Rebels: Terrorists or Freedom Fighters (Battle of Endor too)

[Baal]

This is dumb. The Empire was evil pure and simple.

Vader was on the Death Star for one reason and one reason only. He was there to make sure that Tarkin and the other boys in charge didnt get the dirty little idea that as long as they controlled the Death Star they could put themselves in charge.

Vader was there as a watchdog and a reminder that the Emperor through Vader could strike them all down if they decided to try and take over.

[Noble Ire]

I do not disregard those facts, but they are irrelevant.

Irrelevant because you say so? That's not good enough; I've put forth evidence that indicates that Tarkin and Palpatine were on friendly terms up until the former's death, and that the Moff's opinions had a marked effect on Imperial policy because of the Emperor's favor. You have not put forth any fact that would counter such a supposition.

The Wookiees harbored Jedi fugitives and killed Imperial soldiers. They were hardly innocent.

I will repeat, the entire population was not guilty of harboring fugitives, and yet Kashyyyk was placed under martial rule and at the mercy of slavers, who shipped uncounted thousands off-world for decades. Unless you consider that a valid punishment for defending one's home soil from aggression, the Empire's behavior is utterly unconscionable.

Point of note: the New Order was not unlawful. I do not know how you could consider it illegal considering it was ratified by the Galactic Senate. Keep in mind as well that the Emperor's imperium immunizes him from any crimes committed past, present, or future.

Palpatine made his actions legal in the end, that is true. But to reach that end, he used hideously illegal means, from blackmail to assassination to outright treason (as in his divulgence of Republic state secrets to the CIS to facilitate his fabricated war). Of course, you don't seem to care about these blatantly evil means, so I suppose that arguing the point is useless. I guess that I'll just have to accept that Palpatine's self-immunization makes up for all his ill-methods; he was a benevolent monarch, after all.

Much of what you insist is evil about the Empire was already common practice in the Old Republic. Do you admit the Old Republic is evil as well?

What exactly did the Old Republic do that made it remotely comparable to the Galactic Empire? The only example you've raised so far is the supposed allowance of Czerka's occupation of Kashyyyk, which occurred at a point in the body's history when it was so weakened by war that the corporation could act more or less with free reign.

You must accept that the Empire, or any Star Wars government, cannot be expected to share your own fundamental belief in the basic or natural rights of sentients with any reasonable degree of validity. You are demanding the Star Wars galaxy meet artificial Terran standards that do not hold up under empirical scrutiny. As hard as it may be to believe, Locke and Hobbes might not be the generally accepted political philosophers of the galaxy far, far away.

Indeed? And where is it even remotely indicated in the canon that the people of the GFFA don't value the principles of justice, free speech, and liberty as much as we do? Obviously, the signatories of the Petition of 2,000 and the Alliance to Restore the Republic saw some fault in Palpatine's blatant abuses of power and general disregard for basic rights.

Moffs do. Tarkin certinly would in Oversector Outer.

I was referring to the entirety of the governmental body; ie, the Empire itself. Even Moffs could not have completely controlled the flow of information in and out of their territories. Civilians still were allowed to own hyperdrive-enabled starships and come and go from Imperial worlds; word of rimward abuses would have made their way back to Coruscant eventually. The Rebel Alliance certainly knew about them. Either the Emperor's own intelligence services were inferior to the "insignificant" resistance group you seem to dislike so much, or he heard of the enslavements and abuses, and did nothing to stop them.

Because you refuse to admit it, having decided Mon Calamari and Kasshyyk must be exceptional to the rule because of their prominence, even though that prominence means nothing and has been demonstrated so.

If I understand you correctly, you are claiming that Mon Calamari and Kashyyyk could have been completely hidden from the galaxy at large, despite the fact that Imperial facilities an officials, including Tarkin himself, employed Mon Calamari and Wookiee slaves, because the Empire managed to obscure the nature of the Jedi Order. I still doubt the validity of that comparison, but even if it is true, both efforts would have required similar levels of Imperial oversight and resources. Palpatine played a guiding role in the elimination of the Jedi from history; are you trying to tell me that a similar effort in regards to the Mon Calamari could have been conducted without him or any of his chief advisors knowing about it at all?

Did you know that up until her interrogation onboard the Death Star, Princess Leia of Alderaan did not believe the rumors and hearsay that such interrogation droids actually existed?

What does that have to do with anything? The Empire kept the devices out of the public eye because they went directly counter the benevolent image that Palpatine tried to create for himself. I never disputed the idea that the Empire was capable of impressive feats of deception.

In fact, the arrest of Moff Glovstoak for his illegal actions again show that Impreial officials are held accountable for their actions, should they be discovered.

Moff Glovstoak's actions were directly counter to Palpatine's authority; of course he would be held accountable for them. Even under the New Order, embezzlement of Imperial assets was not legal. That incident has nothing to do with the general, largely uninhibited trends of Imperial slavery and abuse.

I never spoke of chaos, I spoke of quality of life.

I see. So, the quality of life of those living nearer to the galactic core was more important than the quality of life of those living further away, which was increased dramatically in numerous cases due to the Empire's fall?

[TC Pilot]

Irrelevant because you say so? That's not good enough; I've put forth evidence that indicates that Tarkin and Palpatine were on friendly terms up until the former's death, and that the Moff's opinions had a marked effect on Imperial policy because of the Emperor's favor. You have not put forth any fact that would counter such a supposition.

That is because the matter is irrelevant to the question at hand. Proving or disproving Tarkin was on good terms with the Emperor does not change the fact he acted without the Emperor's knowledge in destroying Alderaan.

I will repeat, the entire population was not guilty of harboring fugitives, and yet Kashyyyk was placed under martial rule and at the mercy of slavers, who shipped uncounted thousands off-world for decades.

The battle for Kashyyyk spanned across whole continents. It was not an isolated insurrection. It is entirely sensible to place the planet under martial law.

Palpatine made his actions legal in the end, that is true. But to reach that end, he used hideously illegal means, from blackmail to assassination to outright treason (as in his divulgence of Republic state secrets to the CIS to facilitate his fabricated war).

None of which the galaxy knew of. His actions in the Prequel trilogy were unknown to the general population and the rebels.

I guess that I'll just have to accept that Palpatine's self-immunization makes up for all his ill-methods; he was a benevolent monarch, after all.

The matter was not of Palpatine's benevolence. You will not find a stronger believer of Palpatine's completely unredeemable nature and total lack of altruism than myself. You claim the New Order was illegal, in spite of the fact it was in total accordance with the laws and constitution of its predecessor. The Galactic Empire enjoys being both the legitimate and legal successor to the Galactic Republic and holding the popular consent of the masses.

What exactly did the Old Republic do that made it remotely comparable to the Galactic Empire? The only example you've raised so far is the supposed allowance of Czerka's occupation of Kashyyyk, which occurred at a point in the body's history when it was so weakened by war that the corporation could act more or less with free reign.

The Republic has committed many crimes you would expect the Empire to commit. The Sith species was completely exterminated by the Republic following the Great Hyperspace War. The Ubese homeworld was orbitally bombarded by the Republic and the Jedi. The Republic actively intervened in the war between the Huk and Kaleesh, yet the Sepan Civil War (the system was part of the Republic) was allowed to rage for decades.

Indeed? And where is it even remotely indicated in the canon that the people of the GFFA don't value the principles of justice, free speech, and liberty as much as we do? Obviously, the signatories of the Petition of 2,000 and the Alliance to Restore the Republic saw some fault in Palpatine's blatant abuses of power and general disregard for basic rights.

The the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of the galaxy did not. Just look at the entirety of the Rebellion gathered for the Battle of Endor.

Moffs do. Tarkin certinly would in Oversector Outer.

If I understand you correctly, you are claiming that Mon Calamari and Kashyyyk could have been completely hidden from the galaxy at large, despite the fact that Imperial facilities an officials, including Tarkin himself, employed Mon Calamari and Wookiee slaves, because the Empire managed to obscure the nature of the Jedi Order.

And rewrite recent history, as well. The planets of Kamino, Wayland, Myrkr, for example, were all but forgotten to the rest of the galaxy simply because their entries were deleted from star charts.

Palpatine played a guiding role in the elimination of the Jedi from history; are you trying to tell me that a similar effort in regards to the Mon Calamari could have been conducted without him or any of his chief advisors knowing about it at all?

You're missing the comparison. Moffs were in many respects dictators of their respective territories, wielding significant power,

Did you know that up until her interrogation onboard the Death Star, Princess Leia of Alderaan did not believe the rumors and hearsay that such interrogation droids actually existed?

What does that have to do with anything?

Proof that things can be hidden from the galaxy at large. Thinking: it does the body good.

Even under the New Order, embezzlement of Imperial assets was not legal. That incident has nothing to do with the general, largely uninhibited trends of Imperial slavery and abuse.

This, in spite of the fact that when abuses of this nature were discovered, their perpetrators were held accountable.

I see. So, the quality of life of those living nearer to the galactic core was more important than the quality of life of those living further away, which was increased dramatically in numerous cases due to the Empire's fall?

I'm sorry, but are you arguing that the quality of life of those living further is more important than those living nearer? Keep in mind the Mid-Rim is not near the Core, and is in fact bordering the Outer Rim.

[Surlethe]

Why is it false? By not removing Tarkin upon learning of Alderaan's destruction, the Emperor implicitly gives the Grand Moff his blessing as well as leaving himself the political wiggle-room of post-mortem disavowing. This validates Tarkin's claim that the destruction of the planet is within his authority.

You are operating under the assumptions (unproven assumptions, mind you) that the Emperor discovered Alderaan's destruction prior to Tarkin's death and that he must act upon such knowledge immediately or else he gives his approval.

Perhaps you'd like to elucidate what's so unreasonable about those assumptions; I simply appeal to the EMperor's knowledge of the Force and human nature to validate them.

Admiral Harkov, for example, was known to be breaching the law and even committing treason by selling off Imperial military equipment, but the Empire did not act against him immediately because he was a capable officer. That does not mean the Emperor condoned treason.

And yet the Emperor is bestowing his implicit approval upon the corruption by simply tolerating it. Do you deny that this is the case?

[Noble Ire]

That is because the matter is irrelevant to the question at hand. Proving or disproving Tarkin was on good terms with the Emperor does not change the fact he acted without the Emperor's knowledge in destroying Alderaan.

The Emperor gave control of a planet-destroying weapon to a known mass-murder. He is either obscenely incompetent, despite all the evidence that indicates otherwise, or culpable in Alderaan's destruction, even if he did not expressly order it.

The battle for Kashyyyk spanned across whole continents. It was not an isolated insurrection. It is entirely sensible to place the planet under martial law.

You keep on dancing around the point. The Empire occupied and enslaved Kashyyyk for decades after the Jedi on the planet were eliminated. Its response to the Wookiee's defense of their homeworld is utterly disproportionate.

The matter was not of Palpatine's benevolence. You will not find a stronger believer of Palpatine's completely unredeemable nature and total lack of altruism than myself.

It would have been nice if you clarified that earlier; many of your comments throughout this thread have seemed to indicate that you actually approved of Palpatine and his methods. If you acknowledge his depravity, though, I'm confused by your continued defense of his empire. Do you claim that despite his utterly deplorable and ruthless nature, he staffed his personal dominion with decent and altruistic officers, and promoted the development of constructive and beneficent organizations, despite all the evidence to the contrary?

The the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of the galaxy did not. Just look at the entirety of the Rebellion gathered for the Battle of Endor.

The Rebellion was not a monolithic organization. Perhaps every combat vessel available to the cells affiliated with Leia Organa and Mon Mothma were assembled at Endor, but it was hardly every single sapient in the galaxy who opposed Palpatine or desired basic civil liberties. There were dozens of other resistance cells scattered across the galaxy of varying size, including Garm Bel Ilbis', which did not participate in the battle. And then there were the trillions of citizens who may have been unwilling or unable to take up arms, but still were whole-hearted rebel sympathizers. If the Rebellion and the ideals it upheld were truly as unpopular as you claim, the NR could never have formed, even with the fragmentation of the Empire. Claiming that every Imperial citizen who did not openly rebel was a firm believer in the New Order is like claiming that every German in the Third Reich was a Nazi, or, indeed, that every American alive today is an ultra-conservative Christian.

And rewrite recent history, as well. The planets of Kamino, Wayland, Myrkr, for example, were all but forgotten to the rest of the galaxy simply because their entries were deleted from star charts.

Kamino, Wayland, and Myrkr were also either extremely isolated or virtually unpopulated. Mon Calamari and Kashyyyk were heavily-populated species homeworlds near major trade routes with multi-millennial galactic histories.

You're missing the comparison. Moffs were in many respects dictators of their respective territories, wielding significant power,

I still have a hard time believing that most Moffs would have either the desire or ability to completely isolate their sectors from the Imperial Center. The Empire was not a confederacy.

Proof that things can be hidden from the galaxy at large. Thinking: it does the body good.

Don't be an ass. Hiding the existence of a specific piece of military hardware is vastly different from making a heavily-populated world completely disappear.

This, in spite of the fact that when abuses of this nature were discovered, their perpetrators were held accountable.

Again, there is no correlation between embezzlement and slavery. The first was not condoned because it hindered the greater empire. The second was permitted because it benefitted the Imperial economy, or at least kept fringe-ward officials well-behaved.

I'm sorry, but are you arguing that the quality of life of those living further is more important than those living nearer? Keep in mind the Mid-Rim is not near the Core, and is in fact bordering the Outer Rim.

You know that's not what I'm saying. You seem to be operating under the assumption that as long as the quality of life of one particular population is high, the quality of life of other populations is irrelevant. I am challenging that belief.

[TC Pilot]

Perhaps you'd like to elucidate what's so unreasonable about those assumptions; I simply appeal to the EMperor's knowledge of the Force and human nature to validate them.

As a theory, your assumptions are all well and good. The problem arises when you try and pass it off as proof to counter my argument. Your conclusions are based on unproven assumptions. Since the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your two assumptions, and you have not done so, it is nothing more than another opinion on the matter.

And yet the Emperor is bestowing his implicit approval upon the corruption by simply tolerating it. Do you deny that this is the case?

Of course. Harkov was executed for his crimes in due time, simply not in the timeframe you have proscribed.

The Emperor gave control of a planet-destroying weapon to a known mass-murder. He is either obscenely incompetent, despite all the evidence that indicates otherwise, or culpable in Alderaan's destruction, even if he did not expressly order it.

The differences between the Ghorman "Massacre" and the destruction of Alderaan are large enough that your persistent "mass-murder" [sic] label is annoyingly inappropriate.

No matter how long you argue this, you cannot change the fact the Emperor was not aware of Tarkin's plan to destroy Alderaan, nor can the Emperor be blamed for the actions of rogue subordinates.

Its response to the Wookiee's defense of their homeworld is utterly disproportionate.

I disagree.

It would have been nice if you clarified that earlier;

I did.

many of your comments throughout this thread have seemed to indicate that you actually approved of Palpatine and his methods. If you acknowledge his depravity, though, I'm confused by your continued defense of his empire. Do you claim that despite his utterly deplorable and ruthless nature, he staffed his personal dominion with decent and altruistic officers, and promoted the development of constructive and beneficent organizations, despite all the evidence to the contrary?

The Emperor Palpatine I, alias Darth Sidious, was unquestionably a morally bankrupt scumbag, but that does not necesitate that his Empire is staffed and administrated by those like him, nor that it is illegal, nor that it is unpopular with the people.

I again quote Captain Thrawn: "I encounter civilians like you all the time. You believe the Empire is continually plotting to do harm. Let me tell you, your view of the Empire is far too dramatic. The Empire is a government. It keeps billions of beings fed and clothed. Day after day, year after year, on thousands of worlds people live their lives under Imperial rule without ever seeing a stormtrooper or hearing a TIE fighter scream overhead."

Further, the Empire is not the evil organization you seem to wish it to be. Let Admiral Terran Rogriss explain: "You Rebels remain so very self-righteous. Always speaking of honor, as though you invented the concept. I've spent my whole life in honorable conflict. I've conquered whole worlds to bring civilization to them--literacy and medicine and sanitation and discipline. I've fought the forces of chaos to keep galactic civilization from flying apart. I've only had a few weeks of each year to spend with my children. I've made all these sacrifices...only to be lectured about honor from someone a generation younger than I am. That's reward for you."

Ars Dangor, Imperial Advisor, explains the nature of Imperial government: "We rule through might and fear—fear of the chaos that would ensue should the Imperial government falter. Who better than the most educated, well-trained, highly civilized élite to lead the lesser beings who know nothing about maintaining culture and organization?"

The Galactic Empire stood for peace and order in a galaxy that offered only corruption and chaos. I recently re-discovered a very old, very long article that deals with this very issue. If you would like, I could post it here.

The Rebellion was not a monolithic organization. Perhaps every combat vessel available to the cells affiliated with Leia Organa and Mon Mothma were assembled at Endor, but it was hardly every single sapient in the galaxy who opposed Palpatine or desired basic civil liberties. There were dozens of other resistance cells scattered across the galaxy of varying size, including Garm Bel Ilbis', which did not participate in the battle.

The difference, however, is that the Rebels gathered at Sullust formed the vast, vast, vast majority of resistance forces, and all of the Rebellion to Restore the Republic, more commonly called the Rebel Alliance.

And then there were the trillions of citizens who may have been unwilling or unable to take up arms, but still were whole-hearted rebel sympathizers.

"May have" is the keyword there. Idle speculation is nothing.

If the Rebellion and the ideals it upheld were truly as unpopular as you claim, the NR could never have formed, even with the fragmentation of the Empire.

Because you say so, not because you have proof of it.

Bringing this back to your claim that the Rebellion stood to uphold basic rights in defiance of the Empire, look no further than its Declaration of Rebellion: "We firmly acknowledge the importance and necessity of the institution of Galactic Government. We accept that all must subjugate themselves to that Government, giving up certain rights and freedoms, in return for peace, prosperity and happiness for all."

Claiming that every Imperial citizen who did not openly rebel was a firm believer in the New Order is like claiming that every German in the Third Reich was a Nazi, or, indeed, that every American alive today is an ultra-conservative Christian.

They may not have been firm believers in the New Order, but they were loyal to the Empire and the ruler of Coruscant.

I still have a hard time believing that most Moffs would have either the desire or ability to completely isolate their sectors from the Imperial Center. The Empire was not a confederacy.

As your persistence in refusing to believe anything clearly shows.

Again, there is no correlation between embezzlement and slavery. The first was not condoned because it hindered the greater empire. The second was permitted because it benefitted the Imperial economy, or at least kept fringe-ward officials well-behaved

Slavery actually had no economic benefit with the availability of droids; a rather "peculiar institution".

You know that's not what I'm saying. You seem to be operating under the assumption that as long as the quality of life of one particular population is high, the quality of life of other populations is irrelevant. I am challenging that belief.

You must understand that I am not arguing that. I believe a government that keeps a huge majority of the population living in luxury is better than one that can do so for no one.

[Surlethe]

Perhaps you'd like to elucidate what's so unreasonable about those assumptions; I simply appeal to the EMperor's knowledge of the Force and human nature to validate them.

As a theory, your assumptions are all well and good. The problem arises when you try and pass it off as proof to counter my argument. Your conclusions are based on unproven assumptions. Since the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your two assumptions, and you have not done so, it is nothing more than another opinion on the matter.

If you accept my assumptions, then why are you dismissing them out of hand?

And yet the Emperor is bestowing his implicit approval upon the corruption by simply tolerating it. Do you deny that this is the case?

Of course. Harkov was executed for his crimes in due time, simply not in the timeframe you have proscribed.

He may have been executed in due time; that's immaterial to my point, which is that while the Emperor tolerated blatant treason, he gave it his implicit approval. And the magnitude of Harkov's crime is much less than that of Tarkin, if he was overstepping the bounds of his authority. To counter Tarkin's own idea of his place in the Empire, you only possess Vader's claim that the Emperor should be consulted, which is not clear evidence that Tarkin lacked the authority.

[Noble Ire]

The differences between the Ghorman "Massacre" and the destruction of Alderaan are large enough that your persistent "mass-murder" [sic] label is annoyingly inappropriate.

I find your willingness to disregard the murder of hundreds out of hand disturbing, to say the least. The idea that a sapient life is somehow intrinsically worth more or less based on the number slaughtered in a specific incident is repellent.

No matter how long you argue this, you cannot change the fact the Emperor was not aware of Tarkin's plan to destroy Alderaan, nor can the Emperor be blamed for the actions of rogue subordinates.

I know full well that Palpatine never ordered Alderaan's destruction. It was an enormous blow to the Empire's credibility; he would have never targeted such a high-profile world, at least not without a better pretense for doing so. Nevertheless, he placed the reigns of a planet-killer in the hands of a man he knew he could count on to use it. That alone makes him partially accountable for the world's annihilation.


As to your collection of condescending quotes, I have already acknowledged that there were "good" Imperials, and indeed, that a majority of Imperial officials were probably just men doing their jobs. The organs of the Galactic Empire did an effective job providing for a large number of its subjects. Hell, I'm not even fully opposed to the idea of bringing "civilization" to primitive worlds, as the Empire did on occasion. Nevertheless, I consider the Empire evil because Palpatine allowed or encouraged prejudice, slavery, and murder to solidify his hold on the galaxy and keep those among his minions who were not so sane occupied and in check. The collapse of the New Order undoubtedly undid many of the positive aspects of the Empire on many of its former worlds, but it had other effects as well.

My main point in this thread, and I do see that I've been rather side-tracked from it, has been to point out that this loss of luxury was not the only result of the Empire's fall; surely, you will agree that allowing entire species to break free of bondage, or depriving a few high-ranked madmen of the material and free-reign needed for genocide, are positive outcomes. Whether or not this good outweighs the bad is a matter of personal philosophy, pragmatism versus idealism. It’s simply not a clear-cut issue.

[TC Pilot]

If you accept my assumptions, then why are you dismissing them out of hand?

I never said I accepted your assumptions and I have already explained why I dismiss them.

He may have been executed in due time; that's immaterial to my point, which is that while the Emperor tolerated blatant treason, he gave it his implicit approval.

Which is simply absurd.

And the magnitude of Harkov's crime is much less than that of Tarkin, if he was overstepping the bounds of his authority. To counter Tarkin's own idea of his place in the Empire, you only possess Vader's claim that the Emperor should be consulted, which is not clear evidence that Tarkin lacked the authority.

And remember Tarkin was acting beyond Oversector Outer, which Alderaan obviously does not fall under.

I find your willingness to disregard the murder of hundreds out of hand disturbing, to say the least. The idea that a sapient life is somehow intrinsically worth more or less based on the number slaughtered in a specific incident is repellent.

It's not the number killed, but those who are killed. Victims of the Ghorman Massacre were in violation of the law. They were warned to get out of the way.

Nevertheless, he placed the reigns of a planet-killer in the hands of a man he knew he could count on to use it. That alone makes him partially accountable for the world's annihilation.

But not in any meaningful way or amount. At best, he gave Tarkin orders to use the Death Star against the Rebel headquarters and placed Vader onboard to apply some measure of restraint. The Emperor could not reasonably prepare for every eventuality nor appoint the "perfect" man for the job.

As to your collection of condescending quotes, I have already acknowledged that there were "good" Imperials, and indeed, that a majority of Imperial officials were probably just men doing their jobs. The organs of the Galactic Empire did an effective job providing for a large number of its subjects.

You asked why I support the Empire in spite of the Emperor's unfathomable evil. I gave support for my belief.

surely, you will agree that allowing entire species to break free of bondage, or depriving a few high-ranked madmen of the material and free-reign needed for genocide, are positive outcomes.

In and of itself, yes. But the price to be paid in trillions of lives I do not believe is worth the benefit. Pragmatism vs idealism, I suppose. Perhaps now you will take pause before instantly railing against any defense of the Empire. If you do so, I will consider this discussion a success.

[Noble Ire]

It's not the number killed, but those who are killed. Victims of the Ghorman Massacre were in violation of the law. They were warned to get out of the way.

The idea that it’s acceptable to execute protestors in mass numbers simply because they failed to disperse after being ordered to do so is almost as despicable as saying that their lives are meaningless without larger numbers. I fail to see the value in a legal system that considers death a suitable punishment for simple civil disobedience.

Perhaps now you will take pause before instantly railing against any defense of the Empire. If you do so, I will consider this discussion a success.

I acknowledged the positive aspects of the Galactic Empire well before this exchange, as my previous posts should demonstrate. The only thing this discussion has left me with is a rather sour view of your sense of justice.

[Isolder74]

Saying that the Empire is evil has nothing to do with how well the people in a privilaged class in it live.


Hitler was a great leader after all considering what Germany was like before he came to power. He killed millions but the Trains ran on time.


Your aruments are apologenic, distasteful, and very unethical. Regardless of what you say about the matter, it does not change the truth. Palpatine has been a puppetmaster behind so many evil acts up to that point you somehow think that by ANH he suddenly is now clueless and out of the loop?

A recluse aka out of public eye I will buy but if he knew nothing about all the atrotities being committed in his name then that makes his actions even worse.

And didn't you play Tie Fighter? From the moment you are transfered to Harkov's fleet the Secret Order has you collecting evidence to hang Harcov. Doesn't sound like they were letting him get away with it at all.

You argument that the Death Star being physically complete but not operational when the Senate was disolved is irrelivent, as it was operational within hours of that meeting. It is clear that only minor issues were all that were needed to get things ready to go.

[Connor MacLeod]

I'm a bit tired with this thread, so rather than argue, I'm just going to post a ilttle tidbit Publius was kind enough to remind me about, that he'd once commented to me on before (so obviously credit goes to him, I'm just the messenger boy.)

The Han Solo and the Corporate Sector Sourcebook indicates that Palpatine had already accumulated enough hard and soft power -- that is, his formal authority as a state official, his patronage and personal influence (both licit and illicit), and his secret control of others via his Sith Lord persona -- to rule as a de facto dictator as early as his election to the Supreme Chancellery in 3rS. Yet nevertheless he spent the next thirteen years scheming to gain ever more influence and power, and managing an elaborate stage production to legitimate his position as the galaxy's colossus.

The fact of the matter is that Palpatine had the power to effect the Death Star Project with no more than a stroke of the pen; however, given his carefully created masquerade of being an isolated recluse, it was not desirable for him to be seen directly supporting it. Consequently, there is no primary evidence that the Galactic Emperor was involved; when Moff Tarkin submitted the Tarkin Doctrine, it was one of Palpatine's closest advisors, Ars Dangor, who actually approved the project and promoted Tarkin to Grand Moff. Like Tojo Hideki assuming responsibility for a war tacitly approved by Hirohito, Dangor ensured that Palpatine's personal involvement appears nowhere in the project's records.

Admittedly, Tarkin seemed formally to have full authority as the Galactic Emperor's plenipotentiary. But, as usual in the Empire, matters cannot be judged solely by the letter of the law. In reality, Tarkin was Palpatine's stalking horse; the Sith Lord was always a man who preferred subtlety and willing acquiescence to outright domination, and he was using Tarkin to test the political waters. If the project proved politically untenable, then the whole thing could be blamed on Tarkin (and even, if necessary, on faithful Dangor), leaving Palpatine to wash his hands of it (and conveniently disposing of the "lean and hungry" Tarkin, demoted from stalking horse to cat's-paw). If it proved politically tenable, then he had only to step in and take control more directly; recall that Tarkin was saddled with Darth Vader as an observer, and "Betrayal" reveals that Palpatine would have been quite happy to send Grand Moff Trachta to take Tarkin's place as head of the Project if he had not felt it more important to have Trachta helping run his operations on Imperial Center itself (indeed, "Betrayal" even reveals that Palpatine planned to board the Death Star very shortly after it became operational).

As for the whole "Teh Empire is evul" bit, as I remember Publius ALSO had a bit in his article "Peculiar Institutions" where he pointed out that a lot of the Empire's activities are more than likely illegal even under its own laws.

The fact is, Palpy adheres to the "laws" of the Empire only when it suits him or when it doesn't cost him anything. He'll flaunt them as readily as he flaunted Republic law (or even Sith tradition/law/whatever) if it means achieving whatever he wants. He'll just do his utomst to avoid getting caught out doing it (which is why he so often gets other people to do his dirty work, while he remains the "loveable old but somewhat out of touch Emperor")

Edit: And like the Rebels, I think its a fairly "no duh" situation that the Empire is no more "all evil" than the Rebellion is "all good". IE just as the Rebellion can have elements of terrorists AND Freedom fightrs/guerillas, the Empire can have its good/noble side as well as its bad side. The fact of the matter is though that the bad side does have a substantial representation (it suits Palpatine's purposes.) but its not neccesarily all-encompassing or neccesarily dominant (the "law-abiding/good" side serves his purposes as much as the evil/wicked side does.)

[Srynerson]

Addressing the OP's first question, it could have been an act of terrorism depending on the laws of the Galactic Empire. Here's the official U.S. legal definition of "domestic terrorism" (18 U.S.C. § 2331):

(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Assuming the Empire has a similar law on the books, then the Rebel's attempt to capture or kill the Emperor at Endor was unequivocally an act of "terrorism". Imputing a moral dimension to the term "terrorism" is simply a way of saying there are some terrorists we like ("freedom fighters") and some we don't ("terrorists").

[K. A. Pital]

Rebels are definetely terrorists. Terrorist is merely a legal definition without a moral bearing - it's only today's buzzword slogans which made "terrorist" sound as the epitome of evil.

Terrorists of the early XX century, revolutionaries in the XIX century wore the "terrorist" title with pride and had thousands of people sympathetic to their cause.

I guess it's really "terrorists we don't like" and "terrorists we support" that makes a difference.

Empire #13 and several other EU works show that the Rebellion was involved not only in fighting Imperial armed forces, but also in acts of anti-civilian nature, suicide bombing, et cetera.

Certainly the Rebellion was a revolutionary group which aims were to overthrow a legal government with the use of armed force. Does that make them less sympathetic? Not really.

[TC Pilot]

The idea that it’s acceptable to execute protestors in mass numbers simply because they failed to disperse after being ordered to do so is almost as despicable as saying that their lives are meaningless without larger numbers. I fail to see the value in a legal system that considers death a suitable punishment for simple civil disobedience.

It is not as if the consequences of their violating the law were a mystery. The Empire's legal system is draconian, true. Morality and legality are vastly different, however.

I acknowledged the positive aspects of the Galactic Empire well before this exchange, as my previous posts should demonstrate. The only thing this discussion has left me with is a rather sour view of your sense of justice.

My sense of justice has nothing to do with this. I simply dissociate my own beliefs from those of an entirely foreign cultural, philosophical, and historical entity the GFFA's civilization is.

Saying that the Empire is evil has nothing to do with how well the people in a privilaged class in it live.

I'm glad you've finally come to this realization.

Palpatine has been a puppetmaster behind so many evil acts up to that point you somehow think that by ANH he suddenly is now clueless and out of the loop?

I'm not surprised you can't really grasp the difference between the two situations.

And didn't you play Tie Fighter? From the moment you are transfered to Harkov's fleet the Secret Order has you collecting evidence to hang Harcov. Doesn't sound like they were letting him get away with it at all.

Who are you directing this to? Me, or Surlethe? I certainly never claimed the Empire let Harkov get away with his treason.

You argument that the Death Star being physically complete but not operational when the Senate was disolved is irrelivent, as it was operational within hours of that meeting. It is clear that only minor issues were all that were needed to get things ready to go.

When exactly did this point matter? The Senate was full of conspirators and outright traitors. It needed to be suspended.

[Isolder74]

It was the legitimate ruling body of the Empire. So you are saying that if the President does not like what Congress is voting then he can simply dissolve the body at a whim and it somehow be legal for him to do it?

The FACT THAT IT WAS 'SUSPENDED' WITH A LIE puts a nail in the coffin of your statement.

Now its up to you to prove, beyond the tiny handful that we know were traitors, Leia and Mon Mothma(who had resigned already) NAME THE TRAITORS. Being sympathetic is not the same as being a traitor.

[TC Pilot]

It was the legitimate ruling body of the Empire.

You're, of course, mistaken. HIM Palpatine I ruled the Empire. The Imperial Senate was the legislature.

So you are saying that if the President does not like what Congress is voting then he can simply dissolve the body at a whim and it somehow be legal for him to do it?

As hard as it may be to believe, the Imperial government is not the United States government.

[Isolder74]

It was the legitimate ruling body of the Empire.

You're, of course, mistaken. HIM Palpatine I ruled the Empire. The Imperial Senate was the legislature.

They are the governing body. They make the laws. Palps did not have absolute authority until he disolved the Senate. If it was not an important part of the running of the Empire then the officer in the Death Star would not have said what he did. He Said, "Impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control with out the bureaucracy?"

Tarking replies, "The Imperial Governers now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line, Fear of this Battle Station.

This action by the Emperor disenfranchised every non Imperial ruler in the Galaxy! How could that possible be legal? Only legal in an oppressive dictatorship. It was the last move to destroy the Republic forever. The Alliance was fighting to resore the Republic. Under your veiws, they are criminals no matter what they are fighting for. If you are an American you live under the legacy of the founding fathers who committed treason against the British Empire. They are called patriots and freedom fighters but if they lost they will have all been hanged. If you are not where are you from?

So you are saying that if the President does not like what Congress is voting then he can simply dissolve the body at a whim and it somehow be legal for him to do it?

As hard as it may be to believe, the Imperial government is not the United States government.

I never said that it was. It was an example. For crying out loud would you have rather I used The Roman Empire as an example? The truth of the matter is that the action was illegal otherwise why LIE about it in order to do it?

[Isolder74]

Saying that the Empire is evil has nothing to do with how well the people in a privilaged class in it live.

I'm glad you've finally come to this realization.

The realization of what? That your argument that the end of the Empire disrupted members of the priviledged special class of the Empire that somehow makes the Evil things done good? You are spouting the moronic things Neo-Nazis spout about Hitler!

Palpatine has been a puppetmaster behind so many evil acts up to that point you somehow think that by ANH he suddenly is now clueless and out of the loop?

I'm not surprised you can't really grasp the difference between the two situations.

Did you even watch episodes 1 - 3? Palpatine came to power through direct act of treason in the background! Playing both sides at the same time! Then you claim that 20 years later he has no idea what's going on in his own Empire! That's simply just moronic! He may not have his fingers in the Alliance but how can you claim that he knows nothing about the atrocities commited in his name? He may be putting on a smilley faced image for the benifit of his happy core worlds and using his 'seclusion' to give himself plausible denyability. As far as I see it that makes his actions even worse! he is giving his approval by inaction which as far as Evil acts is far worse if not pulling strings in the background like he has been doing from the start, which is MUCH more likely.

[TC Pilot]

They are the governing body. They make the laws. Palps did not have absolute authority until he disolved the Senate. If it was not an important part of the running of the Empire then the officer in the Death Star would not have said what he did. He Said, "Impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control with out the bureaucracy?"

There is a massive difference between the bureaucracy and who it is who rules the Empire. Would you say that it was the Moffs who ruled the Empire after Yavin? The Emperor was both head of state and government and of course sat on the throne. At best, you could argue that the Senate and Emperor ruled cooperatively, but I doubt you would make such a claim.

This action by the Emperor disenfranchised every non Imperial ruler in the Galaxy! How could that possible be legal?

Disenfranchisement has nothing to do with legality. Any state in existence could theoretically amend a constitution to abolish voting rights and still be within legal limits. You should know this.

Under your veiws, they are criminals no matter what they are fighting for.

Nonsense. If they were fighting for th Empire, they would not be criminals.

If you are an American you live under the legacy of the founding fathers who committed treason against the British Empire. They are called patriots and freedom fighters but if they lost they will have all been hanged. If you are not where are you from?

This is irrelevant. The American revolution has nothing to do with the Rebel Alliance's insurrection against the Galactic Empire, nor are they comparable.

I never said that it was. It was an example.

An example needs to be relevant to the argument. If you are trying to compare apples to apples, don't try showing an orange.

For crying out loud would you have rather I used The Roman Empire as an example?

That would be an inappropriate example, too.

The realization of what? That your argument that the end of the Empire disrupted members of the priviledged special class of the Empire that somehow makes the Evil things done good?

You would do well to take note that I never even attempted to rationalize the Empire's "evil" actions because of the turmoil caused by its downfall. That was not my argument.

Did you even watch episodes 1 - 3? Palpatine came to power through direct act of treason in the background! Playing both sides at the same time! Then you claim that 20 years later he has no idea what's going on in his own Empire! That's simply just moronic!

The idea that masterminding his own ascent to power translates into complete omniscience of the actions of his millions and billions and trillions of subordinates is indeed a curious one.

[Isolder74]

No sir your claim that he playing secluded so he does not know what is going on is moronic.

And how is it using an orange Palpitine's formal title was President of the Senate.

The American Revolution is relevent BECAUSE they are both fighting for the same stated ideals.

Many times we have shown that the Rebels had very good reasons to be fighting the Empire.

Under the strictest definition the Rebels can be called terrorist but that does not change the fact they they are freedom fighters. Under the strictest of definitions the Americans were terrorists.

[TC Pilot]

And how is it using an orange Palpitine's formal title was President of the Senate.

Which has absolutely no comparison to the United States' government. Even if the title were remotely similar, you would have to prove that each title in fact granted the same rights, immunities, powers, and privelages. Since they do not, your example is poorly chosen.

The American Revolution is relevent BECAUSE they are both fighting for the same stated ideals.

Hmm. Perhaps so. But then, what is your point?

Many times we have shown that the Rebels had very good reasons to be fighting the Empire.

I am not interested in reasons. I am interested in results.

Under the strictest definition the Rebels can be called terrorist but that does not change the fact they they are freedom fighters.

I made note of this in my very first post in this thread.

[Isolder74]

And how is it using an orange Palpitine's formal title was President of the Senate.

Which has absolutely no comparison to the United States' government. Even if the title were remotely similar, you would have to prove that each title in fact granted the same rights, immunities, powers, and privelages. Since they do not, your example is poorly chosen.

The American Revolution is relevent BECAUSE they are both fighting for the same stated ideals.

Hmm. Perhaps so. But then, what is your point?

Many times we have shown that the Rebels had very good reasons to be fighting the Empire.

I am not interested in reasons. I am interested in results.

Under the strictest definition the Rebels can be called terrorist but that does not change the fact they they are freedom fighters.

I made note of this in my very first post in this thread.

You just don't get it do you? The disovling of the Senate was a complete declaration of Martial Law. Since it was the Senate that made the policy of the Empire they are similar enough to the Congress of the United States. It is the Legislative body of the Empire. It was the only recourse of having a say in their governemnt the people had in the Empire.

The Senate was disovled by the use of a lie when there was never any plan to let it convene again. It was a direct session of the rights of everyone in the Empire. As such the Rebellion is very justified in doing what they can to take Palpatine out of power and restore the legitimate governing body of the Republic.

As far as results...those speak for themselves, with the destruction of the second Death Star the Empire fell apart and the Republic was restored.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

If it was telling enough, the destruction of Alderaan was blamed on the Rebels......

Yes yes, the Rebels even own a Death Star.

[TC Pilot]

You just don't get it do you? The disovling of the Senate was a complete declaration of Martial Law. Since it was the Senate that made the policy of the Empire they are similar enough to the Congress of the United States. It is the Legislative body of the Empire. It was the only recourse of having a say in their governemnt the people had in the Empire.

Do you just randomly pick things to say in every post, or is there actually an attempt at a cohesive argument underneath all that? I am curious, because it seems every post you have some new random point to make that still doesn't seem to have much of anything to do with what's been said. The legality of Palpatine's actions seem to have dissapeared from your argument entirely.

The Senate was disovled by the use of a lie when there was never any plan to let it convene again. It was a direct session of the rights of everyone in the Empire. As such the Rebellion is very justified in doing what they can to take Palpatine out of power and restore the legitimate governing body of the Republic.

Out of curiousity, do you find the abrogation of rights to be more important than popular will in justifying rebellion and civil war? Because, when you look at what the people wanted, it's clear the Rebellion has no justification.

If you are to gain anything from this argument you should realize that the Empire was a popular political body.

As far as results...those speak for themselves, with the destruction of the second Death Star the Empire fell apart and the Republic was restored.

It is almost needless to say I was referring to the results of the respective governments' rule, rather than their longevity. Keep in mind the loss of the Death Star II would have been unsubstantial if not for Palpatine's death and subsequent decision to destroy the Empire. And I should hardly need to point out the New Republic actually ruled for less time than the Empire.