144 réponses à ce sujet

[Alpha-Centuri]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

snip

Also, give me a good reason why humanity is
inherently more worth saving than the other species - note that "because
I'm human" doesn't work since that's not likely to convince
others.

Proximity. It is a valid argument. Busting out some sociology here, bear with me.

Why is your family more worth saving than anothers? (I'm speculating here, for all I know, you may hate your mom/dad/siblings to the point of wanting to kill them)

Notice when serial killers are caught and they ask the neighbors, many respond "Oh really? That guy is a sweet man and wouldn't harm a fly!"

You are:
Closer to your family than your neighbor.
Closer to your neighbor than the neighborhood across town (Chicago Cubs North Side vs Chicago White Sox South Side rivalry.)
Closer to your city than another city (New York v L.A).

If you extapolate that, you would be closer to humanity than to the rest of the Citadel races, and closer to the Citadel than the Batarians.

It's only a theory, but its one that I suscribe to (within reason of course).

Modifié par Alpha-Centuri, 25 mai 2011 - 03:21 .

[Moiaussi]

If you start punishing entire populations because of the actions of a relatively small number of terrorists, you end up with noone surviving.

That said, if Balak was state sponsored (which from what we know is likely) then open warfare might be justifiable on the basis that we are already in a guerilla war.

The system in question did seem to be a military target (per the codex, it had a strong military presence).

The reality though is that the Council have no desire for warfare regardless of circumstances, and it is all academic because the Reapers were the actual target.

[Richpur]

300k is only the beginning; Shepard's following in the footsteps of Inquisitor Kryptman. Destroy entire worlds to deprive the invading extragalactic horde of resources and slow the invasion. It's the galaxy's only hope of surviving and he'll be punished for it accordingly.

Modifié par Richpur, 25 mai 2011 - 03:29 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Proximity. It is a valid argument.

Yes, that's how humans think. I can see why humans would want to save humans first. I was looking for a rational reason to save humans first.

[Dean_the_Young]

If human thinking isn't rational, then there's literally no other arguments that can be made.

[noxsachi]

Richpur wrote...

300k is only the beginning; Shepard's following in the footsteps of Inquisitor Kryptman. Destroy entire worlds to deprive the invading extragalactic horde of resources and slow the invasion. It's the galaxy's only hope of surviving and he'll be punished for it accordingly.

Punished? A real Inquisitor doesn't start the day off without a rousing Exterminatus. Anything less is heresy.

[Alpha-Centuri]

Someone With Mass wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Shepard DIDN'T WANT to blowup the relay, he had no choice, Balak WANTED to destroy Terra Nova.

The batarians don't know that. Probably wouldn't care, either.

This.

"Intentions don't matter. It's the end result we are all judged by. Evil
in the name of good is still evil. And when you dance with the devil
you seldom get to pick the tune."

- Sherrilyn Kenyon

[Moiaussi]

Alpha-Centuri wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Shepard DIDN'T WANT to blowup the relay, he had no choice, Balak WANTED to destroy Terra Nova.

The batarians don't know that. Probably wouldn't care, either.

This.

"Intentions don't matter. It's the end result we are all judged by. Evil
in the name of good is still evil. And when you dance with the devil
you seldom get to pick the tune."

- Sherrilyn Kenyon

While I agree with the quote, it doesn't really apply. There is no reason to believe that the Batarians in that system would have survived. The Reapers leave no traces.

As for how the Batarians feel about their system being blown up, Shepard isn't being tried by the Batarians. It is arguable if even a conviction would appease them.

[Alpha-Centuri]

Ahh valid point Moiaussi. Now it boils down to whether one of them got out, or the Indoctrinated Shuttle Guy went and proclaimed to the world that Shepard blew up the relay.

[TexasToast712]

Shepard killed 300,000 Batarians/supporters. Who cares? Batarians are evil and Im gonna use em as a distraction for the Reapers to munch on in ME3.

[Yakko77]

Ausstig wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'll kill em all EVEN if I DON'T have too. I hate Batarians.

Fixed for you:)

I like the way you think.

[CroGamer002]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Shepard killed 300,000 Batarians/supporters. Who cares? Batarians are evil and Im gonna use em as a distraction for the Reapers to munch on in ME3.

All you racist are alike, charge hate fast without regard of consequences.

[SalsaDMA]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

  Yes intent does matter.

An important part.

I find it weird how people can excuse the intent of wanting to kill 4 millions with "But they sucked at it", as if that made their intent of attempting it any less. Are people going to wait untill they suceed before recognizing the intent or something?

[LorDC]

BlackwindTheCommander wrote...

 So I've been thinking, are the events of Arrival really something we have to worry about going to war with the Batarians over? 

Granted, 300,000+ civillian casuallities is horrific, but Batarian extremists tried to kill 4.4 million human colonists by doing the same exact thing. Did the humans declare war on the Batarian government? Nope.

I think the Batarians can suck it up, especially since there are bigger baddies to worry about come ME3.

a) Shepard actually succeeded in killing those Batarians.
Batarian reaction not necessarily will be same as Alliance.
c) Political situation could have changed in two years.

So, yes, Batarians may suck it up, but your analogy has nothing to do with it.

[Dean_the_Young]

SalsaDMA wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

  Yes intent does matter.

An important part.

I find it weird how people can excuse the intent of wanting to kill 4 millions with "But they sucked at it", as if that made their intent of attempting it any less. Are people going to wait untill they suceed before recognizing the intent or something?

Of course not. But intent alone has never been a substitute for effect. Arguing any man should be convicted of murder when, in fact, they have not committed the crime, only intended to, is laughable.

While others may be 'excusing' it, others still will recognizing that a failed attempt to commit mass terrorism is not as serious, or even the same weight, as a successful mass terrorism. Not politically, not socially, not economically, not legally, and not even morally.

[SalsaDMA]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

  Yes intent does matter.

An important part.

I find it weird how people can excuse the intent of wanting to kill 4 millions with "But they sucked at it", as if that made their intent of attempting it any less. Are people going to wait untill they suceed before recognizing the intent or something?

Of course not. But intent alone has never been a substitute for effect. Arguing any man should be convicted of murder when, in fact, they have not committed the crime, only intended to, is laughable.

While others may be 'excusing' it, others still will recognizing that a failed attempt to commit mass terrorism is not as serious, or even the same weight, as a successful mass terrorism. Not politically, not socially, not economically, not legally, and not even morally.

You're forgetting we're beyond pure intent, but into actual attempt that got thwarted because they sucked.

I'm sorry, but trying to detonate a WMD is trying to detonate a WMD. Just blowing it off as "he sucked and it didn't blow up like he had planned, so we don't really need to react to it" is imo being incredibly naive.

4 million people were attempted killed by a WMD, only thwarted by the timely intervention of Commander Shepard in the nick of time. Hard evidence exists about who did it and the instigator was a terroist wanting to make it a known 'retaliation' (Heck, he even considered it justified since he felt they were at war already). Nothing was heard of it polititcally.

300k people died by a WMD, extremely sketchy evidence exists about who did it. Nobody is going to walk up and yell 'I did it!'. A political ****storm erupts targeted on Shepard.

Sorry, reactions doesn't compute.

[kaiki01]

BlackwindTheCommander wrote...

 So I've been thinking, are the events of Arrival really something we have to worry about going to war with the Batarians over? 

Granted, 300,000+ civillian casuallities is horrific, but Batarian extremists tried to kill 4.4 million human colonists by doing the same exact thing. Did the humans declare war on the Batarian government? Nope.

I think the Batarians can suck it up, especially since there are bigger baddies to worry about come ME3.

Tried to kill, and did kill are very different.

[Bad King]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Shepard killed 300,000 Batarians/supporters. Who cares? Batarians are evil and Im gonna use em as a distraction for the Reapers to munch on in ME3.

So an entire population is evil just because they belong to a certain race? lolwut?!

[Dean_the_Young]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

  Yes intent does matter.

An important part.

I find it weird how people can excuse the intent of wanting to kill 4 millions with "But they sucked at it", as if that made their intent of attempting it any less. Are people going to wait untill they suceed before recognizing the intent or something?

Of course not. But intent alone has never been a substitute for effect. Arguing any man should be convicted of murder when, in fact, they have not committed the crime, only intended to, is laughable.

While others may be 'excusing' it, others still will recognizing that a failed attempt to commit mass terrorism is not as serious, or even the same weight, as a successful mass terrorism. Not politically, not socially, not economically, not legally, and not even morally.

You're forgetting we're beyond pure intent, but into actual attempt that got thwarted because they sucked.

I'm sorry, but trying to detonate a WMD is trying to detonate a WMD. Just blowing it off as "he sucked and it didn't blow up like he had planned, so we don't really need to react to it" is imo being incredibly naive.

Trying to detonate a WMD is trying to detonate a WMD. It is not, however, detonating a WMD, which has far higher consequences in and of itself.

4 million people were attempted killed by a WMD, only thwarted by the timely intervention of Commander Shepard in the nick of time. Hard evidence exists about who did it and the instigator was a terroist wanting to make it a known 'retaliation' (Heck, he even considered it justified since he felt they were at war already). Nothing was heard of it polititcally.

300k people died by a WMD, extremely sketchy evidence exists about who did it. Nobody is going to walk up and yell 'I did it!'. A political ****storm erupts targeted on Shepard.

Sorry, reactions doesn't compute.

One perpetrator is a veritable unknown. At the end of the day he has killed less than a dozen, and is essentialy a lone world  not linked by reputation or employment to a particular power. The Alliance is not looking for a pretext for war with the Batarians.

One is a perpetrator who is a galactic celebrity, linked at the highest levels to the Alliance and the Council directly. He/she has killed three hundred thousand and actually destroyed a Mass Relay. The Batarians are looking for a pretext for war with the Alliance.


Results and context are, as always, far more important than mere intent.

[PrinceLionheart]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

DaBigDragon wrote...

BlackwindTheCommander wrote...

 So I've been thinking, are the events of Arrival really something we have to worry about going to war with the Batarians over? 

Granted, 300,000+ civillian casuallities is horrific, but Batarian extremists tried to kill 4.4 million human colonists by doing the same exact thing. Did the humans declare war on the Batarian government? Nope.

I think the Batarians can suck it up, especially since there are bigger baddies to worry about come ME3.

Well, yes they did try and kill everything on Terra Nova, but the key difference is they did not succeed whereas Shepard actually did end up killing a mass amount of civilians.

Difference is Shepard did it to save more lives (the rest of the galaxy) where as Balak tried to kill 4.4 million humans because he hates humans and wanted to make a political statement.  Yes intent does matter.

Having good intentions when you commit a war crime doesn't mean you didn't commit a war crime. So no, just saying "Deal with it" shouldn't be the solution to this.

Also the key difference between Balak and Shepard in this scenario is that Balak was a rogue extremist under no one's authority. He's either dead or on the Alliance's most wanted list. Shepard was on an official mission for the Alliance when he nuked an entire solar system.

Modifié par PrinceLionheart, 25 mai 2011 - 08:31 .

[Someone With Mass]

I don't think all batarians are evil.

From their point of view, Shepard is with the Alliance, as in, he carried out someone's orders to destroy the relay. So they can use that as an excuse to go to war with them.

And no, I don't think they or many others for that matter, knows about the Reapers.

[Dean_the_Young]

Oddly enough, I've always felt that the Batarians would be appropriate as a race that DOES believe in the Reapers... if only because they're too paranoid not to.

[KotorEffect3]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

DaBigDragon wrote...

BlackwindTheCommander wrote...

 So I've been thinking, are the events of Arrival really something we have to worry about going to war with the Batarians over? 

Granted, 300,000+ civillian casuallities is horrific, but Batarian extremists tried to kill 4.4 million human colonists by doing the same exact thing. Did the humans declare war on the Batarian government? Nope.

I think the Batarians can suck it up, especially since there are bigger baddies to worry about come ME3.

Well, yes they did try and kill everything on Terra Nova, but the key difference is they did not succeed whereas Shepard actually did end up killing a mass amount of civilians.

Difference is Shepard did it to save more lives (the rest of the galaxy) where as Balak tried to kill 4.4 million humans because he hates humans and wanted to make a political statement.  Yes intent does matter.

Having good intentions when you commit a war crime doesn't mean you didn't commit a war crime. So no, just saying "Deal with it" shouldn't be the solution to this.

Also the key difference between Balak and Shepard in this scenario is that Balak was a rogue extremist under no one's authority. He's either dead or on the Alliance's most wanted list. Shepard was on an official mission for the Alliance when he nuked an entire solar system.

Actualy Shepard was not on an official mission for the alliance when he blew up the relay, he was out there doing a personal favor for Hackett.  Hackett makes it very clear when contacts Shepard that this is a favor and not an alliance operation.  Shepard isn't even with the alliance at this point.  Second of all Hackett didn't tell Shepard to blow up the relay he told Shepard to rescue Dr Kenson.  Those Batarians would have ended up being reaper chow anyway and then the reapers would have killed trillions more if Shepard hadn't blown up the relay.  The real crime would have been if Shepard didn't blow up the relay.  Why is this even up for debate? 

[KotorEffect3]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Indeed?

I would be willing to sacrifice, I like just about every one else though

Edit: Also, if you sacrifice everyone to save the galaxy then you sacrifice everyone to save humanity since there won't be anybody else around.

You know I get real irritated when people quote me out of context,  I never said sacrifice everyone to save humanity,  I think you were just feeling self righteous and uppity so you decided to quote me out of context to stir something up.