[Spiderman Fanboy] 15 and it shows

[Batman]

Even the Allied Powers have commited some war crimes, too.

Difference being, they were admitted to be war crimes. You apparently seem to be thinking blowing up entire planets is okay because some of the populace supported a Rebellion the very existance of which is your own damn fault thanks to being an oppressive dictatorship.

People can lie sometimes too. Maybe Tarkin did know that Leia was lying and he was trying to be sneaky and sarcastic with her.

Which is naturally a perfectly sufficient reason to kill a couple billion civilians.

You're missing what I'd had stated earlier about preventing the star systems from opposing/rebelling against the Emperor.

Which could easily have been achieved by not being a malevolent oppressive tyrant.

Nazi and Japanaese propoganda has called the Americans during WW2 to be evil and sinister. The way that things are worded prove nothing either way.

Unless your very own quotes are Aliiance propaganda, as they seem to come from out of universe sources yes they absolutely are. Oh, and ANH opening cralw? EVIL Galactic Empire.

For example, a Wikipedia entry on the Third Reich will tell us about their atrocities, and even without labeling them to be sinister and power hungry, we know that they are evil sickos.

You apparently wouldn't.

BTW, nobody has proved the internet critic on youtube's idea about the clone wars wrong just yet!

Actually, pretty much everybody has, it just doesn't sit well with your agenda so you blithely ignored it.

[Stark]

I love how the political resistance in the senate (such that it's expected various open acts of oppression will cause a scandal) is just ignored by people. The Emperor had his program, but within the political system he did not have sole control... Until he sacked the senate and started nuking civilians.

It's all the rebellions fault, though. Those senators should have voted the way they were told by the not-evil empire.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

It's literal meaning is very vulgar.

Fucking, or common sense?

Alderran, or somewhere similar would have been destroyed even without the Rebel Alliance because the Empire would still need a high-profile target to demonstrate their doomsday weapon on. The doomsday weapon they started building before the Rebellion was even a thing.

And please, don't insult our intelligence by suggesting the Empire was never going to use the DS II. I cannot find it in myself to believe they would sink so much time, money and manpower in something they only ever meant to use as short-term bait for a trap.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Palpatine design the Clone Wars so that there would be minimal damage wealthy Core Worlds where most of the films happen?

Sounds about right, a civil war is a terrible thing if you plan to be boss afterwards. All the ruined factories, farms and infrastructure are now YOUR ruined farms, factories, and infrastructure, just like all of the dead are your people. Much neater, if you're playing both sides, to minimize damage to the areas you really care about.

People can lie sometimes too. Maybe Tarkin did know that Leia was lying and he was trying to be sneaky and sarcastic with her.

So we go from destroying a planet as a show of force to destroying a planet as a conversational gambit?! Even I have a hard time imagining anyone so callous.

Even if there was no death star, the rebels would have rebelled against the Galactic Empire. Aren't they terrorists because of that?

Anakin Skywalker's redemption had nothing whatsoever to do with the death star, maybe. Padme was trying to redeem Darth Vader on Mustafar, and she had no idea about the death star. Also, Darth Vader didn't like the death star. Although, the idea of the unsuited Hayden Christensen version of Darth Vader destroying Alderaan in ANH, in the hypothethical that he would've killed Obi Wan on Mustafar and then killed Sidious and becoming the Emperor himself sounds sort of interesting.

Please explain your last sentence a little bit better for me, dude.

How many civilians of the Galactic Republic had died during the Clone Wars?

Also, the Naboo Crisis had given Sidious his political status as the Chancellor. Not starting the Clone Wars.

And, besides, the transformation of the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire was no more evil than, per se, a real world analogy of the President violating the US constitution and taking a title of nobility unto himself.

[Stark]

... And then nuking some towns to prevent regional resistance. Don't forget that part.

[Batman]

Even if there was no death star, the rebels would have rebelled against the Galactic Empire. Aren't they terrorists because of that?

Which makes killing rebels legal. This covers genociding the population of Alderaan-how?

Also, the Naboo Crisis had given Sidious his political status as the Chancellor. Not starting the Clone Wars.

Which changes the fact that he started the Clone wars how, exactly?

And, besides, the transformation of the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire was no more evil than, per se, a real world analogy of the President violating the US constitution and taking a title of nobility unto himself.

I'm sorry, did he just actually say that? And yes, when you set a civil war in motion that is going to kill millions, probably billions of people just to make that happen, yeah, I rather think it is.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

... And then nuking some towns to prevent regional resistance. Don't forget that part.

I notice that nobody is directly arguing against/addressing what I'm saying directly.

I'm arguing about whether or not the rebels were waging a just war or not. The existence of war crimes on either side doesn't justify the other side at all, either way.

[DaveJB]

So, Alderaan was destroyed just for saturday morning cartoony evil villian fun?

Had the Empire just built the Death Star and said "Lookie here at our planet-destroying space station," odds are no-one would have believed it had that capability. And if they had used it to destroy Dantooine, or even Yavin IV in all likelihood, people would have just said "Big deal, they'll never use it on a civilian target." The destruction of Alderaan was intended quite simply to prove that not only did could the Death Star in fact destroy planets, the Empire was fully prepared to use it on civilian-dominated worlds.

[Stark]

Right and when you grow up you'll see that what you're doing is reducing a complex conflict to an either/or proposition. You are actually making heinous statements like 'its ok to kill billions to quiet political dissent' or 'it is morally wrong to challenge oppressive policies', and all because you want to feel clever for challenging accept wisdom.

There are ways to talk about the imperial program and policies that don't make you look like an apologist moron. Try to find one.

The use of the DS being a public gesture of resolve is important for timing - I'm not sure Tarkin would have wanted to wait for the DS to relocate even to another holy popular world. He probably wanted news of the attack to hit while discussion of the destruction of the senate was still fresh.

[atg]

And, besides, the transformation of the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire was no more evil than, per se, a real world analogy of the President violating the US constitution and taking a title of nobility unto himself.

After the President has murdered political rivals, and created a civil war with the express purpose of bringing him to power. Are you really that stupid?

BTW, nobody has proved the internet critic on youtube's idea about the clone wars wrong just yet!

The Clone Wars series proves otherwise. If it was just a "small" war why would members of the Republic be afraid of losing the war? Maybe the battles we see and invaded worlds were actually just holograms? Or the bits where Galactic Republic Senators were hotly debating the war actually just re-dubs of them talking about the hotest new pop sensation from Mon Calamari

Would Alderaan have been destroyed if there was no rebellion?

And Alderaan wouldn't have been destroyed if Sidious didn't subvert a legitimate government and create a civil war with the sole aim of bringing himself to power, crushing sentient beings rights in the process which was WHY the rebellion started.

I'm arguing about whether or not the rebels were waging a just war or not.

One of the VERY FIRST ACTS of the Galactic Empire is to enslave the Wookiees, as seen in Dark Lord: The Rise of Lord Vader. The removal and destruction of sentient beings rights is the whole reason the Rebellion started.

[Ahriman238]

Even if there was no death star, the rebels would have rebelled against the Galactic Empire. Aren't they terrorists because of that?

Anakin Skywalker's redemption had nothing whatsoever to do with the death star, maybe. Padme was trying to redeem Darth Vader on Mustafar, and she had no idea about the death star. Also, Darth Vader didn't like the death star. Although, the idea of the unsuited Hayden Christensen version of Darth Vader destroying Alderaan in ANH, in the hypothethical that he would've killed Obi Wan on Mustafar and then killed Sidious and becoming the Emperor himself sounds sort of interesting.

Please explain your last sentence a little bit better for me, dude.

How many civilians of the Galactic Republic had died during the Clone Wars?

Also, the Naboo Crisis had given Sidious his political status as the Chancellor. Not starting the Clone Wars.

And, besides, the transformation of the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire was no more evil than, per se, a real world analogy of the President violating the US constitution and taking a title of nobility unto himself.

Good question to start with. Terrorism is, IIRC commonly defined as using intimidation and the fear of violence to further one's (typically political) ends. In the Rebel/Empire conflict, which party seemed most likely to try and intimidate the common man into supporting them? Which side committed very public atrocities with the stated intention of cowing people?

Where precisely did this thread about the Death Star specifically as a vehicle for Anakin's redemption come from? As far as I can see, no one but you has mentioned it. I'm not trying to be a jackass, I genuinely have no idea what you're arguing against.

You said that Tarkin may have been being 'sneaky and sarcastic' when he said he would destroy Alderran, because Dantooine would make a poor demonstration of the Death Star's power. I asked if you thought he destroyed Alderran (and it's peaceful, unarmed population) just to make a point to one person. I cannot think of any way to interpret that scene that doesn't make the Empire look worse if Tarkin has motives beyond his stated one.

Yes, Palpatine engineered the Naboo invasion to become Chancellor, and later expanded on that success, engineering the Clone War to become Emperor. What part of this is difficult to understand?

If the President in your analogy brutally slaughtered all the people tasked with preventing that specific circumstance (and in the case of the US, that would be the entire government and military. Debatably the populace too.) THEN made himself a hereditary autocrat, THEN instituted slavery and nuked, say, Los Angeles you might have a point. I think. But you're already arguing that if the US government got a lot more evil and autocratic, then the Empire wouldn't be more evil than the US government, which is a pretty silly thing to say in any case.

[atg]

Forgetting the destruction of Alderaan by the Empire, the destruction of Despayre was ordered to test the theory that the DS1 worked. This was a planet where prisoners had been sent to serve out non-death sentances. Woops that didn't mean much to Palps/Tarkin. Many of these were expressly mentioned to be political prisoners, either for speaking out against Palpatine or by accidentally supporting a candidate of a local election that wasn't the one Palpatine chose.

[Batman]

... And then nuking some towns to prevent regional resistance. Don't forget that part.

I notice that nobody is directly arguing against/addressing what I'm saying directly.

Again, everybody is, you just refuse to acknowledge it.

I'm arguing about whether or not the rebels were waging a just war or not. The existence of war crimes on either side doesn't justify the other side at all, either way.

Let me see-artificially engineered Civil War that killed billions for no other purpose than getting Palpatine in power, ruthless suppressive regime that even had people on the ass-end of nowhere hate it, same said regime being perfectly okay with killing billions of innocent civilians just to make a point-yeah, I think the Rebellion was pretty damned justified.

[Ahriman238]

BTW, nobody has proved the internet critic on youtube's idea about the clone wars wrong just yet!

Eh, I've pointed out why I think he's wrong, and a poor example to use for this argument. I feel no particular need to "prove" anything further.

I'm arguing about whether or not the rebels were waging a just war or not.

Very well, let us argue whether or not the Rebels cause was just. Did the Empire govern responsibly when they funneled billions of credits into a moon-sized device to murder their own people with? Does the Empire enjoy a legitimate authority, is it sanctioned by the people it rules? Or does it ignore and then dissolve the elected body through which people can air their grievances? Does the Empire in engage in behaviors that would cause considerable discontent, such as killing lots of people for no good reason? Does the Empire respect the rule of law, or can Darth Vader choke any person he likes?

[Dominarch's Hope]

Aside from the whole "I want to eat everybody" Palpatine was apparently planning, and the dividing the galaxies population against itself with hatred and bigotry, and using terror weapons to increase the residual fear level, nah.


Galactic Empire was a fairly nice place to live if you were sufficiently human.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Even if there was no death star, the rebels would have rebelled against the Galactic Empire. Aren't they terrorists because of that?

Which makes killing rebels legal. This covers genociding the population of Alderaan-how?

Also, the Naboo Crisis had given Sidious his political status as the Chancellor. Not starting the Clone Wars.

Which changes the fact that he started the Clone wars how, exactly?

And, besides, the transformation of the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire was no more evil than, per se, a real world analogy of the President violating the US constitution and taking a title of nobility unto himself.

I'm sorry, did he just actually say that? And yes, when you set a civil war in motion that is going to kill millions, probably billions of people just to make that happen, yeah, I rather think it is.

Finally, at last. I'll just quote those RedletterMedia Reviews to prove my point about this "large galactic war", the Clone Wars.

"Number 5-a war with no consequences".

So, again, this war is between robots and clones. These robots do try to conquer other planets like the wookie planet and utapu, but, basically, the effects of this war are not felt at all on Coruscant, the main setting of the film. The whole war just seems like some kind of minor inconvenience happening somewhere out in space. Even though it says otherwise in the opening title crawl.

Padme combs her hair on the windows, smiling. There's an active night life scene. Ships fly around like business is usual. And then they babble on about taking back whatever system in like a dry, dull, corporate, boardroom meeting."

And Mike had then suggested some ideas about how to fix the Clone Wars.

He had went on to state that Coruscant should have been attacked by the bad guys during the Clone Wars, and that "ordinary men are forced (aka drafted) and die by the millions, causing terrible suffering and chaos on Coruscant. This would make battle scenes more emotionally engaging."

Also, Mike had also said that there should have been a "physical decay on Coruscant over the duration of the clone wars, like with no ships flying around with barely any traffic during the war, with buildings that are in decay, and food lines everywhere. "

[atg]

but, basically, the effects of this war are not felt at all on Coruscant, the main setting of the film. The whole war just seems like some kind of minor inconvenience happening somewhere out in space. Even though it says otherwise in the opening title crawl.

Except for the CIS attack at the very beginning of Ep 3. And the senate debates on the progress of the war, and the Jedi constantly talking about the war... Yeah nothing there.

Its like saying World War Two was no big deal because there wasnt a battle between the USA and Germany in Washington DC.

[Stark]

Contrasting war with normal life = war is fake?

Lets re-examine all those Vietnam war movies in this light.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Contrasting war with normal life = war is fake?

Lets re-examine all those Vietnam war movies in this light.

I don't see what your point is, especially in relation to my previous post about the Clone Wars.

[Stark]

I know, because you're an idiot who would prefer to take his cues from a youtube video than the movies in question.

The contrast of war and peace is a dramatic tool common to movies about war. It's a pretty long how to draw to say that this means the war is small or fake or whatever. The OYW in gundam was fake because some neutral colonies were idyllic and untouched, right?

But yknow 'empire not so bad for politically orthodox supporters of the regime' is the standard to live up to, so ...

[Batman]

Finally, at last. I'll just quote those RedletterMedia Reviews to prove my point about this "large galactic war", the Clone Wars.
"Number 5-a war with no consequences".
So, again, this war is between robots and clones.

And countless millions of civilians all over the galaxy. For the (I don't know, did anybody count?) nth time, RLM's opinion is completely irrelevant and completely wrong. Guess what? Your war with no consequences resulted in the fucking Galactic Empire!!!!!!!!!

These robots do try to conquer other planets like the wookie planet and utapu, but, basically, the effects of this war are not felt at all on Coruscant, the main setting of the film.

Which is-utterly irrelevant to the topic (or rather, subtopic) under discussion, which is the effect of the war on the galaxy at large.

The whole war just seems like some kind of minor inconvenience happening somewhere out in space. Even though it says otherwise in the opening title crawl.

Your minor inconvenience affected millions of people on Naboo alone, fuckface, and affected tens of thousands of star systems as the war moved on. Those facts don't go away just because you apparently slept through the trilogy and the Clone Wars Cartoons.

[Ahriman238]

We saw and responded already to the video. Repeating it will not convince us. At least when we repeat ourselves at you we try and vary it up so we can find something you'll understand.

Oh, but there is a point I forgot, so thanks for that. Yes, they discuss taking back planets and the strategy sessions are like "boring board room meetings." Strategy is boring, and real-life strategy meetings are pretty much exactly like that.

Again, the film tended to focus on the Jedi and the wealthy elite of the Republic on Coruscant, senators, the Chancellor etc. Having a wealthy elite far removed form the war (except for the odd daring raid where the Chancellor is kidnapped) be unaffected by war is completely normal. Do you think William Randolph Hearst ate short rations during either World War?

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Finally, at last. I'll just quote those RedletterMedia Reviews to prove my point about this "large galactic war", the Clone Wars.
"Number 5-a war with no consequences".
So, again, this war is between robots and clones.

And countless millions of civilians all over the galaxy. For the (I don't know, did anybody count?) nth time, RLM's opinion is completely irrelevant and completely wrong. Guess what? Your war with no consequences resulted in the fucking Galactic Empire!!!!!!!!!

These robots do try to conquer other planets like the wookie planet and utapu, but, basically, the effects of this war are not felt at all on Coruscant, the main setting of the film.

Which is-utterly irrelevant to the topic (or rather, subtopic) under discussion, which is the effect of the war on the galaxy at large.

The whole war just seems like some kind of minor inconvenience happening somewhere out in space. Even though it says otherwise in the opening title crawl.

Your minor inconvenience affected millions of people on Naboo alone, fuckface, and affected tens of thousands of star systems as the war moved on. Those facts don't go away just because you apparently slept through the trilogy and the Clone Wars Cartoons.

STOP FLAMING ME BITCH

Anyways, the Naboo Crisis had happened about 10 years before the galactic wide war and it was just a small galactic skirmish in comparison to the Clone Wars. I don't see the relation between the two of them.

The CIS had just simply wanted to secede from a corrupt old galactic Republic.

And the Jedi had started a galactic wide war just to rescue a few of their friends on Genosis. Just like WW1, another very evil and unjust war.

[Ahriman238]

It's significant because both were started by Palpatine, who was a major player (and in the second case, the ONLY player who mattered) on both sides, specifically so he could gain political power. No other result was achieved or attempted, and so everyone who died in either conflict was killed by Palpatine's order so he oculd have his engineered crisis. The two situations are comparable because they are exactly the same except that one takes place a decade later on a far larger scale.

The CIS was created to start a civil war, it's leader Dooku intended from the beginning to start a war because his master, Sidious, commanded him to start a war. The CIS was building a vast and illegal droid army before the Republic so much as suspected a clone army (also created at Palpatine's order) even after the Republic specifically voted NOT to form an army in case shooting started. Hells, the price the Trade Federation demanded for joining the CIS, and thus their war, was the death of Padme.

The CIS never intended to secede peacefully, and even in some alternate universe where that wasn't what the CIS leaders intended, it wouldn't matter because Dooku and Palpatine always meant for there to be a war.

EDIT:

STOP FLAMING ME BITCH

Oh, and BTW, there's no need to use vulgar language in this discussion.

[Batman]

STOP FLAMING ME BITCH

Honeybun I haven't even started flaming you.

Anyways, the Naboo Crisis had happened about 10 years before the galactic wide war and it was just a small galactic skirmish in comparison to the Clone Wars.

No it wasn't it was a completely planetary skirmish that nevertheless affected millions of people. Are you sure you know what galactic actually means?

I don't see the relation between the two of them.

That'd be the part where even before it became a Galactic level event your no consequences war did affect millions of people?

The CIS had just simply wanted to secede from a corrupt old galactic Republic.

Which resulted in-a Civil War affecting tens of thousands of systems? Whatever happened to the minor conflict with no real consequences?

And the Jedi had started a galactic wide war just to rescue a few of their friends on Genosis. Just like WW1, another very evil and unjust war.

Wrong on both counts. The Separatists could easily have prevented a war by simply turning Anakin and Padme over to the Republic legal system and demand they be tried for their crimes.

[lPeregrine]

Also, Darth Vader didn't like the death star.

FFS, are you honestly this stupid? Did you even watch the movie? Vader's "don't be too proud of this technological terror" line isn't expressing his dislike for the death star and the Empire's immoral policy of building planet-destroying weapons, it's a statement to his subordinates that they'd better not think that their shiny new gun is an opportunity to seize power for themselves. IOW, the space wizards are watching at all times and will magically choke you to death no matter how many guns you have.

And of course for someone who supposedly doesn't like the death star (instead of just showing contempt for its commanders) Vader sure has a hard time expressing that dislike. Does he dispute Tarkin's decision to use a civilian target as a demonstration of what happens to anyone who defies the Empire? No. Does show any reluctance to use the death star once his tracking beacon finds the rebel base? No. When the Empire builds another death star does he have any apparent concerns besides whether or not it will be finished on schedule? No.

The simple fact is that Vader's only "problem" with the death star is ensuring the loyalty and efficiency of the people in charge of it.