146 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Bleachrude wrote...

re: Genophage
Given that the first time it was used, it was done by the Turians who were NOT yet a sitting council member race and the fact that the Salarian STG was the inspiration for the Spectres, the salarian STG IMO is independent of the Council itself.

The Genophage was made by the Salarians, not the Turians. But I was talking about Mordin's mission, actually. Given the rapid ascession of the Turians to councilorship immediately after, and there are blindingly obvious indications of negotiation involved.

Why create the Spectres if the citadel council can simply use the salarians?

Direct control, and serving the Council's interests directly rather than serving the Council by proxy of another group's interests.

A smaller, more exclusive, more loyal, and less bound to any other force.

I think the Salarians as a government personally believe that the Krogans are their responsibility since they are the reason why the krogans became a problem....

But the Salarians can not  and does not act without the Council's knowledge, given that it's the Council which maintains the Krogan DMZ. The Council at the very least permits it, and given that the Salarians ARE a third/quarter of the Council...

re: Turian client races
You know...as an aside..I've seen this repeated multiple times with regard to the Turians "conquering" other races..but where are people getting this from?

ME1 Codex. Particularly about Turian military doctrine: annexed races serve as auxilaries.

The issue can also be brought up in a Fem-Shep specific discussion with Kaiden, if you Renegade him.

[General User]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

General User wrote...

In government, as in most things, both the best and the worst ideas come from humans. In the case of the Citadel Council, I think they could really benefit from being organized to being something more along the lines of the United Nations on Earth.

Not only should it be an organization limited in both scope and capacity. But you would have a "Security Council" of the Great Powers (Systems Alliance, Turian Hierarchy, Salarian Union, UAR) being balanced out by a "General Assembly" which would be seated representatives from star-nations like Illium, Horizon, Garvug, Anhur, etc.

===
BTW, does anyone know if Illium is a "multi-system star-nation" or not?  I mean does the Illium government control the other little star systems in their local cluster?

I don't think it's ever said.


I think the hardest aspect of your 'by planet/system' scenario is establishing the minimum bar for qualification. Lord Darius and his pisshole lava pit, after all, need not apply.  And with billions of star systems, that's going to be a big audience chamber. Obviously, not every system need apply.

The occasional ******-ant warlord who cobbles together a vest-pocket empire and wanting to legitimize his rule by being admitted to the Citadel system shouldn't be TOO much of a problem.  Afterall, the idea of preexisting powers deciding whether or not to give recognition to smaller, newer nations might be an occasionally thorny issue, but not exactly a new one.

Doubtless those star-nations that have an axe to grind with the Alliance might choose to recognize a "Darius-type" bloke, whereas Alliance allies will probably not.  And the wheel keeps on turning.  My whole thing is: the Citadel Council shouldn't exist to solve problems, but rather to provide a framework within which problems can be solved.

And, sure a Council divided by nation not race will end up needing a pretty big facility.  It's just that (not to be too, too snarky), but self-determination is an order of magnitude more important to me than office-space availability. 

Besides relocating the "capital" of galactic politics away from the Citadel to a different, planet-based facility is not without wisdom.  As long as the mass relay system remains in place, the Citadel will be THE economic hub of the galaxy.  And keeping one's political and economic centers in separate locales seems a good idea to me.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
But the 'worst' part of it is that it does become a population growth game, for trying to settle more colonies with more people faster than others. That makes reasonable sense within a single species, in which everyone is on a different playing field, but the multi-species galaxy would just become dominated by 'fast growing' species, while slow-growing species would be slowed down.


A readily available solution to that, however, is already available. I wonder how long it would be until, by trickery or force of politics or just force itself, the galaxy was 'evened out' by bringing everyone to the same standard? The low standard?

The Asari standard, of course. We can't let those fair ladies who might reach a family of four over a thousand years be overwhelmed by the rest of the galaxy.


Universal genophage system. All species get the genophage to bring them in line with the Asari baseline.

Council species, as the military-fighting guardians of the galaxy, of course need a little extra growth as compensation for carrying out those duties and to cover the loses. Just an extra percent or three.

umm... Don't we want to get away from a race-based system?  And the unneccessary use of bioweapons against civilians?

To misquote Samara:  "If we adopt the enemy's [the Council in this case] methods, have we really beaten them?"

[Bleachrude]

There's a disconnect there as there's literally no named protectorate race other than the Volus...

The codex simply states that the turians recruit auxillaries from conquered or absorbed minor races but the only minor race we know of is the Volus.

So what races are they talking about?

(p.s. do you have a link to that kaidan/femshep scene...want to see it myself)

EDIT: Council by nation

How do you keep the balance then between the Asari Republics which would mean 1 seat per Republic and the Turian Hierarchy which is only 1 seat?

Modifié par Bleachrude, 24 novembre 2011 - 02:25 .

[Dean_the_Young]

General User wrote...

The occasional ******-ant warlord who cobbles together a vest-pocket empire and wanting to legitimize his rule by being admitted to the Citadel system shouldn't be TOO much of a problem.  Afterall, the idea of preexisting powers deciding whether or not to give recognition to smaller, newer nations might be an occasionally thorny issue, but not exactly a new one.

Bad example, then. I was thinking less in terms of 'unpleasant persons' and more in terms of 'recognition of equality with everyone who puts a ****ty prefab on a rock and calls it a settlement.'


Sort of like how if we recognized every island as an individual nation. Suddenly every rock in the sea becomes an island.

And, sure a Council divided by nation not race will end up needing a pretty big facility.  It's just that (not to be too, too snarky), but self-determination is an order of magnitude more important to me than office-space availability. 

Oh, believe me. I'm not trying to infringe on that. But an assembly of ten thousand people wouldn't be an assembly: it would be a city in its own right.

Some (multiple) levels of heirarchy is needed, just to exist.

I'd arrange it by ascending level of space. Planets-systems-sectors, as possible. Ineficent, but actually workable.

umm... Don't we want to get away from a race-based system? 

Sorry, went off into worldbuilding mode for a second. (I think that having the entire galaxy be under a genophage at Asari limits would have added a new level of design to the Mass Effect universe's setting.)

More seriously, 'groups' would race to colonize and control as much as they could, for more representation. 'Groups' which grow faster can do better. 'Groups' with more fast-breeding species can do that.

Overly long generalization on my part.

And the unneccessary use of bioweapons against civilians?

But it is necessary! For Galactic Stability!

And hey, if even the Turians have it on themselves, it's not really a punishment anymore, is it? Just... an equalizer.

Isn't equality good? 

To misquote Samara:  "If we adopt the enemy's [the Council in this case] methods, have we really beaten them?"

I'd tweak the social-contract as well (the Council is much more defensive of the interests of its associates), but it would be very much a 'gentle' genophage. It's not like the Asari don't grow and reproduce, after all. It's just that people who would otherwise grow faster... won't. But they get plenty of perks and help in getting them comfortably established as Associates in the galactic setting.

There's quite a bit to argue that disproportionate growth rates are a major instability factor in stability. That applies even on earth, but with many races it only gets bigger. If no one can pull off a Krogan/Rachni strategy, and if no one wants to suffer the losses inherent in a war for fear of weakening themselves, you'd get a much more peaceful setting. With stable populations, you'd even help even out the economic development: avoiding population-dependent busts, thanks to family planning.


Of course, most species would be adopted to this policy from the start. In a re-write of the ME universe, part of Humanity's surprising growth strength is that it grew big BEFORE it made contact with the Council, being a much faster breeder than the Asari-standard the rest of the galaxy has...

(Cue big implication of ME1: the Council trying to get Humanity to assent to the genophage-standard in exchange for more galactic power, the Alliance holding out (and threatening war if it's applied) until it gets more galactic power.)

[Dean_the_Young]

Bleachrude wrote...

There's a disconnect there as there's literally no named protectorate race other than the Volus...

There are also only about a dozen named races that we know of, despite being told there are hundreds to thousands.

The Terminus is another example. We're told that it consists of countless empires and states and such... but most of the planets we scan are actually claimed by Citadel species, and our biggest 'Terminus' local is... Aria's one-station empire that she doesn't even govern.

So what races are they talking about?

Minor races no one cares about. Humanity almost joined their ranks in the First Contact War.

(p.s. do you have a link to that kaidan/femshep scene...want to see it myself)

How do you keep the balance then between the Asari Republics which would mean 1 seat per Republic and the Turian Hierarchy which is only 1 seat?

I think his argument would be by world, even if each colony is a nation.

So if the Turian Heirarchy has a thousand colonies, and there are a thousand Asari city-state colonies, the Turian Heirarchy might have a thousand votes while there are a thousand different Asari voting.

[Jerome Jira]

Chewin3 wrote...

An ideal from of a working political government in the galaxy would be very hard, and I'm surprised in how it actually manages to work between the three Council races. Though I partially blame BioWare for not having more info on the subject. But anyway, I'll try to share my views on how it would work.

The biggest councern in a multiracial Council government would be, well, that it is multiracial. I mean think about it, we humans exist within identity groups with shared values which define our political interactions. When values are incompatible we inevitably clash. Thus, on a large scale, difference can become dangerous. And now imagine how it would be in a government like the Council. We've seen in the Mass Effect universe that politics is mainly conducted along racial lines, which means that cultural antagonisms can lead to century long wars between large identity groups, which we've seen has happened already.

This same thing has happened in our history. The culture and identity on politics has and still is hotly contested amongst political thinkers. And this is my major councern when it would come to a multiracial government. It'd the races different culture and identity that shows it clearly. Just like the krogans and their violent nature. The same thing goes for the rachni, batarians, and vorcha. Hell, this is even seen between the council races.

And with that being said, you can at the same time see a mutual respect between the fictional races of the ME universe. Despite the racial antagonisms with humans (First Contact War), turians prove they can be quite tolerant, allowing complete religious freedom within their own species - something we cannot claim of our own kind. Likewise, the monotone elcor accommodate other cultures by clarifying their sentences, explicitly stating their intended tone. The quick thinking, fast talking, seemingly emotionless, and very short lived salarians still manage to maintain healthy relationships with most other species, despite the occasional awkward verbal exchange. In actuality, the Citadel is a remarkably cosmopolitan city run by a relatively diverse political body.

Besides the tragically violent vorcha of ME2, the game succeeds in depicting morsels of hope for mutual cooperation. Even the despotic batarian government can explain their frequent criminal behavior, freeing them of cultural stereotypes. Similarly, a freed rachni queen may help save the universe and sooth the fears her ancestors once birthed.

Though we shouldn't forget that cultural exchanges are frequent in both ME games. A paragon focused player might have released the rachni queen, a universally despised species, because of her proven sentience and ability to conduct rational thought. Similarly in ME2, a paragon may legitimately choose renegade actions in his/her interactions with krogans on Tuchanka, navigating their cultural behaviors while respecting the customs that do not needlessly destroy. Many of the recruitment missions in ME2 require similar cultural interactions. The diverse crew of the Normandy testifies to cosmopolitan virtues in the fictional universe, as well as our own.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With all that being said, I must say that I'm really interested in how the governemt will turn out in ME3. A multiracial government could be a good option as well as bad one. I hardly think a single race should be the leading government in the ME universe, but if you had only a selected few races, it would probably turn out pretty well.

*image removed per Site Rule # 2.*

Agreed 110% on what you wrote.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 24 novembre 2011 - 06:01 .

[Cpt-Brit]

Bleachrude wrote...

Again...other than the AI restriction,
how does the Council meddle in the various races internal affair? I
keep seeing this, but other than AI (and maybe Prothean tech), the
Council pretty much ignores what the various goverments do...

Ok you nailed the AI research how about been forced not to do extensive gene-therapy the Council only uses Medi-Gel because its so fu*king amazing otherwise it would be banned. Intrusion.

How about been told how many Dreadnaughts you can build? I mean Germany been told it couldn't field a decent army was one of the reasons WW2 kicked off (Or at least the German's had this ran home) why shouldn't the Asair beable to build as many Dreadnaughts as the Turians oh wait Citedel Regulations. Why can't the Humans? I mean in a Paragon game they, not the Turians saved the Council, the Turians were busy fighting each other in escape pods to "Blow off steam" when they got beat.

I could probably find more if I went through ME1 & 2 again but there is definately more than 2-3...

wright1978 wrote...

Current galactic government in ME seems exactly like the EU. The big (influential) countries decide the big things & the rest follow.

By Working I also meant "Fairer". Which the EU is not . And also the rest don't always 'follow' in a fairer system the Irish would have killed of the EU Constitution because they voted no (lolz) and because the EU isn't a Democracy they basically said "Although we accept the vote, we think you should vote again just to make sure oh and please only put yes on the voting form ok? buh bye now"

[GnusmasTHX]

Empire of Man.

Anyone who doesn't like it is free to leave, anyone who challenges our security is doomed to extinction. Besides, not like the other races can't provide for themselves.

[Bleachrude]

re: Gene research

Er, that's actually the SA mostly...After meeting the Citadel and various other races, the SA was scared that too many humans would want to graft alien features to earth species and thus the SA instituted the laws restricting genetic enhancement to protect earth's unique biodiversity.

The Citadel laws themselves state that genetic research that creates life is actually ok, sentient life is regulated but not one that create sapient life which the alliance also outlaws (which I don't see as a bad thing).

re: Dreadnoughts
Given that the tradeoff was access to the wider galactic market, earth obviously saw it as a fair tradeoff.

The Batarians have shown that one doesn't HAVE to be a member of the Citadel. You just have to be one if you want to access their markets...

[General User]

Bleachrude wrote...

There's a disconnect there as there's literally no named protectorate race other than the Volus...

The codex simply states that the turians recruit auxillaries from conquered or absorbed minor races but the only minor race we know of is the Volus.

So what races are they talking about?

(p.s. do you have a link to that kaidan/femshep scene...want to see it myself)

EDIT: Council by nation

How do you keep the balance then between the Asari Republics which would mean 1 seat per Republic and the Turian Hierarchy which is only 1 seat?

I say it rests on the principle of sovereignty.  If said asari republic was the supreme power within their own borders and conducted it's own foreign policy (like I think Illium does), then yes I think they should get their own seat. 

Ditto independent human planets like Horizon.  Whereas a planet like Elysium would (as a member of the Alliance) be represented by the Alliance Ambassador. 

A planet would have to decide which would be more beneficial for them: all the burdens and benefits of independence (including more direct representation at the galactic level), or the military and economic factors that go along with being a member of something like the Alliance.

Fun historical trivia:  When the UN was first forming in the 1940's, the Soviets wanted a separate seat for each of the USSR's constituent "socialist republics."  The Americans (iirc) actually agreed on the condition that every State in the Union be given a seat too.   The Russians backed down.

[Abraham_uk]

All races represented with a seat on the Council.

[Someone With Mass]

Jerome Jira wrote...

Chewin3 wrote...
*damngoodargumentsnip*

*snip*

Agreed 110% on what you wrote.

Same here.

It's easier when you have different pairs of eyes looking at the problems.

Not to mention that the Council won't be horribly biased towards one race.

[Cpt-Brit]

Bleachrude wrote...

re: Gene research

Er, that's actually the SA mostly...After meeting the Citadel and various other races, the SA was scared that too many humans would want to graft alien features to earth species and thus the SA instituted the laws restricting genetic enhancement to protect earth's unique biodiversity.

The Citadel laws themselves state that genetic research that creates life is actually ok, sentient life is regulated but not one that create sapient life which the alliance also outlaws (which I don't see as a bad thing).

re: Dreadnoughts
Given that the tradeoff was access to the wider galactic market, earth obviously saw it as a fair tradeoff.

The Batarians have shown that one doesn't HAVE to be a member of the Citadel. You just have to be one if you want to access their markets...

Whether Earth thought it was a reasonable trade off or not isbeyond the point, the council has put restrictions on Dreadnaught numbers which you were saying only really applied to AI.

http://masseffect.wi...ki/Gene_therapy

Yes it is mostly the Systems Alliance but Medi-Gel walks the line between illegal and legal in the Councils eyes and because its so useful they let it off so to speak.

Modifié par Cpt-Brit, 24 novembre 2011 - 03:48 .

[Bleachrude]

Abraham_uk wrote...

All races represented with a seat on the Council.

Again, isn't the limiting factor right now the ability to provide military muscle to help enforce citadel space security?

I can see both the Humans and Turians rightly complaining that they are being forced to shoulder more of a burden than races like the elcor and the hanar yet only have a voice equal to them...

[jackyboy666]

Interesting topic. I guess it all depends on how quickly that species has progressed evolutionary, intellectually and scientifically speaking. All come from different backgrounds so its hard to compare. One thing is clear though, that no matter how smart or intellectual people/aliens maybe, when resources run short, and the galaxy becomes too shrouded with life and intergalactic needs, theres going to be someone kicking up a fuss somewhere for ones survival (no matter how advanced technology is) does this make any sense or relevance to what is being talked about? No. Lol. I just felt like rambling.

[General User]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Bad example, then. I was thinking less in terms of 'unpleasant persons' and more in terms of 'recognition of equality with everyone who puts a ****ty prefab on a rock and calls it a settlement.'

Sort of like how if we recognized every island as an individual nation. Suddenly every rock in the sea becomes an island.

Some (multiple) levels of heirarchy is needed, just to exist.

I'd arrange it by ascending level of space. Planets-systems-sectors, as possible. Ineficent, but actually workable.

Of course most any principle can descend into absurdity when taken to extremes, independence included.  I guess I really don't see that as being a problem in the MEverse because it hasn't really been a problem on Earth.

Something I'd like to see more of in Mass Effect (and the reason I asked about Illium and how much territory they control) is "medium size powers", star-nations that control a moderate numbers of star systems or sectors.  They seem to be underrepresented in the story.

We have the race-based super powers, a few independent planets/systems, and pirate clans but not really much of anything in between.  I think there's a real gap there, both lore and narrative-potential wise.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Isn't equality good?

Sorta, kinda, not really, depends.

Or is this more a case of how, in Mass Effect, all races are equal but some are more equal than others?

Dean_the_Young wrote...
I'd tweak the social-contract as well (the Council is much more defensive of the interests of its associates), but it would be very much a 'gentle' genophage. It's not like the Asari don't grow and reproduce, after all. It's just that people who would otherwise grow faster... won't. But they get plenty of perks and help in getting them comfortably established as Associates in the galactic setting.

There's quite a bit to argue that disproportionate growth rates are a major instability factor in stability. That applies even on earth, but with many races it only gets bigger. If no one can pull off a Krogan/Rachni strategy, and if no one wants to suffer the losses inherent in a war for fear of weakening themselves, you'd get a much more peaceful setting. With stable populations, you'd even help even out the economic development: avoiding population-dependent busts, thanks to family planning.

Of course, most species would be adopted to this policy from the start. In a re-write of the ME universe, part of Humanity's surprising growth strength is that it grew big BEFORE it made contact with the Council, being a much faster breeder than the Asari-standard the rest of the galaxy has...

(Cue big implicationof ME1: the Council trying to get Humanity to assent to the genophage-standard in exchange for more galactic power, the Alliance holding out (and threatening war if it's applied) until it gets more galactic power.)

Sounds like a whole new game.  I'd buy it though (or just read the fanfic).

Modifié par General User, 24 novembre 2011 - 04:16 .

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]General User wrote...

Sounds like a whole new game.  I'd buy it though (or just read the fanfic).
[/quote]
[/quote]Actually, that was just one of my thoughts on how the setting of Mass Effect could possibly make sense as it stood. Not only did the idea of the Asari being the most populous species just seem mind-boggling counter-intuitive, but the treatment of all races having roughly equivalent breeding rates (unless Krogan or Rachni) just didn't make sense.

Combine that with why on Earth the Alliance should be considered a 'big' species, and either Humanity needed a justification for population growth (a 'fast' growing species), artificial growth (clones), or everyone else needed to be repressed (a galaxy-wide population scheme... that serves the Asari interest by not letting them be eclipsed).


Besides expand the genophage implications (the Quarians not only have to deal with immune systems, but were locked into low breeding even before the Geth) , all it really does is help set up the context of ME1 as is. The Terminus races hate the Council because the Council has genophaged them, willing or not. The Council fears the Terminus, and any war, because a galactic war would devastate races for centuries, even millenia, before they could catch back up.

For Humans, the genophage-light being debaated would actually be as symbollic as anything else: Human birth rates depend on culture and other circumstances, rather than pure biology. A replacement+ ratio genophage of 2.1 children per couple would be well ahead of what many modern countries enjoy.



If you're interested, I could PM a write-up of those thoughts to you in private.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:06 .

[HiroVoid]

Wulfram wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...
Edited

I wish people would not do this.

My apologies.  That was immature of me.  Anyone else doing anything similar with spoilers should do the same, and edit them out if possible.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:12 .

[General User]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

How do you keep the balance then between the Asari Republics which would mean 1 seat per Republic and the Turian Hierarchy which is only 1 seat?

I think his argument would be by world, even if each colony is a nation.

So if the Turian Heirarchy has a thousand colonies, and there are a thousand Asari city-state colonies, the Turian Heirarchy might have a thousand votes while there are a thousand different Asari voting.

I was thinking more like one vote per sovereign entity, but not all votes would be equal, like in the UN. 

Major powers like the Hierarchy or the Alliance would have veto power over any binding Council action by virtue of their having premanent seats on the "Security Council."

So while the major powers could be "outvoted" in the "General Assembly" rather easily, such votes would be purely symbolic.

Modifié par General User, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:09 .

[Wulfram]

The UN is a great model for an organisation you want to be utterly inneffectual.

edit: Note that if the Turians have a veto, Humanity probably gets conquered in the Relay 314 incident.

Modifié par Wulfram, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:13 .

[General User]

Wulfram wrote...
The UN is a great model for an organisation you want to be utterly inneffectual.

It is and it isn't.  When it comes to actually solving international problems the UN has been a dismal and occasionally horrific failure.  But it terms of helping independent nations to peacefully solve problems between themselves the UN is as much of a success as anyone ever has been. 

So, in a weird way, ineffectual is kinda what I'm going for.  I don't want to replace one tyrannical super-government with another.  What would be the point of that? 

But at the same time people from different planets and races should have a system in place that sponsors and encourages them to solve their disputes peacefully where ever possible.

Wulfram wrote...
edit: Note that if the Turians have a veto, Humanity probably gets conquered in the Relay 314 incident.

Maybe we would, maybe we wouldn't. 

"Security Council's" are powerful things.  Even if the Council didn't have actual power to force the turians to do anything, defying a firm Council resolution would still be tantamount to "going rogue" ala the krogan during the Krogan Rebellions.

They're funny things too.  The USSR's veto didn't stop the UN from interveneing in the Korean War.

In any case, did the Council order/mandate that the turians stop the war against humanity?  Or did they intervene with an offer to mediate (ie, give the turians a way out while saving face), and the turians+humanity accepted?  Was it even the Council itself, or just the "Council races" ie the asari and salarians.   BIG differences!

And even that doesn't really touch on the motivations of the asari and salarians to stop the war in the first place. 

Modifié par General User, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:38 .

[Wulfram]

Nukes have stopped wars, the UN hasn't. Though some of it's humanitarian agencies have had successes.

Fundamentally, I don't see what you're hoping to achieve really. The power of the council races would still exist, so de facto the "tyranny" you object to would still continue. Just with less pretense of the rule of law, and without a working mechanism by which one great power could be restrained by the others.

Modifié par Wulfram, 24 novembre 2011 - 05:51 .

[General User]

Wulfram wrote...

Nukes have stopped wars, the UN hasn't. Though some of it's humanitarian agencies have had successes.

Fundamentally,
I don't see what you're hoping to achieve really. The power of the
council races would still exist, so de facto the "tyranny" you object to
would still continue. Just with less pretense of the rule of law, and
without a working mechanism by which one great power could be restrained
by the others.

I'm a big fan of nukes.

While the power of the Council races would still exist, the power of the Council would be, not broken, but diluted (did I mention how important a Charter is to this process?). That alone is enough to ensure the end of the current tyranny and see it replaced by a balance of power. Whether that structure eventually becomes anything tyrannical is something time will tell, but there's no inherent reason it need do so.

I'm not that concerned about pretense of the rule of law in this case because, to the Council pretense has been all the regard they've ever given the rule of law. Besides, as far as I'm concerned, no Council or international body has any real business making law in the first place.

The mechanism by which one great power (or combination thereof) can restrain another (or combination thereof) always has ultimately been, and always will ultimately be the same, no matter what system is in place: ie their military.

Modifié par General User, 24 novembre 2011 - 06:05 .

[HiroVoid]

The Turian Councillor's racist as well. I agree that just having an all-human council would be bad though.