you forget, THE ALLIANCE IS PART OF THE COUNCIL. So bringing in Council law enforcement is not any more traitorous than bringing in a different precinct.

Moiaussi, while I admire what you are doing here, you'd be best off just ignoring Seboist here. TIM could personally gas a room full of puppies and kittens and record it to show to little kids and s/he would STILL try to justify it.

[Moiaussi]

You are probably right.... I have a bad habit of tilting at windmills though

[Seboist]

khordlambert wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Shepard isn't the one scheming at arrest and kill members of the Alliance and other human groups at the behest of an alien government, so no.If Cerberus is to be dealt with it's by the Alliance and for human interests.

I look forward to lynching Anderson from the tallest redwood in California in ME3.

You seem to be completely ignoring the fact that that the Alliance considers Cerberus 'illegal.' TIM outright says to himself in Ascension that Cerberus is not part of the Alliance and is involved in activities the Alliance considers criminal unethical and amoral.

When there is corruption in law enforcement, standard proceedure is to bring in outsiders to investigate. Quite often it is another precinct.

Basicly your arguement still seems to be that it is somehow treasonous to arrest or kill traitors. And lest you forget, THE ALLIANCE IS PART OF THE COUNCIL. So bringing in Council law enforcement is not any more traitorous than bringing in a different precinct.

Moiaussi, while I admire what you are doing here, you'd be best off just ignoring Seboist here. TIM could personally gas a room full of puppies and kittens and record it to show to little kids and s/he would STILL try to justify it.

Don't blame me for TIM having the right idea.

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

It involved high ranking traitors to the alliance.

Irrelevant. They are still members of the Alliance and thus privy to classified Alliance intel. Letting the turian get their hands on them worsens the security leak.

So.... it is less of a leak that they are sending classified intel to an enemy than if an ally gets the same intel, but the traitors (and ally) are cut off from any future intel?

Of course it is better that they be taken down 'in house' but by TIM's own words, Cerberus is actively acting against the Alliance. There is no evidence that the Turians are doing so.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Anderson made the situation worse by running to the turians. He made the Alliance look incompetent and he leaked Alliance intel to the turians.

He leaked intel about a common enemy to the turians rather than risk letting said enemy know that the Alliance had said intel before they could actually use it.

In any confrontation with the turians now the Alliance will be at disadvantage thanks to him. The Alliance looking like it can't solve it's own problems undermines its credibility which harms its relations with every race in the galaxy.

Actively working with other species to eliminate the anti-alien extremists amongst our own? You're right, you're absolutely right. That would make the Alliance look terrible to the rest of the galaxy. How dare they be pro-alien, those bastards.

There is also no guarantee the turians only arrested Alliance officials with known Cerberus connections.

Rather a moot point, as the only Alliance officials that show up in the intel have Cerberus connections.

They could have just as easily used the raid as an excuse to grab any Alliance officer who they didn't like or who had sensitive intelligence that they wanted.

No, they couldn't have. The Alliance can easily look at the intel Anderson gave them and say, "This guy's not in here!" And then all hell breaks loose. And the turians know it.

The question of the Cerberus agents having sensitive Alliance intel is a point worth worrying about, I give you that.

Modifié par Nathan Redgrave, 17 mai 2011 - 09:02 .

[Nathan Redgrave]

Saphra Deden wrote...

The Alliance wasn't working with anyone. It was cut out of the loop entirely.

But it was an officially authorized joint-species mission, so what's it going to look like to the outside? You think the Alliance is going to pretend they had no idea what was up and make themselves look truly stupid, or would they more likely take the "I meant to do that" line? The Alliance would easily come out of it looking better to the rest of the galaxy if they played to the "We willingly cooperated with another species" line.

Not necessarily and there is no guarantee the turians have to ONLY target the officers listed by name in the intelligence. They can invent any number of reasons to explain why they arrested other people whilst claiming they too were connected.

"When we reviewed the data it was clear that this person was also connected to Cerberus even though they weren ever mentioned by name."

The real motive being to gain access to as many Alliance secrets as possible and to eliminate Alliance hawks.

If the Alliance cries fowl the turians just remind the galaxy that the Alliance was unwilling or unable to deal with its own dirty laundry and they're bullies and newcommers anyway. The turians win the public relations game, easily.

Or the Alliance accuses the Turians of overstepping the agreed-upon bounds of their joint-species op and the Turians look like the bad guys. One or the other.

So you know better, but you persist on defending Anderson anyway. So you're a fool then.

I prioritize removing a clear threat over being paranoid about a "possible" threat. If you disagree, well, you have the right to your screwed-up priorities.

Modifié par Nathan Redgrave, 17 mai 2011 - 09:18 .

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Smeelia wrote...

It was the Council laws that the Quarians were attempting to circumvent

Ah yes, those righteous Council laws that the quarians have no right to appeal to influence because they have no representation in the Council government. Not even an embassy. This is truly the greatest example of the glory and benevolence of the Council.

They did have an embassy at the time (it was removed for violating Council laws and putting the galaxy in danger, basically).  Those laws were designed to prevent something terrible like, say, an AI race being created that then kills many of it's creators and drives them off of their worlds.  I don't think anyone's arguing that the Council is perfect but it's hard to argue that they were wrong to have those laws.

Saphra Deden wrote...
Remember, Council later tells Udina that it won't risk war over a "few dozen human colonies". They repeat this stance again in ME2. Ekuna was much deeper in Terminus space than any of the human colonies in Traverse and yet the Council was quite eager to send a fleet in to murder the quarians settling there.

It's one of the greatest contradictions in the Council system.

It doesn't make sense that Ekuna would be in the Terminus systems, if it was then Council laws wouldn't apply to it and the Quarians could have settled it (at their own risk) without having to bother the Council at all.  I wonder if that's a flaw in the lore or if it's actually in Citadel Space (if only barely).

It's not really a contradiction in the Council system anyway, they will only act within their jurisdiction.  Races don't have to join the Council, it's just usually better to (for all the trade benefits and such).  Council laws only apply in Citadel Space so any race that doesn't join isn't subject to the Council's laws (outside of Citadel Space at least).

There are plenty of reasons not to go charging into the Terminus systems to protect a "few dozen human colonies" that have nothing to do with the fact that the colonies are Human, it can't be proven that the fact they are Human colonies is even relevant.  Besides, those colonies knew they were taking a risk and would have known that Council assistance was unlikely (and at least some wanted to get away from the Alliance and Council).

[SpaceXDebris]

Not to detract from the current discussion, but.. I had a random thought concerning Cerberus and Morality

I played through ME1 and ME2 with the same character. Her decisions were based on a "for the people / against the system" not tolerating bs, kind of stance. For example, she was generally paragon to her crew, but told the council to shove off. Same in ME2, except she was paragon to her crew and told Cerberus to shove off..

What I wonder, these decisions in ME1 ended up Renegade, while in ME2 they ended up being Paragon. In conclusion, I think morality is too complex for a two-dimensional scale

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

No they didn't. I'm talking about Ekuna here.

You could have made that clearer in the post (the quote of mine you took was talking about prior to the Geth).

I don't think a law protecting your planets from unauthorised habitation is unreasonable either.  Would you support the Quarians (or anyone else for that matter) if they decided to settle on Earth or other Human colonies/planets without permission?

Saphra Deden wrote...
Well I'm not the one who put it there.

So? I was merely pointing out that for the "Council was acting outside of their jurisdiction" argument to work the lore would have to be wrong on something (or at least our information has significant holes).  If we assume that Ekuna is in Citadel Space (and there's no solid evidence otherwise) it makes a lot more sense.

Saphra Deden wrote...
Though you should remember that "Council space" is an unofficial term. I get the impression the Council quietly considering the entire galaxy to be "Council space" but of-course they can't enforce their will on all of it.

The term "Citadel Space" is unofficial but basically if the space is owned by a Council or associated member race then it's subject to Council law and is considered part of Citadel Space.  There's nothing unreasonable about that since anyone that joins the Council is consenting to it and they are under no obligation to join the Council.  The power of the Council and the value of being a member may strongly encourage races to join but the Council doesn't force anyone and they have the right to leave at any time.

SpaceXDebris wrote...

Not to detract from the current discussion, but.. I had a random thought concerning Cerberus and Morality

I played through ME1 and ME2 with the same character. Her decisions were based on a "for the people / against the system" not tolerating bs, kind of stance. For example, she was generally paragon to her crew, but told the council to shove off. Same in ME2, except she was paragon to her crew and told Cerberus to shove off..

What I wonder, these decisions in ME1 ended up Renegade, while in ME2 they ended up being Paragon. In conclusion, I think morality is too complex for a two-dimensional scale

True enough, Paragon and Renegade really only come into decisions if you meta-game (although you may happen to agree with all/most of one particular side's decisions).  Even some choices that the game assigns a "morality" to are debatable (for example, the Geth decision in Legion's loyalty mission).

I'm not sure you can really call Paragon and Renegade measures of morality though, the theory is that both are "good" (in that they're trying to save the galaxy and protect people) it's just that they have different ways of going about it and different places they draw the lines.

Saphra Deden wrote...
I don't understand why the anti-Cerberus folks are so nice to their crew when their crew is still Cerberus.

Generally speaking, people associated with an organisation don't always share the views of the organisation or the responsibility for the wider decisions.  For example, when Humanity joined the Council they didn't become responsible for all of the actions the Council takes (nor did every individual Human everywhere).

Besides, you can be nice to people that you don't agree with or even that are your enemy.

[LorDC]

Saphra Deden wrote...

I don't understand why the anti-Cerberus folks are so nice to their crew when their crew is still Cerberus.

Aww, but they are not Cerberus at all. They were handpicked by TIM just to suit Shepard's desires.
Or that's just what they believe to be.

[Someone With Mass]

Most of the crew on the ship is ex-Alliance. They don't know what's going on behind the curtains.