Luke and his realistic chances

[Stravo]

I don't tell my daughter "You must take the SAT again."

"I can't steal the SAT answer key"

"Then you're not going to college."

That's...not a sensical analogy. If you want to do something along those lines, it's more like:

"You must take the SAT again."
"I can't get a 1600..."
"Then I suppose college is out of the question..."

Oh, that's far worse than mine, see if we follow your logic that Luke is not meant to kill Vader then it is a response that demands correction. Saying that you can't achieve a certain score and saying that you're going to do something completely against your stated goals and purposes is what my anaolgy is all about.

If Obi Wan wants Luke to turn Vader (a proposition that he failed in, that Yoda denied was ever possible throughout the training) then you would think he'd say "Uh...Luke you don't have to go that far." You're saying he just conveninetly remained silent. Silence in the real world = agreement. If I say "McC I think I'll beat my wife today because she mouthed off to me this morning." is greeted with silence from you then that means you agree or you're just a twisted fuck.

Sorry. Obi Wan clearly gave up on Anakin on Mustafar. Why then no acknoweldgement on Anakin's good nature on the Death star. Why the casual acceptance that he was now a Master of Evil and refers to him as Darth.

I think Obi-wan has an attitude shift during the OT as well. He goes from his ROTS/ANH "Anakin is totally dead" mentality to the ROTJ "You must face him again" mentality. His entire demeanor when he speaks to Luke after Yoda's death is different than it has been previously.

Funny you're feeling that he had an attitude shift in a single movie in a span of five minutes of screen time compared to all that he tried to achieve throughout the rest of his life seems like strectching as opposed to the view that he agreed that Vader needed to die.

In ANH Obi Wan is already laying the ground work. WHY come up with such a lie "Darth Vader betrayed and murdered your father." That's called an inflammatory statement. If Obi Wan was really gunning for redemtion he would have painted a far different picture. He could have simply saiud "Your dad died in the clone wars." The Vader statement was clearly meant to create a confrontational atmosphere between father and son.

In ESB Yoda spends the training talking about the finality of the Dark side. "Forever will it dominate your destiny - consume you it will." and what is Luke's instant response "Vader." He's being indoctrinated to take on the boogy man that slew his father.

In ROTS It is Obi Wan who can't bring himself to kill Anakin even though he knows he must die - ie. taking on the Emperor while letting Yoda kill Anakin. He agrees that he must die and when Anakin says "The Jedi are evil in my point of view." Obi Wan states "Then you are truly lost."

After that he maims Vader and turns his back on him forever.

In ANH he confronts Vader, calls him a master of evil, calls him by his Sith name and makes absolutely no attempt to turn him. Smiles when he sees that Luke will see Vader kill him. Seems like a nice set up to me to cement a hatred of Vader no? Why the triumphant little smile AFTER seeing that Luke was watching? "OK Now he will redeem his dad after he sees me cut down in cold blood?"

So what you're now saying is that in light of these facts Obi Wan suddenly changes his mind. Yet he DOESN'T TELL LUKE ANYTHING. Not a godamned thing about redemption, in fact he stresses that Vader is evil and twisted to the very end and if he doesn't kill his father the Emperor has won.

Sorry, by not saying anything, by not correcting him that is agreement with the sentiment. You can twist confrontation not = death and the like all you want but when someone says "I can't kill this person." and you don't mean him to yet your sole response is "Then I guess the bad guys have won." there can be no other common sense interpretation of that statement.

Look at Vader after the escape of the Falcon on Bespin and tell me he doesn't look sad that his son is gone. Tell me that his entire emotional spectrum is just because he lost out on a powerful apprentice, and not because the very thing he turned to the dark side for to begin with -- the purpose he had in doing all the terrible things he does -- has returned.

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this save for this very important fact. THEY BEGGED HIM NOT TO GO. So if the confrontation was supposed to spark this change in Vader they never meant for it to happen. They wanted Luke to kill Vader. Plain and simple. Without an apprentice the Emperor would be more vulnerable and Luke would have a training head start and power level advantage over any other apprentice Palpy finds.

If Luke was meant to spark this change in Vader why worry about his safety? Why beg him not to go. "Mind what you have learned, save you it can." Meaning Vader will kill you. Not "Remember the good in him."

Hell, when it is obvious he is leaving they don't elect to tell him. There is no reason NOT to tell Luke Vader is his father unless you mean for him to kill him. If you mean to change him then you start on Dagobah by telling Luke the truth and training him how to try and reverse the changes in Anakin.

They don't. They don't do anything, neither Obi Wan or Yoda say a thing save to think that Luke is probably going to die and guess what? We have another assassin to train if Luke fails.

You're interpretation requires us to believe that they have discarded their view from the prequels and that their training and emphasis on taking on Vader and defeating him have all been fronts to coax Luke into doing what he can to turn his father.

Which is precisely what happens in the end. Luke poses no threat to the emperor. At all. He recognizes that he has become a Jedi ("Then I am a Jedi" "Not yet -- one thing remains: Vader. You must confront Vader. Then, only then, a Jedi will you be.") by confronting Vader, but not killing him and himself falling to the dark side. And once he has fully embraced the idea that he's a Jedi, what happens? He gets owned. Completely. So either Yoda was just saying, "No more training do you require -- already know you that which you need" for shits and giggles, or he felt Luke was prepared to do 'the task' -- whatever you want to define 'the task' as.

And pray tell how was Yoda supposed to complete Luke's training if he was dying? What makes more sense. Tell Luke "You've got the skill set you need to survive." or "Run for the hills for fucked you are."

As his teacher and mentor Yoda did all he could for him and now everything was up to the will of the Force. Better someone who has some confidence in his abiilties than somone who feels that he is fucked.

Luke was sufficiently equipped to face Vader in combat and to resist the temptation of the dark side, but not to face the emperor, as evidenced by how easily he was beaten. So the whole point has to be him facing Vader. And what's the point of Vader being 'defeated', if the emperor is still alive and kicking? This half-baked notion of rebuilding the Jedi order to take down the emperor? Pardon me, is that bullshit I smell? Taking down Palpatine required the redemption of Anakin Skywalker and Luke was the vehicle for that redemption.

If Luke defeats Vader then what does the Emperor have to defeat Luke? You just robbed the Emperor of everything he foght for in ROTS. The Emperor ran to Vader's side to help him on Mustafar and confided in Yoda that he would be more powerful then either of them. There was no doubt what he valued most.

Remove Vader and you remove Palpy's right hand and are now the second most poweful Force user in the galxy who can only grow stronger as Palpy desperately searches for a replacement that will always be behind you in training and strength,

[McC]

I don't understand this, Stravo. You're saying things that I feel reinforce what I'm saying, yet you're saying they don't.

WHY come up with such a lie "Darth Vader betrayed and murdered your father." That's called an inflammatory statement.

Exactly. Which fits perfectly with the idea of setting Luke against falling to the Dark Side.

In ESB Yoda spends the training talking about the finality of the Dark side. "Forever will it dominate your destiny - consume you it will." and what is Luke's instant response "Vader."

Again, setting him firmly against the dark side. Luke was less trained with the idea "This is the light side and it is good" and much more trained in the idea "This is the dark side and it is bad."

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this save for this very important fact. THEY BEGGED HIM NOT TO GO. So if the confrontation was supposed to spark this change in Vader they never meant for it to happen. They wanted Luke to kill Vader. Plain and simple. Without an apprentice the Emperor would be more vulnerable and Luke would have a training head start and power level advantage over any other apprentice Palpy finds.

Right, because there's so much evidence for lots of Light side Force users being prevalent during the Imperial era, compared to the hordes of Dark side users, right? This "Luke will train a new breed of Jedi to fight the emperor" bullshit just smells worse and worse.

If Luke was meant to spark this change in Vader why worry about his safety? Why beg him not to go. "Mind what you have learned, save you it can." Meaning Vader will kill you. Not "Remember the good in him."

No. No no no no no no NO. Vader killing Luke was never the worry. Vader turning Luke was the fear. His entire training regime emphasises this. This idea that Luke being killed/killing Vader was ever the point is invalidated by the entirety of how Luke is trained and what Luke is warned against throughout ESB.

Hell, when it is obvious he is leaving they don't elect to tell him. There is no reason NOT to tell Luke Vader is his father unless you mean for him to kill him. If you mean to change him then you start on Dagobah by telling Luke the truth and training him how to try and reverse the changes in Anakin.

Sympathy. If Luke knows Vader is his father, he has a pathway for sympathy, and another path to fall to the dark side, which is the point.

And pray tell how was Yoda supposed to complete Luke's training if he was dying? What makes more sense. Tell Luke "You've got the skill set you need to survive." or "Run for the hills for fucked you are."

Yeah, basically. If Yoda thought Luke needed more training, he could've done so after he died. I mean, shit, Qui-Gon trained Yoda after he died, as he did Obi-Wan, presumably. The whole point is that Luke was ready to resist the Dark side, not that he was ready to kill Vader/Palpatine.

If Luke defeats Vader then what does the Emperor have to defeat Luke? You just robbed the Emperor of everything he foght for in ROTS. The Emperor ran to Vader's side to help him on Mustafar and confided in Yoda that he would be more powerful then either of them. There was no doubt what he valued most.

Did you seriously just ask that? "If Luke defeats Vader then what does the Emperor have to defeat Luke?" The emperor is the one that 'defeats' Luke. Vader doesn't do a damn thing to defeat Luke in ROTJ. Vader gets owned. Then the emperor comes in and trashes Luke. Luke posed zero threat to Palpatine.

Remove Vader and you remove Palpy's right hand and are now the second most poweful Force user in the galxy who can only grow stronger as Palpy desperately searches for a replacement that will always be behind you in training and strength,

Except for the fact that the dark side is decidedly faster and more lethal than the light side. Palpatine could've had a cadre of dark side adepts go hunt down and eliminate Luke.

The whole point was to keep Luke from turning so that the redemption of Anakin could be facilitated. If Luke turned in the ESB duel, then Yoda and Obi-wan would've had to call on Leia to confront her brother and her father, which makes things a lot worse.

[Keevan_Colton]

In ANH he confronts Vader, calls him a master of evil, calls him by his Sith name and makes absolutely no attempt to turn him. Smiles when he sees that Luke will see Vader kill him. Seems like a nice set up to me to cement a hatred of Vader no? Why the triumphant little smile AFTER seeing that Luke was watching? "OK Now he will redeem his dad after he sees me cut down in cold blood?"

Actually I'd say that smile was "ah, the kids have got back to the car, I dont have to keep the big guy here occupied any longer."

[Stravo]

I don't understand this, Stravo. You're saying things that I feel reinforce what I'm saying, yet you're saying they don't.

This is the synopsis of my opinion on this matter.

What I am saying is that all of Luke's training and the shtick he's getting from Obi Wan and Yoda is there to KILL Vader not turn him. If his training was meant to resist the Darkside then why ignore questions and curioisty about it.

"But tell me why I can't--"

"No there is no why. Nothing more will I teach you today."

Hmmm...as a parent I can tell you that ignoring your kids' questions about a taboo subject only makes them more curious about it and maybe they'll start investigating on their own. I would imagine that Yoda and Ben wouldn't want Luke probing the darkside.

If you're training is supposed to emphasize Dark side resistance then why is 90% of Luke's on screen training combat training?

The very first training we see is combat lightsaber training. Ben touched on virtually nothing about the Dark side. He gave Luke a lightsaber which he never wielded before and set him on a remote weapon training regimine. Obi Wan's statements about the dark side focussed on Vader and how ireddemably evil he was.

On Dagobah Yoda is training his body hard (something we have not seen in the prequels, the Jedi seem to be all phyiscally fit specimens and the Youngling training we see also seems to not involve physical exercise) and in the novelization there is more lightsaber training. The small snippets we get on dark side training is all regimented and dogmatic. The Dark side is teh bad and that's that. No questions young man and pick up that rock.

In ROTJ we see the results of his training and it is combat oriented with very little deep knowledge of the Force and its intricacies. In the novelization he is almost clueless as to the nature of the dark side and is toyed with by the Emperor.

In the end not a WHIT of Yoda's or Obi Wan's training helps him turn back from the abyss. It is the image of his father's ruined cybernetic stump and his own black gloved hand that snaps him back to reality.

All that we see shows us that Luke is being crafted into a weapon. A weapon aimed right at Vader. Gone is all the philosophical bullshit. What we have is the stripped down shake and bake jedi training meant to accomplish a simple goal. Kill a sith lord.

I don't go through the mental gymnastics needed to believe that the two Jedi masters that were there when the man turned and both tried to kill their sith lord opponents would suddenly think that maybe now we should try to rescue Anakin's soul. As far as they were concerned there was nothing left to save.

The idea that Anakin could be saved came straight from Luke, No one else even suggested it. Yoda was adamant that there was no turning back and Obi Wan set in stone the image of Vader as father killer and Jedi Purger.

Anakin's redemption was an unexpected act on Anakin's part and not a cold calculated plot by the Jedi. It was Luke's faith in his father that brought him back. When no one else would believe in him Luke did. Everyone else was telling Luke Vader was evil. The emperor. His friends, his mentors (Obi Wan and Yoda) and even Vader himself. If that aspect of the story escapes you then you weren't paying attention.

[Vympel]

Just re Yoda and Obi-Wan's plans, if anything, they did plan to train Leia and Luke, according to hte novelization, but they weren't sure when- they left it up to the will of the Force, IIRC (don't have the novel with me right now).

[Perinquus]

I don't understand this, Stravo. You're saying things that I feel reinforce what I'm saying, yet you're saying they don't.

WHY come up with such a lie "Darth Vader betrayed and murdered your father." That's called an inflammatory statement.

Exactly. Which fits perfectly with the idea of setting Luke against falling to the Dark Side.

It also fits perfectly with the idea of inculcating such a loathing for Vader that Luke is ready and willing to kill him -- especially since he is not told Vader is his father. That right there is a telling piece of evidence, as far as I am concerned. If they had ever meant that turning Vader back from the Dark Side was the primary objective, then they would have told Luke so, in order to create sympathy for Vader, and make Luke want to reclaim him. Instead they tell him things calculated to make him despise Vader as a traitor and a murderer.

In ESB Yoda spends the training talking about the finality of the Dark side. "Forever will it dominate your destiny - consume you it will." and what is Luke's instant response "Vader."

Again, setting him firmly against the dark side.

And you're missing the adjunct that goes right along with this: also setting him against Vader himself. Not to mention that you are simply denying the fact that Yoda tells Luke that once you have turned to the Dark Side, stick a fork in you, you're done. He in no way shape or form leads Luke to believe anything that would indicate reclamation is possible. This has the salutory effect of making Luke extremely wary of the Dark Side, which is good. But it also tells him clearly that the reason you have to be so wary, is because if you turn, you are forever lost.

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this save for this very important fact. THEY BEGGED HIM NOT TO GO. So if the confrontation was supposed to spark this change in Vader they never meant for it to happen. They wanted Luke to kill Vader. Plain and simple. Without an apprentice the Emperor would be more vulnerable and Luke would have a training head start and power level advantage over any other apprentice Palpy finds.

Right, because there's so much evidence for lots of Light side Force users being prevalent during the Imperial era, compared to the hordes of Dark side users, right? This "Luke will train a new breed of Jedi to fight the emperor" bullshit just smells worse and worse.

Why is that so hard to believe? You ave twice called it bullshit, but you've done precisely jack shit to explain why this is an unrealistic and supposedly ludicrous goal. We know that Luke has a sister who can be trained. We know there are other potential force users out there waiting to be trained. And we know that the Jedi have no scruples whatever about ganging up on an enemy. When Mace Windu went to arrest Palpatine, he didn't go by himself. He took some backup along with him (though the emperor turned out to be so powerful that Windu ddin't take enough). When Obi Wan and Qui Gon fought Darth Maul, they didn't adhere to some ridiculous naive ideal that they had to "fight fair" and take him on one at a time. They both waded in and fought him together. When Obi Wan gets set to take on Dooku in AOTC, he plainly tells Anakin that he needs his help to take on Dooku, because he lacks the power to do it alone. And when Anakin impetuously rushes in by himself, Obi Wan yells for him to stop; he clearly intends that they should combine their strength.

So again, just why is it such bullshit to suppose that Yoda, realizing that Luke will almost certainly never have the power to take on the emperor by himself, intends that he will pass on his knowledge to others, so that they can try to take on the emperor together? When you are faced with a more powerful opponent than you are, what is the logical course of action? Get help. Why is this so hard to imagine? Just what is "bullshit" about this? It makes perfect sense to me. What strikes me as bullshit, is the notion that despite every single piece of evidence indicating that Yoda thinks Anakin is irretrievably lost to the Dark Side, and every piece of evidence indicating further that Yoda has never been convinced of either the truth of the prophecy about the chosen one, or about the commonly accepted interpretation of it, he is suddenly going to put everything on one throw of the dice, and gamble that maybe, just maybe, this prophecy in which he never had much faith, was true after all.

If Luke was meant to spark this change in Vader why worry about his safety? Why beg him not to go. "Mind what you have learned, save you it can." Meaning Vader will kill you. Not "Remember the good in him."

No. No no no no no no NO. Vader killing Luke was never the worry. Vader turning Luke was the fear. His entire training regime emphasises this. This idea that Luke being killed/killing Vader was ever the point is invalidated by the entirety of how Luke is trained and what Luke is warned against throughout ESB.

What difference does it make if they feared Vader killing Luke or Vader turning Luke. Since they believe Luke would be irretrievably lost himself either way, one result is as bad as the other. None of this means they didn't think turning to the Dark Side was a one way ticket. Everything else they ever said indicates that they thought precisely that.

Hell, when it is obvious he is leaving they don't elect to tell him. There is no reason NOT to tell Luke Vader is his father unless you mean for him to kill him. If you mean to change him then you start on Dagobah by telling Luke the truth and training him how to try and reverse the changes in Anakin.

Sympathy. If Luke knows Vader is his father, he has a pathway for sympathy, and another path to fall to the dark side, which is the point.

Wait a minute. Let's see if I've got this right. You suggest that if Luke knows Vader is his father, it will create sympathy for Vader in Luke's mind, which will make him more vulnerable to being turned. Yet you also suggest that Luke is supposed to reach out to Vader and turn him back? How? If he doesn't know Vader is his father, how would he even try to turn Vader? WHY would he even try to turn Vader? You are making no sense at all.

And pray tell how was Yoda supposed to complete Luke's training if he was dying? What makes more sense. Tell Luke "You've got the skill set you need to survive." or "Run for the hills for fucked you are."

Yeah, basically. If Yoda thought Luke needed more training, he could've done so after he died. I mean, shit, Qui-Gon trained Yoda after he died, as he did Obi-Wan, presumably.

No, he was able to teach them one thing, how to communicate from the netherworld of the Force. There is no indication that he could or did teach them anything else. And if it were possible to give a Jedi student training from the other side of death, why didn't Kenobi do it for Luke? Months or even years went by between Ben's death and the time Luke went to Dagobah to study under Yoda -- time that could have been productively used to train Luke in much needed skills, had Kenobi been able to do it. He couldn't.

The whole point is that Luke was ready to resist the Dark side, not that he was ready to kill Vader/Palpatine.

The likelihood is that Luke was never intended to take the emperor on by himself, but was supposed to train his own reinforcements. That is what seems most logical, that is what fits most believably with the Jedi's methods, and that seems far more plausible that Yoda suddenly going against everything he ever said before, and making his plan around something he never once indicated he thought possible.

If Luke defeats Vader then what does the Emperor have to defeat Luke? You just robbed the Emperor of everything he foght for in ROTS. The Emperor ran to Vader's side to help him on Mustafar and confided in Yoda that he would be more powerful then either of them. There was no doubt what he valued most.

Did you seriously just ask that? "If Luke defeats Vader then what does the Emperor have to defeat Luke?" The emperor is the one that 'defeats' Luke. Vader doesn't do a damn thing to defeat Luke in ROTJ. Vader gets owned. Then the emperor comes in and trashes Luke. Luke posed zero threat to Palpatine.

By himself, yes. A whole new order of Jedi is a different story. Palpatine was probably more powerful than any Jedi who ever lived. He fought Yoda to a standstill, despite Yoda's being far older and more experienced. Yet Palpatine was not able to just come in and power his way to the top. He had to spend years making plans, hatching plots, laying the groundwork to seize power and eliminate most of the Jedi indirectly. In fact that Sith spent something like 2000 years biding their time and laying the groundwork. Individually, they might be a lot more powerful than any Jedi, but they can't take on all the Jedi at once. So again, why is it so hard to believe that Yoda would try to recreate a situation that had, in the past, proven favorable to the Jedi: use numerical advantage to take on an enemy no single Jedi is able to face alone?

Remove Vader and you remove Palpy's right hand and are now the second most poweful Force user in the galxy who can only grow stronger as Palpy desperately searches for a replacement that will always be behind you in training and strength,

Except for the fact that the dark side is decidedly faster and more lethal than the light side. Palpatine could've had a cadre of dark side adepts go hunt down and eliminate Luke.

Easier said than done. He could have had them do so for Kenobi and Yoda as well, but didn't. Probably because it's a fucking big galaxy, and a job like that would making looking for a needle in a haystack look easy by comparison.

The whole point was to keep Luke from turning so that the redemption of Anakin could be facilitated.

Again, there is no evidence to indicate that this was thought to be possible by either Yoda and Obi Wan, and in order to sustain this belief, you are ignoring numerous statements by them that clearly indicate they did not think it was.

If Luke turned in the ESB duel, then Yoda and Obi-wan would've had to call on Leia to confront her brother and her father, which makes things a lot worse.

Yes it does, but for different reasons than you assume.

[Vympel]

Yeah I just don't get this argument Mcc. There really is not a shred of evidence that either Obi-Wan or Yoda thought Luke would turn Vader back to the light. They wanted him to kill him. Obi-Wan outright lied to further this goal (certain point of view be damned) and Yoda purposely concealed it if not actively told untruths.

[Cal Wright]

Just re Yoda and Obi-Wan's plans, if anything, they did plan to train Leia and Luke, according to hte novelization, but they weren't sure when- they left it up to the will of the Force, IIRC (don't have the novel with me right now).

Ah, but I do!

Ben only states that Bail instructed her to find him if her situation ever became dire. Like the Death Star plans. He also mentions training Leia, that because of her strength in the Force, she sought Ben out. Because it was her destiny to learn and his to train.

[Darth Wong]

McC, if Yoda and Obi-Wan actually planned to send Luke to face both Vader and the Emperor simultaneously in the hope that Luke would get beaten down by the Emperor but not killed too quickly for Anakin to have a sudden epiphany and strike down his master, then it was a stupid fucking plan. Nobody in his right mind would bank on a plan like that. They could only have hoped that Luke was capable of actually fighting Vader, that he wouldn't have to face both Vader and Palpatine simultaneously.

[McC]

I'm just going to quote Wong, since his post sums up everyone else's comments nicely.

McC, if Yoda and Obi-Wan actually planned to send Luke to face both Vader and the Emperor simultaneously in the hope that Luke would get beaten down by the Emperor but not killed too quickly for Anakin to have a sudden epiphany and strike down his master, then it was a stupid fucking plan. Nobody in his right mind would bank on a plan like that. They could only have hoped that Luke was capable of actually fighting Vader, that he wouldn't have to face both Vader and Palpatine simultaneously.

Fair point.

However, it's also intensely stupid for them to have him take out just Vader. What's the point? There's no logic in that plan either, and that's why I'm sticking to my admittedly weak interpretation -- it's still better than this half-baked "well, Luke is supposed to kill both of them" notion which Luke demonstrably can't do. He barely beats Vader -- only does so by teetering on the dark side. Luke is not a Jedi superweapon. He is barely able to best a crippled Anakin, and is totally at the mercy of Palpatine. Therefore, some other interpretation than the "Luke is the new Jedi superweapon" is necessary. Hence mine, which I admit is weak. But there's at least some precedent for it, unlike this wonky "oh, well, Luke is clearly going to rebuild a new legion of Jedi to take out Palpatine after he takes out Vader" which has no evidence at all.

[Darth Wong]

However, it's also intensely stupid for them to have him take out just Vader. What's the point? There's no logic in that plan either, and that's why I'm sticking to my admittedly weak interpretation -- it's still better than this half-baked "well, Luke is supposed to kill both of them" notion which Luke demonstrably can't do.

Bullshit. How is it more logical to go with a plan that relies on the well-timed good will of your enemy than to simply be optimistic about your champion's chances on the field of battle? Especially since Palpatine is by now so old that he is basically infirm and can barely move? Even Force users are eventually limited by age; Yoda died of old age after all.

[McC]

Bullshit. How is it more logical to go with a plan that relies on the well-timed good will of your enemy than to simply be optimistic about your champion's chances on the field of battle? Especially since Palpatine is by now so old that he is basically infirm and can barely move? Even Force users are eventually limited by age; Yoda died of old age after all.

That's the reason my interpretation (or at least the Yoda/Obi-Wan part of it) is weak. It's a pretty big long-shot. The point of me sticking to it has far less to do with me advocating it and far more to do with shitting on this even more bullshit idea of Luke-as-superweapon, which there's no precedent and even less evidence for.

Palpatine's infirmity is hardly an issue. Yoda died of old age, but didn't exhibit any greater infirmity than he did 25 years earlier. Granted, his species is radically biologically different than a human, but I always got the impression that Palpatine would've more or less been around forever had he not been offed. He gives off that vibe.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

However, it's also intensely stupid for them to have him take out just Vader. What's the point?

So he can then take on the Emperor without having to deal with BOTH of them at the same time (which the scene where Vader blocks Luke's attack at Palpatine illustrates so well).

If Luke were to kill Vader, and make Palpatine think he was submitting to him, he could get the drop on him more easily and try to take him out.

[Vympel]

Mcc, your interpretation flies in the face of the facts. The alternate does not. There may be no direct evidence that they intended Luke to train more Jedi to take on the Emperor, but its possible, or its simply that they thought he would have a chance against the Emperor alone, especially given his increased age (notice he needs no walking stick in RotS). That's not unreasonable, he would've instinctually raised his lightsabre had he not thrown it away.

Oh, and another thing: "he could destroy us."

Nuff said. Indeed Luke was powerful, as the Emperor had foreseen ... I personally think he was at least the equal of Anakin at the height of his power, if not more.

[Darth Wong]

Bullshit. How is it more logical to go with a plan that relies on the well-timed good will of your enemy than to simply be optimistic about your champion's chances on the field of battle? Especially since Palpatine is by now so old that he is basically infirm and can barely move? Even Force users are eventually limited by age; Yoda died of old age after all.

That's the reason my interpretation (or at least the Yoda/Obi-Wan part of it) is weak. It's a pretty big long-shot. The point of me sticking to it has far less to do with me advocating it and far more to do with shitting on this even more bullshit idea of Luke-as-superweapon, which there's no precedent and even less evidence for.

Yet again you repeat your absurd claim that despite the Emperor's fear of him, Luke is pitiful and insignificant. Not to mention your strawman exaggeration of him into a "superweapon" when all he needs is a remote fighting chance to be a better solution than your moronic theory of "let's send him out there, let him fail, put him on death's door, and hope this changes Anakin's mind after 20 years of faithfully serving the Dark Side!"

Palpatine's infirmity is hardly an issue. Yoda died of old age, but didn't exhibit any greater infirmity than he did 25 years earlier. Granted, his species is radically biologically different than a human, but I always got the impression that Palpatine would've more or less been around forever had he not been offed. He gives off that vibe.

So you seriously think that Yoda could have leapt off his deathbed to fight?

[Imperial Overlord]

Luke was potentially extremely powerful. He had been trained as much as they were able, all that could be done now was let experience temper him. I don't think that Yoda and Obi-Wan anticipated a confrontation with Palpatine so quickly. Luke did reasonably well against Vader in ESB and had improved since then. And their faith wasn't unfounded. He was able to beat Vader, after all.

[McC]

Blah. Argument conceded. I'm rapidly losing interest in going over what is, to me, a relatively subjective point. My biggest contention is with the idea that Luke was meant to kill Vader so that he could train more Jedi to then come back and kill Palpatine. This is a retarded plan and there's no proof, and by that I stand resolutely. The rest is open to interpretation as you wish.

So you seriously think that Yoda could have leapt off his deathbed to fight?

Oh hell no. Not at that point. But the Emperor wasn't at all as near death as Yoda by the time of ROTJ.

[Cal Wright]

However, it's also intensely stupid for them to have him take out just Vader. What's the point? There's no logic in that plan either, and that's why I'm sticking to my admittedly weak interpretation -- it's still better than this half-baked "well, Luke is supposed to kill both of them" notion which Luke demonstrably can't do.

Bullshit. How is it more logical to go with a plan that relies on the well-timed good will of your enemy than to simply be optimistic about your champion's chances on the field of battle? Especially since Palpatine is by now so old that he is basically infirm and can barely move? Even Force users are eventually limited by age; Yoda died of old age after all.

Case in point, during the Ep III novel, Dooku himself is admitting that he is too old to keep up the fight with Skywalker. A few times this is mentioned actually in that entire sequence.

[Stofsk]

Blah. Argument conceded. I'm rapidly losing interest in going over what is, to me, a relatively subjective point. My biggest contention is with the idea that Luke was meant to kill Vader so that he could train more Jedi to then come back and kill Palpatine. This is a retarded plan and there's no proof, and by that I stand resolutely. The rest is open to interpretation as you wish.

Ironically, this is exactly what occurs if you count Dark Empire as a sequel to ROTJ. Luke, Leia, (and the unborn Jacen and Jaina IIRC - or was it Anakin?) defeat the Clone Emperor by redirecting his force storm against him. Since Luke trained Leia as a Jedi, it fits. Too bad no other EU author seems to remember that Leia was meant to be trained as a Jedi as well, and instead kept making her into a politician.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

It was Anakin. Jacen and Jaina were already born.

[Perinquus]

Blah. Argument conceded. I'm rapidly losing interest in going over what is, to me, a relatively subjective point. My biggest contention is with the idea that Luke was meant to kill Vader so that he could train more Jedi to then come back and kill Palpatine. This is a retarded plan and there's no proof, and by that I stand resolutely.

Yes, when faced with an enemy you know is too powerful for you to take on alone, getting reinforcements to help you take him on is retarded.

What makes it even more amazing that you say this is the fact that Luke actually did go on to found a new Jedi order. So just what, exactly, is so hard to believe about the idea that this might have been what he was originally intended to do in order to fight the emperor?

You say this, and then seriously offer as an alternative the idea that Yoda and Obi Wan deliberately undertook, as plan A, their primary course of action, the most farfetched and unlikely gamble I have ever heard of, which Mike summed up quite succinctly: they supposedly bet everything on the proposition that Luke would be brought before the Emperor, and defeated, but critically, not killed too soon to cause Vader to have that crucial epiphany that brings him back from the Dark Side after two decades of faithful service to it.

Dude, THINK about it. You construct so frankly preposterous a hypothesis as this, and then tell me with a straight face that my idea that the plan might have been for Luke to found a new Jedi order (which, moreover, he later did, in fact) is "retarded"? I'm speechless.

[Crown]

Guys, McC is basically arguing that Obi-Wan was using reverse psychology on Luke in RotJ -- an not unheard of technique. Whether that happened or not ... *shrug*

[Perinquus]

Guys, McC is basically arguing that Obi-Wan was using reverse psychology on Luke in RotJ -- an not unheard of technique. Whether that happened or not ... *shrug*

The problem with his argument is that he is saying that Obi Wan was using reverse psychology to encourage Luke to pursue an objective so incredibly unlikely that only the greatest of fools would gamble on such an outcome.

[Crown]

Guys, McC is basically arguing that Obi-Wan was using reverse psychology on Luke in RotJ -- an not unheard of technique. Whether that happened or not ... *shrug*

The problem with his argument is that he is saying that Obi Wan was using reverse psychology to encourage Luke to pursue an objective so incredibly unlikely that only the greatest of fools would gamble on such an outcome.

Well that's a pretty clear way of putting it.