653 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

mosor wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

The codex states that the Citadel races fought a losing war against the rachni for nearly a century until the salarians uplifted the krogan. I think they have tried to find a better way to beat the rachni. But after 100 years (diplomacy wasn't possible)...I can't blame them.

And I doubt Wrex's reforms would be successful without the genophage.

Sure they were fighting a losing war. However, thats still short of saying they would have lost without the krogan. You're assuming:
1. Their defeat was imminent
2. That uplifting the krogan was their one and only  chance for victory

As for the turians. They were allies of the council at the time and the genophage was developed by the salarians. So if you believe the genophage was morally wrong, then the council bares some responsibility for turian actions. Especially considering they rewarded the turians with a council seat after the conflict.

Do you have ANY idea of the casualty levels in a centuries long interstellar war? You really think that everything else they could think of wasn't tried already?

If their defeat was literally imminent, there wouldn't have been time, Krogan or no Krogan. Rachni with interstellar travel and superior weaponry would have landed on the Krogan homeworld, and the Krogan would have been the ones on the defensive. Even if they captured a ship they wouldn't have been able to fly it. No time to arm or teach them, assuming contact could still be made peacefully.

And the Krogan were not forced to go to war with the rest of civilization. They could have stuck to fighting among themselves per their tradition. They are sentient beings. They chose war.

[Moiaussi]

[quote]Arijharn wrote...

But read between the lines here. If they purposely kept their birth rate to 'pre-industrial' levels, but know how the Krogan work as a social unit, and also know that technology will continue to pour into Tuchanka (although not to the point where the Krogan can form a naval presence) then they should be fully cognizant of the fact that the Genophage (especially after the less-than-ethical second deployment of the strain) is going to have a massive detriment to the species.[/quote]

And your evidence of this is.....? The Krogan seem to have stabilized and are doing just fine. They are adapting and developing new and better ways to interact with the world.

[quote]The first Genophage was deployed to give the Council and it's Turian allies a military counterpoint to the Krogan strength of quick breeding and physical maturity during the time of Krogan Rebellions (the very strengths that were needed against the also quick breeding of the Rachni). What then, was the second deployment for then? To keep them down. The Krogan had went from honored combatants of the Rachni War to neutered pets of the Council.[/quote]

The second was to ensure that the first doesn't wear off before the Krogan find better answers on their own. They are on their way to those better answers, but aren't there yet. You are also completely ignoring the fact that those 'honoured combatants', who were rewarded with worlds and tech decided that wasn't enough and went to war. Even after losing the war, they still wanted more war, simply for the sake of wanting war. Go back to ME1 and listen to Wrex regarding his initial attempts to generate reform on Tuchanka and the resistance he faced especially from older Krogan. Or his comments on how the vast majority of Krogan handled the Genophage, namely to go out and fight for others, mostly as mercs.

There is no evidence that the Krogan would have been willing to accept peace without the genophage. So what is the real alternative? Actual genocide? Taking away all their tech and killing any that know anything? Prevent them from leaving their world at all and thus giving them no chance to learn other ideas?

[quote]My point being is that it's ridiculous to plain asinine to pass judgement of an entire species based on the actions of a few individuals. I'm sure you wouldn't want Cerberus actions to be reflected on humanity as a whole, so why paint the Krogan with that brush as well?

Their culture is their culture, that isn't ever going to change too drastically as far as I see it, simply because believe it or not, their culture is what gives the Krogan strength. The Krogan Rebellions wasn't driven by 'revenge' (against what? Against whom?) It was driven primarily through its need to expand due to insufficient living space and insufficient resources. Action needed to be taken and the Genophage was decided upon. Whether that was the right thing to do or not at the time is irrelevant, it's the second Genophage (i.e., Mordin's) that is the real issue, because there was no pressing need (i.e., the decision for military action) for that situation[/quote]

But their culture is changing. It was already trying to before Shepard met Wrex. Even if Wrex dies, it still changes. And it wasn't 'a few individual Krogan.' We have first or second hand accounts from credible sources, from the Krogan themselves, that there was no opposition to the war at all until after the genophage, and even after many Krogan still wanted war. By ME2, they have a stable leadership developing alternatives. The only reason there seemed to be no pressing need for the second run is that the Salarians were monitoring the situation and recognized the danger signs before it got to the point of a new war.

[quote]I guess the real way to gauge the Council's stance is if during ME3 the Council takes action via STG or Spectre involvement to assassinate (character or physical) Wrex/Wreav.[/quote]

Why in blazes would they want to assassinate a moderate leader who is talking of alternatives to a new war? I can understand Cerberus assassinating Wrex to try to get the Council to suppress or eliminate the Krogan threat permenantly, but no logic in the Council doing so.

[quote]What Krogan military vessels? If you can provide some I'll happily concede the point but the only Krogan vessel I've actually seen was the transport that ferried Gatatog if you and Grunt were successful in defeating the Thresher Maw.[/quote]

The blood pack flap their arms to get between systems? Book commercial flights? Engage in acts of piracy using unarmed freighters pretending to be heavily armed? Tuchanka doesn't have a fleet, but there are Krogan out there with ships.

[quote]We see viciousness in both games from proponents of other species as much or even more than we do the Krogan, and yet it's the Krogan who seem to be the only ones who get called animals etc.[/quote]

Who are calling the Krogan 'animals?'

[quote]Are you implying then that Cerberus is out to get humanity? Cerberus dips into outright criminal activities of course, but that isn't the same as say abducting all the people from Hong Kong or all the people from Ireland. Cerberus isn't out to make people or even humanity in general to suffer for nothing but giggles which leads me to believe this was just sensationalistic rhetoric on your part.[/quote]

In the 'obtain' sense of 'get,' yes, Cerberus are out to get humanity. They are treating humanity as a possession rather than as an actual free thinking race that should be allowed to govern themselves and decide their fate themselves. And they don't need to abduct cities worth of people. They instead assassinate anyone with opposing views and install leaders they feel they can control.

[quote]I don't agree that Cerberus wants human dominance in the sense that it actively oppresses other species. I see them as placing humanity in a position to strongly protect its own sovereignty from other parties. Humanity has had contact with other species for about 30-50 years now give or take, humanity isn't going to benefit from outright isolationism (like the batarians) nor would it benefit in the long run if humanity was outright kings of the world either (look how the other species treat humans if there's an all-human council).

But to answer your questions, no I don't think they would and frankly, I don't think they should stop trying to push the envelope (although; studying children? How is that going to help directly with adult biotic soldiers?) The nature of unknown threats is that they are unknown, so just in case humanity got to hold the conch shell doesn't mean some utter bastard isn't going to throw a stone at you. Case in point? Look at the world perception of US foreign policy.[/quote]

I don't recall the US experimenting on its citizens since the 60's and most of that was done by volunteers, with the scientists unaware of the full risks yet. In fact the example of criticism of  US foreign policy applies much more to the Council. I could give specific examples, if you wish, although the mods don't like RL politics being brought into the forums.

[quote]Absence of evidence doesn't mean evidence of absence. We don't really know anything about how other species view us, other than of course with a sense of trepidation, unease and a view that we are bullies, but let me see if I can give you some answers.[/quote]

A yes, the assumption that since we don't see any evidence, that proves they are just good at interferring. What a conveient arguement.

[quote]Batarian Hegemony - state run fascist organisation, because of our military capabilities, proven during hostilities with the Turian Hierarchy during the First Contact War, we were given colonisation 'rights' to the Skyllian Verge (I think), an area that was previously declared a 'zone of Batarian interest.' When the Batarian pleas to the Council fell on deaf ears, they completely withdrew from the Council (closing its embassy) and retreated to their home system while funnelling money and supplies to pirates and slavers to give incentive to hit human worlds. We can hear in the game itself just how dimly they view humanity by hearing the state broadcasts from the Hegemony on Omega 4 (listen to the batarian news channel). Even Balak hits X57 purely on the basis that Terra Nova is a human world.[/quote]


There is a vast difference between dealing with other nations peer to peer, and interferring directly in their political process. What you seem to be saying is that the Council should only make decisions that benefit others, or somehow make everyone happy. There is a huge difference, though between, the US, say, playing hardball on softwood lumber, and the US rigging Canadian elections to support their position. The Council is doing the former... playing hardball on trade and border issues. Cerberus is doing the latter. Eliminating candidates that don't support their goals. Manipulation by propeganda and other means. You do realize there is a difference don't you? You seem to be insisting the Council give up sovereignty and insisting that Cerberus is justified in taking away Alliance sovereignty.

[quote]Personally though, I think you're pushing a car uphill if you are trying to push the view that Cerberus is somehow oppressive of humanity though. Assassinating the pope actually improved human diplomatic relations with other species; namely the Salarian's. And how is supporting 'key candidates' in any way 'oppressive'? Current political parties do it all the time. Who gets to be Prime Minister? We vote; but we vote on people the party puts forward.[/quote]

Wow... are you actually advocating assassinating popes? Listen to yourself. You really need to read the Shadow Broker's dossier on Cerberus. If we vote, but all moderate or otherwise non-pro-Cerberus candidates are dead, is it really a free election?

[quote]Considering:
a) Cerberus continues to operate despite the odds stacked against it.
We could never find out how many actual operations it has
c) How many operations fail because of their own actions (Pragia) vs how many operations fail due to outside influences (Shephard, Shadow Broker, Anderson)

Then yes, I think he is a great leader. Cerberus has it's fair share of troubles of course, but it's their ability to roll with the punches that is what makes them worthy of grudging respect at the least. Also, the game world would probably be pretty boring if Cerberus only ever had successes.[/quote]

Yup, you are a fanboi... you believe. You take it on faith that Cerberus are competent and are everything you think they should be.

[quote]That's your prerogative. The alliance would have benefited from the research in any case (even if not directly) in your example if it 'piggybacked' into the Alliance's Ascension program.[/quote]

Or the tortured prisoners kept to help train Jack could have disrupted the Ascension program.. there is insufficient data to conclude either way.

[quote]True, but here's how I think of it.

Say you're building a car, your supervisor may know that you need 20,000 screws to complete it, but does your company's shareholders really need that information? Aren't the shareholders more likely going to care if the car is finished or not? Cerberus exists because of it's relative secrecy, not because it discloses information. Furthermore; the Council and it's associates have publicly suppressed information on the Reapers, and have even gone so far as to say to their saviour (providing of course, that you did) that he's a complete and utter nut job if (s)he continues to go on about it. Whether they privately think that as well or not is for ME3.

What Collector information did they conceal? As far as I recall, the Systems Alliance and the Council didn't actually give a sh*t about the abductions because they didn't happen within Council controlled space, and the Alliance had insufficient resources to pursue its investigations until Cerberus took advantage of their own infamy and got the Alliance to act because they name dropped Shephard, gambling on the fact that the Collector's still took an interest in him/her and anyone who was directly responsible in destroying Sovereign, and the Alliance was still more concerned about Shephard's involvement with a terrorist organization than it was with the colonists.[/quote]

If the Alliance didn't care about abductions, why were they arming colonies? That costs money (both in terms of the armaments, and the cost of maintaining troops that far afield). He also concieled the distress beacon. If the Turians suddenly lost a real patrol investigaing, it is a safe bet they would have become a lot more interested in the situation.

As for Cerberus existing because of its secrecy, they put the front company's logo on everything despite the fact it is well known it is a front. They were announcing to everyone that Shepard is theirs.

[quote]Maybe I'm running out of caffeine, but I'm not sure how this answers the question I asked. I guess our answer primarily depends on how many actions went rogue as opposed to how many failed due to outside influences. I can think of Pragia and Overlord failing in that it pushed the ethical boundaries too far, but they still proved the core things that they set out to do was doable. Lazarus succeeded in it's own case where it not for the Shadow Broker, and Grayson failed as far as I know because Anderson tipped off the Turian's who promptly kicked the front door down.[/quote]

TIM's answer was that every operation Shepard fought was either rogue , or 'another branch of Cerberus.' If the other branches aren't under his control, who really runs Cerberus?

[quote]You don't think that giving the amount of money that the backers pour into Cerberus that actual tangible rewards wouldn't be expected (we are talking billions here, not $5 notes here)? Even if the backer was the most xenophobic person in the world, he's still going to want to get something for his troubles. Providing the super rich back Cerberus, I think it isn't unreasonable to assume that they don't have other professionals to go over any schematics that Cerberus provides.

Considering Cerberus depends on their good faith, I don't think it would be in Cerberus long term interests to 'fake it.'

[/quote]

Really? Consider some of your own rhretoric and blind faith, and consider how long organized religion has been around. Scientology, a faith developed on a bet between science fiction writers is going strong in its 58th year. Cerberus has only been around for 29.

[Dean_the_Young]

Jagri wrote...

So is the Council, if you made the Spectre decision. Since many people also make a distinction, supported in-game, of 'I'm working with, not for,' and Shepard's actions aren't exactly dictated by Cerberus at all...

We are considering all the possiabilities and potential actions Shepard can take or views. I do recall posting about some actions and choices Shepard can make being dismissed because they are outright stupid, childish, or immature but was told by what people usally label as a "Cerberus Lawyer"  that it can and should be allowed in discussion.

And that changes how Cerberus doesn't dictate Shepard's actions... how?

This Cerberus lawyer sounds like an interesting person. Perhaps you should quote the person in context, or at least refer to them by name so they could know if you were representing their position accurately?

...because the station was overrun with a wild, insane group of aliens that were spreading chaos across the quadrant?

How is this proof of genocidal intent?

Log 3 also reported that the Rachni shouldn't have been caged like animals but treated like POWs because of the intelligence they displayed. So despite any claims that could be made they were out to terminate all test subjects and given the vague defination established by the UN and a basic webster dictionary its genocide.

Ah, so you like the loosest abuse of the word genocide, the one so badly it doesn't really mean anything of consequence anymore?

Funnily, I argue against that usage regularly, as it demeans the concept of genocide. I've written rather large posts about my dislike of that usage: you should read them some time.

A "Cerberus Lawyer" made the case that the destruction of Soverign could be consider a act of genocide. Simply put a Gray Paulson was a unique being. A new race or hybrid all his own and for him to be hunted down also fits the vague defination of genocide.

I'm sure a Cerberus Lawyer would properly laugh at such a comparison, noting that while Grayson was an indoctrinated human, a singular being with voices piped into his head, whereas, say, Sovereign was the gestalt AI of an entire species.

Again refere to vague defination of genocide.

Funnily enough, I've argued against the vague definition of genocide being applied when it isn't large-scale.

During the events of Mass Effect 2 out of 150 Operatives how many people did you think died between Project Overlord/Reaper Corpse/Lazarus Project?

And that changes or even challenges the assertion that the projects that fail are exceptional notes... how?

You might as well go ask a jail guard how many people are criminals by the standard of how many he sees a day. It'll be just as objective a view.

So a alliance was made and the Turians honored it? I never asked for conditions in which the alliance was established.

You distinctly implied that the Turians honored a pre-existing agreement as a basis for entering the war against the Krogan.

Which they didn't.

Indeed it never went into such details in game but I can say the same for the discussions that lead up to the genophage being needed. Predictions and assumtions are all the fills these gaps.

Oh and here is the defination for genocide...


Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.

Is that the definition do you want to use? It isn't the UN def. By this one, after all, simply abolishing a state (by conquest, by assesion, by assimilation) would qualify, even if no one died.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 décembre 2010 - 10:00 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

mosor wrote...

As for the turians. They were allies of the council at the time and the genophage was developed by the salarians. So if you believe the genophage was morally wrong, then the council bares some responsibility for turian actions. Especially considering they rewarded the turians with a council seat after the conflict.

Morally wrong - I don't know.

But I can't really blame the council.

Krogan rebellions...it doesn't look good for asari/salarians (again)
The turians help...great!
The krogan use asteroids as weapons against the turians (rendering three planets uninhabitable)
.
.
.
And now tell them this: We have a weapon to end the war, but you're not allowed to use it

The first usage of the genophage was the most reasonable: the Krogan were actively using their breeding rates as a weapon of war. And in destroying Saren's cure, the same applied: Saren's usage was going to be a weaponization.


The second genophage, however, was not necessary. They did not need to reimplement it against a species they were not at war with at a time when conventional means could be implemented to restrict the Krogan. Even if they felt they must, they still didn't need to re-impliment it at such a rate at which the Krogan would die off in a few generations unless they reformed in a Council-acceptable way. The 'new' genophage could have been targetted to meet a bare-minimum replacement ratio that actually existed, not what the Salarians and the Council wanted to exist.

The first time was a crime of necessity that ended a galactic war, saving untold numbers of both Council and Krogan lives. The after-effects could have been handled better, but the act itself was justifiable. The Virmire Cure destruction was justified as well.

Mordin's genophage re-implementation, however, was not as necessary, both in cause or in scope.

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The first usage of the genophage was the most reasonable: the Krogan were actively using their breeding rates as a weapon of war. And in destroying Saren's cure, the same applied: Saren's usage was going to be a weaponization.


The second genophage, however, was not necessary. They did not need to reimplement it against a species they were not at war with at a time when conventional means could be implemented to restrict the Krogan. Even if they felt they must, they still didn't need to re-impliment it at such a rate at which the Krogan would die off in a few generations unless they reformed in a Council-acceptable way. The 'new' genophage could have been targetted to meet a bare-minimum replacement ratio that actually existed, not what the Salarians and the Council wanted to exist.

The first time was a crime of necessity that ended a galactic war, saving untold numbers of both Council and Krogan lives. The after-effects could have been handled better, but the act itself was justifiable. The Virmire Cure destruction was justified as well.

Mordin's genophage re-implementation, however, was not as necessary, both in cause or in scope.

Pardon, but the second run only reestablished the rates of the first. The Krogan were curing themselves through rapid evolution. If you feel that the original implementation shouldn't have been cured, why is maintaining it a bad thing?

[Dean_the_Young]

The original implementation during the war ended a war of mass destruction provoked by the Krogan at a time when the Council had no other means to win the wars or force the Krogan to heel.



After the war, once a DMZ was established and enforced, the Council was not at war with the Krogan, and did have other means and options for keeping Krogan from spreading into space and breeding out of control (such as keeping restored Krogan on quarantine worlds, similar to the Yahg), the genophage was no longer a necessary tool. It was a convenient tool instead.

[Arijharn]

[quote]Moiaussi wrote...
And your evidence of this is.....? The Krogan seem to have stabilized and are doing just fine. They are adapting and developing new and better ways to interact with the world.
[/quote]
They aren't advancing as freely as say humanity though are they? Have you considered though that perhaps Krogan culture is the way it is for a reason though? I don't think the Council necessarily has any more 'right' to infringe on a purely internal matter of Krogan politics as it does human.

[quote]Moiaussi wrote...
The second was to ensure that the first doesn't wear off before the Krogan find better answers on their own. They are on their way to those better answers, but aren't there yet.
[/quote]
The problem though is that the Genophage doesn't do that, nor does it allow a diplomatic solution. If the Council only enforced the DMZ against the krogan homeworld, then that gives rise to the option to good faith negotations to fit in with those 'better answers' you like to talk about.

They can not negotiate in the spirit of a 'meeting of the minds' with a Genophage hanging over their heads. Furthermore, as we find out from the very actions of Weyrloc Guld and others like them, the Krogan feel (and in my opinion) victimised by the 'lawful' genocide of their people, I can certainly understand their frustration in their situation as well. They are products of their own environments, and the Genophage moulds their nature and outlooks as well as Tuchanka.

[quote]Moiassui wrote...
You are also completely ignoring the fact that those 'honoured combatants', who were rewarded with worlds and tech decided that wasn't enough and went to war.
[/quote]
What's the alternative though? Not that I support their decision to go to war, but it was to the point that they needed more worlds because they simply outbred the areas they did control due to the fact that the worlds they now owned didn't have the same 'population controls' as their native Tuchanka.

I'm not sure about you, but when I think massive overpopulation I think shanty towns like in Bangladesh or India.

[quote]Even after losing the war, they still wanted more war, simply for the sake of wanting war. Go back to ME1 and listen to Wrex regarding his initial attempts to generate reform on Tuchanka and the resistance he faced especially from older Krogan.
[/quote]
I may be incorrect (at least I know I'm right on some details), but as I recall Wrex said that he was eventually getting through to the clans but it was his father that wanted to 'continue as they were.' I don't know how important his father was to the Krogan as a species, but I got the impression that while powerful, he wasn't powerful enough to be say the leader of the Krogan species as a whole. I'm not sure if his father was indicative of general Krogan sentiment though if a relative youngster such as Wrex managed to persuade clans to his side.


[quote]Moiassui wrote...
There is no evidence that the Krogan would have been willing to accept peace without the genophage. So what is the real alternative? 
[/quote]
The first genophage you're right of course, but they didn't really give the Krogan a chance at all did they with the second? It was very much a case of: "Oh, we can't let this happen!" As far as I know, there wasn't any negotiations to that, they just went out and did it... legally of course.
You control imports into Tuchanka, and because the DMZ is something there then if the Krogan 'mature' then they can enter negotiations in good faith. The Council can pull back DMZ's far easier than say getting another STG crew to modify the Genophage all over again (and successfully deploy it).


[quote]Moiaussi wrote...
But their culture is changing. It was already trying to before Shepard met Wrex. Even if Wrex dies, it still changes. And it wasn't 'a few individual Krogan.' We have first or second hand accounts from credible sources, from the Krogan themselves, that there was no opposition to the war at all until after the genophage, and even after many Krogan still wanted war. By ME2, they have a stable leadership developing alternatives.
[/quote]
I'll concede this point, but I don't see how it makes the second Genophage more 'ethical.' What first/second hand accounts from credible sources though? I'm not sure if Wrex dying would still mean the culture would continue to change though as I very much got the impression that it was his drive that made it possible rather than any sentiment (although I admit my perception is principally clouded by Uvenk's staunch disagreement). Many clans may agree with what he's doing, but I'm not sure if that means they'd pick up the ball and run with it should he fall.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
The only reason there seemed to be no pressing need for the second run is that the Salarians were monitoring the situation and recognized the danger signs before it got to the point of a new war.
[/quote]
That's a nice way of putting it, but I think here was no push at all for a second war because the Salarian's pre-emptively deployed the strains irrespective of whether their culture was currently 'changing' or not. Why? Because their 'simulations were clear.'

Do I really need to point out just how ridiculous the idea is that they could possibly 'account for all variables' right? I mean, you later give me lip about 'trusting Cerberus at their word' and all that (which I don't, I just think sometimes you may have to get your hands filthy (the saying is of course dirty, but you know, I don't think there is actually someone out there that truly and fully supports Cerberus all the way in everything they do -- and filthy seems more apt in regards to what they do.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
Why in blazes would they want to assassinate a moderate leader who is talking of alternatives to a new war? I can understand Cerberus assassinating Wrex to try to get the Council to suppress or eliminate the Krogan threat permenantly, but no logic in the Council doing so.
[/quote]
I didn't mean to imply that they would of course, just thinking out loud. But... really, what steps is Wrex/Wreav taking to make 'alternatives.' Maybe dear old Wrex is writing to the Council saying:
Dear Council,
Today I added two more clans to my unified Krogan state. Things are progressing worse than I hoped but better than I feared, but it's okay because you already know my intentions so you you don't need to be afraid.
Love,
Wrex. XXXOOOXXXOOO
P.S: The Asari Councillor is so hot, but please don't tell her that I said so! I don't want to ruin my Krogan reputation as a bad ass...

Basically, my (very) lame sense of humour is trying to say is that the Council may view any attempt to unify the Krogan species as a bit of a threat because we all know what happened the last time they got together... How would the Council know his intentions?

I don't think though that Cerberus would assassinate Wrex though because Wrex isn't being overtly anti-human if at all as far as I know. He could be I guess, but I always got the impression that if there is one thing that defined Wrex it would be a sense of neutrality.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
The blood pack flap their arms to get between systems? Book commercial flights? Engage in acts of piracy using unarmed freighters pretending to be heavily armed? Tuchanka doesn't have a fleet, but there are Krogan out there with ships. 
[/quote]
I don't know you very well, but what I do know is that you aren't a moron. You know full well that freighters aren't restricted from entering Krogan space (although it is restricted from carrying parts or weapons that could be classified as WMD's (i.e., ship based Mass Accelerator Cannons) or be components to construct them). There is no rule that Krogan can't purchase ships et al.

The DMZ fails in the sense that it doesn't (and couldn't) track those freighters getting parts outside the system, and obviously it doesn't prevent piracy anyway... but you know what; the Blood Pack may have a huge compliment of Krogan, but those Krogan aren't say members of a central Krogan army that represents Krogan interests in the same way that the Systems Alliance represents human interests.

You do get what I'm trying to say right? You do see that there is say a difference between commercial interests (aka; the Blood Pack and whatever it's 'transports' are) and what could be construed as real navy (with modern ships and technology built expressly for the purposes of waging and beating opponents in scale military engagements)

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
Who are calling the Krogan 'animals?'
[/quote]
None that I can think of to be honest, but don't you get the sense that there is some degree of discrimination made against the Krogan for being, well Krogan?

From those Krogan on the citadel not being able to go to the presidium on the account of them being Krogan and they might 'cause a scene' or something to even dear old Mordin scoffing at the suggestion of Krogan scientist despite the fact that I can think of 3 maybe 4:
1) Saren's scientist 'threatening to undo the Salarian's gentle genocide' on Virmire.
2) Warlord Okeer (he knew enough to get to a certain point in which case he asked for Collector help)
3) Wrex's head scientist that is put to engineer crops that can take root in Tuchanka's blasted landscape (and I think he killed his predecessor too, implying that he picked up where someone left off).
Lets not forget the fact that Krogan science had to have progressed to the point that they could wage nuclear war on each other before the Salarian's 'uplifted' them, and they knew enough about their neighbouring toxic planet that measures manhood or something to be toxic before the Salarian's realised that they knew that.

[quote]Moiassui wrote...
In the 'obtain' sense of 'get,' yes, Cerberus are out to get humanity. They are treating humanity as a possession rather than as an actual free thinking race that should be allowed to govern themselves and decide their fate themselves. And they don't need to abduct cities worth of people. They instead assassinate anyone with opposing views and install leaders they feel they can control.
[/quote]
Cerberus is doing what a black ops organisation does I guess. Isn't that the point of those organisations? As far as I see it; Cerberus does what it needs to ensure its own survival. Whether that's 'just' or not, well... I'm guessing our views differ.


[quote]Moissaui wrote...
I don't recall the US experimenting on its citizens since the 60's and most of that was done by volunteers, with the scientists unaware of the full risks yet. In fact the example of criticism of  US foreign policy applies much more to the Council. I could give specific examples, if you wish, although the mods don't like RL politics being brought into the forums.
[/quote]
First of all, the US government, if it was conducting experiments on it's citizens past the 60's I would wager would be covered by something like the Official Secrets Act, so they wouldn't release information of that and if they did it would be so heavily redacted it probably wouldn't matter.

I know some people's disdain of all things wikipedia but: http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States, I wonder if those prisoners have given their consent that they're totally okay with being test fired on by a weapon that apparently causes 'unbearable pain'? Unless of course, you're going to argue that prisoners don't have rights.

If the mods are against bringing RL politics, then I think it would be prudent not to put it in (feel free to PM me that stuff if you want)

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
A yes, the assumption that since we don't see any evidence, that proves they are just good at interferring. What a conveient arguement.
[/quote]
It's as convenient as saying that because we don't see that many Cerberus successes then they therefore must not have many successes which flies in the face that they are still around and not only that, but are deemed a serious enough threat to be called an 'avowed enemy of the Council.'


[quote]Moissaui wrote...
There is a vast difference between dealing with other nations peer to peer, and interferring directly in their political process. What you seem to be saying is that the Council should only make decisions that benefit others, or somehow make everyone happy.
[/quote]
EDITING BECAUSE I DIDN'T MAKE SENSE:
Not at all; you asked if there was any government that actively represses humanity. I answered. It goes beyond simple terrorist funding of slaver hits on human worlds though, as because of the nature of the Batarian Hegemony, it controls (or at the very least; attempts to control) Batarian views on humanity itself (http://masseffect.wi.../wiki/Batarians). How? Because the Batarian Hegemony controls everything about Batarian culture, to the point that leaving Batarian space is illegal.
Now, you're probably thinking: "Is he an idiot? He still doesn't understand what I asked" but let me retort: Not even Cerberus, for all of it's dastardly deeds, interferes with the Systems Alliance political process to the point of no-return. They may align the Terra Firma party to be perhaps more pro-Cerberus, but they haven't destroyed a voter's capability to vote for other representatives, which seems to be the point you're trying to make.
The Batarian's do repress humanity in the sense that their entire political spectrum has been made out to be completely anti-human. Hell, there was a Citadel politician who actively campaigned as being anti-human as well.


[quote]Moissaui wrote...
There is a huge difference, though between, the US, say, playing hardball on softwood lumber, and the US rigging Canadian elections to support their position. The Council is doing the former... playing hardball on trade and border issues. Cerberus is doing the latter. Eliminating candidates that don't support their goals. Manipulation by propeganda and other means. You do realize there is a difference don't you? You seem to be insisting the Council give up sovereignty and insisting that Cerberus is justified in taking away Alliance sovereignty.
[/quote]
I have a slight nitpick about your argument. The council isn't supposed to have any sovereignty on member species. It's supposed to exist as a way for trade to exist primarily. They may pass laws that effect Citadel Space, but providing that an associate or member has the political will and allies (or is plain stubborn enough or strong enough due to circumstance or a resource) then it can ignore certain directives. I think (although I can't prove and can't be anything other than an observation) that the Batarian's must have hold some degree of importance at a point in time because they were able to maintain their position as an associate species despite the fact that they had legal slavery, despite the fact that apparently said practice is illegal.

I don't think Cerberus is necessarily justified in taking Alliance sovereignty though, I haven't got the game open at the moment though but I think those assassinations took place during the time where Cerberus was the Alliance's 'black ops' organisation.

[quote]Moissaui wrote..
Wow... are you actually advocating assassinating popes? Listen to yourself. You really need to read the Shadow Broker's dossier on Cerberus. If we vote, but all moderate or otherwise non-pro-Cerberus candidates are dead, is it really a free election?
[/quote]
I'm not advocating at all, I'm just stating what Cerberus did and the effect that action had. Cerberus also didn't assassinate everyone to leave a sole party behind. It placed Charles whats-his-face at the head of the Terra Firma party, but there are still presumably other parties to vote for.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
Yup, you are a fanboi... you believe. You take it on faith that Cerberus are competent and are everything you think they should be.
[/quote]
I'm not a 'fanboi' in the sense that I fully support everything they have and ever will do,there is issues that I have with them. I still think that they are needed though.

I have faith that Cerberus is 'competent' because it would be stupid if in the universe everything they do results in catastrophe.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
Or the tortured prisoners kept to help train Jack could have disrupted the Ascension program.. there is insufficient data to conclude either way.
[/quote]
I don't think so, I don't see how it could be in Cerberus' interests to sabotage any attempt of humanity to train and make 'better' biotics. I also think the project is still operational, after all, the Alliance has to train biotics somewhere.

[quote]Moiassui wrote...
If the Alliance didn't care about abductions, why were they arming colonies? 
[/quote]
Did you even read my huge block of text or just skim it? If you skimmed it (totally understand you doing so... even I get bored reading) then I can see how you missed it. They armed the colony's because Cerberus and Shephard were name-dropped, that got the Alliance thinking 'ruh roh' and worthy of investigation.

[quote]Moiassui wrote...
That costs money (both in terms of the armaments, and the cost of maintaining troops that far afield). He also concieled the distress beacon. If the Turians suddenly lost a real patrol investigaing, it is a safe bet they would have become a lot more interested in the situation.
[/quote]
1) The colony is in the Terminus System IIRC, that means that in reality the Alliance really shouldn't be there in case they set off the other inhabitants of the systems. This is why they were so distrusting of the VS and the guns being there in the first place.
2) While a 'what if' scenario might have merit, I think he was pretty confident of the situation. Furthermore, he might not necessarily be against the Turian's coming along to help out Shephard in such a scenario, other than insisting that Shephard get all the pertinent information he could. I don't think he's necessarily stupid to say: "Sorry Turian's, we're investigating. You can't come in."

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
As for Cerberus existing because of its secrecy, they put the front company's logo on everything despite the fact it is well known it is a front. They were announcing to everyone that Shepard is theirs.
[/quote]
I'm not convinced of the fact that it is a 'well known front company' though. I mean, think about it. If it was common knowledge that BP was a front corporation for Hezbollah, do you really think anyone would allow it to operate? I mean, that's pretty stupid right?

I guess it really depends on how much things are shown and said for the benefit of the player versus what's realistic or not though.

[quote]Moissaui wrote...
TIM's answer was that every operation Shepard fought was either rogue , or 'another branch of Cerberus.' If the other branches aren't under his control, who really runs Cerberus?
[/quote]
'Another branch of Cerberus'? When does he ever say that?

TIM may say things occasionally to shift blame, and honestly I wouldn't be so trusting of Shephard's position either if I was in his shoes. I mean, I may not be the most sympathetic person on the planet, but even I don't see the point of an actual reason to specifically go out of one's way to test on children, but I see no reason to automatically dismiss everything he says because he's a 'bad' person either.

The way I see it is that TIM generally hires people he thinks has the vision and ability to see projects through, but other than that he 'generally' lets them do as they see fit. An example; if you hire a micro-biologist to do a job, you don't tell the micro-biologist how to do his job if you aren't a micro-biologist yourself.

Furthermore; in both rogue facilities we definitely know about, Pragia and Overlord, we know for a fact that TIM was suspicious of events going on there. "The Illusive man is asking for operational reports again. He's getting suspicious." and "Please tell the Illusive Man that we will have a demonstration ready for him at a future time."

[quote]Moiassui wrote...
Really? Consider some of your own rhretoric and blind faith, and consider how long organized religion has been around. Scientology, a faith developed on a bet between science fiction writers is going strong in its 58th year. Cerberus has only been around for 29.[/quote]
'Blind faith' You're arguing with me about the ethics of Cerberus actions in the past and how 'justifiable' they are while giving the Council a free pass on the Genophage, and we haven't even touched on the Council's other decisions yet.

Modifié par Arijharn, 06 décembre 2010 - 12:34 .

[Tennessee88]

[/quote]
[quote]Are you implying then that Cerberus is out to get humanity? Cerberus dips into outright criminal activities of course, but that isn't the same as say abducting all the people from Hong Kong or all the people from Ireland. Cerberus isn't out to make people or even humanity in general to suffer for nothing but giggles which leads me to believe this was just sensationalistic rhetoric on your part.[/quote]

In the 'obtain' sense of 'get,' yes, Cerberus are out to get humanity. They are treating humanity as a possession rather than as an actual free thinking race that should be allowed to govern themselves and decide their fate themselves. And they don't need to abduct cities worth of people. They instead assassinate anyone with opposing views and install leaders they feel they can control.

[/quote]

Don't mean to jump in on yalls truly interesting converstation (and I mean that, not trying to get cute) but thought I would add my two cents.

I think the word "possesion" is a tad strong although your intention in its use is not without merit. Cerberus is effectively acting as a shadow government for humanity, one that seeks to save it from the collecters as well as propel it into a period of dominance. However there is evidence to suggest that TIM truly wishes to save humanity even if it costs him and his organization dearly. For example his willingness to let Anderson live with the information obtained by Cerberus on the Reapers. Anderson obviously caused some serious damage to Cerberus, but he could very well prove to be a major tool in salvation.

As for Cerberus's actions regarding assasination and their other actions that would obviously be considered sinister in today's world. Can we really apply the same level of morality to them that we apply to institutions of power today.
For one, the Universe is upon the edge of knife, if not walked correctly mass extinction is an inevitability. That fact alone takes "the ends justify the means" to a level that is almost incomprehensible in our comparetively comfortable world.

On top of that humanity exists in a inter-galactic society which treats it as little more than a child. The turians had no problems killing hundreds of humans for what amounts to a simple mistake. They aimed to crush us into a status no better than slaves and thanks to their ignorance and intervention by the council we were allowed to avoid this. I wish I could say evidence points towards the council believing we deserved more than the turian boot on our throat, but all sources point to a wish to avoid a war that would be against their best interest. Keep in mind they didn't step in when the turians thought they had us beat, they stepped in only when we fought back.

Our colonies were ravaged by one of their own agents, then when our colonists started missing by the thousands they showed as much compassion as I would if my neighbors cat died.

Then turians attacked Cerberus assets with Anderson because its obvious the Alliance brass has a vested interest in Cerberus, they must have a reason. At their behest they build the SR1, then at the very least facilitated the SR2.

Also keep in mind that if it wasn't for Cerberus, thousands upon thousands of Colonist would have been killed in gruesome fashion by the collectors.

I am not saying your points are invalid, or that they are even wrong. The Illusive Man could prove to be nothing more than a psuedo-hitler. However at the same time, and my personal belief is that he may crave too much power, but he is also the key to humanity's salvation from the Reapers and their deliverer to there rightful place in the galaxy. If it takes us becoming the dominant race in the galaxy to protect our own species from the neglect of an incompetent and self-centered Council than so be it. One thing is clear, the status quo will not do with regards to the Reapers or the Council Government, and only Cerberus is willing to do something about that.

[Moiaussi]

[quote]Arijharn wrote...

They aren't advancing as freely as say humanity though are they? Have you considered though that perhaps Krogan culture is the way it is for a reason though? I don't think the Council necessarily has any more 'right' to infringe on a purely internal matter of Krogan politics as it does human.[/quote]

Very few Krogan show interest in science. "Krogan scientist" is still considered an oxymoron. If anything, they are likely progressing faster now. And that isn't because of them being held back.... unless you consider the Council not surrendering to them as 'holding them back.' Again, I refer you to Krogan attitudes in ME1.

[quote]The problem though is that the Genophage doesn't do that, nor does it allow a diplomatic solution. If the Council only enforced the DMZ against the krogan homeworld, then that gives rise to the option to good faith negotations to fit in with those 'better answers' you like to talk about.

They can not negotiate in the spirit of a 'meeting of the minds' with a Genophage hanging over their heads. Furthermore, as we find out from the very actions of Weyrloc Guld and others like them, the Krogan feel (and in my opinion) victimised by the 'lawful' genocide of their people, I can certainly understand their frustration in their situation as well. They are products of their own environments, and the Genophage moulds their nature and outlooks as well as Tuchanka.[/quote]

You really are playing some other game.. They ARE finding solutions. Yes, there are still warmongers, and there are factions not currently in power that want power. You are saying that because the entire society didn't change their culture completely that therefore nothing is working? What is your evidence that they would be peaceful without the genophage?

[quote]What's the alternative though? Not that I support their decision to go to war, but it was to the point that they needed more worlds because they simply outbred the areas they did control due to the fact that the worlds they now owned didn't have the same 'population controls' as their native Tuchanka.

I'm not sure about you, but when I think massive overpopulation I think shanty towns like in Bangladesh or India.[/quote]

Both of which manage to maintain those populations without going to war. India is doing rather well economically last I heard (at least it was before the recent world economic downturn). But humans can and do use birth control. In western nations we use it so much we are importing people just to keep the population levels up. The Krogan have shown no such inclination and revel in their birth rate and constant war. The genophage, which is essentially enforced birth control, stabilizes the population so that they have other options.

[quote]I may be incorrect (at least I know I'm right on some details), but as I recall Wrex said that he was eventually getting through to the clans but it was his father that wanted to 'continue as they were.' I don't know how important his father was to the Krogan as a species, but I got the impression that while powerful, he wasn't powerful enough to be say the leader of the Krogan species as a whole. I'm not sure if his father was indicative of general Krogan sentiment though if a relative youngster such as Wrex managed to persuade clans to his side.[/quote]

His father was powerful enough that he was able to have Wrex ambushed by a large enough contingent to make it a real fight, and for Wrex not to simply write it off as a small event. Wrex was making progress, but not to the level in ME2.


[quote]The first genophage you're right of course, but they didn't really give the Krogan a chance at all did they with the second? It was very much a case of: "Oh, we can't let this happen!" As far as I know, there wasn't any negotiations to that, they just went out and did it... legally of course.
You control imports into Tuchanka, and because the DMZ is something there then if the Krogan 'mature' then they can enter negotiations in good faith. The Council can pull back DMZ's far easier than say getting another STG crew to modify the Genophage all over again (and successfully deploy it).[/quote]

The second just maintained the first. It didn't make it worse. It made it the same. And negotiations aren't going to  be 'in good faith' easily under such circumstances. There is no evidence that the Krogan are ready for a return to former birth rates. They still barely have anything resembling a central government.

[quote]I'll concede this point, but I don't see how it makes the second Genophage more 'ethical.' What first/second hand accounts from credible sources though? I'm not sure if Wrex dying would still mean the culture would continue to change though as I very much got the impression that it was his drive that made it possible rather than any sentiment (although I admit my perception is principally clouded by Uvenk's staunch disagreement). Many clans may agree with what he's doing, but I'm not sure if that means they'd pick up the ball and run with it should he fall.[/quote]

We know that even if Wrex dies in ME1, another of his clan takes the same path. What Wrex is doing is working, and the majority recognize that. There will always be others who disagree for various reasons. Culture changes slowly, even with something as major as the genophage driving change.

[quote]That's a nice way of putting it, but I think here was no push at all for a second war because the Salarian's pre-emptively deployed the strains irrespective of whether their culture was currently 'changing' or not. Why? Because their 'simulations were clear.'

Do I really need to point out just how ridiculous the idea is that they could possibly 'account for all variables' right? I mean, you later give me lip about 'trusting Cerberus at their word' and all that (which I don't, I just think sometimes you may have to get your hands filthy (the saying is of course dirty, but you know, I don't think there is actually someone out there that truly and fully supports Cerberus all the way in everything they do -- and filthy seems more apt in regards to what they do.[/quote]

In this case, though, you are actually talking about increasing the birth rate by 1000x. Imagine if that was done on earth.... What would be the Krogan alternatives? Internal wars per their pre-rachni war history? A second uprising? Maintaining the genophage is not the same as a new genophage.

[quote]I didn't mean to imply that they would of course, just thinking out loud. But... really, what steps is Wrex/Wreav taking to make 'alternatives.' Maybe dear old Wrex is writing to the Council saying:
Dear Council,
Today I added two more clans to my unified Krogan state. Things are progressing worse than I hoped but better than I feared, but it's okay because you already know my intentions so you you don't need to be afraid.
Love,
Wrex. XXXOOOXXXOOO
P.S: The Asari Councillor is so hot, but please don't tell her that I said so! I don't want to ruin my Krogan reputation as a bad ass...

Basically, my (very) lame sense of humour is trying to say is that the Council may view any attempt to unify the Krogan species as a bit of a threat because we all know what happened the last time they got together... How would the Council know his intentions?

I don't think though that Cerberus would assassinate Wrex though because Wrex isn't being overtly anti-human if at all as far as I know. He could be I guess, but I always got the impression that if there is one thing that defined Wrex it would be a sense of neutrality.[/quote]

But with the genophage in place, if the Krogan remilitarized they would just be another regular power, and would actually be outnumbered. They would still have their physical advantage, but wouldn't have any major strategic advantage that would lead them back to war.

[quote]I don't know you very well, but what I do know is that you aren't a moron. You know full well that freighters aren't restricted from entering Krogan space (although it is restricted from carrying parts or weapons that could be classified as WMD's (i.e., ship based Mass Accelerator Cannons) or be components to construct them). There is no rule that Krogan can't purchase ships et al.

The DMZ fails in the sense that it doesn't (and couldn't) track those freighters getting parts outside the system, and obviously it doesn't prevent piracy anyway... but you know what; the Blood Pack may have a huge compliment of Krogan, but those Krogan aren't say members of a central Krogan army that represents Krogan interests in the same way that the Systems Alliance represents human interests.

You do get what I'm trying to say right? You do see that there is say a difference between commercial interests (aka; the Blood Pack and whatever it's 'transports' are) and what could be construed as real navy (with modern ships and technology built expressly for the purposes of waging and beating opponents in scale military engagements)[/quote]

My point is that the Krogan government may be restricted from having warships, but there are Krogan out there with armed vessels. There are problems all through ME discussions when the subject of nations and empires comes up in that they are all treated as racial rather than governmental. Unless they amended the constitution, an Asari born on US soil would be a US citizen.

[quote]None that I can think of to be honest, but don't you get the sense that there is some degree of discrimination made against the Krogan for being, well Krogan?[/quote]

No, actually. People follow their lead on and off the battlefield. I don't recall any prejudice against them in ME1 or ME2. Against humans, against vorcha, against batarans, against turians (from humans), against Quarians, but not against Krogan.

[quote]From those Krogan on the citadel not being able to go to the presidium on the account of them being Krogan and they might 'cause a scene' or something to even dear old Mordin scoffing at the suggestion of Krogan scientist despite the fact that I can think of 3 maybe 4:
1) Saren's scientist 'threatening to undo the Salarian's gentle genocide' on Virmire.
2) Warlord Okeer (he knew enough to get to a certain point in which case he asked for Collector help)
3) Wrex's head scientist that is put to engineer crops that can take root in Tuchanka's blasted landscape (and I think he killed his predecessor too, implying that he picked up where someone left off).
Lets not forget the fact that Krogan science had to have progressed to the point that they could wage nuclear war on each other before the Salarian's 'uplifted' them, and they knew enough about their neighbouring toxic planet that measures manhood or something to be toxic before the Salarian's realised that they knew that.[/quote]

And yet Wrex is allowed on the presidium. The Krogan in ME2 are threatening to fish in the pool.
I agree that Mordin's comments count.. it would have been better writing if he softened on that after meeting okeer. Waging nuclear war is not that difficult actually. As for knowing something measures manhood, that concept goes back to tribal humanity.

[quote]Cerberus is doing what a black ops organisation does I guess. Isn't that the point of those organisations? As far as I see it; Cerberus does what it needs to ensure its own survival. Whether that's 'just' or not, well... I'm guessing our views differ.[/quote]

There is a difference between doing black ops on behalf of an elected government, and doing black ops for your own purposes with no oversight at all. Even for an elected government, black ops are normally actually illegal, hence the differentiation from conventional espionage or counterespionage. There is a reason for that....

[quote]First of all, the US government, if it was conducting experiments on it's citizens past the 60's I would wager would be covered by something like the Official Secrets Act, so they wouldn't release information of that and if they did it would be so heavily redacted it probably wouldn't matter.

I know some people's disdain of all things wikipedia but: http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States, I wonder if those prisoners have given their consent that they're totally okay with being test fired on by a weapon that apparently causes 'unbearable pain'? Unless of course, you're going to argue that prisoners don't have rights.

If the mods are against bringing RL politics, then I think it would be prudent not to put it in (feel free to PM me that stuff if you want)[/quote]

Note that the vast majority of cases in that article are from the 60's or earlier as I suggested. There are a couple from the 70's.

The only recent incidents listed are the use of synthetic blood, in which consent couldn't be given because the patients were emergent, and since they were emergent, the need for blood immediately was absolute.

The heat ray is to be tested on rioting inmates, which is not the same as simply tested on inmates. It is being tested as a non-lethal subdual option. It has been tested on willing volunteers already, including some journalists (NBC has footage of one of their journalists being hit with it). Despite that, NBC characterized the jail implementation as a test of something other than effectiveness in breaking up fights or riots. Got to love modern reporting.....

[quote]It's as convenient as saying that because we don't see that many Cerberus successes then they therefore must not have many successes which flies in the face that they are still around and not only that, but are deemed a serious enough threat to be called an 'avowed enemy of the Council.'[/quote]

So the Council considering them dangerous makes them a success? As Shepard I considered them dangerous in ME1 too, simply because of the nature of their experiments.


[quote]Not at all; you asked if there was any government that actively represses humanity. I answered. It goes beyond simple terrorist funding of slaver hits on human worlds though, as because of the nature of the Batarian Hegemony, it controls (or at the very least; attempts to control) Batarian views on humanity itself (http://masseffect.wi.../wiki/Batarians). How? Because the Batarian Hegemony controls everything about Batarian culture, to the point that leaving Batarian space is illegal.[/quote]

Umm... not sure what you are saying here... are you advocating total dictatorships and suggesting humanity cannot be properly represented unless we live under a despotic dictatorship and let them represent us entirely without us having any actual say? 

[quote]I have a slight nitpick about your argument. The council isn't supposed to have any sovereignty on member species. It's supposed to exist as a way for trade to exist primarily. They may pass laws that effect Citadel Space, but providing that an associate or member has the political will and allies (or is plain stubborn enough or strong enough due to circumstance or a resource) then it can ignore certain directives. I think (although I can't prove and can't be anything other than an observation) that the Batarian's must have hold some degree of importance at a point in time because they were able to maintain their position as an associate species despite the fact that they had legal slavery, despite the fact that apparently said practice is illegal.[/quote]

Go re-read the codex entry on the Council. Members have full rights, including voting. Associates merely have embassies. Of course any given person, state, or organization can flaunt the law and the law may or may not be enforced, but that is a red herring as that is true of all laws since the dawn of time.

I don't think Cerberus is necessarily justified in taking Alliance sovereignty though, I haven't got the game open at the moment though but I think those assassinations took place during the time where Cerberus was the Alliance's 'black ops' organisation.[/quote]

I almost wonder if the writers forgot Cerberus was supposedly originally alliance. The first mention of Cerberus in the official timeline is just after the first contact war, with TIM publishing a manifesto calling for Cerberus to be formed as a pro human army. The Alliance appearantly didn't even have a parliament yet. The assasinations though fit Cerberus' ideals, not those of any elected anyone. They assassinate the pope, a parliament member, the US president and chinese premier. That sounds pretty 'rogue' to me.

[quote]I'm not advocating at all, I'm just stating what Cerberus did and the effect that action had. Cerberus also didn't assassinate everyone to leave a sole party behind. It placed Charles whats-his-face at the head of the Terra Firma party, but there are still presumably other parties to vote for.[/quote]

They assassinated a parliament member, as well as the US and Chinese leaders.

from the sb dossier:


2174 - Radium placed inside office chair of Systems Alliance parliamentarian Artyom Gavrikov. Gavrikov's death attributed to cancer. Emergency election much cheaper to manipulate than normal process. Cerberus-backed candidate loses; winning candidate approached, found susceptible to bribes.
[quote]I'm not a 'fanboi' in the sense that I fully support everything they have and ever will do,there is issues that I have with them. I still think that they are needed though.

I have faith that Cerberus is 'competent' because it would be stupid if in the universe everything they do results in catastrophe.[/quote]

They undoubtedly have some successes, but that isn't the same as competency. The implication is that there are no questionable or incompetent organizations in the world simply because that doesn't fit with your world view....

By the way, they can be competent at fund raising and still incompetent otherwise.

[quote]I don't think so, I don't see how it could be in Cerberus' interests to sabotage any attempt of humanity to train and make 'better' biotics. I also think the project is still operational, after all, the Alliance has to train biotics somewhere.[/quote]

Those weren't the only biotics in the program. There was already a program in place. Cerberus snuck the kids in hoping to salvage something.

[quote]Did you even read my huge block of text or just skim it? If you skimmed it (totally understand you doing so... even I get bored reading) then I can see how you missed it. They armed the colony's because Cerberus and Shephard were name-dropped, that got the Alliance thinking 'ruh roh' and worthy of investigation.[/quote]

So you figure that if they discovered on their own that it was the Collectors they would have said 'well that's ok since it isn't Cerberus?' Your theory seems a little shakey.

[quote]1) The colony is in the Terminus System IIRC, that means that in reality the Alliance really shouldn't be there in case they set off the other inhabitants of the systems. This is why they were so distrusting of the VS and the guns being there in the first place.
2) While a 'what if' scenario might have merit, I think he was pretty confident of the situation. Furthermore, he might not necessarily be against the Turian's coming along to help out Shephard in such a scenario, other than insisting that Shephard get all the pertinent information he could. I don't think he's necessarily stupid to say: "Sorry Turian's, we're investigating. You can't come in."[/quote]

I think (1) went out the window after the Citadel War. The Alliance were already patrolling that space in search of Geth holdouts. They even ordered Shepard into the area and told him essentially that they prefered he stay there.

Both (1) and (2) are also problematic in that if the Turians wouldn't come, why did he jam the signals?

[quote]I'm not convinced of the fact that it is a 'well known front company' though. I mean, think about it. If it was common knowledge that BP was a front corporation for Hezbollah, do you really think anyone would allow it to operate? I mean, that's pretty stupid right?

I guess it really depends on how much things are shown and said for the benefit of the player versus what's realistic or not though.[/quote]

Well they know Shepard is now Cerberus and the Normandy 2 certainly is, yet they allow both to dock and to fly away again as many times as they please. In the real world, Cord-H would have been shut down or at least heavily fined for selling to terrorists, since their logo is even on the Normandy.

[quote]'Another branch of Cerberus'? When does he ever say that?[/quote]

I think it was Miranda actually... saying something along the lines of 'well those are the other branches... we don't oversee those.

[quote]TIM may say things occasionally to shift blame, and honestly I wouldn't be so trusting of Shephard's position either if I was in his shoes. I mean, I may not be the most sympathetic person on the planet, but even I don't see the point of an actual reason to specifically go out of one's way to test on children, but I see no reason to automatically dismiss everything he says because he's a 'bad' person either.[/quote]

I see TIM as akin to Stalin in WWII. Someone you have to deal with even though he is almost as bad as the enemy you are fighting, but too important and useful to ignore. Shepard shouldn't have rolled over so quick. TIM did still need Shepard too.

[quote]The way I see it is that TIM generally hires people he thinks has the vision and ability to see projects through, but other than that he 'generally' lets them do as they see fit. An example; if you hire a micro-biologist to do a job, you don't tell the micro-biologist how to do his job if you aren't a micro-biologist yourself.

Furthermore; in both rogue facilities we definitely know about, Pragia and Overlord, we know for a fact that TIM was suspicious of events going on there. "The Illusive man is asking for operational reports again. He's getting suspicious." and "Please tell the Illusive Man that we will have a demonstration ready for him at a future time."[/quote]

I take it you have never taken a management course. Look up 'agency costs' sometime. It is the reality that when you have no way to be sure someone is doing the job you hired them for, they have little incentive to do that job well, or at least timely.

There are systems one can put in place to mitigate such risks, such as having independant oversight and rotating personel. TIM may ask for reports, but he doesn't follow up personally enough.  

[quote]'Blind faith' You're arguing with me about the ethics of Cerberus actions in the past and how 'justifiable' they are while giving the Council a free pass on the Genophage, and we haven't even touched on the Council's other decisions yet.[/quote]

I have defended the genophage based on the facts, which should actually be irrelevant here anyway. There are are theives and murderers in the world. That is simple fact. Does that justify you becoming one? Even if you think the person you kill or rob deserves it?

[Xilizhra]

From those Krogan on the citadel not being able to go to the presidium on the account of them being Krogan

Considering that one of the krogan was plotting to kill various turians in revenge for that snubbing, complaints like this sort of sound to me like "You humans are all racist!"

[Moiaussi]

Tennessee88 wrote...

For one, the Universe is upon the edge of knife, if not walked correctly mass extinction is an inevitability. That fact alone takes "the ends justify the means" to a level that is almost incomprehensible in our comparetively comfortable world.

Those assassinations were made before anyone knew of the Reapers.

On top of that humanity exists in a inter-galactic society which treats it as little more than a child. The turians had no problems killing hundreds of humans for what amounts to a simple mistake. They aimed to crush us into a status no better than slaves and thanks to their ignorance and intervention by the council we were allowed to avoid this. I wish I could say evidence points towards the council believing we deserved more than the turian boot on our throat, but all sources point to a wish to avoid a war that would be against their best interest. Keep in mind they didn't step in when the turians thought they had us beat, they stepped in only when we fought back.

And the Turian councellor voted in favour of an end to the war. And a similar 'simple mistake' started the Rachni war, which nearly wiped out all the Council races.

Our colonies were ravaged by one of their own agents, then when our colonists started missing by the thousands they showed as much compassion as I would if my neighbors cat died.

Those weren't 'our' colonies. The residents there don't consider themselves alliance and even still are suspicious of the alliance even after being saved by an alliance gun. There is a danger in assuming that since the major empires are essentially racially pure, that all members of those races are citizens of those empires.

Then turians attacked Cerberus assets with Anderson because its obvious the Alliance brass has a vested interest in Cerberus, they must have a reason. At their behest they build the SR1, then at the very least facilitated the SR2.

It is well known that Cerberus has infiltrated the Alliance navy to high levels. That is not the same as the navy or alliance condoning cerberus.

Also keep in mind that if it wasn't for Cerberus, thousands upon thousands of Colonist would have been killed in gruesome fashion by the collectors.

And if they simply leaked the information to the Alliance via their operatives, the Alliance fleet couldn't have done as well or better?

I am not saying your points are invalid, or that they are even wrong. The Illusive Man could prove to be nothing more than a psuedo-hitler. However at the same time, and my personal belief is that he may crave too much power, but he is also the key to humanity's salvation from the Reapers and their deliverer to there rightful place in the galaxy. If it takes us becoming the dominant race in the galaxy to protect our own species from the neglect of an incompetent and self-centered Council than so be it. One thing is clear, the status quo will not do with regards to the Reapers or the Council Government, and only Cerberus is willing to do something about that.

What makes 'dominant' our 'rightful place?' The danger is that in worrying too much about dominance, we are at greater risk against the reapers. And keep in mind that among the things Cerberus is 'willing to do' is to assassinate any politicians that disagree with them.

[Barquiel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Mordin's genophage re-implementation, however, was not as necessary, both in cause or in scope.

Okay, now I'm curious...I assume you saved Maelon's data to cure the krogan?

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Mordin's genophage re-implementation, however, was not as necessary, both in cause or in scope.

Okay, now I'm curious...I assume you saved Maelon's data to cure the krogan?

No, but then I'm a cruel, callous human-supremacist bastard lovechild of TIM and Satan who doesn't insist on doing the right thing at all costs. I killed the Rachni, shot Shiala, enabled a crime lord go free in order to turn a galactic syndicate towards lesser crimes, sold Legion to Cerberus, killed Rana Thanapolis. I left the romance option to die on Virmire to save the bomb, told Anderson to get himself shot to unlock the Normandy, and selected Udina to head the all-human Council.

I am, apparently, the Cerberus Lawyer to boot.

I'm the low bar in this argument, really. The fact the Council does what I'd do is a bad sign, not a good sign, and while I might feel it was preferable (by my standard) I make no pretenses it was any less bad.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 décembre 2010 - 03:24 .

[Jagri]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
And that changes how Cerberus doesn't dictate Shepard's actions... how?

Simply perception and law. If Shepard ever goes to trial for his actions because he was consider a Cerberus operative cause he rejected the councils proposal to reinstate Spectre status then the actions he/she took will be added to the crimes of Cerberus as a whole. Despite to what lengths or depths Cerberus was truely involed.

This Cerberus lawyer sounds like an interesting person. Perhaps you should quote the person in context, or at least refer to them by name so they could know if you were representing their position accurately?

Not going to specifically name people on the forum.

Ah, so you like the loosest abuse of the word genocide, the one so badly it doesn't really mean anything of consequence anymore?

Genocide is still genocide even if term is abused and used loosely.

I'm sure a Cerberus Lawyer would properly laugh at such a comparison, noting that while Grayson was an indoctrinated human, a singular being with voices piped into his head, whereas, say, Sovereign was the gestalt AI of an entire species.

Paul Grayson was a unique being... Not entirely a Husk or a victim of simple indoctrination. In fact a new racial identity.

Funnily enough, I've argued against the vague definition of genocide being applied when it isn't large-scale.

Failure to understand the defination of genocide.

And that changes or even challenges the assertion that the projects that fail are exceptional notes... how?

That these within a period of 3 year Cerberus has lost nearly 150 Operatives if not more. A organization which given their own actions and that of a single man can repeatly have their numbers depleted can be consided a failure of a organization.

You distinctly implied that the Turians honored a pre-existing agreement as a basis for entering the war against the Krogan. Which they didn't.

Possiably implied but wasn't intended and anything further is a excuse.

Modifié par Jagri, 06 décembre 2010 - 05:57 .

[Yakko77]

I think Cerberus was initially set up with good intentions but as the saying goes, "The Road to He1l is paved with good intentions."

TIM pretty much has absolute power and if I may make another snappy quote, "Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely."

With a few exceptions (like bringing Shepard back but to what purpose in TIMs mind) Cerberus has conducted itself in a manner that would make N@zi war criminals green with envy. They claim to work for the benefit of humanity but they disregard human life at the drop of a hat at every opportunity when it suits their purposes.

All that being said, Cerberus as a organization is arguably "evil" but certain individuals within (like many if not most in the Normandy SR2 crew) are just there because Cerberus is the only one fighting the fight that needs to be fought against the Reapers. Again, TIMs intention for doing such is likely to attain even more power when the dust settles but I'll finish with yet another quote, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Modifié par Yakko77, 06 décembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Jagri wrote...

Genocide is still genocide even if term is abused and used loosely.

This rather tidely sums up the reason we'll never come to agreement.

[Moiaussi]

It is interesting that the best defence that can be presented of Cerberus still seems to be 'but the Council are evil too.' Not sure how that makes Cerberus 'good,' even if true.

[Dean_the_Young]

Moiaussi wrote...

It is interesting that the best defence that can be presented of Cerberus still seems to be 'but the Council are evil too.' Not sure how that makes Cerberus 'good,' even if true.

Who's ever said it did, Moiaussi?

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

It is interesting that the best defence that can be presented of Cerberus still seems to be 'but the Council are evil too.' Not sure how that makes Cerberus 'good,' even if true.

Who's ever said it did, Moiaussi?

Essentially anyone using that arguement, which seems to be the majority of pro Cerberus posters.

[aeetos21]

Two wrongs don't make a right. As for the Council being evil, of course they are but they operate openly or at least more openly than Cerberus. That makes a big difference. This is going to be an indecisive thread because what we're really debating is "What is evil?" and since we all have different definitions of that people can scream and holler all they want, won't go anywhere.

[rma2110]

I don't trust TIM and therefore don't trust Cerberus. I do trust the crew of the normandy sr-2 though. I don't rust the council, but my Shep would rather go back to the Alliance.

[Dean_the_Young]

Moiaussi wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

It is interesting that the best defence that can be presented of Cerberus still seems to be 'but the Council are evil too.' Not sure how that makes Cerberus 'good,' even if true.

Who's ever said it did, Moiaussi?

Essentially anyone using that arguement, which seems to be the majority of pro Cerberus posters.

Not dismissing Cerberus as an ally out of hand on the basis that it's no worse than the Council is not equivalent to saying Cerberus is good and ideal, Moiaussi.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 07 décembre 2010 - 12:41 .

[Dean_the_Young]

rma2110 wrote...

I don't trust TIM and therefore don't trust Cerberus. I do trust the crew of the normandy sr-2 though. I don't rust the council, but my Shep would rather go back to the Alliance.

You don't trust TIM, but you do trust the equipment he supplies, the personnel he hand-picks, and the organization he admits to having contact and influence with?

[rma2110]

Strange isn't it? I don't know TIM, but I did get to know the crew. I only trust TIM as far as taking out the collectors go. We have the same goal there. After that I fully expect him to stab my Shep in the back.

Modifié par rma2110, 07 décembre 2010 - 12:48 .

[Dean_the_Young]

rma2110 wrote...

Strange isn't it? I don't know TIM, but I dig get to know the crew. I only trust TIM as far as taking out the collectors go. We have the same goal there. After that I fully expect him to stab my Shep in the back.

Because the reason he brought you back (the Reapers and your importance to humanity), had you investigate the colony disappearances (the importance to humanity and concerns about the Reapers), and the reason he never says a word or take action no matter how anti-Cerberus you are in word and deed before the Collector Base decision (again, the Reapers and your importance to Humanity) change after the Collector Base decision?

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 07 décembre 2010 - 12:49 .