Xilizhra wrote...
THEY DO NOT DESERVE IT!
I heavily disagree. Everyone deserves life, regardless of what they do, and the only time I'll accept killing is if it's an unfortunate necessity to defend others.
For once, I have to completely agree with that. Evolutionary-wise, the only way to prove yourself worthy of survival is to survive. If you live, you deserve it. It's simple as that.
If you're strong enough to completely wipe out all organic species to ensure that your kind goes on and the cycle continues, then you deserve to live.
If you're powerful enough to throw all the lesser species on the frontlines and use then as cannon fodder in a war against an overwhelming opponent, while your own species are waiting it out in the safe place, then you deserve to live.
If you're devious enough to brainwash a species who fought this war for you into destroying their own kind to save your kind, then you deserve to live.
However, my sense of fairness protests against this. If they want to prove that they deserve to live more than we do, then they should be doing more to win this war than we did. They should be doing
something, at least. You don't get to sit on your hands, with all that power to make a difference, when it's your own damn job to save the galaxy since you declared yourself to be in charge of galactic stability, while a minor species is doing all the job to ensure everyone's survival, and then declare that you somehow magically deserved to survive this war more than we did.
That's why I think the only way to decide who deserves to live more in such a dilemma - humanity or the rest of the galaxy - would be to let humanity fight to the death for their lives.
The survival of the species is not for a single person to decide. That person could be suicidal, or self-hating, or brainwashed by the Council, or indoctrinated, or unable to grasp the situation, or just wrong, or have some peculiar view of the galaxy as a whole, or have an asari LI, or have faulty genes, or misinformed, or desperate, or blackmailed, or drugged, or subdued, or he broke under pressure, or anything else, countless things.
And if you give him that power to press the trigger of mass destruction, and he loses it and uses it against the Earth - well, I just hope that humanity has a failsafe in place to prevent that from happening - like Cerberus.
Only the Earth can decide whether or not the Earth could be blown up to save the galaxy. Humanity has made it this far together - and only humanity as a whole can decide whether or not they're going to be sacrificed. You want to destroy humanity, you have to fight humans - every single one of them.
Discussions like this make me glad that Shepard is not in charge of the decisions during the war, he's not a general, and that he's just an inspiration behind the resistance, a poster boy/girl for the galaxy.
Nobody should be in charge. The union of the species must be a careful balance of powers, which each species fighting for their own survival, and combining their efforts to destroy a single enemy who threatens them all. That's what makes them into a "whole." They fight for each other.
But if they decide to sacrifice one of their alliance to save the rest of them, after they owe their lives to humanity several times over, then the scapegoat is no longer a part of the whole. If they're not fighting for humanity and want to sacrifice us, then humanity is no longer a part of them. And we're on our own. And we can destroy them all to save ourselves. And it would be perfectly moral and just. We would have survived, and they would have died, and both sides would have perfectly deserved it.
All is fair when it comes to survival of your own species. You don't get to sacrifice humanity to save your own kind and then judge TIM for having no principles, and declare your principles to be more noble than his. Nope. You're same as him. There's something on your shining halo, people - you've got blood of billions of innocents on it. Wipe it away before anyone notices.