233 réponses à ce sujet

[ShepisFinnish]

I personally never liked Quarians. They just annoyed the heck out of me. And, I don't know, I just saw the way the Quarians lost their home-planet as being very much a "too bad, so sad" kind of thing.

[Il Divo]

I'm only comparing the two scenarios in which no lives were saved.

In one, you had the opportunity to act, but chose not to.

In the other, you didn't have the opportunity to act, and thus made no choice.

If there is a difference between those two events, I want to understand why.

I'll add a third scenario: You were present and physically capable of acting, but didn't work out the moral problem fast enough and lost your opportunity before getting to the decision-making phase.

That one certainly looks identical to the not present scenario, as no choice was made.

 

This is why it's not an effective utilitarian calculation. ​Once more: utilitarianism is about the net outcome: maximum benefit, for minimum cost. It uses this outcome as a determination of "morality". You can't ignore the positive outcomes in making a utilitarian argument. The sheer weight of the positive outcome (saving a life), and therefore the net outcome, itself is the basis for condemning the bystander for doing nothing, not the negative outcome scenario.

 

In the other hypothetical scenario you listed, there is no alternative scenario for us to work out. The person didn't have the faculties in place to make the moral decision. In effect, it's no different than being physically incapable of acting and falls into the same category as the person who didn't have the opportunity to act.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This is why it's not an effective utilitarian calculation. ​Once more: utilitarianism is about the net outcome: maximum benefit, for minimum cost. It uses this outcome as a determination of "morality". You can't ignore the positive outcomes in making a utilitarian argument. The sheer weight of the positive outcome (saving a life), and therefore the net outcome, itself is the basis for condemning the bystander for doing nothing, not the negative outcome scenario.

So you're not talking about actual outcomes at all. You're talking about possible outcomea.

Because if I don't act, there is no positive outcome. But I could have acted, so you're counting that possible outcome - something that never occurred - as some sort of baseline.

In the other hypothetical scenario you listed, there is no alternative scenario for us to work out. The person didn't have the faculties in place to make the moral decision. In effect, it's no different than being physically incapable of acting and falls into the same category as the person who didn't have the opportunity to act.

That seems like a perverse incentive to adopt overly complex moral systems, but I like the consistency.

[Il Divo]

So you're not talking about actual outcomes at all. You're talking about possible outcomea.

Because if I don't act, there is no positive outcome. But I could have acted, so you're counting that possible outcome - something that never occurred as some sort of baseline.
That seems like a perverse incentive to adopt overly complex moral systems, but I like the consistency.

 

But that's absolutely critical. Utilitarianism deals with opportunity costs in determing morality, which rely upon possible outcomes. Look at it this way, we have:

 

Input A: Minimal Effort.

Input B: Substantial Effort.

Input C: No effort.

Output A: Let the person die.

Output B: Save the person.

 

Both people, one very far away and one near, can access Output A, which requires no effort on either part. But if person X only needs minimal effort to save a life, compared to person Y who requires substantial effort, utilitarianism would rule that person X committed a greater moral crime by not acting, given that he could achieve the same output with an incredibly small input. It's not enough just to say "there is no positive outcome" because utilitarianism, by its design, measures the different consequences of our actions in terms of output/input.

 

Regarding the latter: I just think it's a logical consequence of what utilitarianism leads to. If Person X is unable to perform action Y, there is no scenario where option Y is on the table for us to consider in determining cost/benefit analysis.   ​

[Sylvius the Mad]

But that's absolutely critical. Utilitarianism deals with opportunity costs in determing morality, which rely upon possible outcomes.  ​

I don't think you made that clear earlier.

 

I also don't see how such a system would be workable without some reliable method not just to see those possible futures, but to measure them.

 

Utilitarianism appears to lack philosophical rigour.

[Youknow]

 

 

Agreed, you should read it along with Revelations if you are interested in the setting. The latter paints a very different picture of the geth-quarian conflict that is closer to Terminator than Commander Data, and I frequently have to cite it when people take ME3's geth propaganda as gospel. Both novels are much better than ME3 narratively. Deception is terrible though, and good thing too because it is essentially non-canon.

I might if it's actually good. Deception was the one I had primarily heard about (as I jumped on Mass Effect around the later half of ME2's popularity, so ME3 was well on its way before I even really even got into it). Hearing that the third one was absolutely awful, I really didn't want to work my way through a series of books to get to a painful read for the finale. The propaganda I didn't take at face value at all even without the help of the books: Legion lies to you quite a few times and withholds information from Sheperd enough that there should be distrust. It also doesn't help its case in the simulation where it shows Sheperd "images of what Sheperd remembers" with the Quarians having helmets. The last few things I was told by Legion were things that should support the Geth. There's no way to tell if my unconcious mind is seeing what I wish was actually true at this point. 

 

 

 

The humans and turians are as stupid as any other Council species before the conflict, but start doing work few questions asked when they can no longer deny the threat. The humans do lose points for the "WE MUST DEFEND EARF" crap, though, considering it doesn't have much more strategic importance than any other Council world up until the Citadel is moved there.

I'd honestly say the humans win for being the worst by virtue that Cerberus is human as well. And I can agree with defending Earth, it really doesn't make much sense when there are bigger things at stake. 

 

Krogans I had a beef with because some of their own actions are what lead people to distrust them as well. Honestly? Based on their behavior, Wrex is about the only way I'd even bother to not go with the Salarian plan by virtue that they refuse to act civil towards people when the only grudge they should really have should be against Salarians and Turians really. Quarians only really seem to be screwed by the council, but honestly, they seem to screw with anyone that isn't Salarian and Asari. The turian seemed to become progressively less obnoxious the further the series went along. Quarians at least gain major points in my eyes for not acting like the humans and running to the council anytime something mildly unpleasant happens. TBH, they were probably one of the toughest races in the series. As for Salarians, Asari and Geth. Completely agree. They were the ones that I was absolutely disgusted by. The rest are at least debatable for some merit.  Rachni are cool though.

 

 

 

The quarian offensive strategy relies on deployment of the anti-Lidar weapon developed by Rael'Zorah and later completed by Daro'Xen. There are only like 6 months to a year between ME2 and 3 (the exact amount isn't clear due to Arrival). Xen presumably needed time to complete the weapon, and the quarians to complete retrofits to arm the Civilian ships and mobilize their forces (including the recall of as many pilgrims as possible). We aren't sure they even had information of the Reaper invasion before starting the offensive, and in fact it is most likely they didn't. We get an article on the Specter terminal describing their mobilization and leaving from Illium for the Veil upon our first visit to the Citadel mere hours after the Reapers hit earth, and who in Council space has a hotline to the quarians that could get the information to them within hours (or would consider such a priority at such a time)? By the time we meet them halfway through the game, 17 days have already past in their campaign. It's likely they were attempting to complete the plan before Reaper arrival (given they had already acknowledged the existence of and committed to helping Shepard with the Reapers years ago) so their forces would be ready, but simply got the timing wrong by literally a few days to a week.

Perhaps it's because it's been awhile since ME3, but is this also mentioned in the books? I don't remember the weapon being mentioned in game. That could be valid for when they actually engaged then if what you're saying is true. I don't actually remember that though. 

 

 

 

Your fortress analogy assumes that the quarians were retaking the planet to simply park and ignore the war on it. Comments by Admirals Gerrel and Raan directly contradict this, as do comments by Tali. They want to help against the Reapers, which is part of the reason for retaking the planet in the first place. I suppose you could assume they are all lying, though there isn't any precedent for that from any of them so I don't know how reasonable such a claim would be.

Actually, my point was that because they have to leave it, it makes obtaining it kind of pointless. Especially if they don't have any time to really gather any resources there that could be helpful.

 

 

 

Resident anthropological expert Liara seems to think the war would last "at least 100 years". The one with the Protheans lasted several centuries. I'd say it's entirely concievable that the quarians could have floated around in space for 90 years until they had no working ships left to live on as the Council species continued to resist the Reapers, though they likely would have been attacked long before that. It's beside the point since the quarians never planned on doing such a thing, but they are extinct either way without Rannoch so there's little reason for them to care otherwise.

Didn't the protheans also have better tech than the current cycle? 

[Monica21]

I might if it's actually good. Deception was the one I had primarily heard about (as I jumped on Mass Effect around the later half of ME2's popularity, so ME3 was well on its way before I even really even got into it). Hearing that the third one was absolutely awful, I really didn't want to work my way through a series of books to get to a painful read for the finale. The propaganda I didn't take at face value at all even without the help of the books: Legion lies to you quite a few times and withholds information from Sheperd enough that there should be distrust. It also doesn't help its case in the simulation where it shows Sheperd "images of what Sheperd remembers" with the Quarians having helmets. The last few things I was told by Legion were things that should support the Geth. There's no way to tell if my unconcious mind is seeing what I wish was actually true at this point.

Or it's just because Bioware didn't want to create new models for the Quarians and used the "you see them the way you know them" as a somewhat lame excuse for it.

[GreyLycanTrope]

No they cant, since there is no air in Geth ships. 

 

Council sent envoys to the Geth after morning war. Geth killed them/destroyed them. That was before heretics existed. Geth attacked anyone entering their systems

 

The difference is if a suit raptures on Rannoch the person will be down with mild infection. If a suit raptures on some other planet death is highly probable.

Also, Rannoch was about to be destroyed by the Geth, due to the dyson sphere and made uninhabitable for organic life

Looks like they some sort of life support cause it seems to work out just fine.

 

Initially yes, it's been 300 years though they seem to have evolved beyond self preservation in that time span though since they've been observing and trying to understand organics since. Tali even has a direct line to the Geth consensus via Legion, it's under utilized.

 

The probability of an allergic reaction is lower on rannoch infection rates are about the same on either planet. I've covered my thoughts on teh dyson sphere already.

[Dantriges]

No one wants war if their objectives can be acquired by less destructive means, the geth simply thought they could hold their ill gotten territory without one and use it how they saw fit until the end of time.

Ill gotten territory?   Ever looked at a world map from 1715 and how much land changed hands by warfare or secession?
 

Or it's just because Bioware didn't want to create new models for the Quarians and used the "you see them the way you know them" as a somewhat lame excuse for it.

Wasn´t that some kind of "Preserve the mystery how the quarians look like?"

[Il Divo]

I don't think you made that clear earlier.

 

I also don't see how such a system would be workable without some reliable method not just to see those possible futures, but to measure them.

 

Utilitarianism appears to lack philosophical rigour.

 

I'm not denying utilitarianism is flawed. The "calculation" itself can become difficult for all but the most simplified scenarios (as above) and there are a number of other issues to consider. I just thought it was important to point out that in this instance, utilitarianism would distinguish between those two individuals in terms of assigning guilt. ​

[Monica21]

Wasn´t that some kind of "Preserve the mystery how the quarians look like?"

 

Sure, until you see that lame picture of a very human-looking Tali.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Sure, until you see that lame picture of a very human-looking Tali.

I"m just sorry we  couldn't give her one back in return

[aka.700]

Nothing you've said here explains why someone supposedly acting out of self-preservation murders children and geriatrics, people who could pose no concievable threat to them.

Exactly where in the game it's told that the Geth killed the Quarian children. As a matter of fact it's been very clearly said that the Geth spared some Quarians.

[aka.700]

If they have no pitty why give them more processing power trough reaper code that will be impossible to match by any organic civilization?

It's the same thing with trusting the Quarians, who have acted very stupidly many times,(plus firing on a ship when there's your people and your allies in it) with the fighting of the war with the Reaper. Trust....
The Geth didn't come out of the veil to kill people until Sovereign's offer and also not all the Geth. But the Batarians have kidnapped many Humans and Batarians, for slavery. They abused them but Shepard still trusts them and accepts their fleet. At least I do.
The Geth aren't violent in nature even though they have no pity. Think about Legion, the most advanced geth unit. When they all have the Reaper code, I don't see any reason indicating that they cannot be like him.

I'm sorry but don't be so narrow-minded "They're not organics so we cannot trust them to play nice."
The krogan are organics, the Batarians are. Can we trust them to play nice? What makes Geth so different? Because they are sytnhetics. We can't even trust the organics fully to play nice, so to me there is no difference.

[Quarian Master Race]

 

Legion said the geth can't be permanently hacked, they auto-correct after a bit. Instead, the geth are reasoned with. Allers explicitly asks if the upgraded geth can be hacked by the reapers and Shepard says "no", they are not going to turn again...and you know what? Shepard is right. After the upgrade and the geth gained individuality we never once hear any reports that the reapers hacked a geth. Not once. There is no evidence they can do so. And that's all the information we've on this subject.

and it is wrong, as usual. Legion itself in ME2 can make opposing geth dance around all day by simply renewing the hack over and over (as can any character with AI Hacking). Xen seems to have absolute control over the Reaper upgraded geth on the Dreadnought's bridge and can maintain the hack seemingly indefinitely, and she's not the Reaper who created the code they operate with. Moreover, who said anything about permanence and why do the geth need to be permanently hacked to pose a massive danger? A Pyro unit gets hacked for 10 seconds behind an allied squad and roasts it to death before anyone even knows what happened. Geth cruiser gets hacked and puts a thanix shot straight through a "friendly" frigate, and it is completely impossible to anticipate. No competent military commander would ever want such a ridiculous liability on their side, and no soldier would ever want to fight beside such a thing.

The lack of reports of such things happen no more deny than confirm their existence. There's no evidence that they can't be hacked either, and in fact plenty of evidence that they can be right there in all 3 games, Reaper upgraded geth included. Moreover you're attempting to use metagaming knowledge anyway, knowlege that one doesn't have when making the decision. That's like making the argument that it's pointless to choose the geth because they'll get deactivated by the destroy beam anyway.

 

Nice, resorting to petty insults now? The OP wanted to hear reasons why people side with the geth and I posted my reasons. And I'm certainly not going to try to convince people to side with the geth...3 years after the game came out. Anyways, welcome to my block list...

Your ostensible reasons are based on faulty logic and incorrect information. Don't get butthurt that I pointed it out.
 

Exactly where in the game it's told that the Geth killed the Quarian children. As a matter of fact it's been very clearly said that the Geth spared some Quarians.

Other than part of Shepard's reasoning to EDI immediately after the geth are wiped out....uhh...the fact that quarians don't pop out of their mums as full grown adults maybe?

Pre war population of the quarians was over 2,000,000,000. Less than 1,000,000 survived the genocide, a 99.5% mortality rate. Unless you are suggesting that the entire .5% of the quarian population that survived were all infants who could operate spaceships, the logical conclusion is entirely obvious.

In fact, given that quarian reproduction and growth cycles are similar to that of humans, and this is what human population distribution looks like

Spoiler

it is likely that a plurality to slight majority of the billions of people geth have been killing throughout their history are minors, adolescents or other children. They don't discriminate, that is a fact. Every organic is an acceptable target to them, even unarmed or ones unable to offer resistance. Whether or not one cares is a different question.

[aka.700]

Other than part of Shepard's reasoning to EDI immediately after the geth are wiped out....uhh...the fact that quarians don't pop out of their mums as full grown adults maybe?

Pre war population of the quarians was over 2,000,000,000. Less than 1,000,000 survived the genocide, a 99.5% mortality rate. Unless you are suggesting that the entire .5% of the quarian population that survived were all infants who could operate spaceships, the logical conclusion is entirely obvious.

In fact, given that quarian reproduction and growth cycles are similar to that of humans, and this is what human population distribution looks like

Spoiler

it is likely that a plurality to slight majority of the billions of people geth have been killing throughout their history are minors, adolescents or other children. They don't discriminate, that is a fact. Every organic is an acceptable target to them, even unarmed or ones unable to offer resistance. Whether or not one cares is a different question.

Thank you for not being sarcastic or trying to impose the ideas into my head forcefully but giving thoughtful comments.
I see your point but I remember a line from EDI who is a synthetic "They [the armed civilian fleet] are also more likely to be targeted when armed. The Geth would have ignored unarmed civilian ships as tactically insignificant."
What I'm trying to say that the Geth isn't after eradicating the Quarians fully and they haven't show ay action against any other race to indicate that. They were defending themselves becuase if the Quarians before were as stubborn as we see now they pretty much brought them on themselves. We also know that even the Krogan is capable of killing the children and innocent and Batarians as well. The Geth aren't that much different from the organics on this.

[Quarian Master Race]

It's the same thing with trusting the Quarians, who have acted very stupidly many times,(plus firing on a ship when there's your people and your allies in it) with the fighting of the war with the Reaper. Trust....
The Geth didn't come out of the veil to kill people until Sovereign's offer and also not all the Geth. But the Batarians have kidnapped many Humans and Batarians, for slavery. They abused them but Shepard still trusts them and accepts their fleet. At least I do.
The Geth aren't violent in nature even though they have no pity. Think about Legion, the most advanced geth unit. When they all have the Reaper code, I don't see any reason indicating that they cannot be like him.

I'm sorry but don't be so narrow-minded "They're not organics so we cannot trust them to play nice."
The krogan are organics, the Batarians are. Can we trust them to play nice? What makes Geth so different? Because they are sytnhetics. We can't even trust the organics fully to play nice, so to me there is no difference.

It isn't at all the same. The quarians can't upgrade themselves at an exponential rate to the point that they completely outclass and can impose their will upon all other organic civilizations in every concievable manner unless those other civilizations are simply stagnant in comparison. Neither can batarians. Krogan have the reproductive issue, but are technologically backwater and lower in intelligence (relatively speaking), and can be and were defeated by a simple disease, and that when only the asari and salarians were around to oppose them. They aren't an existential threat either. The geth absolutely are, especially with Reaper code.

How is a single commander unilaterally firing on a highly important enemy asset while there are 3 people on it (all of whom not only survive but are completely unharmed, mind you) comparable to massacring billions upon billions of people from all organic species (not just quarians) indiscriminately based solely on the fact that they are made of meat and water rather than polymers and metal?

"They're not organics so we can't trust them to play nice" is actually a logical conclusion. They think thousands to millions of times faster than we do, their motives are unknowable and impossible to anticipate, and even if we could anticipate them it's unlikely we'd be able to do anything about it. They are categorically different. Batarians not playing nice? Kick them off the Council and sanction them, and watch their pathetic Hegemony crumble. Krogan? Inflict them with a disease and confine them to their homeworld, then watch them kill themselves off.

Geth though? I suppose there was Xen's anti-lidar weapon before the Reaper code, but what after? You'd better be entirely certain that your predictions on geth motives (based entirely on the word of the single geth you have had contact with, and said geth who is predisposed to lying mind you) hold true 100% until the end of time, because post Reaper code they hold all the power. You are in their cage, subject to their whims. It doesn't matter how guilded said cage is, ultimately they dominate you via the ability to impose their will at any time they choose to. It is hardly different from the arrangement with the Reapers except that it is less predictable. Machine masters are machine masters.

[Dantriges]

Oh only one million? The quarian population pyramid would probably look different. The global population pyramid is closer to third world demographics obviously. But yeah sure, the Geth killed many children.
 

 

The quarians can't upgrade themselves at an exponential rate to the point that they completely outclass and can impose their will upon all other organic civilizations in every concievable manner unless those other civilizations are simply stagnant in comparison.

 

We never saw the Geth doing that either.

 

Exactly where in the game it's told that the Geth killed the Quarian children. As a matter of fact it's been very clearly said that the Geth spared some Quarians.

 

In the books apparently. The same books where all quarians wear their suits 24/7 so you don´t see their faces, ah no, because they would infect each other or so.
 

Sure, until you see that lame picture of a very human-looking Tali.

 
Hm yeah. Perhaps it´s just a pic tali gave Shep, so he could troll the people who ask "So Shep, how do quarians look like?"

[SilvinC]

I personally never liked Quarians. They just annoyed the heck out of me. And, I don't know, I just saw the way the Quarians lost their home-planet as being very much a "too bad, so sad" kind of thing.

Same here. The quarians were just too stupid and self-absorbed for me to choose them. They were always careless and reckless and then blaming others (f.e the geth, the council, Shepard) for their bad judgements.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm not denying utilitarianism is flawed. The "calculation" itself can become difficult for all but the most simplified scenarios (as above) and there are a number of other issues to consider. I just thought it was important to point out that in this instance, utilitarianism would distinguish between those two individuals in terms of assigning guilt. ​

My main objection is that it creates moral obligations involuntarily. It compels people to act a certain way. Someone could run afoul of it simply by being unaware of it.

And if that's ever true of rules that govern behaviour, those rules need to be unambiguously written down somewhere people can read them.

[Hrulj]

Exactly where in the game it's told that the Geth killed the Quarian children. As a matter of fact it's been very clearly said that the Geth spared some Quarians.

 

Sorry but it is a logical conclusion. A space faring civilization that colonized entire planets and systems and built space stations capable of housing milions of people, certainly numbered in bilions. By the merit that fleet neither grows or shrinks, and that there are 17 000 000 Quarians around, one can make a logical conclusion that wast majority of Quarians were killed. Children included.

 

 

It's the same thing with trusting the Quarians, who have acted very stupidly many times,(plus firing on a ship when there's your people and your allies in it) with the fighting of the war with the Reaper. Trust....
The Geth didn't come out of the veil to kill people until Sovereign's offer and also not all the Geth. But the Batarians have kidnapped many Humans and Batarians, for slavery. They abused them but Shepard still trusts them and accepts their fleet. At least I do.
The Geth aren't violent in nature even though they have no pity. Think about Legion, the most advanced geth unit. When they all have the Reaper code, I don't see any reason indicating that they cannot be like him.

I'm sorry but don't be so narrow-minded "They're not organics so we cannot trust them to play nice."
The krogan are organics, the Batarians are. Can we trust them to play nice? What makes Geth so different? Because they are sytnhetics. We can't even trust the organics fully to play nice, so to me there is no difference.

 

I cant agree with you there. They acted out of desire to not only reclaim the homeworld but save it from being made uninhabitable, which the Geth would have done with their Dyson sphere.

 

I even agree with Han Gerel on shooting the dreadnought, it is a sound choice, it took 9 Quarian ships to die to make a tiny hole in it. The ship was destroyed, with it thousands of lives, and no one is injured in the event. They will open fire just the same if a Quarian admiral is with you, either Tali or Xen, showing its nothing personal against Shepard or out of maliciousness.

 

The Geth had 300 years to establish normal relations. Council tried many times, but Geth refused, and killed the envoys. Imagine a country that existed since 1715 till today and refused to make any contact or relations with outsiders, after it most of the locals, and that also proceeds to kill envoys sent to it. 

 

Organics can be controled in other ways. You can poison their world, change the athmosphere, blockade the planet, embargo the food exports to them, to bring them to their knees. Organics cant replicate, and after certain loses Organics will desire peace. Machines arent limited by any of that. They can fight to the last. They have no inner compass to tell them that fighting will only cause their children to die.

[Quarian Master Race]

Thank you for not being sarcastic or trying to impose the ideas into my head forcefully but giving thoughtful comments.
I see your point but I remember a line from EDI who is a synthetic "They [the armed civilian fleet] are also more likely to be targeted when armed. The Geth would have ignored unarmed civilian ships as tactically insignificant."
What I'm trying to say that the Geth isn't after eradicating the Quarians fully and they haven't show ay action against any other race to indicate that. They were defending themselves becuase if the Quarians before were as stubborn as we see now they pretty much brought them on themselves. We also know that even the Krogan is capable of killing the children and innocent and Batarians as well. The Geth aren't that much different from the organics on this.

 

EDI's statement is a poor and naïve judgement likely based upon its own valuing of synthetics over organics. Quarians didn't have Civilian ships to arm in the first war and their noncombatants were indiscriminately slaughtered regardless. We also see geth hunting down and indiscriminately executing unarmed, frightened civilians in escape pods during the mission to rescue Admiral Koris. There was no reason for the quarians not to arm the Civilian ships, because the geth don't discriminate regardless. They do not hold organic moral concepts based on sentience, such as pity, suffering or compassion. When they see a Liveship, they don't care whether or not it has guns on it, they will attack it based solely on the fact that it is strategically a means to destroy their enemy by denying them resources they require to survive. When they see a quarian civilian (regardless of age, political or medical status), they see someone who could potentially pose resistance in the future. Why do you think none of the quarians who were attempting to defend their geth platforms survived the first war? The anti geth quarians were reduced in number by 99.5% and all were forced into exile. They couldn't have eliminated all of the other faction if said faction wasn't being killed at similar rates as well, especially if the geth would've been reciprocative and defended their owners.

 

Indeed you can see this in action on two separate occasions. The first is if Admiral Koris is not rescued. Without him there to rally them, around 1/3rd of the Civilian Fleet (including one of the 3 Liveships) tries to flee from the war and retreat to the Mass Relay. They are slaughtered by the geth regardless of posing no threat and attempting to escape. The second is in the geth Fleet strategy should you side with them. As described by the codex, they ignore the quarian military vessels and focus their attack on the Civilian Fleet and Liveships, knowing that strategically it is the means by which the quarians continue to offer resistance. An enemy that can't produce food or has too low of a population to reproduce is not going to be able to offer resistance for very long. The strategy is successful in maniuplating the quarians into engaging in a futile defense of their noncombatants and strategic resources. The geth weren't concerned with defending themselves from the enemy, they were dedicated to utterly destroying their enemy as a species to remove any chance of future resistance permanently. 

I'd disagree with that assesment. Genocide to the last man, woman, child (or in the case of geth, platform, assuming you afford them analogous rights to sentient beings) is an extremely difficult thing to do, and requires extremely concerted, organized effort. Look at Hitler in the second world war. Despite 4+ years of concentrated effort at destroying certain racial/ ethnic groups, going so far as to even build facilites specifically for the job he was unsuccessful at even killing a quarter of the people he wanted to (the groups the Nazis were most successful at eliminating were the Jews and Roma, which they managed to reduce by 60% from their prewar European populations, compared to the geth's 99.5%-100% succces rate vs the quarian population). Hardly anyone will ever directly admit to genocide, they always pass it off as "self defense" or something else more palatable for either themselves or the people they wish to influence to their cause. As a consequentialist, for me the proof is in the numbers. You can't tell me you had no intention to kill an entire race/ ethnic group/ species/ population when none of them survived. I wouldn't buy it from Han'Gerrel, and I don't buy it from the geth. 

The only reason the geth had to "defend themselves" was because they were intent upon holding onto someone else's property. If I broke into someone's house and they shot me when I refused to leave, I wouldn't really have much right to complain, especially if like in the case of the geth I didn't even need that "house" to survive (they can live in space and draw resources from asteroids) but the owner did (quarian biology is dependant upon Rannoch, as is their Reaper War strategy). They are the "stubborn" ones here. Fighting not for survival (which they could attain virtually anywhere in the galaxy that has rocky bodies from which to draw resources) but for a planet they don't need for any reason whatsoever, but someone else does.

 

[GreyLycanTrope]

Genocides pretty easy with nuclear weaponry though, odds are the massive casualties are a result of WMDs. After all geth don't have to worry about radiation or chemical contaminations as much.

[Batarian Master Race]

 

 

In the books apparently. The same books where all quarians wear their suits 24/7 so you don´t see their faces, ah no, because they would infect each other or so.

 

We don't talk about Deception.

[TheN7Penguin]

*generally just gives likes to QMR*