Palpatine's Empire, NO Death Star(s)

[Ghost Rider]

Again, what you brought up was your suppositions and a couple of minor points that do not even cover the fact that ALLIANCE in canon were unable to gain any major ground until the death of PALPATINE. So yes, on your points...you are a fucking moron.

And also you took SCRawl out of context since his post was about....hmmm what the Empire could do with a Death Star, with Lazarus making a point about that this would aid the rebellion and mine about how the fuck would they revolt if they aren't on parity.

Thus your entire blithering literally was an out of context post because you wanted a debate.

Again, read the post you ignorant retard, not my problem that's you cannot do this.

[Warsie]

Again, what you brought up was your suppositions and a couple of minor points that do not even cover the fact that ALLIANCE in canon were unable to gain any major ground until the death of PALPATINE. So yes, on your points...you are a fucking moron.

So you're a only-movie person who focuses on what is blatantly stated in the movies then? Then I have nothing to say. You think differently.

Thus your entire blithering literally was an out of context post because you wanted a debate.

I did NOT want a debate. I was answering you.

Again, read the post you ignorant retard, not my problem that's you cannot do this.

I did, dumbshit.

[Darth Ruinus]

So you're a only-movie person who focuses on what is blatantly stated in the movies then? Then I have nothing to say. You think differently.

I'm pretty sure its in the EU also that the Rebellion before the death of Palpatine was an incredibly small part of the galaxy.

[Havok]

So you're a only-movie person who focuses on what is blatantly stated in the movies then? Then I have nothing to say. You think differently.

I'm pretty sure its in the EU also that the Rebellion before the death of Palpatine was an incredibly small part of the galaxy.

Well it had to be at least large enough to "pose a threat" and allow Palpatine to use it as an excuse to disband the Imperial Senate for the duration of it, which was the public reason given for doing so.

[Lazarus]

The flaw in your argument is you are trying to compare the Rebellion with earthbound insurgencies. In order for the Rebel Alliance to inflict any significant damage or have even a lasting impact, they must possess weapons and logistical support for something vastly larger than bands of local guerillas.

Indeed, virtually all the Rebel Alliance's equipment and war materials are derived from support, secretly or otherwise, donated by dissenting planetary governments. The Death Star would then be the deterrent to such dissent, because no planetary government would risk obliteration. That is why Tarkin declared "No star system will dare oppose the Emperor now."

Fair point, though it's not as if the Empire was unable to effectively destroy planets beforehand (for all intents and purposes), although I suppose if the planet in question possessed shields and other defences it could get messy.

I'm pretty sure its in the EU also that the Rebellion before the death of Palpatine was an incredibly small part of the galaxy.

Havokeff is right, even in ANH the Alliance was a significant enough threat to worry General Tagge, who given his position of power in both the Imperial military and galactic politics is well placed to make such a judgement. The EU depicts a great many examples of the Alliance posing a significant threat as an insurgency to the Empire; no, they aren't fighting conventional warfare, because they don't have the capability, but they ARE having an effect.

[Ghost Rider]

Again, what you brought up was your suppositions and a couple of minor points that do not even cover the fact that ALLIANCE in canon were unable to gain any major ground until the death of PALPATINE. So yes, on your points...you are a fucking moron.

So you're a only-movie person who focuses on what is blatantly stated in the movies then? Then I have nothing to say. You think differently.

So tell us where in the movie they were gaining major ground?

Oh wait your first example was from

X-Wing the game.

You care to show how that's from the movie again?

Thus your entire blithering literally was an out of context post because you wanted a debate.

I did NOT want a debate. I was answering you.

Strange that you didn't. So I guess evasion is the only way you can debate, you lying fuck?

Again, read the post you ignorant retard, not my problem that's you cannot do this.

I did, dumbshit.

Apparently not, because your examples are pretty easily handled and you have yet to show a concrete example against the thought of what the Empire versus the Alliance with the DS in operation.

But hey, keep deluding because you literally did not show and after your initial examples you blither how you answered the question, when the movies themselves demonstrated something completely different.

[bz249]

With the DS in operation, any significant rebellion would be doomed to failure. Consider this scenario.

Empire (broadcast to anyone who wants to hear): Rebels! Lay down your arms or we'll blow up Alderaan.

Rebels: Bah, he doesn't have the firepower to do that.

Empire: Boom. Lay down your arms or we'll blow up Corellia.

Rebels: Holy shit, he did it! But he wouldn't do it again. Would he?

Empire: Boom. Lay down your arms or we'll blow up <fill in the blank>.

Pretty soon the rebels would get the idea that they won't be able to continue to operate. That's why it was so important to blow it up -- not to merely escape Yavin, but to actually destroy the DS.

This is the same flawed idea that every single dictatorial government fighting an insurrection has had, and which inevitably only causes more support for the guerrillas. In the same way as executing civilian hostages does NOT cause guerillas to lose support, but rather swells their ranks, killing billions of innocent people will INCREASE support for the Rebellion, not decrease it. You seriously think a government executing billions of it's own people would make an insurgency give up and go home? Hells no, because every single citizen who doesn't like the idea that their government can kill them at any time will join the Rebellion.

Just like as it happened in the Boer Wars, the Malayan rebellion, at the Tienanmen Place, the recent Myanmari Revolt... and a number of times. History has quite a number of proofs that one the most efficient ways of suppressing a guerrilla movement is neglecting the warriors and target the supporting infrastructure (i.e. the civilian populace). That's why the Battle of Yavin was a useless gesture, something such a master of psychological warfare, like Tarkin should have known.

[bz249]

Didnt someone on this board make a calc that the Death Star is equal to about 5 billion ISDs? So Palpatine doesnt build the Death Star, but the Tarkin Doctrine is enforced by the 5 billion ISD fleets. In which case, I think it would have been harder for the Rebellion, since all those extra ISDs going around are going to make any battles they have, or even bringin up a fleet, extremely hard.

Yes, but the whole point of the Imperial power structure was to allow a more and more direct controll over the GFFA for Palpatine. A fleet of 5 billion capital ship is impossible to manage even for the greatest Sith Lord in history. To create an OoB for such high number of ships (which are not like grunts, but true weapons of mass destruction) a hell lot of intermetiate level is required, so controll would slip out from the hands of the Inner Circle.

[Lazarus]

Just like as it happened in the Boer Wars, the Malayan rebellion, at the Tienanmen Place, the recent Myanmari Revolt... and a number of times. History has quite a number of proofs that one the most efficient ways of suppressing a guerrilla movement is neglecting the warriors and target the supporting infrastructure (i.e. the civilian populace). That's why the Battle of Yavin was a useless gesture, something such a master of psychological warfare, like Tarkin should have known.

Tiananmen Square? Myanmar protests? You're using peaceful protests of a few ten thousand civilians as an example of guerrilla warfare?

These AREN'T guerrilla actions. History DOES NOT show that targeting the civilian populace puts down guerrillas, it suggests that it makes the problem worse. If the government kills your family, does it make you fearful of their power and hence you stay away from partisans? No, you join the bloody partisans to get back at the bastards who just killed your family.

And how the hell would a victory as Yavin have been a useless gesture? It would have caused significant loss to the Alliance leadership, and while it certainly wouldn't have proven fatal it would have been a decisive defeat. You can't win a guerrilla war through battles like Yavin, but if the Alliance is stupid enough to stick it's head up like that then the Empire should try to shoot it off.