446 réponses à ce sujet

[RoboticWater]

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

What if you knew that the other guys were savages who knew nothing of peace? Would you ask for diplomacy when you knew that nothing would come out of it?


They exterminated until the quarians left. They were frightened like an animal and would only calm until the other animal left for good. They let the rest go because they did not intend to commit genocide, they just wanted to be left alone. 

Modifié par BlahDog, 02 mai 2012 - 01:56 .

[Catamantaloedis]

[quote]BlahDog wrote...

[quote]Catamantaloedis wrote...
Do you know how unpopular leaving your own planet would be especiall when the thing forcing you out is of your own design? Sure, people would leave but not on a mass scale. Even then, you would have martial law which would restrict flight (not completely but enough). Also, the military probably took the remaining ships. 

[/quote]

War refugees are a common problem in our own world and in the ME universe. They flood their neighbors lands when their home nation has been invaded. They value their lives much more than their homes. 

And how can the military simply seize all of their ships? If your country went to war tomorrow, would they really be able to seize everyone's cars? 
[/quote]
War refugees are an issue but they never had to leave their own planet and be forced to wear a siut for the rest of their life. Even if real life refugees could be linked to quarians, culture was a big player as well. Not only do most quarians have an obligation todefeat the monster they created but their ancestral religion probably made many stay and fight for the lands that they "deserved."

Also, flight is much easier to control than ground travel. Locking down ports, enabling fire on unauthorized ships, and other extreeme methods may be taken to disrup interplanetary travel.

[/quote]
Comparing modern flight to that of a futuristic world where interstellar flight is a daily occurence and a fact of life, is dubious at best. Additionally, the military isn't like that of say, the Soviet Union, which was more or less at peace and could put all attention necessary to controlling its population. The Quarians would have been fighting on every planet and in every city. There's no way a military that occupied could devote so much attention to making sure no one fled.

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

At this point, I just see the Morning War as a giant clusterf**k that really doesn't make much sense and which is basically a logic black hole. The fact that Bioware has half-retconned the whole thing doesn't help matters either. I just like to think of it as both races committed atrocities and that neither side is innocent (just like most, if not all wars in human history) and leave it at that.

Modifié par Mr. Big Pimpin, 02 mai 2012 - 01:58 .

[Raiil]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

You're pre-supposing that at any point, the Quarians attempted to negotiate peace. There's no proof of that. And from how the Quarian leaders at large act, we have no reason to believe that either.

The Geth might not be good guys, but they're also a) the ones who were targeted and attacked first simply because they awoke, the true geth demonstrated that they're not interested in starting a fight over anything besides survival, and c) the Quarians have repeatedly targeted the Geth at large. The Heretics are a small schism who are dealt with, partially with the aid of a True Geth, Legion. If we have to pick a side, why wouldn't someone view the Geth in a more positive light? 

Hell, Shepard can call Tali out on the Quarians and their attacks in the first game. It's not like it came out of the blue. 

[Catamantaloedis]

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

What if you knew that the other guys were savages who knew nothing of peace? Would you ask for diplomacy when you knew that nothing would come out of it?


They exterminated until the quarians left. They were frightened like an animal and would only calm until the other animal left for good. They let the rest go because they did not intend to commit genocide, they just wanted to be left alone. 

If they were simply animals, then killing them would certainly be immoral, but it would not as bad as genocide. It would not be killing what we would call "people".

[RoboticWater]

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Comparing modern flight to that of a futuristic world where interstellar flight is a daily occurence and a fact of life, is dubious at best. Additionally, the military isn't like that of say, the Soviet Union, which was more or less at peace and could put all attention necessary to controlling its population. The Quarians would have been fighting on every planet and in every city. There's no way a military that occupied could devote so much attention to making sure no one fled.

And now we come to the speculation problem. It's the future, it's hard to say what a government or a military could do. The quarians were very tech-oriented and may have had the ability to keep all ship inside the bounds of the planet.

[Catamantaloedis]

Valentia X wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

You're pre-supposing that at any point, the Quarians attempted to negotiate peace. There's no proof of that. And from how the Quarian leaders at large act, we have no reason to believe that either.

The Geth might not be good guys, but they're also a) the ones who were targeted and attacked first simply because they awoke, the true geth demonstrated that they're not interested in starting a fight over anything besides survival, and c) the Quarians have repeatedly targeted the Geth at large. The Heretics are a small schism who are dealt with, partially with the aid of a True Geth, Legion. If we have to pick a side, why wouldn't someone view the Geth in a more positive light? 

Hell, Shepard can call Tali out on the Quarians and their attacks in the first game. It's not like it came out of the blue. 

Again, even if the Quarians did not attempt peace, it is unreasonable to conclude that so many of them could have died without the Geth attempting to exterminate them. It is not an easy task to kill 99% of a population. You have to work at it.

[TheGreenAlloy]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

There was no extermination, and there was no mercy. Quarians tried to kill off the Geth, but the Geth decided to let the Quarians live. Those are facts.

[Catamantaloedis]

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Comparing modern flight to that of a futuristic world where interstellar flight is a daily occurence and a fact of life, is dubious at best. Additionally, the military isn't like that of say, the Soviet Union, which was more or less at peace and could put all attention necessary to controlling its population. The Quarians would have been fighting on every planet and in every city. There's no way a military that occupied could devote so much attention to making sure no one fled.

And now we come to the speculation problem. It's the future, it's hard to say what a government or a military could do. The quarians were very tech-oriented and may have had the ability to keep all ship inside the bounds of the planet.

Would the Turians and Batarians lack this ability? Because members of all of the races have fled to the Citadel as refugees. So much so that they are being turned away. The situation of the Quarians was  similar to that of the these races against the Reapers, the only difference being that they shot first.

[Shadow Shep]

General User wrote...

Further more, when an army conquers a territory, it becomes responsible for the administration of that territory, including what happens to civilians therein.  For the victorious geth army on Rannoch and the other former-quarian worlds to encourage, or even simply allow, the quarian populations under theri control to die when it could have been prevented, would constitute an organized campaign of extermination in and of itself.

Historically, using hunger/exposure/etc. to wipe out a people is one of the easiest, most common ways of doing so. 

Why would the Geth be expected to follow this code/rule?  They weren't likely to have any understanding of it. 

[TheGreenAlloy]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

You're pre-supposing that at any point, the Quarians attempted to negotiate peace. There's no proof of that. And from how the Quarian leaders at large act, we have no reason to believe that either.

The Geth might not be good guys, but they're also a) the ones who were targeted and attacked first simply because they awoke, the true geth demonstrated that they're not interested in starting a fight over anything besides survival, and c) the Quarians have repeatedly targeted the Geth at large. The Heretics are a small schism who are dealt with, partially with the aid of a True Geth, Legion. If we have to pick a side, why wouldn't someone view the Geth in a more positive light? 

Hell, Shepard can call Tali out on the Quarians and their attacks in the first game. It's not like it came out of the blue. 

Again, even if the Quarians did not attempt peace, it is unreasonable to conclude that so many of them could have died without the Geth attempting to exterminate them. It is not an easy task to kill 99% of a population. You have to work at it.

That still leaves 1%.

[Catamantaloedis]

TheGreenAlloy wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

There was no extermination, and there was no mercy. Quarians tried to kill off the Geth, but the Geth decided to let the Quarians live. Those are facts.

Here's another fact. 99% of the Quarians did not survive that war. If you truly believe that the answer to attempted genocide, (if we can call the Geth people. I'm not sure, but that's another topic) is genocide, then I can not argue with you.

Modifié par Catamantaloedis, 02 mai 2012 - 02:03 .

[General User]

DJCubed wrote...

General User wrote...

Further more, when an army conquers a territory, it becomes responsible for the administration of that territory, including what happens to civilians therein.  For the victorious geth army on Rannoch and the other former-quarian worlds to encourage, or even simply allow, the quarian populations under theri control to die when it could have been prevented, would constitute an organized campaign of extermination in and of itself.

Historically, using hunger/exposure/etc. to wipe out a people is one of the easiest, most common ways of doing so. 

Why would the Geth be expected to follow this code/rule?  They weren't likely to have any understanding of it. 

Exactly!  The geth wouldn't have any understanding of these matters and can't reasonably be expected to abide by these codes/rules/etc.  That's precisely what makes the geth so dangerous.

Modifié par General User, 02 mai 2012 - 02:08 .

[RoboticWater]

Catamantaloedis wrote...
If they were simply animals, then killing them would certainly be immoral, but it would not as bad as genocide. It would not be killing what we would call "people".

But the geth had no idea what they were doing. To them it was self-defense at it's most basic form. They had someone who was attacking and they attacked back to save themselves. And in this animal rage, they destroyed everything so that they wouldn't be hurt again. When faced with a bigger dilema, making a race extinct, they didn't know what to do because they never had to process that kind of thought.

Would you kill a child who broke a lamp just so he wouldn't break a lamp again? No (hopefully), you would teach him not to. Sure, you could do it firmly or softly but nothing extreeme(hopefully).

 

[humes spork]

General User wrote...

Further more, when an army conquers a territory, it becomes responsible for the administration of that territory, including what happens to civilians therein.  For the victorious geth army on Rannoch and the other former-quarian worlds to either encourage, or even simply allow, the quarian populations to die when it could have been prevented would constitute an organized campaign of extermination in and of itself.

Historically, using hunger/exposure/etc. to wipe out a people is one of the easiest, most common ways of doing so. 

You wanna bring just war theory into this? Okay!

Jus ad bellum
Quarians were the aggressors. They initiated the war because they feared geth would revolt and out of fear of Citadel Council sanctions. They had no reason to believe geth would prove hostile, nor proof the geth had been hostile. There were no damages incurred against the quarians by the get. War was their first recourse. Their probability of success was exceedingly low. There was no anticipated benefit of waging war with the geth.

There was no jus ad bellum.

Jus in bello
The quarians made no distinction between geth combatants and noncombatants. Moreover, there was no attempt to take prisoners, provide due process, nor fair treatment. Lastly, there was no distinction between quarian sympathizer combatants and noncombatants -- if indeed there were geth-sympathetic combatants. There was no exposited attempt to take quarian prisoners or provide fair treatment. Military actions were conducted with no sense of proportionality or necessity. Assuming quarians engaged in electronic warfare, that would constitute malum in se against artificial intelligences.

Quarians did not wage their war in accordance with just in bello.

Jus post bellum
There was no formal termination of the war. Quarians, as the aggressor, made no exposited attempts to ensure fair treatment and the welfare of their own citizens who may have been left behind or captured. Quarians, as the aggressor, made no attempt at truth and reconciliation or rehabilitation.

Meanwhile, the geth due to their (at the time) limited comprehension of mortality and morality, and for their extremely limited processing power, cannot be reasonably held culpable for events occurring after termination of the war. Culpability requires competency and intent, in neither case the geth at the time of cessation of hostilities qualify.

The only thing which can be said of the quarians in regards to jus post bellum is they had just cause for terminating the war. However, they did not honor proportionality, declaration, intent or authority.

Summation
The quarians did not start war justfully. They did not wage war justfully. They did not end war justfully. They were competent and had intent. They are, unilaterally and in every case, the culpable party for the execution and resolution of the war to the near-extinction of their own people.

[RoboticWater]

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Here's another fact. 99% of the Quarians did not survive that war. If you truly believe that the answer to attempted genocide, (if we can call the Geth people. I'm not sure, but that's another topic) is genocide, then I can not argue with you.

Geth were not people when they were attacked but after they had time to becoem smarter.

To us the answer is never genocide but attack a bear, you'll get the geth's opinion.

Modifié par BlahDog, 02 mai 2012 - 02:11 .

[Raiil]

Catamantaloedis wrote...


Again, even if the Quarians did not attempt peace, it is unreasonable to conclude that so many of them could have died without the Geth attempting to exterminate them. It is not an easy task to kill 99% of a population. You have to work at it.

And neither is it reasonable to conclude that the Geth were personally responsible for the widespread death. But rulers can and have decimated large parts of their own population through their direction of the country. Ranavolona I of Madagascar managed to halve her own population in less than a decade in a time where her own country wasn't constantly under direct fire with others:



 Due in large part to loss of life throughout the years of military campaigns, high death rate among fanompoana workers, and harsh traditions of justice under her rule, the population of Madagascar is estimated to have dropped from around 5 million to 2.5 million between 1833–1839, and from 750,000 to 130,000 between 1829–1842 in Imerina,[9]contributing to a strongly unfavorable view of Ranavalona's rule in historical accounts.  Wiki link with additional citations. [/i]


There's absolutely no reason why the Quarians couldn't have done that to themselves as well. It's quite possible to nearly kill off your own society with dumb enough'/bloodthirsty enough/desparate enough leaders and the right weapons. Ranavalona managed to do it without hi-tech weaponry.

Modifié par Valentia X, 02 mai 2012 - 02:10 .

[Catamantaloedis]

humes spork wrote...

General User wrote...

Further more, when an army conquers a territory, it becomes responsible for the administration of that territory, including what happens to civilians therein.  For the victorious geth army on Rannoch and the other former-quarian worlds to either encourage, or even simply allow, the quarian populations to die when it could have been prevented would constitute an organized campaign of extermination in and of itself.

Historically, using hunger/exposure/etc. to wipe out a people is one of the easiest, most common ways of doing so. 

You wanna bring just war theory into this? Okay!

Jus ad bellum
Quarians were the aggressors. They initiated the war because they feared geth would revolt and out of fear of Citadel Council sanctions. They had no reason to believe geth would prove hostile, nor proof the geth had been hostile. There were no damages incurred against the quarians by the get. War was their first recourse. Their probability of success was exceedingly low. There was no anticipated benefit of waging war with the geth.

There was no jus ad bellum.

Jus in bello
The quarians made no distinction between geth combatants and noncombatants. Moreover, there was no attempt to take prisoners, provide due process, nor fair treatment. Lastly, there was no distinction between quarian sympathizer combatants and noncombatants -- if indeed there were geth-sympathetic combatants. There was no exposited attempt to take quarian prisoners or provide fair treatment. Military actions were conducted with no sense of proportionality or necessity. Assuming quarians engaged in electronic warfare, that would constitute malum in se against artificial intelligences.

Quarians did not wage their war in accordance with just in bello.

Jus post bellum
There was no formal termination of the war. Quarians, as the aggressor, made no exposited attempts to ensure fair treatment and the welfare of their own citizens who may have been left behind or captured. Quarians, as the aggressor, made no attempt at truth and reconciliation or rehabilitation.

Meanwhile, the geth due to their (at the time) limited comprehension of mortality and morality, and for their extremely limited processing power, cannot be reasonably held culpable for events occurring after termination of the war. Culpability requires competency and intent, in neither case the geth at the time of cessation of hostilities qualify.

The only thing which can be said of the quarians in regards to jus post bellum is they had just cause for terminating the war. However, they did not honor proportionality, declaration, intent or authority.

Summation
The quarians did not start war justfully. They did not wage war justfully. They did not end war justfully. They were competent and had intent. They are, unilaterally and in every case, the culpable party for the execution and resolution of the war to the near-extinction of their own people.

Just war also states that one should never target civilians directly, and that force used must be proportionate to the threat. 
Essentially eliminating a group of people violates both of these principles.

[Dean_the_Young]

humes spork wrote...

Quarians were the aggressors.

Here's where you start off wrong, and this flaw continues across your post. The Quarians weren't the aggressors. The Quarian government was the aggressor.

One of those big foundational blocks for all theories on appropriate actions in war, for all sides, is the distinction between governments and the people they rule.

[RoboticWater]

Catamantaloedis wrote...
Just war also states that one should never target civilians directly, and that force used must be proportionate to the threat. 
Essentially eliminating a group of people violates both of these principles.

Guess what. The Geth neither understood Latin nor the concept of war. Just self-preservation.

Modifié par BlahDog, 02 mai 2012 - 02:14 .

[humes spork]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Just war also states that one should never target civilians directly, and that force used must be proportionate to the threat. 
Essentially eliminating a group of people violates both of these principles.

The irony that you use this point to defend the quarians is palpable.

Here's where you start off wrong, and this flaw continues across your post. The Quarians weren't the aggressors. The Quarian government was the aggressor.

One of those big foundational blocks for all theories on appropriate actions in war, for all sides, is the distinction between governments and the people they rule. 

You mean like how the geth were sapient beings created by quarians, to serve quarians, and as such under the jurisdiction of the "quarian government"?

And, how the "quarian government" made zero distinction between combatants and noncombatants, geth and geth sympathizer alike?

Modifié par humes spork, 02 mai 2012 - 02:17 .

[TheGreenAlloy]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

TheGreenAlloy wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

There was no extermination, and there was no mercy. Quarians tried to kill off the Geth, but the Geth decided to let the Quarians live. Those are facts.

Here's another fact. 99% of the Quarians did not survive that war. If you truly believe that the answer to attempted genocide, (if we can call the Geth people. I'm not sure, but that's another topic) is genocide, then I can not argue with you.

Uh, the Geth were trying to figure out their self-awareness. Boom. Attempted genocide. Obvious retaliation. They went a little too far, but stopped before it was too late. 

[Catamantaloedis]

Valentia X wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...


Again, even if the Quarians did not attempt peace, it is unreasonable to conclude that so many of them could have died without the Geth attempting to exterminate them. It is not an easy task to kill 99% of a population. You have to work at it.

And neither is it reasonable to conclude that the Geth were personally responsible for the widespread death. But rulers can and have decimated large parts of their own population through their direction of the country. Ranavolona I of Madagascar managed to halve her own population in less than a decade in a time where her own country wasn't constantly under direct fire with others:



 Due in large part to loss of life throughout the years of military campaigns, high death rate among fanompoana workers, and harsh traditions of justice under her rule, the population of Madagascar is estimated to have dropped from around 5 million to 2.5 million between 1833–1839, and from 750,000 to 130,000 between 1829–1842 in Imerina,[9]contributing to a strongly unfavorable view of Ranavalona's rule in historical accounts.  Wiki link with additional citations. [/i]


There's absolutely no reason why the Quarians couldn't have done that to themselves as well. It's quite possible to nearly kill off your own society with dumb enough'/bloodthirsty enough/desparate enough leaders and the right weapons. Ranavalona managed to do it without hi-tech weaponry.

After reviewing that link, it seems, as is likely, a pre-industrial relatively primative Queen did in fact cause all of this destruction. However, the vast majority of the deaths were due, as one could guess, from disease and famine. 
Why would the Quarians destroy  their own medical supplies and food sources? Additionally, a bunch of primitive tribesmen in Madagascar have absolutely nowhere to flee. It's an island.

Modifié par Catamantaloedis, 02 mai 2012 - 02:22 .

[Catamantaloedis]

humes spork wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Just war also states that one should never target civilians directly, and that force used must be proportionate to the threat. 
Essentially eliminating a group of people violates both of these principles.

The irony that you use this point to defend the quarians is palpable.

Here's where you start off wrong, and this flaw continues across your post. The Quarians weren't the aggressors. The Quarian government was the aggressor.

One of those big foundational blocks for all theories on appropriate actions in war, for all sides, is the distinction between governments and the people they rule. 

You mean like how the geth were sapient beings created by quarians, to serve quarians, and as such under the jurisdiction of the "quarian government"?

You continue to assume that I'm defending the Quarians which I find highly amusing. I have stated throughout this topic, SEVERAL times that both sides were WRONG to an extent. This whole topic, which if you read the topic clearly states, not that the Quarians were right, but simply that the Geth attempted to decimate the Quarian population.

Modifié par Catamantaloedis, 02 mai 2012 - 02:22 .

[Catamantaloedis]

TheGreenAlloy wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

TheGreenAlloy wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

BlahDog wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...
They had some higher thought. They had a concept of a soul, and they must have believed that their Creators had them.

Additionally, if the Geth did not know right from wrong, than in what sense can you say that they are fully sentient beings, and therefore equals to the Quarians?

That was one isolated unit that said that so only a few may have had the cognitive functions to conceive such things but there are other factors.

-If some guy just came up and shot someone you knew right next to you I doubt, even in your higher thinking mind, that you would go to diplomacy first. 
-The geth may have only know a few things, a soul being one of them. It is possible that they had no idea of diplomacy for a long time (especially in war time)
-Even if early attempts of diplomacy were made I doubt that the quarians would just let them talk, they don't want them thinking at all.

And the geth are sentient, now anyway. They became smart over time but it was too late. The Heretics had probably already formed and attacked of the Reapers and the rest of the geth were treated like the boogy man.

Of course I wouldn't go diplomacy first if someone killed someone next to me. But let's say I had 100 guys with me, and I attack another group of 100 guys. I kill a few of them at first. But then they kill 75 of my guys. I beg for peace and then they kill the other 25.
Even if they don't know diplomacy, the fact remains that they exterminated the quarians. It is impossible to believe that they simply let the quarians who were willing  flee, simply because almost no one survived.
Their casualties were of apocalyptic proportions.

People who simply pretend that the Geth are the "good guys" are doing just that--pretending.

There was no extermination, and there was no mercy. Quarians tried to kill off the Geth, but the Geth decided to let the Quarians live. Those are facts.

Here's another fact. 99% of the Quarians did not survive that war. If you truly believe that the answer to attempted genocide, (if we can call the Geth people. I'm not sure, but that's another topic) is genocide, then I can not argue with you.

Uh, the Geth were trying to figure out their self-awareness. Boom. Attempted genocide. Obvious retaliation. They went a little too far, but stopped before it was too late. 

A little too far? Understatement of the year.