justafan wrote...
The Geth have a perfectly logical reason to target every Quarian ship during ME3. I won't dispute that, from their perspective, every ship is attacking them, and are thus legitimate targets (up until a certain point). The problem is, when deciding who to save, it is a valid point to bring up the issue of civilians. The Geth are a hivemind, every action of any Geth is the action of EVERY Geth. Both their crimes and their justifications are universal.
With the Quarians, it is entirely different, the actions of the captains and admirals do not reflect the universal guilt or innocence of the Quarian species. While every Geth has participated in the Morning War, the actions which put the Quarians in the position where they are forced to rely on civilians in war, the decision to join the reapers, etc. The same is not true of the Quarians. If you look at the decision on Rannoch from the perspective of "Which choice will save to most innocent lives", which I believe to be the basis of the decision, you have to take into account the presence of civilians and individuals on one side, and the total lack on the other.
The Geth are a consenus or democracy. They vote and the majority wins. We know there are dissenting votes but the Geth defer to the majority. The Quarians defer to their Admirals. This is like me saying I will judge not on right and wrong but which government I prefer. That is illogical. The way you choose to govern has no bearing on whether the choices you make are right or wrong. You can't claim the Quarians defered to their admirals when that is the government they chose as if the Geth or disagreed with the Consensus as we know they do are doing any different. Legion disagreed with the rest of the Geth but just like a Quarian deferred to his leaders.
It is perfectly fine if you view it by what will save the most lives. I base it on who is the agressor ie who is wrong because that is how society judge things. We don't establish laws but then say let's disregard right and wrong and judge by who is more sympathetic. If a nation is judged to be wrong then that nation is punished with sanctions or war and that burden is born by its citizens. I don't sit there and say well this nation has a larger population so let's ignore who we think is wrong and vote for them because they have more people.
And no I don't have to take into account civilians when by the definitions of war they are not civilains. Once you pick up a gun and fire it at an enemy, you lose the rights and protections you are deemed ot have as a civilians. THose civilains were conscripted soliders.




Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut




