Riot86 wrote...
I never said that "everyone" would try to attack the Reapers. But to assume that everyone would just accept the Reapers presence afterwards is naive. Some people are stupid, some are racist, some have violent tendencies and some just cannot accept being at the Reapers mercy who could still wipe out all organics if they decided to. And seeing your loved ones getting murdered and the perpetrator get away with it might make some of them do (as you called them) "idiotic "things. Which could in fact could very likely lead to a civil war between Anti-Reaper factions which are willing to die for their cause and the Reaper. But we don't see that. So, why is that?
What we get to see in the epilogue is that everybody seems to be fine and everything is peaceful. Which is completely unrealistic and contradicts the characterization we have gotten from the likes of Jack, Wreav, Javik, EDI, Hackett and the like. That is solid evidence that something has changed in the way those people are thinking.
...and yes that IS in-game evidence. We can only debate over the things that are in the game itself, not those that might happen afterwards. And just saying "no evidence" over and over again, doesn't change that and simply makes you look like someone who is unable to have a serious discussion once he is out of good arguments himself. If you'd like to headcanon the ending the way you like, that's perfectly fine. But headcanon is not any sort of evidence.
(I'm off to bed now, I'll answer tomorrow if you should respond)
Even if someone would willingly reignite a war that they almost lost, who would support them? Following WWI an appeasement policy was taken with Germany for fear of another war. Nobody wants conflict directly following conflict. And considering the incredible amount of damage a Reaper can sustain, how would a single individual, or even a small group of individuals, get ahold of these weapons and manage to strike at a Reaper with enough force to do more than ruffle its feathers? Maybe some people do try something, but it wouldn't be relevent. I just think that by the time the war would have faded enough that someone would be willing to consider something that drastic, it would have faded enough that their wouldn't be enough support for the idea.
I don't know much about Wreav. From what I could tell, he seemed more concerned with threatening war to make gains than actually starting a war. Again, I haven't played much when Wrex dies, so I'm not sure. Hackett seemed more concerned with ending the war than actually killing the Reapers. I know he says, "Dead Reapers are how we win this." but that was after the (definitely insane) Illusive Man suggested Control. Additionally, we knew nothing of the Reaper's motives. While I doubt anyone would call it acceptable, I also doubt that that would be used to reignite a war. Considering UNC: The Negotiation, I doubt that Hackett is very black-and-white. All and all, I don't think any individual could pull the amount of sway needed to reignite the Reaper war.
I don't think it's headcanon. Not anymore than any other "after the war" theory, anyway. There is no evidence that they would remain hostile in face of what they just survived, and if they did, they wouldn't survive it much longer. I like to think that my squadmates aren't that stupid.
Maybe to be sure, define headcanon for me?