1939 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Where did I say that? All I said was that it isn't terrorism.

You're indicating that blowing up a ship when they clearly have no rime or reason to do so is justifiable just because they're trying to grab something that's theirs, that's all.

... I didn't say that.

[upsettingshorts]

Pulletlamer wrote...

Answer me please, wouldn't it be the same the salarians did with the Krogan?
Don't put my quotes out of context, please. Thanks in advance.

I don't think comparisons are useful in this case (or the Geth one for that matter).  I think it is more useful to examine each decision on its own merits.

So to answer your question:  I honestly do not believe your question is relevant, at least when it comes to my thought process.  If it helps you though, I'm not going to argue that you shouldn't use it as a guide.

Someone With Mass wrote...

You're indicating that blowing up a ship when they clearly have no rime or reason to do so is justifiable just because they're trying to grab something that's theirs, that's all.

No, we're just saying it's not terrorism.

Here's a short example:

There is a red truck.

You: "That truck is blue.  The Alliance and Council have officially said so"
Us: "Actually, it's red.  There's no blue paint even on it."
You: "So you're saying it's not even a truck?!"

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:13 .

[Leonia]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Too tired to go browse through my
two novels at the moment, though Retribution does mention it once and
IIRC the Ascension Project is using some of the data retrieved from the
Subject Zero project.

Nothing to say they don't keep it themselves, though.

Correct on the Ascension front, granted Cerberus is probably responsible for the existance of most human biotics but hey it does prove they are working in humanity's best interests ultimately. Remember TIM even lets Shepard give Daniel up to the Ascension project in Overlord, he doesn't agree but he doesn't try to stop Shepard either.

I believe there are CDN entries that cover some of the other front companies but since we don't know all the name of the front companies that support Cerberus behind-the-scenes, it's harder to connect all those dots. I believe the genetic company that Miranda's father owned/worked for was one such company and it sounded like they were doing a lot of good for humanity as a whole beyond just supporting Cerberus.

Modifié par leonia42, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:15 .

[Homebound]

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

missing the point. they attacked the migrant fleet.

Missing the point: they were after Gillian. The quarians were in the way when they decided to provide her shelter. Their fault. Like so many things they try to blame others for.

Thats right, they provided shelter.

[Leonia]

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

missing the point. they attacked the migrant fleet.

Missing the point: they were after Gillian. The quarians were in the way when they decided to provide her shelter. Their fault. Like so many things they try to blame others for.

Thats right, they provided shelter.

So when the Pakistanis provided sheltered for a known terrorist, it is considered terrorism when the US attacks them and retrieves the terrorist that they are protecting?

[Homebound]

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

missing the point. they attacked the migrant fleet.

Missing the point: they were after Gillian. The quarians were in the way when they decided to provide her shelter. Their fault. Like so many things they try to blame others for.

Thats right, they provided shelter.

So when the Pakistanis provided sheltered for a known terrorist, it is considered terrorism when the US attacks them and retrieves the terrorist that they are protecting?

The Quarians provided asylum to a child who was in danger from a criminal organization with a history of abusing children.

[Leonia]

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism. It was not an attack against the flotilla. It was a "retrieve what is ours". Whether you agree that Gillian is "thers" or not isn't the question. You accused them of attacking the fleet when the fleet was simply putting themselves in known danger when they agreed to provide shelter for the child. They knew they were going to attract attention from Cerberus by doing that. So Cerberus did as was expected. They got the child and killed whatever quarians got in the away. It was not a coordinated attack against the Fleet at all, it was a rescue and retrieve operation with casualties on the quarian side.

Modifié par leonia42, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:17 .

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

... I didn't say that.

No, but you're indicating it.

[Homebound]

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

Modifié par Hellbound555, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:16 .

[Pulletlamer]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Pulletlamer wrote...

Answer me please, wouldn't it be the same the salarians did with the Krogan?
Don't put my quotes out of context, please. Thanks in advance.

I don't think comparisons are useful in this case (or the Geth one for that matter).  I think it is more useful to examine each decision on its own merits.

So to answer your question:  I honestly do not believe your question is relevant, at least when it comes to my thought process.  If it helps you though, I'm not going to argue that you shouldn't use it as a guide.

I'm not using it as a guide to justify my reasons, I'm just saying that giving reaper technology to an organization you know little about it and his motivations (and everything you know is not ethic or positive) is as bad as doing what the salarians did with the whole Rachni conflict.

Upsettingshorts wrote..

Someone With Mass wrote...

You're indicating that blowing
up a ship when they clearly have no rime or reason to do so is
justifiable just because they're trying to grab something that's theirs,
that's all.

No, we're just saying it's not terrorism.

Here's a short example:

There is a red truck.

You: "That truck is blue.  The Alliance and Council have officially said so"
Us: "Actually, it's red.  There's no blue paint even on it."
You: "So you're saying it's not even a truck?!"

Doesn't matter the truck comparison. If Al-Qaeda blew up a train station, killing hundreds of innocent perople, just to cause a distraction to release "insert name here" person from prison wouldn't it be terrorism?

I think it would.

Modifié par Pulletlamer, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:18 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

But not a terrorist one.

[Dave of Canada]

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

She's not arguing that it isn't a criminal act. It's been said countless times, it is criminal but it isn't terrorism.

[upsettingshorts]

Someone With Mass wrote...

No, but you're indicating it.

No he isn't.  Unless you're arguing that there are no other crimes other than terrorism, and that by saying "Cerberus aren't terrorists" one denies that Cerberus is guilty of any other crimes.

Except there are other crimes, and they are.

Pulletlamer wrote...

If Al-Qaeda blew up a train station, killing hundreds of innocent perople, just to cause a distraction to release "insert name here" person from prison wouldn't it be terrorism?

I think it would.

I disagree.  It'd still be mass murder, though.  That said, convenient hypothetical without real world parallel has hints of strawman.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:21 .

[Leonia]

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

They didn't attack the whole damn flotilla, they infiltrated one ship and a few quarians lost their lives. Stop exaggerating.

[Leonia]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

... I didn't say that.

No, but you're indicating it.

Perhaps we should establish arguments based on what is actually being said instead of delving into the realm of mind-reading?

[Kaiser Shepard]

Pulletlamer wrote...

Doesn't matter the truck comparison. If Al-Qaeda blew up a train station, killing hundreds of innocent perople, just to cause a distraction to release "insert name here" person from prison wouldn't it be terrorism?

No, because the fear/dissent would in this case be a means to an end. If it were to be terrorism, the fear/dissent itself would be the end.

[Someone With Mass]

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

They didn't break any law by offering shelter to a human they knew little of. It's not like they were hiding a mass murderer. That'd be something different.

Also, Cerberus has no right in the whole galaxy to enforce some kind of law or rule anywhere.

Because that'd make them the biggest hypocrites in existence.

[Someone With Mass]

leonia42 wrote...

Perhaps we should establish arguments based on what is actually being said instead of delving into the realm of mind-reading?

Or perhaps people should just word their sentences better so they can't be misread.

[Pulletlamer]

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

They didn't attack the whole damn flotilla, they infiltrated one ship and a few quarians lost their lives. Stop exaggerating.

Still blewing up/attacking one ship could be perfectly considered an attack against a political government (quarians in this case) and a declaration of opposition against this governement / war.

Which I think it's terrorism.

[upsettingshorts]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

No, because the fear/dissent would in this case be a means to an end. If it were to be terrorism, the fear/dissent itself would be the end.

Thanks for understanding this.

The capability to grasp nuance is depressingly rare on the BSN, and the world at large for that matter.

[Leonia]

Not to be blunt but terrorism is about, well, terror and fear. If there's no agenda or attempt to scare people, then it's just a criminal act. Terrorism always furthers a cause or agenda, it's not the same as stealing an old lady's purse.

[Homebound]

leonia42 wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And the quarians suffered the penalty for harboring her when they came knocking. Not terrorism.

Still criminal act. Attacking the flotilla and all..

They didn't attack the whole damn flotilla, they infiltrated one ship and a few quarians lost their lives. Stop exaggerating.

They still attacked.

[Dave of Canada]

Someone With Mass wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Perhaps we should establish arguments based on what is actually being said instead of delving into the realm of mind-reading?

Or perhaps people should just word their sentences better so they can't be misread.

Pointing out what's terrorism and what isn't terrorism can be misread as implying the ends justify the means? Sorry, I don't think I could've been any clearer. Especially when I was denying it. Twice.

[Leonia]

Pulletlamer wrote...

Still blewing up/attacking one ship could be perfectly considered an attack against a political government (quarians in this case) and a declaration of opposition against this governement / war.

Which I think it's terrorism.

If you read the novel, you will realise that TIM wanted the operation to be as quiet as possible. He was trying to AVOID such a conflict with the quarian people. Get the girl, get out, minimum casualties. If he wanted to directly attack the flotilla he might have brought in more than Kai Leng and actually made his intentions known as such.

Sure, the quarians see it as an attack, no question about that.. Tali makes that pretty clear. But that doesn't mean it WAS an attack or was supposed to be an attempt to undermine the Flotilla's government. The quarians got in the way, that was all. 

Again, you are using the term terrorism wrong, by the way.

Modifié par leonia42, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:26 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

No, because the fear/dissent would in this case be a means to an end. If it were to be terrorism, the fear/dissent itself would be the end.

Thanks for understanding this.

The capability to grasp nuance is depressingly rare on the BSN, and the world at large for that matter.

I aim to please.

But then again, it isn't that much of an achievement. I too expected pretty much everyone to know the difference, but alas...