I think it is actually worthwhile that the Geth did not actively decide to commit a complete act of Genocide the way the Quarians did.
A genocide is a genocide, no matter if it was finished or not. The Geth were also far, far, far more succesful in their attrocities than the Quarians.
What atrocities did the Geth commit? The Quarians committed many. The Geth committed zero. A genocide is a genocide. What is a genocide?
Deinon bro, don't waste your time arguing with Shodiswe, he just keeps repeating the same points over and over, ignores what you say, ignores the other side of the conflict completely and uses weird headcanon as an argument(Legion "the Lincoln of synthetics", wut?).
Sounds like your arguments.
Yeah, I do seem to have stumbled right back into this swamp with my eyes wide open.Deinon bro, don't waste your time arguing with Shodiswe, he just keeps repeating the same points over and over, ignores what you say, ignores the other side of the conflict completely and uses weird headcanon as an argument(Legion "the Lincoln of synthetics", wut?).
Yeah, I do seem to have stumbled right back into this swamp with my eyes wide open.
You did. You'll have to convince people what atrocities the Geth committed, and, from my one argument the other day, how it can't all fall back on the Quarians.
Sounds like your arguments.
Yeah, but at least I don't use headcanon
I wouldn't have said your argument sounded like his if you didn't.
What atrocities did the Geth commit? The Quarians committed many. The Geth committed zero. A genocide is a genocide. What is a genocide?
I wouldn't have said your argument sounded like his if you didn't.
I can do so, but part of the problem then becomes when you start disputing things like the definition of genocide. Debate can't find common ground when we can't even agree on the definition of basic terms. It doesn't help that the one time I saw a writer on here, she said they left things deliberately vague to encourage debate, so this will inevitably bog down into headcanon versus headcanon.You did. You'll have to convince people what atrocities the Geth committed, and, from my one argument the other day, how it can't all fall back on the Quarians.
Sounds like this mission sorely needed a middle dialogue option.
Killing civilians is not an attrocity? Killing armed robots is? Ok...
I thought the Quarians were killing the Geth without provocation first (they were), programs that had done nothing to the Quarians nor had any intention of doing so until the Quarians attacked.
Why is the Geth's killing of the civilians an atrocity? Why are you resorting to dismissive and degrading language towards the Geth?
How many of the Geth "died" during the war without rifles in their hands? Or do their losses not matter? Or do you honestly think they had none?...
I've never said the Geth were always wrong, or the Quarians were always right. It's tough to debate people on the subject who have thoroughly convinced themselves that 99.15% of the population died with rifles in their hands.
I thought the Quarians were killing the Geth without provocation first (they were), programs that had done nothing to the Quarians nor had any intention of doing so until the Quarians attacked.
Why is the Geth's killing of the civilians an atrocity? Why are you resorting to dismissive and degrading language towards the Geth?
How many of the Geth "died" during the war without rifles in their hands? Or do their losses not matter? Or do you honestly think they had none?
I thought the Geth used chemical weapons against Quarian cities.
I thought the Geth used chemical weapons against Quarian cities.
implied by Legion but never outright stated, it would also make logical sense given quarian biology and geth immunity
I respect your expertise, I respect your service, and I believe you're an intelligent person; it's the "we do what we must because we can" thing I've seen recently that I have trouble wrapping my head around. On this subject, I'm restricted to trying to debate with you in purely economic terms.
I thought the Geth used chemical weapons against Quarian cities.
Geth don't have children. Quarians do.
Well, not quite as bad, because the Geth let some of the Quarians escape, which the Quarians (or any Council races) would not have done.Atrocity doesn't justify counter atrocity, by your own argument the Geth were as bad as the Quarian military/government.
Well, not quite as bad, because the Geth let some of the Quarians escape, which the Quarians (or any Council races) would not have done.
they didn't "let" them leave, they hesitated and the quarians made it out before the geth mad up their minds
When did I last use headcanon in an argument? I usually try to remain true to the source material, even if my arguments sometimes suck.
Sometimes? Try 'always'.
And I can't pull up the last time you've used headcanon, but I can say that you've stuck to it before.
Yes and the Quarians were wrong in doing so(not that they didn't have their reasons).
Well, because there is no reason or justification for killing civilians, who pose no threat...oh man, there is no point in arguing with you, if you don't believe in any morality anyway.
Also "armed robot" is not in any way dismissive or degrading. They were armed and they are robots, simple as that.
Yes, indeed they were wrong in doing so. I'd argue that a postulated potential reason isn't one.
Retour en haut