Likelihood of a Second Galactic Empire?

[Shroom Man 777]

Well the USAF have bombed bridges, power plants (they knocked out the water supply of the Novi Sad cardiology clinic) and not in the distant past, but eleven years ago.

In WWII they dropped two nuclear bombs to two Japanese cities to shorten the war. Before that they created artificial firestorms in Hamburg killing at least 50.000 civilians and make destroying 250.000 homes, since it was an important German industrial center. Those actions resulted in much higher casualities relative to the total population than the destruction of the Alderaan.

Earlier, in the Civil War Union troops deliberately target civilian infrastructure in the Atlanta and Shenandoah Valley campaign to reduce the warfighting ability of the South.

And they were the good guys in those campaigns.

You're a shithead. The USAF does carpet bombing because its bombs are shitty, but now it has smart bombs and GPS-guided sonic electronic ball breakers because - aside from precision and accuracy - they want to minimize casualties too. Did the Civil War Union troops deliberately kill every fucking man, woman and child in entire villages or towns or cities? Because that's what the Empire did. They could've done it any OTHER way, but they didn't. Hell, Alderaan - as I've previously said, dumbass - was an IMPERIAL planet, with a seat in the Imperial senate! Just because some rebels are in it, doesn't justify at all killing EVERY FUCKING PERSON ON THE FUCKING PLANET, you fuck.

Yes war is hell and most military commander would easily pick a path which results in an earlier victory with less casuality on his side. From a pure warfighting point of view demonstrating the ability and willingness to destroy any world which supports the insurgents is a prudent decision. This alone does not make the Empire evil, only harsh.

The fact that the Empire is evil we know from other sources.

It does make it evil, you stupid shit.

They killed every fucking man, woman and child on that planet NEEDLESSLY, you moronic piece of crap. The world didn't even attack them at all! Alderaan wasn't even an 'enemy' world of another nation warring with the Empire, it was an Imperial planet. Hell, there were probably shitloads of law-abiding Imperial citizens and Imperial government people and Imperial military people on that fucking planet. Leia wasn't some foreign dignitary, she was a member of the Imperial Senate - the Empire's own government. And they blow up one of their own worlds for no good fucking reason? Hah. That's not even a remotely reasonable act.

[Tiriol]

Well the USAF have bombed bridges, power plants (they knocked out the water supply of the Novi Sad cardiology clinic) and not in the distant past, but eleven years ago.

In WWII they dropped two nuclear bombs to two Japanese cities to shorten the war. Before that they created artificial firestorms in Hamburg killing at least 50.000 civilians and make destroying 250.000 homes, since it was an important German industrial center. Those actions resulted in much higher casualities relative to the total population than the destruction of the Alderaan.

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

Earlier, in the Civil War Union troops deliberately target civilian infrastructure in the Atlanta and Shenandoah Valley campaign to reduce the warfighting ability of the South.

And they were the good guys in those campaigns.

The fact that something was done in history does not actually justify it. In Roman times, it was a general practice to sell people into slavery after they were conquered and in extreme cases to destroy everything there was to destroy and to salt the earth and yet it's still not brought up as something "maybe a little bit ugly, but on average OK". You do know that even German commanders refused Hitler's orders to destroy everything they could (including a relatively unknown town with the name of "Paris" attached to it...) and that even Albert Speer, Hitler's valued architect, considered him insane because of those orders, don't you?

Yes war is hell and most military commander would easily pick a path which results in an earlier victory with less casuality on his side. From a pure warfighting point of view demonstrating the ability and willingness to destroy any world which supports the insurgents is a prudent decision. This alone does not make the Empire evil, only harsh.

The fact that the Empire is evil we know from other sources.

Just saying "war is hell" doesn't justify anything. In fact, if you tried to use that justification in a trial you would be laughed at and then sentenced for war crimes and left to rot. I could say "war is hell" and rape just about every woman I could set my sights on if there was a war going on, but that would just prove that I am a disgusting piece of human filth that needs something to justify his brutal and sociopathic nature to the rest of the world. "War is hell" is indeed a statement of fact, but just as saying "gravity is a bitch"doesn't justify someone pushing people down the stairs, it also doesn't justify war crimes or crimes against humanity (or against sentience, as they call them in SW universe).

We KNOW that the Empire is evil from the films themselves: even in ANH they ignore diplomatic immunity (Leia's consular ship), kill innocent people (Jawas, the Lars family), blow an entire planet with billions living on it (Alderaan) and generally act like assholes. In later films they decide that this off-hands approach to evil isn't enough so they move to personal evil by strangling people to death or electrocuting and torturing them because they can.

[Shroom Man 777]

Oh no Triol lemme pull out some half-assed shit from history in a vain attempt at justificaterizing the Empire's evil shitty actions because I am a limp bitch who can't get it on without the sight of spiffy uniforms and gunmetal grey spacecocks full of incompetent stormietroopers who can't discharge their blasters hard enough and get their faces eaten by ewoks! oh no! somebody call a nuers! a nuers! war is hell, look at me i'm so hurf hurf, gloss over entire planets being blown up because i'm a war WHOREWHOREWHORE, it dont matter if a billion-million-quintiminiminillion people die because the USAF did something amoral during the Battle of Tripoli and emerged from the Napoleonic Wars as good guys after carpet bombing Hannibals armies and raping all of nanjing! the Empire is good! reallies!

[Ritterin Sophia]

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

In order for your analogy to be correct the entirety of Japan's population and industry would have to exist in an underground bunker, invulnerable to any and all conventional attacks.

We KNOW that the Empire is evil from the films themselves: even in ANH they ignore diplomatic immunity (Leia's consular ship),

Would you accept an argument for diplomatic immunity if Bjarne Kallis was caught running plans to a Christian terrorist group to plan an attack on the Finnish Naval Academy?

blow an entire planet with billions living on it (Alderaan)

An entire planet that was acting as a training and supply center for what the Empire felt was a terrorist organization and were protected by heavy defenses that could hold off everything the Empire could throw at it for months or years and even after that's down it's a pretty safe bet Alderaan could have some pretty extensive deep underground bunkers, so even once you get through you need to BDZ the place anyhow.

I'm not arguing that the Rebellion weren't right to fight the Empire or that it was totally cool for the Empire to act like evil dicks, but your analogy is flawed and those three things you wish to condemn them for are hardly without justification. I understand you're trying to use only the movies, but if you really want to show the full malevolence of the Empire don't use a planet that was complicit in terrorist acts and turned itself into a valid target, especially when you have a perfectly good example of an actually pacifist planet.

Edit: Oh and I forgot to add that you left out torturing a prisoner of war.

[bz249]

Just saying "war is hell" doesn't justify anything. In fact, if you tried to use that justification in a trial you would be laughed at and then sentenced for war crimes and left to rot. I could say "war is hell" and rape just about every woman I could set my sights on if there was a war going on, but that would just prove that I am a disgusting piece of human filth that needs something to justify his brutal and sociopathic nature to the rest of the world. "War is hell" is indeed a statement of fact, but just as saying "gravity is a bitch"doesn't justify someone pushing people down the stairs, it also doesn't justify war crimes or crimes against humanity (or against sentience, as they call them in SW universe).

We KNOW that the Empire is evil from the films themselves: even in ANH they ignore diplomatic immunity (Leia's consular ship), kill innocent people (Jawas, the Lars family), blow an entire planet with billions living on it (Alderaan) and generally act like assholes. In later films they decide that this off-hands approach to evil isn't enough so they move to personal evil by strangling people to death or electrocuting and torturing them because they can.

Okay, does raping every women offer a path which shorten the war/grants victory to you? Because in the ROTJ it is stated:

When completed, this ultimate
weapon will spell certain doom
for the small band of rebels
struggling to restore freedom
to the galaxy...

Thus operational Death Star means automatic Imperial victory. The destruction of Alderaan was an attack against a high profile strategic target*, supposedly break the will of the Rebellion and make any further insurgency impossible (indeed the whole second half of Episode IV is about the absolute neccesity to destroy the Death Star). They did it not because they were evil, but because that was the easiest way to achieve victory.

*Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

Nope the closest analogy would be to use nuclear weapons during the invasion of Grenada. Alderaan represented a very tiny fraction of the Galactic population.

[Tiriol]

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

In order for your analogy to be correct the entirety of Japan's population and industry would have to exist in an underground bunker, invulnerable to any and all conventional attacks.

That is also incorrect: the Clone Wars pitted two major powers, both which had planets with planetary shields against each other, and still worlds were being conquered and besieged. Cato Neimoidia, an important planet for the Trade Federation and Viceroy Gunray in particular, fell to the Republic and I'm pretty sure that a major world like that did have a working planetary shield. The Clone Wars prove that you can conquer worlds without superweapons like the Death Star or even a torpedo sphere, but it takes more time and effort (Pellaeon remarked as much in The Last Command during the Battle of Ukio).

We KNOW that the Empire is evil from the films themselves: even in ANH they ignore diplomatic immunity (Leia's consular ship),

Would you accept an argument for diplomatic immunity if Bjarne Kallis was caught running plans to a Christian terrorist group to plan an attack on the Finnish Naval Academy?

blow an entire planet with billions living on it (Alderaan)

An entire planet that was acting as a training and supply center for what the Empire felt was a terrorist organization and were protected by heavy defenses that could hold off everything the Empire could throw at it for months or years and even after that's down it's a pretty safe bet Alderaan could have some pretty extensive deep underground bunkers, so even once you get through you need to BDZ the place anyhow.

In case of Kallis, he actually doesn't have a diplomatic immunity when Finnish affairs are concerned; the fact that Princess Leia enjoyed diplomatic immunity is more a concern of the Empire's state of affairs which was still, apparenly, more like a confederation than an US-style government. Violating diplomatic immunity isn't evil, per se, as you noted, but it does show a somewhat cavalier attitude about international (or interstellar) law.

And we only know for certain that the House of Organa was politically involved with the Rebellion along with several invidual Alderaanians (Leia's aide, Winter, for example). And Tycho Celchu was an Imperial pilot loyal to his government, as was his parents and family, and they got blown up along with other Alderaanians. To claim that the entire planet was full of terrorist cells and sympathizers is a pretty big leap of faith.

I'm not arguing that the Rebellion weren't right to fight the Empire or that it was totally cool for the Empire to act like evil dicks, but your analogy is flawed and those three things you wish to condemn them for are hardly without justification. I understand you're trying to use only the movies, but if you really want to show the full malevolence of the Empire don't use a planet that was complicit in terrorist acts and turned itself into a valid target, especially when you have a perfectly good example of an actually pacifist planet.

Edit: Oh and I forgot to add that you left out torturing a prisoner of war.

We can indeed wage a war of words about justification behind Alderaan's destruction and Vader's callous attitude towards Leia's diplomatic status, so I'm willing to leave it at that, if you so wish. It's more about nit-picking than anything else, really.

Just saying "war is hell" doesn't justify anything. In fact, if you tried to use that justification in a trial you would be laughed at and then sentenced for war crimes and left to rot. I could say "war is hell" and rape just about every woman I could set my sights on if there was a war going on, but that would just prove that I am a disgusting piece of human filth that needs something to justify his brutal and sociopathic nature to the rest of the world. "War is hell" is indeed a statement of fact, but just as saying "gravity is a bitch"doesn't justify someone pushing people down the stairs, it also doesn't justify war crimes or crimes against humanity (or against sentience, as they call them in SW universe).

We KNOW that the Empire is evil from the films themselves: even in ANH they ignore diplomatic immunity (Leia's consular ship), kill innocent people (Jawas, the Lars family), blow an entire planet with billions living on it (Alderaan) and generally act like assholes. In later films they decide that this off-hands approach to evil isn't enough so they move to personal evil by strangling people to death or electrocuting and torturing them because they can.

Okay, does raping every women offer a path which shorten the war/grants victory to you? Because in the ROTJ it is stated:

When completed, this ultimate
weapon will spell certain doom
for the small band of rebels
struggling to restore freedom
to the galaxy...

Thus operational Death Star means automatic Imperial victory. The destruction of Alderaan was an attack against a high profile strategic target*, supposedly break the will of the Rebellion and make any further insurgency impossible (indeed the whole second half of Episode IV is about the absolute neccesity to destroy the Death Star). They did it not because they were evil, but because that was the easiest way to achieve victory.

*Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration

I could justify the raping by simply saying it proves to the enemy that unless they surrender, everyone will get the same treatment - basically it's a weapon of terror. Just like the Death Star... Only that the Death Star wipes out its target completely. And guess what? Neither practice - raping everyone with a pulse and a vagina and blowing up planets - accomplished what they tried to do: history has shown that despite armies raping their enemies' womenfolk, the enemies didn't surrender; and the destruction of Alderaan actually galvanized the resistance and convinced many to become Rebels, entire worlds in fact. The importance of the Death Star's destruction is indeed without any doubt, but it still failed to impose Tarkin's doctrine as it was intended.

And guess what? The military doesn't, at least a civilized one, always choose the easiest way. Otherwise there wouldn't be anything left of Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam etc. It's called having some ethics and other considerations aside from totally destroying everything. And judging by their previous actions, the Empire would have used the Death Star again and again even after any actual resistance was gone.

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

Nope the closest analogy would be to use nuclear weapons during the invasion of Grenada. Alderaan represented a very tiny fraction of the Galactic population.

Is that all you can say? You try to defend the mass murder of billions by saying that it didn't actually affect THAT many beings on galactic scale. You love your Stalin quotes, don't you?

[bz249]

[




I could justify the raping by simply saying it proves to the enemy that unless they surrender, everyone will get the same treatment - basically it's a weapon of terror. Just like the Death Star... Only that the Death Star wipes out its target completely. And guess what? Neither practice - raping everyone with a pulse and a vagina and blowing up planets - accomplished what they tried to do: history has shown that despite armies raping their enemies' womenfolk, the enemies didn't surrender; and the destruction of Alderaan actually galvanized the resistance and convinced many to become Rebels, entire worlds in fact. The importance of the Death Star's destruction is indeed without any doubt, but it still failed to impose Tarkin's doctrine as it was intended.

Well after the destruction of the Alderaan the Empire lost the Death Star, so we do not know what kind of effects it could have. However both the Imperials and the Rebels agreed that it is the ultimate weapon and whoever controls it controls the Galaxy. In our history there was no wars between first class powers in the last 65 years. Partly because of the fear of nuclear weapons.

And guess what? The military doesn't, at least a civilized one, always choose the easiest way. Otherwise there wouldn't be anything left of Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam etc. It's called having some ethics and other considerations aside from totally destroying everything. And judging by their previous actions, the Empire would have used the Death Star again and again even after any actual resistance was gone.

It is a rather difficult question to choose the right way to fight a war. Taking a path which prolongs the war however is rarely the ethical one. As for the Empire and the further usage of the Death Star, knowing they conducted numerous BDZ strikes, yes there is a chance that they use it again and again. Though most of them would like to rule the Galaxy instead of destroying it (Palpatine is a different story).

Is that all you can say? You try to defend the mass murder of billions by saying that it didn't actually affect THAT many beings on galactic scale. You love your Stalin quotes, don't you?

Again war and Galaxy, the Galactic Civil War take a death toll orders of magnitude above the destruction of Alderaan. For every massacred Alderaanian there are thousands of dead non-Alderaanians. Thus it is not like massacring 10% of the world population. Or do you think that nuking a remote island is not serious enough?

[Ritterin Sophia]

That is also incorrect: the Clone Wars pitted two major powers, both which had planets with planetary shields against each other, and still worlds were being conquered and besieged. Cato Neimoidia, an important planet for the Trade Federation and Viceroy Gunray in particular, fell to the Republic and I'm pretty sure that a major world like that did have a working planetary shield. The Clone Wars prove that you can conquer worlds without superweapons like the Death Star or even a torpedo sphere, but it takes more time and effort (Pellaeon remarked as much in The Last Command during the Battle of Ukio).

If you're attempting to make a rational argument you're failing completely, because I think you'll find the Death Star wasn't completed until nearly two decades after that war.

In case of Kallis, he actually doesn't have a diplomatic immunity when Finnish affairs are concerned; the fact that Princess Leia enjoyed diplomatic immunity is more a concern of the Empire's state of affairs which was still, apparenly, more like a confederation than an US-style government. Violating diplomatic immunity isn't evil, per se, as you noted, but it does show a somewhat cavalier attitude about international (or interstellar) law.

So does hiding and training Rebels when you're supposedly a peaceful planet.

And we only know for certain that the House of Organa was politically involved with the Rebellion along with several invidual Alderaanians (Leia's aide, Winter, for example). And Tycho Celchu was an Imperial pilot loyal to his government, as was his parents and family, and they got blown up along with other Alderaanians. To claim that the entire planet was full of terrorist cells and sympathizers is a pretty big leap of faith.

Bail Organa was the Prince Consort to Queen Regent Breha. After Breha's death Bail became the Prince Regent, I assume until Leia became of age to be Queen Regent. Bail is the monarch and his heir apparent was Leia, the Organa Family became the ruling family and held authority over the entire planet. You don't get much more clear cut than that.

We can indeed wage a war of words about justification behind Alderaan's destruction and Vader's callous attitude towards Leia's diplomatic status, so I'm willing to leave it at that, if you so wish. It's more about nit-picking than anything else, really.

No we really can't since we don't know the conditions of her 'Diplomatic Immunity' for all we know it could be successfully argued that sedition is the limit according to statement made by Vader in ANH.

[Boeing 757]

They killed every fucking man, woman and child on that planet NEEDLESSLY

In deed.

The world didn't even attack them at all!

Not quite true though. Its government might not have attacked through direct military operations, but it did help the wrong side in the conflict and certainly that pissed off the Imperial leadershp. Protesting is one thing...but building warships for insurgents and supplying them with arms is some thing entirely different. Plus, raising planetary shields thereafter immediately when an Imperial battlestation enters the system without so much as asking its commander what in heck is going on, really demonstrates quite plainly how much tension existed between this planet and the Imperial leadership...and it could very well have been construed as a sign of further resistance by any leadership.

If any thing some sort of response was warranted for Alderaan. Of course, that does not negate the fact that blowing up the planet was both brutal and unnecessary--and therefore evil. There were other options that were available to the Empire and instead it decided to carry out the harshest measure, and all in order to spread fear of Imperial repraisal.

Leia wasn't some foreign dignitary, she was a member of the Imperial Senate - the Empire's own government.

She is also a part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor, and apparently so is the planetary government which she represents.

And they blow up one of their own worlds for no good fucking reason? Hah. That's not even a remotely reasonable act.

It could be argued that Alderaan was destroyed in order to dissuade other planets and sectors from resisting Imperial rule (as the Tarkin Doctrine would have it, thus ensuring 'peace'), and so I don't think that it was destroyed without a 'fucking reason.' However, I do agree that the act was evil, it was certainly counterproductive in the long run as events had it...and there were other methods by which the Emperor could have gotten what he desired.

[fractalsponge1]

No we really can't since we don't know the conditions of her 'Diplomatic Immunity' for all we know it could be successfully argued that sedition is the limit according to statement made by Vader in ANH.

If not sedition, attacking Imperial forces probably would be; Tantive IV fired on Devastator first.

Of course, there are so many better ways for the Empire to deal with the Alderaan situation in general than blowing up an entire member world, if it really gave a damn about its image.

[Tiriol]

That is also incorrect: the Clone Wars pitted two major powers, both which had planets with planetary shields against each other, and still worlds were being conquered and besieged. Cato Neimoidia, an important planet for the Trade Federation and Viceroy Gunray in particular, fell to the Republic and I'm pretty sure that a major world like that did have a working planetary shield. The Clone Wars prove that you can conquer worlds without superweapons like the Death Star or even a torpedo sphere, but it takes more time and effort (Pellaeon remarked as much in The Last Command during the Battle of Ukio).

If you're attempting to make a rational argument you're failing completely, because I think you'll find the Death Star wasn't completed until nearly two decades after that war.

... No. My statement is clear: worlds with planetary shields can be conquered even without a superweapon like the Death Star. It just takes more effort. The fact that worlds were conquered both by the Separatists and the Republic proves it, unless there is a proof floating around somewhere that all those worlds were without planetary shields.

In case of Kallis, he actually doesn't have a diplomatic immunity when Finnish affairs are concerned; the fact that Princess Leia enjoyed diplomatic immunity is more a concern of the Empire's state of affairs which was still, apparenly, more like a confederation than an US-style government. Violating diplomatic immunity isn't evil, per se, as you noted, but it does show a somewhat cavalier attitude about international (or interstellar) law.

So does hiding and training Rebels when you're supposedly a peaceful planet.

Is there any proof that even a sizeable minority or a majority of Alderaanians were Rebels or actively helping them? Or does simply having Rebel sympathies count (which was also not the reason why the Senate, which was known to have those sympathies, was dissolved: it was merely a last check on Palpatine's power and "disbanded for the duration of the emergency" so that the whole civil war could be fought "more efficiently" - or rather, as Palpatine wanted to fight it without having anyone telling him otherwise)?

And we only know for certain that the House of Organa was politically involved with the Rebellion along with several invidual Alderaanians (Leia's aide, Winter, for example). And Tycho Celchu was an Imperial pilot loyal to his government, as was his parents and family, and they got blown up along with other Alderaanians. To claim that the entire planet was full of terrorist cells and sympathizers is a pretty big leap of faith.

Bail Organa was the Prince Consort to Queen Regent Breha. After Breha's death Bail became the Prince Regent, I assume until Leia became of age to be Queen Regent. Bail is the monarch and his heir apparent was Leia, the Organa Family became the ruling family and held authority over the entire planet. You don't get much more clear cut than that.

So because the ruling family engaged in rebellion - in secret, actually, since there apparently wasn't any proof of their rebellion before Leia blew their cover during the Death Star plans' acquisition - the whole planet, along with billions of sentient living beings living there peacefully, has to go the way of supernova? Is there any proof that a majority of the Alderaanians were actually Rebels, or that there was even a sizeable minority? Having Rebel sympathies does not cut it, since Coruscant was not blown up (and it was apparently pretty obvious to just about everyone that the Imperial Senate, stationed on Coruscant, had Rebel sympathies)? We know that there were some Rebels on Alderaan, but we also know that there were some Rebels on Corellia or that they were hailing from it and Corellia wasn't punished in any shape or form. Alderaan was unceremoniously blown up under the justification of a demonstration and "they were asking for it".

We can indeed wage a war of words about justification behind Alderaan's destruction and Vader's callous attitude towards Leia's diplomatic status, so I'm willing to leave it at that, if you so wish. It's more about nit-picking than anything else, really.

No we really can't since we don't know the conditions of her 'Diplomatic Immunity' for all we know it could be successfully argued that sedition is the limit according to statement made by Vader in ANH.

And immediately after Vader rebuked the Princess, Vader's officer commented that it might be dangerous to hold her and that the Senate would become enraged, if we go by the novelization: Vader even mused as much in there. Of course, it's not like the Empire would care much for the rule of law or that Vader in particular would give a rat's ass about it. I'm willing to grant that diplomatic immunity covering sedition could be excluded, though: but based on Vader and stormtrooper officer's dialogue, they didn't have that much of an evidence or at least so much that it would please the Senate. Fortunately for them the Emperor saw fit to dissolve the Senate.

[Boeing 757]

If a lunatic megalomaniac and his cadre of vicious monsters had the ability to prevent a pan-galactic conflict from causing hundreds of trillions of deaths, then I'd have to say yes from an utilitarian perspective.

Except we're back at the assumption that the Empire was better suited to defeating the Vong, an assessment which has no real basis.

How so? The Empire owns (or at least dominates) virtually its entire galaxy, is optimized for war (being rather militaristic) and is ruled by a shadowy Sith Lord who tolerates no threats to his rule lest they benefit his causes. The NR is the complete antithesis of the Empire in all these aspects, so that assumption hardly seems to have no real basis.

Sure, Nom Anor says something to that effect, but Nom Anor is a known liar, a specialist in disinformation, so taking anything he says on face value is foolish.

Said words were spoken by him during a briefing, and as such would serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever for his side's morale by stating that the 'infidels' might have had a chance at defeating the Vong.

It's not like they're technologically more advanced than the New Republic, and logically they would have similar industrial capability

IIRC, Publius posted a thread here a while back, stating that the NR only held a million worlds in its grasp. This is insignifcant compared with the Billions of worlds (not a typo) which the Empire held during its height. Furthermore, much of the NR's infrastructure ought to be thoroughly reduced, considering that they've waged two major civil wars in the span of a century.

[Ritterin Sophia]

... No. My statement is clear: worlds with planetary shields can be conquered even without a superweapon like the Death Star. It just takes more effort. The fact that worlds were conquered both by the Separatists and the Republic proves it, unless there is a proof floating around somewhere that all those worlds were without planetary shields.

You can, just like the US could have invaded Japan and lost countless soldiers. The entire purpose of the Death Star was to bypass these shields.

Is there any proof that even a sizeable minority or a majority of Alderaanians were Rebels or actively helping them? Or does simply having Rebel sympathies count?

You mean like Winter after being persuaded by Bria Thranten's arguments and the convincing Bail to secretly arm his own people?

So because the ruling family engaged in rebellion - in secret, actually, since there apparently wasn't any proof of their rebellion before Leia blew their cover during the Death Star plans' acquisition - the whole planet, along with billions of sentient living beings living there peacefully, has to go the way of supernova?

The Force Unleashed remains canon no matter how much you dislike it.

Is there any proof that a majority of the Alderaanians were actually Rebels, or that there was even a sizeable minority?

You mean except Alderaan payrolling the Rebellion?

Having Rebel sympathies does not cut it, since Coruscant was not blown up (and it was apparently pretty obvious to just about everyone that the Imperial Senate, stationed on Coruscant, had Rebel sympathies)? We know that there were some Rebels on Alderaan, but we also know that there were some Rebels on Corellia or that they were hailing from it and Corellia wasn't punished in any shape or form. Alderaan was unceremoniously blown up under the justification of a demonstration and "they were asking for it".

No, it was blown up because they were complicit in sedition and treason and were being used to blackmail Leia into revealing the Yavin IV base.

And immediately after Vader rebuked the Princess, Vader's officer commented that it might be dangerous to hold her and that the Senate would become enraged, if we go by the novelization: Vader even mused as much in there. Of course, it's not like the Empire would care much for the rule of law or that Vader in particular would give a rat's ass about it. I'm willing to grant that diplomatic immunity covering sedition could be excluded, though: but based on Vader and stormtrooper officer's dialogue, they didn't have that much of an evidence or at least so much that it would please the Senate. Fortunately for them the Emperor saw fit to dissolve the Senate.

There's a lot of things that could enrage the Senate, but it wouldn't matter if it were still illegal.

[Darth Fanboy]

Oh goodie, another round of shrill appeals to emotion. Typical response of the butt-hurt whiney fanboy.

Hey you were the moron who got Hall of Shamed because you posture more than you argue, and when you do argue it's piss poor. I appeal to the large number of dead beings the Empire racked up before falling out of power.

But then again all those traitors on Alderaan deserved everything they got so why am I even posting?

[Bellosh101]

As I noted above, the Imperials could just have laid a siege on Alderaan and thus cut it off of the rest of the galaxy (good luck trying to fund an insurrection or do anything else if you can't even contact anybody else). They CAN do it: the HoloNet is the Imperial state's to run as they see fit (access to it was incredibly restricted) and physically getting in or out of Alderaan might be pretty problematic if there is an Imperial fleet surrounding it with strict orders of "nobody's going anywhere". Then there's also the possibility, if the authorities suspect Alderaan enough, to bombard the shield until at least a part of it goes down and send in the troops (like the Outer Rim sieges only two decades ago). But that would be time-consuming, so why bother: let's just blow things up and call it a day and score some points for Doctrine of Fear.

Of course, there are costs to sieging planets..... especially heavily defended ones. The ships used to besiege Alderaan won't be able to be used to maintain peace and order elsewhere in the galaxy. Without those extra ships to maintain peace and order, shit like convoys and such are left that much more vunerable to attacks by terrorist spacecraft. Plus there's the additional factor that sieges are not unstoppable; not only could blockade runners potentially slip men, weapons, and instructions past a siege, but there's always the possibility that an Alliance-sympathetic world with a strong navy like Dac could make an attempt to lift the Imperial siege by force, which would inevitebly lead to the Imperial Starfleet suffering massive humiliation.

Naturally, the Death Star solves such dilemmas; it frees ships from having to participate in costly sieges and instead lets them maintain the peace. In addition, it serves (in a galaxy without Luke Skywalker to fire torpedos down exhaust ports) as a perfect deterrent for any Imperial member world to no way whatsoever tolerate Rebel activity. For all the shitty stuff Tarkin did throughout his lifetime, there is no indication at all that he would carelessly destroy any other member worlds of the Empire besides Alderaan. Just like how the US didn't nuke the USSR during the Berlin blockade or China during the Korean War. Deterrent weapons like the nuclear bomb and the Death Star do not get used every time some sort of war or insurgency breaks out.

[Ritterin Sophia]

you posture more than you argue, and when you do argue it's piss poor....
But then again all those traitors on Alderaan deserved everything they got so why am I even posting?

In the same breath even.

[Darth Fanboy]

Snip

Hi, I see you are new. Can you please explain to me why you think an entire planet's population needed to be destroyed outright, including a number of children and young adults numbering at least in the low millions (probably a lot higher i'm guessing) had to be killed to? Oh wait I forgot it is totally bad ass to blow up a planet that makes it right! Furthermore, read down that list of atrocities I posted and see if you can spot the pattern that TC Pilot is apparently too dumb to figure out.

2.) Palpatine was the evilest Sith Lord of all time, who has to be stopped no matter of the cost, and one should join the first group which is capable of that. In their war agains the Empire the Rebels were the good guy, since they were the only group with a decent enough chance to kill that bastard. So siding with the Rebels is the morally just action.

And it is exactly my fucking point that the empire is far from "morally just".

3.) Fighting against an oppressive regime does not make anyone a competent administrator, the Rebels were incredibly untalaneted in ruling the Galaxy after they took it over.

That has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the Galactic Empire was a force for good in the galaxy, it's piss poor justification.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

In order for your analogy to be correct the entirety of Japan's population and industry would have to exist in an underground bunker, invulnerable to any and all conventional attacks.

If the entirety of Japan was located in an underground bunker, then all the US would have to do is seal up the entrances until they surrender, which would save a hell of a lot more lives than bunker-busting it would. Much like the already floated suggestions here that Alderaan be blockaded into submission. All sides are happy, the Japanese/Alderaanians survive, and their threat to the US/Empire are neutralized. And no genocide is involved, fucking hooray!

You can, just like the US could have invaded Japan and lost countless soldiers. The entire purpose of the Death Star was to bypass these shields.

I'll leave aside, for the moment, the fact that there is still considerable debate over whether a conventional would have been more costly in terms of total lives lost(because I'm of that strange belief that American lives *aren't* worth more than Japanese lives), and point out a few other things:

1) The nuking of Japan isn't really comparable to the destruction of Alderaan because the nukes didn't kill off every last citizen and destroy the entirety of the island chain. They vaporized two cities of an openly hostile nation during an open war, an act (literally) worlds less severe than complete genocide, yet still capable of stirring intense debate, to this day, of its necessity.

2) Japan was a wartime power with a fleet that, though not nearly as strong, was a palpable threat to the US fleet in the Pacific. Alderaan was a single planet, while the Empire had however many hundreds of thousands of big huge warships that could cross the entirety of the galaxy in days or less. To be more accurate with the comparison: Japan is a single, mile-long island with, maybe, a couple fishing trawls, deep bunkers, and an AA battery (which also happens to be shipping a few M-16s and funds to a few terrorist cells in other parts of the world). While the US owns the rest of the globe (aside from a couple other small islands) and has a couple thousand long-range heavy bombers capable of reaching any point in the globe in less than a day. Instead of, say, making sinking or disabling the trawlers, surrounding the island with a few destroyers and letting them surrender on their own time while effectively neutralizing whatever minimal threat they pose, they instead launch a few ICBMs at the island, knock the entire place below sea level and kill every single person on that island in a nuclear inferno.

[Darth Fanboy]

you posture more than you argue, and when you do argue it's piss poor....
But then again all those traitors on Alderaan deserved everything they got so why am I even posting?

In the same breath even.

Read the rest of my posts jackoff.

Hey, and not only that, but by editing out an important part of my post in your quote, you're fucking misrepresenting me.

[Darth Fanboy]

And they blow up one of their own worlds for no good fucking reason? Hah. That's not even a remotely reasonable act.

It could be argued that Alderaan was destroyed in order to dissuade other planets and sectors from resisting Imperial rule (as the Tarkin Doctrine would have it, thus ensuring 'peace'), and so I don't think that it was destroyed without a 'fucking reason.'

Emphasis mine. I know this is probably a big nitpick, but jesus fuck Boeing if you're going to quote someone don't be a misrepresenting douchenozzle about it. You quoted his actual statement in the same post and then cropped it out to mean something completely different just a few lines down.

[Norade]

And there is debate from time to time whether those decisions were moral or right. And the closest analogy of the Death Star blowing up Alderaan would be for the United States to exterminate the entire Japanese population and to destroy the nation as a whole by nuking the entire isle chain to the ground.

In order for your analogy to be correct the entirety of Japan's population and industry would have to exist in an underground bunker, invulnerable to any and all conventional attacks.

If the entirety of Japan was located in an underground bunker, then all the US would have to do is seal up the entrances until they surrender, which would save a hell of a lot more lives than bunker-busting it would. Much like the already floated suggestions here that Alderaan be blockaded into submission. All sides are happy, the Japanese/Alderaanians survive, and their threat to the US/Empire are neutralized. And no genocide is involved, fucking hooray!

Unless that bunker, like Alderaan was able to survive under siege indefinitely. While a blockade would have worked for keeping them from supplying anything that is far far more costly than blowing it up as an example.

You can, just like the US could have invaded Japan and lost countless soldiers. The entire purpose of the Death Star was to bypass these shields.

I'll leave aside, for the moment, the fact that there is still considerable debate over whether a conventional would have been more costly in terms of total lives lost(because I'm of that strange belief that American lives *aren't* worth more than Japanese lives), and point out a few other things:

1) The nuking of Japan isn't really comparable to the destruction of Alderaan because the nukes didn't kill off every last citizen and destroy the entirety of the island chain. They vaporized two cities of an openly hostile nation during an open war, an act (literally) worlds less severe than complete genocide, yet still capable of stirring intense debate, to this day, of its necessity.

2) Japan was a wartime power with a fleet that, though not nearly as strong, was a palpable threat to the US fleet in the Pacific. Alderaan was a single planet, while the Empire had however many hundreds of thousands of big huge warships that could cross the entirety of the galaxy in days or less. To be more accurate with the comparison: Japan is a single, mile-long island with, maybe, a couple fishing trawls, deep bunkers, and an AA battery (which also happens to be shipping a few M-16s and funds to a few terrorist cells in other parts of the world), while the US owns the rest of the globe (aside from a couple other small islands) and has a couple thousand long-range heavy bombers capable of reaching any point in the globe in less than a day. Instead of, say, making sinking or disabling the trawlers, surrounding the island with a few destroyers and letting them surrender on their own time while effectively neutralizing whatever minimal threat they pose, they instead launch a few ICBMs at the island, knock the entire place below sea level and kill every single person on that island in a nuclear inferno.

1) The attack of Alderaan certainly killed more people than the attacks on Japan but percentage wise it isn't even close. The nuking of Japan was far worse percentage wise than anything that could have been done to Alderaan and a half dozen other worlds. That isn't to say it's right, but then again outside of 2 uses nukes have never seen use again so something sure went right there.

2) Not really the same given that there may not have been the political will to maintain a siege against Alderaan for any length of time. There is also a cost factor, any attacking army will always value their lives more highly than yours so when combined with cost, effect, political will needed, and the creation of a new form of deterrence the destruction of a world was justified.

[Ritterin Sophia]

you posture more than you argue, and when you do argue it's piss poor....
But then again all those traitors on Alderaan deserved everything they got so why am I even posting?

In the same breath even.

Read the rest of my posts jackoff.

Hey, and not only that, but by editing out an important part of my post in your quote, you're fucking misrepresenting me.

Nothing of importance was snipped that deters from your point, you argue a large body count but for some reason in these vast piles of bodies landing a military transport on top of protesters that are on a landing platform and directly interfering on military property is notable enough to be worth mention.

[Darth Fanboy]

Nothing of importance was snipped that deters from your point,

Actually it did, because I was accused of an appeal to emotion, when in my post I was clearly referring to the atrocities listed in that thread I posted before.

you argue a large body count but for some reason in these vast piles of bodies landing a military transport on top of protesters that are on a landing platform and directly interfering on military property is notable enough to be worth mention.

So it's cool to land a transport on top of protestors because the body count wasn't above double or triple digits? Dumbass you're taking two of the smaller evils off of that list and completely ignoring the other incidents involving Imperial murders and especially the not-so-short list of species and populations ENSLAVED by the Empire. Slavery being a crime of such douchebaggery it got its own category on our list.

[Boeing 757]

And they blow up one of their own worlds for no good fucking reason? Hah. That's not even a remotely reasonable act.

It could be argued that Alderaan was destroyed in order to dissuade other planets and sectors from resisting Imperial rule (as the Tarkin Doctrine would have it, thus ensuring 'peace'), and so I don't think that it was destroyed without a 'fucking reason.'

Emphasis mine. I know this is probably a big nitpick, but jesus fuck Boeing if you're going to quote someone don't be a misrepresenting douchenozzle about it. You quoted his actual statement in the same post and then cropped it out to mean something completely different just a few lines down.

I left that out purposely because IMO, 'good' will be taken differently by each respective party. What seems good to some one like you or Shroom Man, may not be good in the eyes of the Imperial leadership which felt that it was doing 'good' for their cause by blowing up Alderaan.

[Norade]

you argue a large body count but for some reason in these vast piles of bodies landing a military transport on top of protesters that are on a landing platform and directly interfering on military property is notable enough to be worth mention.

So it's cool to land a transport on top of protestors because the body count wasn't above double or triple digits? Dumbass you're taking two of the smaller evils off of that list and completely ignoring the other incidents involving Imperial murders and especially the not-so-short list of species and populations ENSLAVED by the Empire. Slavery being a crime of such douchebaggery it got its own category on our list.

Nobody forced them to protest there and I'm sure they were warned to GTFO before the ships set down.