798 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

chrono21791 wrote...

OOOOOOOOOOOK guys, I get it, Zulu is trollin'. That, or he has no idea what evidence actually is, how to use it, or how to prove or support a claim. You have no proof. You have only speculation. I read the entire OP and there was not a single shred of SOLID evidence that definitively pointed to supporting his claim.

If there was a "single shred of SOLID evidence", I'd bid the Red Panda to lock this thread for redundancy. And started a new one, named "I told you so!"

That'd be trollin' indeed.


In the meantime, let's keep voting!

Is the Alliance evil, or inept?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 mars 2011 - 08:21 .

[Rekkampum]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
If there was a "single shred of SOLID evidence", I'd bid the Red Panda to lock this thread for redundancy. And started a new one, named "I told you so!"

Thou shall not sin by bearing false utterance before the Bioware Gods, lest the Pacifien One cometh and wreak a just vengeance upon ye. Then shall the Pacifien One take thine keys away so that no man may enter this hallowed ground, and we shall lament it.

[Pwener2313]

Rekkampum wrote...

Thou shall not sin by bearing false utterance before the Bioware Gods, lest the Pacifien One cometh and wreak a just vengeance upon ye. Then shall the Pacifien One take thine keys away so that no man may enter this hallowed ground, and we shall lament it.

BW is the new religion? I must have missed the memo.

[Rekkampum]

Pwener2313 wrote...

Rekkampum wrote...

Thou shall not sin by bearing false utterance before the Bioware Gods, lest the Pacifien One cometh and wreak a just vengeance upon ye. Then shall the Pacifien One take thine keys away so that no man may enter this hallowed ground, and we shall lament it.

BW is the new religion? I must have missed the memo.

I'm currently inspired by the Asari religion.

[PatT2]

There is corruption and greed whenever power pools. No matter how righteous a group claims to be. You show me a cabal of the "powerful" and I'll find corruption in it. Churches, governments, militaries, heck, clubs. I have no faith in any human organization to make things better. It's up to individuals. Because that's all any organization is, is a group of individuals. But the people who want power, who gravitate to it? Well, I believe that power attracts the corruptible.

America is no different. I don't trust our government to protect me. If it's in their interest to turn on me and disappear me, they will. Sit with your back to the corner, folks.

[swenson]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

swenson wrote...

So there has to be a reason why the Alliance didn't admit the true means of Kahoku's death. Whether because they didn't want to alert people (humans and aliens alike) to the existence of a pro-human terrorist group or because they didn't want to admit their connection with it (assuming Cerberus really was originally with the Alliance; in this case, it wouldn't matter whether they went rogue or not. Revealing to the press that a group that used to be in the Alliance and very well might still have connections... that would not be a smart political move), the Alliance deliberately covered up Kahoku's means of death.

How would the revelation that Kahoku was killed by the "terrorists" harm the Alliance and implicate that the "terrorists" were in fact its own black ops outfit? In fact, some truth (about Kahoku) seems to be coming up in ME2 (so long as you've saved both Cpl. Toombs and Dr. Wayne in ME1).

The only reason I see plausible, is that the Alliance would want to cover any Cerberus action regardless of potential implications to its proper self.

I don't know. I wasn't really trying to explain the Alliance's actions, just explore them. Forgetting about everything else we know or think we know about the Alliance and Cerberus, there must be a reason why the Alliance didn't want to reveal Kahoku's death. Therefore, there must be some reason why they can't just denounce it as "terrorists".

My possible thoughts (as stated in my post, although I didn't make them very clear) were:
1) Assuming Cerberus is NOT part of the Alliance (unlikely, but technically still possible, as Admiral Kahoku could have either been merely assuming Cerberus was part of the Alliance or have been fed misinformation by some unknown party), it's possible that they wouldn't want to reveal their existence because aliens would be upset that there was a pro-human terrorist group out there. I doubt this possibility and still don't understand why the Alliance wouldn't reveal Cerberus' existence, but it's a possible way of interpreting Cerberus' role.

2) Assume Cerberus IS part of the Alliance, by which I mean the Alliance's top officials know about it, give it orders, and sanction its actions, even if they do not directly offer support (in the form of money) or recognize it as part of the Alliance. In this case, other governments might already suspect a connection between Cerberus and the Alliance; revealing that one of the Alliance's own admirals was killed by Cerberus would be hugely embarassing from a political point of view, as it would imply either that the Alliance is willing to stab their people in the back OR that the Alliance is incapable of controlling its own branches. This does a decent job of explaining why the Alliance covered up the death but doesn't explain the way Cerberus is presented in ME2, at least not to me.

3) Finally, assume Cerberus is NOT part of the Alliance. In this possibility, the Alliance not only knows of Cerberus' existence but allows it to continue to exist. They make no attempt to shut down Cerberus, because Cerberus is useful and their goals often align with what the Alliance wants to do, but can't because it's illegal/morally wrong/a bad political move. Nobody from the Alliance tells Cerberus what to do and Cerberus doesn't really recieve funding from them, but the Alliance sort of looks the other way so long as Cerberus doesn't make a nuisance of itself. In this case, they would not want to reveal that Kahoku was killed by Cerberus because it could reveal that they know about Cerberus and are willingly allowing it to exist. Again, a very bad thing to reveal from a political point of view!

All of these explanations, by the way, are merely different ways of interpreting the link (or lack thereof) between Cerberus and the Alliance. I am not intending to explain why Kahoku was killed or whether or not the group that killed him was a "rogue" part of Cerberus (like the part of Cerberus that experimented on Jack, although I have my doubts about how much of that was actually rogue behavior), just offer these possible ways to look at Cerberus.

Personally, my money's on number 3. Cerberus being part of the Alliance, whether official or unofficial, just doesn't make sense to me. I think it's much more reasonable that they're a separate organization that the Alliance just sort of overlooks. In this case, Cerberus could be viewed as a part of the Alliance, because the two might work together on occasion, but neither actually answers to the other. *shrug* Just my opinion, though, and likely wrong. My views on Cerberus and supposed "rogue cells", on the other hand, I'm much more adamant about. But that's a whole different can of worms.

[Zulu_DFA]

swenson wrote...

I don't know. I wasn't really trying to explain the Alliance's actions, just explore them. Forgetting about everything else we know or think we know about the Alliance and Cerberus, there must be a reason why the Alliance didn't want to reveal Kahoku's death. Therefore, there must be some reason why they can't just denounce it as "terrorists".

My possible thoughts (as stated in my post, although I didn't make them very clear) were:
1) Assuming Cerberus is NOT part of the Alliance (unlikely, but technically still possible, as Admiral Kahoku could have either been merely assuming Cerberus was part of the Alliance or have been fed misinformation by some unknown party), it's possible that they wouldn't want to reveal their existence because aliens would be upset that there was a pro-human terrorist group out there. I doubt this possibility and still don't understand why the Alliance wouldn't reveal Cerberus' existence, but it's a possible way of interpreting Cerberus' role.

2) Assume Cerberus IS part of the Alliance, by which I mean the Alliance's top officials know about it, give it orders, and sanction its actions, even if they do not directly offer support (in the form of money) or recognize it as part of the Alliance. In this case, other governments might already suspect a connection between Cerberus and the Alliance; revealing that one of the Alliance's own admirals was killed by Cerberus would be hugely embarassing from a political point of view, as it would imply either that the Alliance is willing to stab their people in the back OR that the Alliance is incapable of controlling its own branches. This does a decent job of explaining why the Alliance covered up the death but doesn't explain the way Cerberus is presented in ME2, at least not to me.

3) Finally, assume Cerberus is NOT part of the Alliance. In this possibility, the Alliance not only knows of Cerberus' existence but allows it to continue to exist. They make no attempt to shut down Cerberus, because Cerberus is useful and their goals often align with what the Alliance wants to do, but can't because it's illegal/morally wrong/a bad political move. Nobody from the Alliance tells Cerberus what to do and Cerberus doesn't really recieve funding from them, but the Alliance sort of looks the other way so long as Cerberus doesn't make a nuisance of itself. In this case, they would not want to reveal that Kahoku was killed by Cerberus because it could reveal that they know about Cerberus and are willingly allowing it to exist. Again, a very bad thing to reveal from a political point of view!

All of these explanations, by the way, are merely different ways of interpreting the link (or lack thereof) between Cerberus and the Alliance. I am not intending to explain why Kahoku was killed or whether or not the group that killed him was a "rogue" part of Cerberus (like the part of Cerberus that experimented on Jack, although I have my doubts about how much of that was actually rogue behavior), just offer these possible ways to look at Cerberus.

Personally, my money's on number 3. Cerberus being part of the Alliance, whether official or unofficial, just doesn't make sense to me. I think it's much more reasonable that they're a separate organization that the Alliance just sort of overlooks. In this case, Cerberus could be viewed as a part of the Alliance, because the two might work together on occasion, but neither actually answers to the other. *shrug* Just my opinion, though, and likely wrong. My views on Cerberus and supposed "rogue cells", on the other hand, I'm much more adamant about. But that's a whole different can of worms. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/joyful.png[/smilie]

#1 used to be the interpretation back in the day, but then ME2 came out and "explained" that Cerberus in fact has been on the air awhile back, and although its notoriety is downplayed in the media, the experts and even many mercenaries do know about Cerberus. I wouldn't call it exactly a retcon, but in certainly required a re-interpretation of Kahoku's investigation. Moreover, the Shadow Broker's files on Cerberus state that Kahoku began his investigation even before ME1. That means, Kahoku probably knew about Cerberus' existence, and had his suspicions of Banes' connection to the organization. The real revelation for him was that Cerberus had been functioning as nothing less than an Alliance black ops outfit. Too bad we can't really tell, if it'b been just a conjecture on his part, or he had seen some "solid evidence" of that.

However, it's still can be interpreted as you say: the unwillingness to draw any attention to the "terrorist" problem. Even if it were old news, that there is a Cerberus, a refreshment of the news would be as unwanted as if it were a  revelation.

Also, the public ire might boil up to the point of demanding a reprisal, so that the Alliance would have to show some genuine counter-terrorist activity, which is something the Alliance is very reluctant to do, for one reason or another.

There is also a strong evidence against #3. Namely, Akuze. It was definitely more than just "the Alliance looking away". Some folks try to explain it along the lines that "Cerberus infiltrators" in the Alliance somehow deceived it into providing its auspices for the project, without any one "honest" Alliance official really knowing what it was all about. But c'mon, who're you kidding???

As to the "rogue" cells, I'm too of the opinion, that they were never any more rogue, than Cerberus itself. Or the Alliance itself, for that matter.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 07 mars 2011 - 12:43 .

[Sajuro]

It matters not if Cerberus is still part of the Alliance, if taking them down means I have to go through the Alliance then so be it. The corrupt will be replaced with the just.

[Rekkampum]

Sajuro wrote...

It matters not if Cerberus is still part of the Alliance, if taking them down means I have to go through the Alliance then so be it. The corrupt will be replaced with the just.

You didn't steal that quote from Samara, did you? <_<

[Pwener2313]

This thread has been ruined by the one who created it. Comparing Zulu's initial posts to the ones now, he sound like a raving madman.

[Sajuro]

Rekkampum wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

It matters not if Cerberus is still part of the Alliance, if taking them down means I have to go through the Alliance then so be it. The corrupt will be replaced with the just.

You didn't steal that quote from Samara, did you? <_<

I don't remember >,> I don't think Samara ever talked about tearing down the Alliance if she needed to  in order to get rid of Cerberus. But the sentiment is probably the same.

[Pwener2313]

Samara says something between the lines of not needing to know someone on a personal level on how he's morals stand for her to need to kill that individual.

[Sajuro]

Pwener: I would only kill the people who supported Cerb, if I was able to incapacitate the guards just doing their jobs then I would. \\
plus: I don't know about that Pwener, this always seemed like a tinfoil thread.

[Pwener2313]

Zulu went bad and turned into a troll. Poor guy, I'll miss the old Zulu.

[Sajuro]

All of the good renegades are gone >.>....... nevermind, they were just like the renegades now.

[Pwener2313]

lol, I guess it's just me protect Cerbe... errr... humanity's interests. I can't do a worse job then Zulu.

[Rekkampum]

Pwener2313 wrote...

lol, I guess it's just me protect Cerbe... errr... humanity's interests. I can't do a worse job then Zulu.

Somehow, I'm sensing that was a burn. 

I have god knows how many Shepards, I've got some renegades that kept the base - some also destroyed it just out of pure awesomeness - and even a paragon who saved it. I hope we get to take over Cerberus in the next game. TIM's gotten soft.

[Sajuro]

Rekkampum wrote...

Pwener2313 wrote...

lol, I guess it's just me protect Cerbe... errr... humanity's interests. I can't do a worse job then Zulu.

Somehow, I'm sensing that was a burn. 

I have god knows how many Shepards, I've got some renegades that kept the base - some also destroyed it just out of pure awesomeness - and even a paragon who saved it. I hope we get to take over Cerberus in the next game. TIM's gotten soft.

Take over Cerberus and give it a new, more positive name like, Fenrir, Darkspawn, or Murder Murder Kill Kill

[Rekkampum]

Sajuro wrote...

Rekkampum wrote...

Pwener2313 wrote...

lol, I guess it's just me protect Cerbe... errr... humanity's interests. I can't do a worse job then Zulu.

Somehow, I'm sensing that was a burn. 

I have god knows how many Shepards, I've got some renegades that kept the base - some also destroyed it just out of pure awesomeness - and even a paragon who saved it. I hope we get to take over Cerberus in the next game. TIM's gotten soft.

Take over Cerberus and give it a new, more positive name like, Fenrir, Darkspawn, or Murder Murder Kill Kill

I'm liking Fenrir. Perhaps it will be the evolution of the Cerberus organization via a new top-secret Alliance project. *puts in more plot loop holes the size of the Collector base*

[zer0netgain]

Very probable.

In real life, a lot of nasty stuff goes on, and if you can do it via intermediaries, it gets done with no stain on the officials who wanted it done but were prohibited from doing so.

I had some problem seeing Cerberus as bad guy in ME1 then they are this group with a few bad apples in ME2. Your explanation makes a lot of sense. Perhaps the original Cerberus was a terrorist organization, but for a group of powerful players in the military-industrial complex to take ownership of the identity and use it as a cover for a ton of stuff they want done via plausible deniablity isn't far fetched.

That Cerberus has done bad things a la Akuze or Subject Zero is more about cells operating with autonomy and willing to get results at any cost. Even Project Overlord did questionable things TIM would likely be concerned about sanctioning, but the choice to do so appears to have always been made by the project lead ABSENT TIM's approval or knowledge. Results at all cost. If we succeed, TIM won't care how we did it. Not all project leads would sink to such depths to get results, but the know the profit of success and the cost of failure.

Certainly, if Cerberus was so bad and always operating as a rouge element, someone like Jacob would not have joined up with them.

Modifié par zer0netgain, 08 mars 2011 - 07:08 .

[swenson]

@ Zulu - you bring up a good point with Akuze, I'd forgotten about it.

Well, none of the theories fit it perfectly. I still think 3 is the most likely, but all three of the ones I suggested have severe problems.

[jamesp81]

I was thinking about this.

I don't know what Cerberus's true status is. But it's clear that they are tolerated quite a lot for being a "rogue" outfit. Consider that in LotSB, you see an email exchange between Admiral Hackett and an Alliance officer that wants to arrest Shepard when he's found working for Cerberus. The officer makes a great argument about why Shepard should be brought in. Hackett's two word response: Request Denied.

Cerberus might not be part of the Alliance, but there are a lot of officers that understand some of the things they do, even if they don't like Cerberus.

[MichaelN7]

"Cerberus is an idea..." as the Illusive Man (Jack Harper) stated.

That idea is that humanity should be able to defend itself against and be independent from the aliens out there:alien:<_< and play a greater role on the galactic stage:), and that the Alliance is too much of a push-over.

Ideally, they would be "humanity's sword" as Commander Shepard stated, but more accurately; they simply combine the best and worst that humanity has to offer.

Their goal (greater role in galaxy) is indeed NOT EVIL, but the means they use to achieve that goal are simply too extreme and any virtue taken to an extreme is a vice.

On a more practical level, Cerberus's main weapon is information/knowledge. Cerberus has multiple LEGITIMATE companies that serve as "fronts" and supply most of Cerberus's funding (annual spending trends number in the billions of credits).
Also, Cerberus is masterful at planting the people they want in positions of power, whether by manipulation:huh: or assassination.
In addition, Cerberus technology is top-notch; probably not the same level as the Asari (no one's is), but considering how long humanity as a whole has been on the galactic stage (not very long) compared to the other races (centuries at least), it's astonishingly impressiveB).

In ME1, Cerberus was largely unknown, the Council knew it existed, but not much else. That secrecy greatly aided Cerberus's mission.
In ME2, with the Collectors:devil: invading and kidnapping human colonies, that more or less blew the cover on Cerberus.  Remember, Cerberus is all about human advancement and achievement, regardless of the means used. Unfortunately for them, this exposure reminded the galaxy of who they were and what they were trying to do overall.
In ME3, this is where Cerberus REALLY gets extreme:bandit:, what with doing semi-indoctrination with their own troops:sick: to enforce loyalty, to deceiving their own kind at Sanctuary, just to discover how husks are created and controlled:sick:.
What makes this complicated is that the Illusive Man is doing this to PROTECT humanity:police:, he legitimately thinks that he is doing the right thing:innocent:, that the ends justify the means:devil:.

Coming full circle, the IDEA of Cerberus:innocent: isn't evil, but it became such because the means used to implement said idea were taken to an extreme:devil:.

(Personal Note: When I obtain the Cerberus Spirit armor [major bonus to powers, minor bonus to shields, best armor for my power-based Vanguard], it has the white/black color scheme with gold trim, so on every mission I use it, I look like a Cerberus operative. I like to see my Shepard (Paragon):innocent:acting as "humanity's sword" as Cerberus was SUPPOSED to be. Sort of like a "what-if", as in what if Cerberus were indeed NOT an extremist organization. Just a thought.)

Modifié par MichaelN7, 16 novembre 2013 - 07:50 .

[MichaelN7]

Another interesting fact, Cerberus is in fact the organization that convinced the Alliance to co-operate with the Turian Hierarchy in researching, designing, and building the Normandy SR1.

Modifié par MichaelN7, 25 novembre 2013 - 03:55 .