Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:
Can't scale up without a very good cause, pal. Remember, as someone else said, the Aldies would want to bump up the population as much as possible, while crushing the Imperial DS (and Byss) populations down as far as possible. It is entirely feasible to have a planet with only a few billion people. The only reason we bumped up Coruscant's population is after a close look.
That's like saying that Imperial Apologists will do all they can to bump up the population of the things that the Rebels destroyed (the Death Stars).
We never see the surface of Alderaan, so the highest canon is silent. Instead we get offical numbers, which are thrown out in favor of maximizing the Death Star and minimizing a core planet.
There is automation. Just that there is still place for a lot of men.
Why do they need them though? Okay, so you have a few thousand TIE Fighters, and a pilot for each one. You have a few squads of Stormtroopers for... guard duty? I dunno. And a few officers to give orders to those Troopers. But this sounds like a Clerks thing. They need a few billion janitors to polish all those floors. They need billions of electricians to make sure all the wiring is going right. Etc.
Basically the Death Star is made into it's own planet when it doesn't need to be. We know the technology exists to mass produce droids. Heck, they don't even need to have people fixing them, they can have other droids fix the droids. And they can just recycle them into more, etc. The few command positions are ruled by humans, but we need not assume that there are 16 billion Stormtroopers on the Death Star, do we? All the action in ANH takes place within a very very tiny area. But the way its setup is literally left open. Likewise with Alderaan. Yes, Alderaan could have just 2 million people (to correspond literally with Obi-Wan's quote), and the Death Star could have been 1 million (to correspond with the EU). Or they both could have been much higher. Who knows? I just see less reason for the DS to be heavily populated, but Alderaan to not be (as if it were some Star Trek colony).
But if you want the Full-War Clause, then Alderaan is merely an act of Strategic Bombing of a Munitions site which unfortunately, due to the "hard" nature of the target, produced a lot of collateral damage. While in Full War, of course the Rebels blowing up the DS is legitimate, but you already thought that whether this is Full War or not, so that doesn't help you much. But that also legitimizes the Empire's blowing up Alderaan as a Enemy Strategic Target that fakes being part of them, so that's a net gain for us.
My contention is that they had other choices besides total destruction of the planet with all beings dead. On the subject of the Death Star, the Rebellion didn't have the resources to defeat the Death Star in a large scale fleet engagement. And the Death Star was a military target. Alderaan (as was mentioned) may have had military targets ON it, but the entire planet wasn't a military target to be wiped out, civies and all.
Honestly, if the Death Star blew up Alderaan, then blew up Yavin, breaking the back of the Rebel Alliance, I find it hard to believe those Rebels won't quiet down.
That Rebellion perhaps. But what's to stop a future Rebellion? There is always the possibility, with a population of Quadrillions, that people will try to organize to resist the oppression. That means the Death Star is going to "have to" kill Billions more. Besides, after a generation or so, the effect of Alderaan will have to to be "renewed," right?
The Nazis and the Soviets didn't just massacre a few people when they took power and then stop. They killed millions and millions throughout their rule. I would be surprised if the Empire had the moral restraint not to follow suit.
And in Tarkin's viewpoint, this is clearly what he expects to happen, so this should be the viewpoint by which his actions are judged. IN his mind at least:
A) Death of Alderaan ... the last two billion
B) Allow Galactic Civil War, producing trillions of casualties.
Well, he was a psychotic madman, so why should we follow his reasoning? I'm sure Hitler felt all his actions were necessary "in his reasoning." Maybe he could be let of for his crimes by reason of insanity but that doesn't excuse the fact that all of his victims are dead or homeless.
If he'd never built the Death Star, he wouldn't have had to worry about a Galactic Civil War (read the opening crawl of ANH again). If his boss hadn't created the Clone Wars, he wouldn't have had to worry about any of this crap. The Empire is ultimately responsible for all of these events. That the Rebels choose to try to stop the madmen from doing more damage and defending themselves is only natural. Either that or they were just supposed to roll over and die, since nobody is safe from the Empire.
Honestly, considering the reliability of that fucking Senate, abolishing it is a matter of time. Remember how the RSB admits that its Bail Organa Senator is giving away funds that are supposed to go to Imperial soldiers to the Rebels? Senator Mon Mothma, leader of the Rebel movement? Senator Leia Organa, spy of the Alliance, liar to Tarkin? The Senate is obviously becoming a tool for the Rebels to use official status to become Enemies of the State. Honestly, it doesn't have to the Emperor. I would have abolished that stupid Senate.
So the Senate is corrupt, wow. So is the Empire. Only thing is, the Senate at least represents the people. The Emperor on the other hand is a dicator. He represents his own interests. He's a tyrant, and a malevolent one at that.
And is not a constant state of Civil War, in a Hyperdrive-fought war (thus no frontlines) also a constant source of Fear?
We'll have to see in Episode III I guess. But the Clone Wars last what, 3 years? The Galactic Civil War lasts anywhere from 20 to only 4 years. Then there's the EU Civil War that lasts 25 years or something.
But where is the time for the supposed "peace, law & order" of the Empire?
No, the laws can be unjust. I don't like High Human Culture either. But the Empire obviously would think they are Just and therefore Enforce them. One needs to keep that in mind, that's all, and not take Two Points off, once for making the Law and the other the attempt to Enforce it.
The Empire need not think they are Just. They may simply be a means to power, or they may be sadistic madmen. Making an unjust law is one point off. Enforcing a law you know to be unjust is another. Unless, as you're saying, we assume that they assume the unjust law is just and then assume it's just to enforce it the way they did. That's getting into the argument of Moral Relativism. The Empire thought it was okay to do this or that, so therefore it was moral "for them" and we can't say otherwise. But that still gets into the notion of whether or not they have the right to infringe on the rights of others (such as Alderaan). By Alderaan choosing to remain in the Empire (in name only at least) instead of seceding, are they accepting Imperial right to punish them however they see fit?
By analogy, it's like saying that the Jews who chose to remain in Germany during Hitler's rule should have accepted the regimes right to exterminate or torture them. Right?
Of course they are.
Well that settles it then. At least you're consistent.
Treason is punishable by Death, remember? Giving funds to the Rebels is not treason?
Treason is punishable by death, and that's a rule that the Empire made. I'm sure they also made it legal to murder millions or billions of people when the Regional Governors deemed necessary. Those are just examples of unjust laws. So what?
Big Brother makes ThoughtCrime punishable by death. Hitler makes being a Jew punishable by death. So what?
But if they are giving funds to the Rebels, they are not exactly a Neutral Fence-sitter, are they? Also, the situation is a little different this time. The government should be able to expect its citizens to be at least minimally loyal. Obeying the law and not helping out the terrorists is a minimum, don't you think?
So arrest the guilty parties and put them on trial. Don't kill the entire planet, without giving them any chance to surrender. That's overkill and absurd in the extreme.
How do they know that every person on the planet is a traitor? Is Palpatine reading their minds and determining this? It's the same logic that we should blow up the United States because of a few terrorists living here, or Northern Ireland because of the IRA, or (fill in name of any country that has terrorists living there, ie: pretty much all of them).
Since the Empire has the technology to take out "just the terrorists" and spare the population at large, and they have the ability to negotiate, yes, they are acting rashly by murdering the entire population. Were their traitors on Coruscant? Maybe the Death Star should blow up that planet too. So we're going to have to kill trillions, using Alderaan as the precedent. I'm not saying that in a slippery slope way, but I mean the logic is the same. If the reason for destroying the entire planet was becuase of a few terrorists or funding for the Rebellion, then many more worlds will have to be destroyed. Does the end (rooting out "disloyalty" against an oppressive totalitarian regime) justify the means (exterminating untold numbers of people)?
Oh, so you negotiate with terrorists?
Why not? It would save countless lives. And they still have the option of killing the terrorists outright without killing everyone on the same planet as them. It's not an either or: Either give up all power to the "terrorists" or kill everyone living nearby them.
For an analogy, Al Qaeda, a real terrorist organization is supposed to have, what, 50,000 members? But they are all over the world. They are spread out. So if we adopted the tactic of nuking every country they resided in, we'd be nuking a lot of countries, and causing a LOT of collateral damage. But the analogy breaks down there, because we (the US and its allies) don't have the technology the Empire has at it's disposal.
It is a munitions dump being converted into a recruiting and perhaps later training post as well.
So what? That doesn't justify killing the entire planet, only invading or destroying certain precision targets ON the planet. There's a difference between wiping out everyone on the planet and killing a few people on specific sites. Again, unless you assume the only choice is to kill every single person, which seems to be your position, which is ludicrous.
The fate of every armed Rebellion. Go on.
Well, no. In real life a Rebellion could theoretically "give up" and leave the country. Ie: secede or actually flee. Many Palestinians left after Israel got declared and started saber rattling and went to other countries. But the Rebels have nowhere to go (well I guess they could try to feel to another galaxy). The Empire controls the whole galaxy, so it's much harder to do that.
They could also surrender in the hopes of being given a fair trial, but the Empire's record of brutality and uncompromising nature precludes that.
What other level of Force can reach a planet protected by that monster of a planetary shield.
An Imperial Fleet (or even a few ships). The DS's wide range of other weapons (turbolaser batteries; plus ion cannons and missiles per the novelisation). They could have Vader mind trick the Shield operators, etc. That's in addition to hypothetically firing a low powered shot from the superlaser. But I would think those other options would be easier.
Pledges of loyalty? Don't make me laugh. The fucking Aldies offered them once, to the point of sending Senators. Senators that spied and diverted funds to the Rebels. Honestly, Alderaan's credibility for these pledges is in the dirt, thanks to the Organa family.
So surrender is not an option? Either they kill the entire planet or ignore it? That's a false dilemma, as I and others have shown. They could say "Okay, okay, we'll turn over the Royal Family for prosecution if you spare our world. And Tarkin says "okay" and they live happily ever after. Alderaan agrees to have an Imperial garrison over them and maybe give up their Senatorial benefits, in exchange for their survival, etc.
It's like the Nazis did with the people they occupied. You see any Jews or spies? Turn 'em over to our Gestapo! Etc.
Ransom? Of what? Money? The Empire has all the money. The surrender of the Rebellion? Leia is valuable, but not that valuable.
Stop funding the Rebellion, turn over the following known Rebel spies, take down your shield, etc. Or she and her entourage gets tortured and executed. Complie with us and they are pardoned or spared. A lot of possibilities.
Dooku thought of this idea decades earlier. "Surrender, and your lives will be spared." At least he gave it a try.
Three ISDs cannot enforce their will on that planetary shield. Even as they threaten, the Aldies would buckle down for a long blockade and commence wire transfers to everyone they can reach.
Three ISD's can utterly destroy a planet. One ISD can BDZ right? Isn't that more energy than a shield can absorb? Correct me if I'm wrong.
As to wire transfers, can't they jam the planet? Or is that beyond Imperial technology? Besides, barring the weakness of the DS, which is not widely known, the DS is able to withstand any massive fleet engagement, that's what it was built for: crushing planets and taking on a large scale battle fleet.
And any possible negotiations were kind of cut short as the Aldies raised their middle fingers and their shield. Fortunately for the Empire, they had the Death Star. Unfortunately for them, they then got it blown up, so they lost that Deterrent effect, looked like idiots ... etc.
They didn't even try to negotiate. "Lower your shield or our Superlaser will destroy your planet. Your shield is not powerful enough to withstand our ultimate weapon. If you surrender and turn over your leaders for an questioning, we will spare your lives and your planet."
It sounds like you're saying genocide is perferrable to the Empire "losing face." That's pretty harsh. They have other options and they can still come out the winners. Besides, it would show that the Empire is reasonable if you are reasonable back. All this incident shows is that you better fight your hardest because the Empire is determined to kill us all.
Not in Tarkin, the Decider of this Action's mind. He really thinks the Rebellion would quiet down. Hardly illogical given the new stakes of this game. So this could easily be the last two billion.
True, he does think that no system will dare oppose the Emperor now, not when they've seen this station's destructive power. He was wrong of course. But all this assumes his actions were justifed as a means to an end. It didn't work, and so he killed all those people for nothing. In fact, he just encouraged the Rebellion to gain support, because they could now use Alderaan as a rallying cry. Why obey the Empire if they are going to randomly destroy planets without negotiating? Find that damned station and blow it up, it's our only chance!
Prove that one. I really doubt any government would dare do so, at least not for the next hundred years.
The fact that more systems joined the Rebellion? And the example of other totalitarian governments in real history. They don't just commit one atrocity and nobody ever messes with them again. They have to keep doing them in order to maintain the same level of fear. To up the ante once people have become desensitized to that. "Oh it will never happen to me" each new generation, etc.
The Force used for Deterrence continues to exist, so does the Fear/Awe/Respect that force generates. Did the threat of Deterrence somehow diminish between the US and the Soviet Union just because the nukes had been there sitting for awhile.
That's MAD you're talking about. The Alliance is no equivalent Death Star to deter the Empire from using their's. The Galaxy at large doesn't have superweapons on the scale of the Death Star to oppose it.
It's more akin to one nation having enough nukes to destroy the world and nobody else having any. Some say the reason the US hasn't used its nukes lately is because it's not the only nation that has them. MAD still exists, even if on a smaller scale. Plus it would be politically a very troublesome decision, since politicians in the US, as corrupt as you want to call them, do have accountability to their constituants. The Empire has no accountability to anyone. That's why they are so dangerous.
Considering the demands of the Group Leia was in, Negotiation from the Government viewpoint is pointless, for they don't have even halfway acceptable demands. They aren't only calling for one clause. They are calling for the Emperor to resign. Really, how many Emperors can choke that one down.
That's assuming that the entire population are Die-Hard rebels like Leia. I'm sure there's people on there who would turn in their next door neighbor if it meant their family would be spared. So you incite a revolution on Alderaan (I picture a mob storming the Organanian palace), and the world basically pledges loyalty. "Okay Imperial dudes, we got rid of the traitors, now please don't kill us."
For an example, the US could have made a big production and pointed nukes at Afgahnistan, had bombers with nukes flying overhead, and said "if you don't give us Bin Laden or tell us where he is, you will be nuked until you are all dead, that's our ultimatum." That would have caused an outcry from the world and been very unpopular, but it would have been a much greater impression on them than what we did do, which was just say "we're going to attack you if you don't turn him over soon." They'd been through sieges before with the Soviety Union and probably figured they could weather that one. But utter destruction? I'd turn over one man in the face of that threat. I think Alderaan would too.
Rule by fear is the only option for those who cannot Respect or are not naturally Law-Abiding.
The drawback by Rule by fear is that there are those who will decide that you are more dangerous to allow to remain in power than to leave alone. And Rule by fear is NOT the only option for those who are not naturally law abiding. Simple law enforcement will take care of that.
That's why we have police, because people break laws. Vs. say mass extermination because people aren't law abiding. Do we send out death squads to murder people in their beds to maintain order in Chicago or New York City? Do we send Helicopter Gunships to shoot up neighborhoods in the ghettos of Washington, DC every so often?
The US has some high crime cities, but what do you want? We could nuke those cities, that would take care of the crime problem. But it might incite a revolution (which would be crushed, but not before many many people died).
They are bad, from the Imperial POV.
Right, and the Empire is also bad. So we're arguing who's worse? Clearly by any rational standard, the Empire is. They may have cool uniforms, but they're still evil bastards. The Nazis believed they were right as well, but that doesn't make their actions justifiable, unless you're as insane as they are.
OR they start thinking. Big Brother ain't all that bad. I think I'd just learn to be Good.
Cleary they didn't or the Rebellion wouldn't have existed at all. Build Death Star, everyone starts walking on eggshells and thinks happy thoughts about the Emperor from now on.
This is SDN. Even the so-called extremists are very rational by standards anywhere else
Your proof of that? I enjoy SDN too and every club likes to pat themselves on the back as being #1, but seriously, where do you get that idea?
No really. ; )
I'd say we have a plenty mix of folks here. Otherwise we'd have nothing to do all day but jack each other off, right?
- that I can accept. 
).
