1304 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

Aaleel wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

And by choosing to destroy the Reapers and knowing it would annihilate the geth as well, Shepard tageted them both.

Ok, say aliens attacked the Earth tomorrow, and all the people of the world built a weapon deciding that it was the only way to stop the aliens and preserve the continuity of the human race.  But you also knew that wherever you used this weapon i would cause wide scale devastation to whatever area it was used on killing scores of people.

You go ahead with the plan agreed to by everyone and use it and defeat the enemy but you wipe out a large of portion of whatever population was native to the country you used it in.

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry.  What you did was not a war crime.

In a court, maybe not.  Genocide it remains.

[BatmanTurian]

Zaidra wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

And that's the argument that the plaque on the wall is for EDI's Dr Core body, but it is unlikely.

I think that bioware did such a good job covering all of the options up until the last twenty minutes of the game, then they managed to leave like five hundred plotholes that just leave us guessing....

trolls

Masterful trolls, i'd say.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:28 .

[KotorEffect3]

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

The target was the reapers, the geth were collateral damage. Yes Shepard knew they would go down when the catalyst told him that destroy would destroy all synthetics but it was the only way to do destroy the reapers. Every species that was fighting on earth and in the skies over earth was commited to do what it takes to destroy the reapers, including the geth.  You can call it genocide if you want but to me it was justified considering the circumstances.

If it were humans?  What would you do then?

Yes I would, I think I even mentioned in this thread that I would without hesitation.  To me ending the billion year nightmare that has been the reapers is more important than the fate of any single species, doesn't matter if that species is synthetic, organic, or even my own species.  There is an entire galaxy at stake here.

Your ruthless, I get it.

Actualy most of my Shepards are paragon and I play leaning heavily towards paragon decisions.  It's just the reality of the reaper threat makes some things unavoidable.

Perfectly avoidable, you had two other alternatives. (Refuse doesn't count)

But I respect your opinion

Thanks for respecting it,  and if it means anything I still think the other two options are more viable than refuse.  I will never pick refuse.  Also I did not want to destroy the geth there is a reason I negotiated peace between them and the quarians.  I believed in them and Legion was a friend but to me the reapers must be destroyed.  I am just not comfortable with the thought of them sticking around in control and synthesis (though I admit the epilogues are interesting, I just think destroy is the best outcome for the galaxy in general)

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:31 .

[Kabooooom]

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

[BatmanTurian]

Lord Aesir wrote...
If you don't trust him at all, there's no reason to believe Destroy
won't kill EDI and the Geth while leaving the Reapers completely fine.

agreed.

[masster blaster]

Lord I could go into your Synthesis thread.....if you want to talk about siding with the enemy, and other things.

"And by choosing to destroy the Reapers and knowing it would annihilate the geth as well, Shepard tageted them both."

[Aaleel]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

And by choosing to destroy the Reapers and knowing it would annihilate the geth as well, Shepard tageted them both.

Ok, say aliens attacked the Earth tomorrow, and all the people of the world built a weapon deciding that it was the only way to stop the aliens and preserve the continuity of the human race.  But you also knew that wherever you used this weapon i would cause wide scale devastation to whatever area it was used on killing scores of people.

You go ahead with the plan agreed to by everyone and use it and defeat the enemy but you wipe out a large of portion of whatever population was native to the country you used it in.

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry.  What you did was not a war crime.

In a court, maybe not.  Genocide it remains.

Genocide is a defined crime.  Either it is or it isn't.

[AlanC9]

BatmanTurian wrote...

And that's the argument that the plaque on the wall is for EDI's Dr Core body, but it is unlikely.

Try "preposterous." In low-EMS Control you can get Dr. Core's body vaporized on the beam run. EDI does not show on the wall.

[Dr_Extrem]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

The target was the reapers, the geth were collateral damage. Yes Shepard knew they would go down when the catalyst told him that destroy would destroy all synthetics but it was the only way to do destroy the reapers. Every species that was fighting on earth and in the skies over earth was commited to do what it takes to destroy the reapers, including the geth.  You can call it genocide if you want but to me it was justified considering the circumstances.

If it were humans?  What would you do then?

Yes I would, I think I even mentioned in this thread that I would without hesitation.  To me ending the billion year nightmare that has been the reapers is more important than the fate of any single species, doesn't matter if that species is synthetic, organic, or even my own species.  There is an entire galaxy at stake here.

Your ruthless, I get it.

Actualy most of my Shepards are paragon and I play leaning heavily towards paragon decisions.  It's just the reality of the reaper threat makes some things unavoidable.

unavoidable - yes ... moraly justified - no

that is the core problem ... you end the reaper threat - but at a terrible, personal cost.


you did commit genocide - it does not matter, if the galaxy thanks you. you still commited genocide

alea acta est.

the question is, how you are going to live with that? are you willing to face the consequences?


in my (shepards) case .. alcohol .. lots of it.

[masster blaster]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
If you don't trust him at all, there's no reason to believe Destroy
won't kill EDI and the Geth while leaving the Reapers completely fine.

agreed.

That could be said about Synthesis too Lord.

[Heimdall]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Thanks for respecting it,  and if it means anything I still think the other two options are more viable than refuse.  I will never pick refuse.

Same

Really, it takes a certain sort of pig headedness to try for a conventional victory when the entire game (Multiple games even) has been screaming at you that it's impossible.

[Aaleel]

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

People are not trying to rationalize responsibility.  Shepard did it, just like he/she flew the asteroid in the relay.  Shepard is responsible for thsose deaths and has to live with it.  People are saying that what they did does not constitute a heinous WAR CRIME.

Modifié par Aaleel, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:33 .

[Dr_Extrem]

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

brought it to the point.

thats what i am trying to show.

[BatmanTurian]

Fandango9641 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

What point these silly little semantic games? 2 minutes on google tells me that The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) define genocide as being:

Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. (Article 2 CPPCG)

Destroy is genocide, no question.

But it is a genocide perpetrated to stop an omnicide. So there's that.

Don't care, I'm Salarian.

just sayin...

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:33 .

[Rip504]

Define Synthetic:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/synthetic
Define Genocide:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genocide

Modifié par Rip504, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:34 .

[KotorEffect3]

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Thanks for respecting it,  and if it means anything I still think the other two options are more viable than refuse.  I will never pick refuse.

Same

Really, it takes a certain sort of pig headedness to try for a conventional victory when the entire game (Multiple games even) has been screaming at you that it's impossible.

Agreed, I would never screw over the galaxy just to satisfy a self righteous sense of pride.

[Heimdall]

masster blaster wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
If you don't trust him at all, there's no reason to believe Destroy
won't kill EDI and the Geth while leaving the Reapers completely fine.

agreed.

That could be said about Synthesis too Lord.

I know, that's why I said I do put a certain degree of trust in the Catalyst.  Otherwise, we have no information to base any decisions on.

I'm also not certain its even capable of lying.

[BatmanTurian]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

brought it to the point.

thats what i am trying to show.

everybody rationalizes things every day. We have to eat so we eat plants or meat. Either way, we are taking a life to preserve our own.

[KotorEffect3]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

The target was the reapers, the geth were collateral damage. Yes Shepard knew they would go down when the catalyst told him that destroy would destroy all synthetics but it was the only way to do destroy the reapers. Every species that was fighting on earth and in the skies over earth was commited to do what it takes to destroy the reapers, including the geth.  You can call it genocide if you want but to me it was justified considering the circumstances.

If it were humans?  What would you do then?

Yes I would, I think I even mentioned in this thread that I would without hesitation.  To me ending the billion year nightmare that has been the reapers is more important than the fate of any single species, doesn't matter if that species is synthetic, organic, or even my own species.  There is an entire galaxy at stake here.

Your ruthless, I get it.

Actualy most of my Shepards are paragon and I play leaning heavily towards paragon decisions.  It's just the reality of the reaper threat makes some things unavoidable.

unavoidable - yes ... moraly justified - no

that is the core problem ... you end the reaper threat - but at a terrible, personal cost.


you did commit genocide - it does not matter, if the galaxy thanks you. you still commited genocide

alea acta est.

the question is, how you are going to live with that? are you willing to face the consequences?


in my (shepards) case .. alcohol .. lots of it.

The point is that galaxy will live with out the threat of the reapers looming over them.  My Shepard will take the guilt of what happened with the geth if that means the people of earth, palevan, thessia, tuchanka, rannoch, surkesh, etc.. now have a future.  what happened to the geth was regrettable but it had to be done.  Not to mention future generations won't have to endure what we and countless civilizations had to go through at least not at the hand of the reapers.

[Heimdall]

Aaleel wrote...

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

People are not trying to rationalize responsibility.  Shepard did it, just like he/she flew the asteroid in the relay.  Shepard is responsible for thsose deaths and has to live with it.  People are saying that what they did does not constitute a heinous WAR CRIME.

Annihilating an entire sentient race, allies no less, is heinous no matter what way you spin it.  What your doing is rationalizing away just how bad it is through semantics.

[Dr_Extrem]

Aaleel wrote...


People are not trying to rationalize responsibility.  Shepard did it, just like he/she flew the asteroid in the relay.  Shepard is responsible for thsose deaths and has to live with it.  People are saying that what they did does not constitute a heinous WAR CRIME.

and shepard turned hin/herself over to the authorities. shep does know that he commited a heavy crime and is willing to take the consequences.


the point is, that there are people here, who think that killing innocent is moraly acceptable, if a sh*tstorm reaches a certein intensity.

[Heimdall]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

brought it to the point.

thats what i am trying to show.

everybody rationalizes things every day. We have to eat so we eat plants or meat. Either way, we are taking a life to preserve our own.

Extinction is hardly comparable.  The moral issue remains.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 08 octobre 2012 - 11:39 .

[BatmanTurian]

Lord Aesir wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kabooooom wrote...

You did not commit genocide on the citizens of whatever country you used it in, you just didn't I'm sorry. What you did was not a war crime.

This was analogous to using the atomic bombs. A similar situation, but no one can question the moral ramifications of that choice. Whether you call it genocide, or mass murder of innocents, or a war crime - whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter. You are killing people to save a greater number of people.

The problem is, as Taboo pointed out and as I pointed out earlier in this discussion, people are trying to rationalize away responsibility. And that's kind of missing the point.

brought it to the point.

thats what i am trying to show.

everybody rationalizes things every day. We have to eat so we eat plants or meat. Either way, we are taking a life to preserve our own.

Extinction is hardly comparable

not extinction if the synthetic can be rebuilt.

[MegaSovereign]

Legion was willing to sacrifice his creators to save the Geth.

Why is it morally repulsive for organics to do the same? Why are you guys holding yourselves at a higher moral ground?