310 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

Mesina2 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I might remind you that in 1&2 Cerberus was still offical part of the Alliance, so you are hereby calling them terrorist to?

According to LotSB Dossiers, Cerberus is called a terrorist organization by both Council and Alliance.


You got no evidence to support that Cerberus is official part of Alliance.

Cerberus has people in Alliance, but secretly.
And they had to kill some people to replace their own.

Was overlord and act aimed against the state, no it wasn't.

You don't have to attack a state to be a terrorist.

Hey, dude play Mass Efect 1, Cerberus was an Alliance ops initative, gone rogue a few months prior to start of the game, of course the second game retconned this, making people believe it was always independant.

Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

in order for something to be terrorism, you have to deliberately want to hurt people, David Archer was just necessary sacrifice in project to make contact with the geth.

[jamesp81]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Nothing in particular.  There's a big difference, however, in temporarily ceding Earth to the Reapers and abandoning it entirely.  At some point, the fleet will be used to retake, or attempt to retake, the homeworld.  That's what humanity has a fleet for.  If the fleet does not ultimately attempt to do this, there's no REASON to even have a fleet.

And no self-respecting military force is going standby indefinitely while their homes are ravaged by space monsters.

Also no military would ever let the enemy gain a foothold in their galaxy from which the enemy can use it to strike more and more places within. Logic implies they would try to stop them by any means from gaining that foothold.

I actually find it silly unless they explain in game through story how an entire fleet of ships the size of what they are could even get to earth without trying to be stopped or atleast tried to be stopped by not just human ships. Unless other races could not send ships to help stop them due to their own worlds are also being attacked so resources needed there then wouldn't be so iffy relying on human ships alone.

Well, space is a very big place.  Hiding an entire fleet in the empty void is not appreciably harder than hiding a single ship in the empty void.

I think the justification we're seeing is that the Reapers hit the Batarians first.  They are very insular and don't let any info out, so no info is coming from them other than "something is really wrong down there."

[Dragoonlordz]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...


I don't think any of the Alliance leaders would put their faith in some terrorist to come up with a solution for them.

They seemed perfectly willing to do just that with regards to the Collectors.

"We're all hoping you and Cerberus have an ace up your sleeves." - Hackett

It's a figure of speech he isn't speaking on behalf of the alliance in an official capacity.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:12 .

[Fixers0]

MDT1 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...



I might remind you that in 1&2 Cerberus was still offical part of the Alliance, so you are hereby calling them terrorist to?

Was overlord and act aimed against the state, no it wasn't.

So lets say a CIA agent decides to blow himself up in a mosque without order from the President.

According to your logic either the CIA is a terrorist organization or what he did isn't terrorism.

The Alliance didn't seem to have a problem with it, and while they officialy have gone 'rogue' it still part of the Alliance, Besides terrorism is only terrorism when your goal is deliberately kill or hurt people

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Hey, dude play Mass Efect 1, Cerberus was an Alliance ops initative, gone rogue a few months prior to start of the game, of course the second game retconned this, making people believe it was always independant.

Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

in order for something to be terrorism, you have to deliberately want to hurt people, David Archer was just necessary sacrifice in project to make contact with the geth.

Oh, no. The writers actually did a mistake that they tried to fix. The game is RUINED FOREVER.

Pff...

[jamesp81]

Arijharn wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...
I'm not sure we would.  Consider that many of the thug regimes of the Terminus systems reside in the galactic north east.  In terms of where the Reapers enter the galaxy and their general direction, this would be one of the last places to be hit by them.

Even if a few scattered human outposts survive, they would be incapable of defending themselves and would be conquered in short order by such thug regimes.  Many of which have an axe to grind with humans.

You and I also know that the council wouldn't lift a damned finger to stop it, either.

Maybe, but that's assuming that the Reapers wont devastate their colonies as well. Humanity may be getting hit first, but we aren't the last.

Granted, it all depends on when they are stopped.  Still, criminals seem to find a way no matter the circumstances.

[Tonymac]

Its Earth. Its a dump. Why is science fiction so cool - filled with other worlds and and starships and planets and wonder? Because they are NOT Earth.

These other places are not full of screaming little kids and retards and traffic and beggars. They are not filled with ****** sorry cops eating doughnuts while tagging passersbye with a speeding ticket - or red light cameras - or high taxes and maggot welfare programs for lazy people who are too worthless to make something of themselves. These other worlds are not full of pollution and disease and idiots who live in the desert and complain about the lack of food and water. They are not flooded with illegal immigration problems.

These other worlds are free of the only thing that makes Earth a dump - Humanity! And that is exactly why I would let the place burn to the ground. The Reapers can have it.

Leave a giant "For Sale" sign in the middle of it and let the Reapers move in. You want it?! Take it - I dare you!

Yes, this is a good bit overboard - and it's made to make people laugh. After all, its Monday and I just pounded down 2 Monster energy drinks.

[CroGamer002]

Fixers0 wrote...

Hey, dude play Mass Efect 1, Cerberus was an Alliance ops initative, gone rogue a few months prior to start of the game, of course the second game retconned this, making people believe it was always independant.

When did I said they were always independent?

Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

in order for something to be terrorism, you have to deliberately want to hurt people, David Archer was just necessary sacrifice in project to make contact with the geth.

You shot yourself in the foot. You said then need to threaten a state for that and now you game me proof that harming people enough.

And Cerberus did harm people in Overlord, David Archer( by putting him on that thing) and Geth( brainwashing them).

[Someone With Mass]

Saphra Deden wrote...

They were doing just that. In that same dialogue Hackett tells you the Alliance is sending fleets to guard their larger colonies and evacuating their smaller ones.

We also have the Alliance base on Watson.

So just accept it, on this relatively minor issue you were proven wrong. You'll look better if you just admit defeat here. Otherwise you look ignorant.

Okay, I was wrong. Go stroke your ego dick some more. It obviously keeps you alive.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:24 .

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Hey, dude play Mass Efect 1, Cerberus was an Alliance ops initative, gone rogue a few months prior to start of the game, of course the second game retconned this, making people believe it was always independant.

Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

in order for something to be terrorism, you have to deliberately want to hurt people, David Archer was just necessary sacrifice in project to make contact with the geth.

Oh, no. The writers actually did a mistake that they tried to fix. The game is RUINED FOREVER.

Pff...

No, no, no Cerberus is was Alliance initative, but they decided to go rogue, or at least offical, how is this a mistake,

Of course for the second game Marketing wanted something 'cool' like working for the bad guys, but they first needed to retcon their history in order to make it viable or whatever.

[Fixers0]

Mesina2 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Hey, dude play Mass Efect 1, Cerberus was an Alliance ops initative, gone rogue a few months prior to start of the game, of course the second game retconned this, making people believe it was always independant.

When did I said they were always independent?

Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

in order for something to be terrorism, you have to deliberately want to hurt people, David Archer was just necessary sacrifice in project to make contact with the geth.

You shot yourself in the foot. You said then need to threaten a state for that and now you game me proof that harming people enough.

And Cerberus did harm people in Overlord, David Archer( by putting him on that thing) and Geth( brainwashing them).

I guess you don't seem to meaning of the word ''deliberately'', if you want to deliberately hurt someone, you need to do this because you want to do so.

[Goneaviking]

Fixers0 wrote...


I might remind you that in 1&2 Cerberus was still offical part of the Alliance, so you are hereby calling them terrorist to?

Was overlord and act aimed against the state, no it wasn't.

In Mass Effect 1 Cerberus was portrayed as being rogue elements in the Alliance military. It was not part of the Alliance.

In Mass Effect 2 Cerberus is said to have supporters within the Alliance. It was not part of the Alliance.

What defines a terrorist is not actions against a state, what defines him is politically motivated acts of violence against non-combatants by people who are not acting on behalf of a government. Cerberus is not a part of any government.

[CroGamer002]

Fixers0 wrote...

No, no, no Cerberus is was Alliance initative, but they decided to go rogue, or at least offical, how is this a mistake,

Of course for the second game Marketing wanted something 'cool' like working for the bad guys, but they first needed to retcon their history in order to make it viable or whatever.

What history?

We know nothing about Cerberus in ME1 but that they went rogue, did some sick experiments, killed Alliance soldiers and Admiral.

[Dragoonlordz]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Okay, when are you going to understand that the Alliance isn't allowed to work within Terminus space?

They were doing just that. In that same dialogue Hackett tells you the Alliance is sending fleets to guard their larger colonies and evacuating their smaller ones.

We also have the Alliance base on Watson.

So just accept it, on this relatively minor issue you were proven wrong. You'll look better if you just admit defeat here. Otherwise you look ignorant.

The Alliance is sending ships and troops to defend colonies it has nothing to do with what Cerberus is doing, seporate actions not official co-operation. Hacket doesn't speak in an official capacity for Alliance with his figure of speech in your example, the sending of troops to defend colonies is not a cooperation with Cerberus, they are two different entities working seporatley who just happen to for time being attacking/defending against the same oppressor. In fact your Hackett statement is proof of that alone that the Alliance isn't working with Cerberus in any regard and thats why Hackett hopes given Alliance is doing something else with different goals that Shepherd and his crew (whatever they upto with Cerberus) would also be of help even though Alliance isn't helping them.

'Terror'ism it's in the word, using terror akin to civilian casualties to enforce your will on people through fear. Doesn't matter if it's goverment imposing it or a fanatic group. Experiments on humans isn't terrorism if noone knows about it aka telling people will be used for it if they don't submit. However killing of an admiral and civilians and of picking high profile people and innocents for purpose of putting off anyone else from retaliatin is. (imho)

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:29 .

[Fixers0]

Goneaviking wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...


I might remind you that in 1&2 Cerberus was still offical part of the Alliance, so you are hereby calling them terrorist to?

Was overlord and act aimed against the state, no it wasn't.

In Mass Effect 1 Cerberus was portrayed as being rogue elements in the Alliance military. It was not part of the Alliance.

In Mass Effect 2 Cerberus is said to have supporters within the Alliance. It was not part of the Alliance.

What defines a terrorist is not actions against a state, what defines him is politically motivated acts of violence against non-combatants by people who are not acting on behalf of a government. Cerberus is not a part of any government.

I was talking about example 1&2 , Akuze and Teltin.

[CroGamer002]

Fixers0 wrote...

I guess you don't seem to meaning of the word ''deliberately'', if you want to deliberately hurt someone, you need to do this because you want to do so.

So hurting Geth was just an accident?

[Fixers0]

Mesina2 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I guess you don't seem to meaning of the word ''deliberately'', if you want to deliberately hurt someone, you need to do this because you want to do so.

So hurting Geth was just an accident?

There are just machines, AI

[Arijharn]

Can Geth 'feel'? Oh wait, no I don't want to open that particular can of worms.

[Fixers0]

Mesina2 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

No, no, no Cerberus is was Alliance initative, but they decided to go rogue, or at least offical, how is this a mistake,

Of course for the second game Marketing wanted something 'cool' like working for the bad guys, but they first needed to retcon their history in order to make it viable or whatever.

What history?

We know nothing about Cerberus in ME1 but that they went rogue, did some sick experiments, killed Alliance soldiers and Admiral.

Because the Mass effect 2 gives the impression that Cerberus has been independant from the start, Just talk to EDI about the construction of the normandy,,

"Cerberus encourgend the Alliance to Co-Developd the original Normandy'' or something like that.

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:27 .

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

There are just machines, AI

Or not.

They're sentient beings, because they're trying to fulfill what they believe is their purpose in life. No-one told them to do that but themselves.

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

There are just machines, AI

Or not.

They're sentient beings, because they're trying to fulfill what they believe is their purpose in life. No-one told them to do that but themselves.

They are not seen life forms, nor do they have any kind of nervous system that can influence their feelings.

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 juillet 2011 - 02:30 .

[CroGamer002]

Fixers0 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

I guess you don't seem to meaning of the word ''deliberately'', if you want to deliberately hurt someone, you need to do this because you want to do so.

So hurting Geth was just an accident?

There are just machines, AI

No, they aren't just that.
They are sentient and very possible sapient.


Even Quarians call Tali's father a war criminal for experimenting on Geth.

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Because the Mass effect 2 gives the impression that Cerberus has been independant from the start, Just talk to EDI about the construction of the normandy,,

"Cerberus encourgend the Alliance to Co-Developd the original Normandy'' or something like that.

I'm just wondering, do you have a different definition of "independant"?

Because all Cerberus ever did was to infiltrate the Alliance military to be able to pull some strings here and there.

They're not dependant on the Alliance at all.