StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bakustra wrote: And that's the real bitch to prove, if you'll pardon my language. We have the chief of state complicit in the Rebellion, and an unknown number of the members of his government, but we have little idea of just how far things went. To a certain extent it's a matter of opinion too, as to whether Bail Organa can be separated from his status as the king when he is leading the resistance movement.

We also lack real world examples of people taking part in international heinous activities as private individuals while ruling a country to help us assess the situation through comparison.

I'd guess if it was simply the case, they should have asked Alderaan to surrender their king to the Empire for a proper trial. Which leads to another question: is it possible for Alderaan to allow their king to be investigated. Many real-world democratically elected leaders are immune for prosecution from higher courts according to their own constitution: I don't think we can conclude that asking Alderaan to send their king to be judged was a possible course of action, or that landing to arrest him would'nt lead to a regular war, even if the traitorous activities were done on the side.

Richelieu wrote:

Bakustra wrote: And that's the real bitch to prove, if you'll pardon my language. We have the chief of state complicit in the Rebellion, and an unknown number of the members of his government, but we have little idea of just how far things went. To a certain extent it's a matter of opinion too, as to whether Bail Organa can be separated from his status as the king when he is leading the resistance movement.

We also lack real world examples of people taking part in international heinous activities as private individuals while ruling a country to help us assess the situation through comparison.

I'd guess if it was simply the case, they should have asked Alderaan to surrender their king to the Empire for a proper trial. Which leads to another question: is it possible for Alderaan to allow their king to be investigated. Many real-world democratically elected leaders are immune for prosecution from higher courts according to their own constitution: I don't think we can conclude that asking Alderaan to send their king to be judged was a possible course of action, or that landing to arrest him would'nt lead to a regular war, even if the traitorous activities were done on the side.

We have little knowledge about Alderaan's constitution, though. We know that Mon Mothma was due to be arrested by the ISB before Organa warned her, (where's that diplomatic immunity?) but Chandrila's legal status under the Empire hasn't been expressed clearly, so it's possible they're not a dominion like Alderaan.

So Patroklos, I know your poor fingers are aching, but do you plan to concede to me or what?

After all, you said:

The problem is, as was alluded to ealier in this thread, there is really nothing much pointing to the Empire oppressing anyone to any great degree.

I responded with links supporting multiple acts of genocide, bombardment of civilian targets, unprovoked invasions of systems, systematic slave-taking, and, oh yeah, a class of starship designed as a mobile death camp.

NONE of those things existed under the Old or New Republic, to my knowledge. Do you have an answer for this?

You also said:

self righteous group of terorists/drug smugglers/deposed royalty/arms dealers/down and out politicians/defeated seperatists NOT say this?

I asked you to support your claims of terrorism (i.e. attacking of non-military targets) and drug smuggling (Solo is not known to have smuggled spice after his association with the Rebellion). Even better would be why these activities demanded an disproportionate response. You have not done so.

You also said:

2.) The Empire was ruled by fiat since the moment of its declaration, with the consent of the previously empowerd Senate of course.

I pointed out that Senators who didn't vote the right way were arrested, in at least two cases arrested because it was THOUGHT they would not vote the right way. It is also a point of no small relevance that Palpatine thought nothing of mentally influencing Senators on a wide scale. You have not issued any response to the first point. Feel free to respond to the second point too, as it too significantly damages the legitimacy of Palpatine's ascension (or would in any sane legal system). Voting under duress or mental influence is not an expression of the will of the people.

I also asked you to support your claim that the destruction of Alderaan nearly prevented the deaths of trillions of people. You have not (in fact I have turned up no evidence in an admittedly cursory search that the Galactic Civil War even claimed so many lives, or what the cause of death was for the bulk of the casualties). In a "clean" war it's unlikely that the Empire would have found trillions of Rebels to kill.

My being mean to you is not an excuse for you to ignore my arguments around here, asshole.

As far as how the Empire could deal with Alderaan in a less...final fashion, seeing as how the world had mostly defensive weapons and therefore supplied money and recruits to the Rebellion, freezing their assets would seem appropriate. The threat of a blockade would also be likely to cause Organa to surrender himself. Or, simply parking the Death Star in orbit and giving the Royal Palace a call. (Actually, this would probably have worked better. "Hi Bail, I've got your daughter here and the Death Star, yeah, remember, THAT Death Star...in orbit. Tell me where the Rebel base is right now." Unless Bail and Leia had a pre-arrangement to use the same lie, Leia's fibbery would have been found out.)

A commando raid would also have been an option, seeing as how the Alderaanians don't even search landing ships.

Except there's doubtless all kinds of 'we don't negotiate with terrorists' rhetoric going around.

For what it's worth - It's likely support for the Empire remains high in many Core Worlds because of Imperial Propaganda and the citizenry not being aware of the scale of Imperial oppression, or not caring because, hey, it's just Aliens and dirt-farmers, right?

AniThyng wrote:For what it's worth - It's likely support for the Empire remains high in many Core Worlds because of Imperial Propaganda and the citizenry not being aware of the scale of Imperial oppression, or not caring because, hey, it's just Aliens and dirt-farmers, right?

It's also worth noting that people supported the Empire while condemning individual Imperials (Hilariously and interestingly, apologists tend to think the same way.) that committed atrocities, so, while Alderaan was the biggest example of atrocities, especially to fellow Core-Worlders on other "luxury-liner" worlds, with Tarkin's death, the power structure likely disassociated themselves from him and he could be declared "not a true Imperial." Of course, popular support for the Emperor remained high because of his apparent distance from the mechanisms of government, foisting blame onto his subordinates. Still, popular support for the Empire began to significantly erode after Alderaan's destruction. After all, where do the hundreds of worlds joining the fledgling New Republic come from, if not dissatisfied Imperial worlds?

Anguirus wrote:As far as how the Empire could deal with Alderaan in a less...final fashion, seeing as how the world had mostly defensive weapons and therefore supplied money and recruits to the Rebellion, freezing their assets would seem appropriate. The threat of a blockade would also be likely to cause Organa to surrender himself. Or, simply parking the Death Star in orbit and giving the Royal Palace a call. (Actually, this would probably have worked better. "Hi Bail, I've got your daughter here and the Death Star, yeah, remember, THAT Death Star...in orbit. Tell me where the Rebel base is right now." Unless Bail and Leia had a pre-arrangement to use the same lie, Leia's fibbery would have been found out.)

A commando raid would also have been an option, seeing as how the Alderaanians don't even search landing ships.

That's true. In addition, depending on how planetary shields work, it might be possible to kill individual projectors through momentum transfer (this is my pet rationalization for torpedo spheres). But a frontal assault is out of the question. Overwhelming Alderaan's shield would almost certainly kill everybody on the planet and possibly BDZ it as well. Of course, Tarkin had ulterior motives regardless, so the thought would almost certainly never occur to him seriously.

Bakustra wrote:Okay, that clarification makes a lot more sense. I see it as being for the purpose of understanding why the Empire would, say, declare the Mon Calamari non-sapient...

Now that's just ridiculous...

"Help! We're being attacked by a two mile long, hyperdrive-capable Star Cruiser! Call animal control!"

Richelieu wrote:I don't think you'll find anyone really asking themselves that question. When an ennemy appears, any society would put it down instead of really considering surrendering for the greater good.

Yes. I know.

But if they start committing great evils in the process of putting down an enemy, they don't get a free pass purely because they were fighting someone. They have to be fighting someone dangerous enough that they can claim that the evils they committed really were the lesser evils. Against the Rebels, the Empire cannot credibly make that claim, and so they do not get to hide all their atrocities under the shield of "but we were fighting a rebellion that sought to overthrow us!" That is not enough justification for actions like blowing up entire planets without bothering to call on them to surrender.

This isn't about whether I expect someone to fight- anyone can reasonably be expect to fight an enemy. It's about whether I can use "it was necessary to win the war" as a defense for my actions after the fact. By analogy, I can use self defense to justify wounding or even killing someone. But I cannot use it to justify killing their family. The fact that the person attacked me does not give me the right to do that, even if it would stop them from attacking me again. Likewise, I cannot use self defense to justify flaying an attacker alive after I have disabled them; that is an act of pure savagery that has nothing to do with my legimate need for self defense. Not all crimes can be erased by pleading self defense.

In this case, the Galactic Empire can reasonably be excused for fighting a war to avoid being destroyed by the Rebels. But it cannot reasonably be excused for committing bloody-handed atrocities in the process of fighting that war, unless it can demonstrate that the atrocities really were the lesser evil than surrender would have been.

After all, there are always two ways to end a war: surrender and victory. If surrender will cause far less bloodshed than victory, you can't justify killing huge numbers of people to get victory with less death, because you've already skipped over the option that causes the least death.

If I proclaimed myself Supreme Benevolent Leader of Earth and asked the leaders of the Western countries to surrender their power to me, it's nearly certain they would resist without considering the benefits of letting me rule and create a new era of enlightenment and prosperity without bloodshed. Can't say I blame them.

I can't either. But if they start carpet bombing cities to stop you, they dont get a "get out of jail free card" for doing so purely because they were fighting you. Not if they can't show that you would have carpet bombed cities, or done comparably evil things.

It's not the decision to fight that is morally questionable here, it's the attempt to justify war crimes by pleading necessity in situations where they aren't necessary.

Richelieu wrote:We also lack real world examples of people taking part in international heinous activities as private individuals while ruling a country to help us assess the situation through comparison.

I'd guess if it was simply the case, they should have asked Alderaan to surrender their king to the Empire for a proper trial. Which leads to another question: is it possible for Alderaan to allow their king to be investigated. Many real-world democratically elected leaders are immune for prosecution from higher courts according to their own constitution: I don't think we can conclude that asking Alderaan to send their king to be judged was a possible course of action, or that landing to arrest him would'nt lead to a regular war, even if the traitorous activities were done on the side.

If nothing else, it would make sense to issue an ultimatum: "We know your planet is scheming against the Empire. Hand over

• within 48 hours or we will vaporize you." It's not as if they're in that big a hurry.
  
  Now, the ultimatum might require that Alderaan violate its own constitution, but it's far less of an atrocity to provoke a constitutional crisis within a nation than it is to kill everyone.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Bakustra wrote:Okay, that clarification makes a lot more sense. I see it as being for the purpose of understanding why the Empire would, say, declare the Mon Calamari non-sapient...

Now that's just ridiculous...

"Help! We're being attacked by a two mile long, hyperdrive-capable Star Cruiser! Call animal control!"

Yeah, that's one of the stupider things WEG did with their RPG. Of course, the same sources claimed that the Empire discovered the Mon Calamari. If only we could throw the entire supposed history of the Mon Calamari out... Anyway, Wookiees and Talz were also declared non-sapient for the purposes of "domestication" and yet we see them both just hanging around in the films, with nary an indication of "domestication" or other euphemisms for slavery. Sometimes I wonder just where WEG got all their ideas.

Of course, bring this up with an apologist, and you'll hear cries of "rogue officers!" so fast your head will spin.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Richelieu wrote:snip

snip

I will point out that a large part of the problem comes from thinking of the Rebels as an enemy fighting a conventional war. While they were the Rebel Alliance, the only conventional space battle they fought was Endor. Things that are considered acceptable in "total war" aren't considered acceptable when fighting terrorists/freedom fighters/revolutionaries/counterrevolutionaries. The tolerance of collateral damage is much lower, because any and all collateral damage is loyal citizens. Of course, that's why Patroklos needed the Corellian Treaty to be a declaration of war by Alderaan, so that the dead on Alderaan are merely collateral.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Bakustra wrote:Okay, that clarification makes a lot more sense. I see it as being for the purpose of understanding why the Empire would, say, declare the Mon Calamari non-sapient...

Now that's just ridiculous...

"Help! We're being attacked by a two mile long, hyperdrive-capable Star Cruiser! Call animal control!"

De-humanizing the enemy is as old as humanity itself... the Empire has just done that literally. Note however that droids were not considered sentient well in the Republic era, while they clearly demonstrated intelligence and droids can build, maintain and manage starships. Thus the definition of a sapient being could be different from ours, and non-sapient beings can be capable of operating a two mile long Star Cruiser.

Bakustra wrote:Yeah, that's one of the stupider things WEG did with their RPG. Of course, the same sources claimed that the Empire discovered the Mon Calamari. If only we could throw the entire supposed history of the Mon Calamari out... Anyway, Wookiees and Talz were also declared non-sapient for the purposes of "domestication" and yet we see them both just hanging around in the films, with nary an indication of "domestication" or other euphemisms for slavery. Sometimes I wonder just where WEG got all their ideas.

I don't know about Talz, but the only Wookiee I remember seeing in the movies is Chewbacca. And he's so obviously with Han Solo that people aren't going to treat him the way they would if he were wandering around alone. If he tried to make it on his own in a place like Tatooine or Bespin, let alone a core world with a more developed legal system, he might well end up falling afoul of the authorities and being sold into slavery in short order.

Even if we ignore West End Games (as I am predisposed to do, because I don't own any of their material), the EU makes it clear that there is a long history of Wookiees being enslaved, to the point where the ongoing struggle against aliens who want to make them into slaves is one of the dominant threads of Wookiee history. For the Empire to declare them property (and thus exempt from any normal restrictions on slavery) would not be at all unusual; Wookiees have always been the targets of discrimination in certain sectors of society, usually the richer and less hairy ones. Czerka Corporation was treating the Wookiees more or less exactly as the Empire does four thousand years before the Battle of Yavin, after all. And one can only assume that the galaxy played along with them, or at least was cooperative enough not to shut down their operations outright.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Richelieu wrote:snip

snip

I will point out that a large part of the problem comes from thinking of the Rebels as an enemy fighting a conventional war. While they were the Rebel Alliance, the only conventional space battle they fought was Endor. Things that are considered acceptable in "total war" aren't considered acceptable when fighting terrorists/freedom fighters/revolutionaries/counterrevolutionaries. The tolerance of collateral damage is much lower, because any and all collateral damage is loyal citizens. Of course, that's why Patroklos needed the Corellian Treaty to be a declaration of war by Alderaan, so that the dead on Alderaan are merely collateral.[/quote]Honestly, I don't understand where Imperial apologism would come from. With real evil leaders, there's a matter of national pride tied up in it; most leaders who did terrible things also did impressive things, and it's understandable if someone wants to be able to remember the impressive stuff in their own past without also remembering that the guy who built those monuments worked fifty thousand slaves to death to create them. But with a fictional evil leader? It's like trying to put a good spin on the villain of a children's cartoon, who apologizes for Skeletor?

Crazedwraith wrote:Except that the Death Star is massively overpowered for the purpose of defeating planetary shields. Alderaan's held out for what? A billionth of a second; and the beam was still enough to blow up the planet with exceptional amounts of energy left over.

The Death Star was not a necessity for defeating shields. It was a terror weapon to blow up planets. This is explicitly clear in the movie.

Umm- I know I haven't got anywhere hear the end of the thread yet - but could a 20th Century equivalent of the Death Star 1's drydock (as seen near the end of ROTS, about where Anakin kills the separatists at Palpatine's command IIRC) be Nazi Germany's Heavy Water and missile R&D sites in Peenemunde around 1944?

Hitler was commissioning research into a long-range ballistic missile as a successor to the V2 rocket - these research plans were smuggled out to the Allied lines - this research into rocketry led to the arms race after the end of WW2...

cf James A Michener, Space, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun etc.

Just thought I'd chuck that in...