StarDestroyer.Net BBS

MRDOD wrote:
Even if you pack a plaza full of people and stack people on top of people until that plaza is a cubical compressed mass of riot, you'd still not come close to a percentage point of the population of Coruscant.

So I don't really consider it to mean much either way, since you probably could find an equal proportion of people in real life America who celebrated during 9/11 or something else equally unlikely.

You can take a statistical approach if you wish, however if you look at the authoritarian nature of the empire, and that indeed the goverment had no problems killing large swaths of citizens to quell disention (ref Alderaan) the simple idea of rioting and/or cheering the death of the head of that goverment shows quite a bit of support for the rebels.

Your argument is akin to saying there wasn't much support for freedom in China since only one guy died by being ran over by a tank and only a scant percentage of the population was there in the square at the time.

All cool and fine, however we're attempting to gauge the support of the empire from the people, using a celebration/riot to show it exsists, not necessarily as an example of the percentage of population that disliked the empire. That such a display happened in the heart of hte empire and so blazenly, pulling down statues, puts serious question to the idea that the people of the core supported the goverment.

And to put forth something on the original topic; Freedom fighters. The Rebels never showed any sort of operation against civilian targets. All military ops seemed directed at military or goverment targets.

Concerning the riots in Coruscant: in Mara Jade: By the Emperor's Hand Grand Vizier Sate Pestage congratulates Director Ysanne Isard for her quick action in quelling further riots and punishing those who had dared to celebrate the Emperor's death. Stormtroopers are shown executing a group of prisoners at the same time, suggesting quite clearly that the fate of those who celebrated Alliance's victory on Endor was most grim. However, the initial riots seemed to have surprised Imperial authorities.

Is there some reason why Rebels can't be both terrorists and "freedom fighters"?

Darth Wong wrote:Is there some reason why Rebels can't be both terrorists and "freedom fighters"?

Certainly not; many of the actions of the Colonists during the American Revolutionary War could be easily be described as terrorist in nature, and yet the Colonists were undoubtedly fighting for freedom as well. Due to the propagandizing of the post-9/11 world, especially America, the buzz-words "terrorism" and "freedom" have been aligned in direct opposition to one another, when their association is actually far less definite.

Knife wrote:How much of that core support was from planetary goverments and how much was from the 'people'? Even before Moffs, a lot of planets had King and Queens, Dictates and Viceroys. Authoritarian local goverments might indeed enjoy a dictatorship on the galactic level that supported them instead of a democracy.

I though most of the monarchies were constutional and as such people had full right. Naboo even elected its' Monarch/

The riots on Coruscant are described as being ruthlessly supressed by Castin Donn, who was one of the rebel supporters that instigated them. Certainly, the Imperial response was slower than might be expected, but then they were hardly prepared for sudden flash riots.

As for whether the Alliance to Restore the Republic itself is a terrorist organisation, its difficult to say for the reason that the word 'terrorist' is very loosely defined in culture, even if it seems simple from a dictionary definition. Certainly, it is frequently used in American media to describe any form of resistance/guerilla group, although 'insurgents' is also highly popular. That the people being described as 'terrorists' are striking legitimate military targets (convoys, vehicles, patrols etc) does not factor into it. Therefore, using the popular definition of a terrorist group, the Alliance IS a terrorist organisation.

It should also be noted that, although the leaders of the Alliance and their immediate followers (e.g Echo base) would probably not order attacks on civilians, Rebel cells did conduct such operations. For example, in the 'Empire' comic series a Rebel cell feeds false information to a squadron of Imperial bombers, leading to them attacking civilians. This was the intended result, as it provoked aggression against the Empire.

For example, in the 'Empire' comic series a Rebel cell feeds false information to a squadron of Imperial bombers, leading to them attacking civilians. This was the intended result, as it provoked aggression against the Empire.

I don't see this as a terrorist-ic sort of attack. The way I see it, terrorism is intended to cause mass terror and fear far out of proportion to the military value of a target. This operation was certainly a dirty tactic, but the intent was not to cause mass terror of the Rebels. The goal, as you stated, was to provoke aggression and anger against the Empire.

Isolder74 wrote:That sounds like an apologenic twisting of the Tarkin Doctrine that we see in A New Hope and that fact of the existence of the Death Star.

Regardless, Ars Dangor is one of the most powerful men in the Empire and in fact actually promoted Tarkin to the position of Grand Moff. The Tarkin Doctrine, while always decried as rule through terror, is really not so. The doctrine proposed by Tarkin is in regards to dealing with rebellion and disorder in systems through the implementation of Oversectors, while providing a singular symbol of Imperial power to discourage further insurrection and disobediance. Such an act is very common throughout history.

What other use is the Death Star other than to be used as a terror weapon to prevent uprisings?

We do not know what it could be used for, but that does not mean that it would be sent around the galaxy blowing up planets at will. By the same virtue, Star Destroyers and Stormtroopers had much the same effect as the Death Star probably would have had, but they were certainly not instruments of terror.

weren't three of the founding members of the Alliance core worlds?

Yes. And the New Republic was founded by a mere eight worlds, which shows how pitifully small their movement really was.

Warsie wrote:Given most people live in ward yes; but many outer rim worlds went rebel, also given many of them were COnfederate worlds.

Oh, it's even worse than that. The entire sum total of the Rebel Alliance was at the Battle of Endor. The movement was dwarfed by a single Imperial Sector Group. The Rebels were a grain of sand in a much larger, greater beach.

Knife wrote:But on a public level, there were a lot of people on Coruscant cheering and partying after learning of the death of the Emperor to say overwhelming amounts of the 'people' wanted the empire.

Consider that Coruscant has a population of a trillion sentients and it does not become so impressive. For every Rebel world, there were thousands of loyal Imperial worlds. In the ROTJ novelization, Vader contemplates how the galaxy would even mourn the death of Palpatine, their beloved demigod, if he overthrew him.

Excuse the inquiry, TC Pilot, but I wish to clarify you're position. Are you simply arguing that the Empire held at least the overt alliegance of many of its citizens, as it undoubtedly did, or are you actually advocating the Galactic Empire, at its height, as a favorable ruling body?

And the Tarkin Doctrine is, at least in part, expressely about maintaining order through fear. The Grand Moff says it himself in ANH. The fact that such a doctrine has real-world historical precedent does not make it any more just or conscionable.

Noble Ire wrote:Excuse the inquiry, TC Pilot, but I wish to clarify you're position. Are you simply arguing that the Empire held at least the overt alliegance of many of its citizens, as it undoubtedly did, or are you actually advocating the Galactic Empire, at its height, as a favorable ruling body?

That's a much more complex question than it first seems, since the Galactic Empire was not a monolithic bloc. Rather, it had several competing factions and ideologies within it which can more or less be identified with various bureaucratic and administrative organs. ISB and COMPNOR generally represent the totalitarian wing, which are a despicable lot. The meritocratic and paternalist wings of the government exist in some forms within the Ruling Council and the Imperial Navy, and have my support, and the traditional Core World aristocracy to a lesser extent.

The Empire, as it was, is certainly a better choice than the political system the counterrevolutionaries thrust upon the galaxy.

And the Tarkin Doctrine is, at least in part, expressly about maintaining order through fear.

I never said it wasn't. But it leaves open room to clarify what form rule through fear will take, as the quote I provided earlier shows.

Tarkin, it should be noted, acted illegally when he destroyed Alderaan.

The fact that such a doctrine has real-world historical precedent does not make it any more just or conscionable.

Nor does it matter how just or conscionable it is.

Tarkin, it should be noted, acted illegally when he destroyed Alderaan.

Do you have proof? I doubt that Vader would allow him to blatantly break Imperial law. Unless, that is, the Emporer didn't care whether the law was shattered and left along the wayside.

TC Pilot wrote:That's a much more complex question than it first seems, since the Galactic Empire was not a monolithic bloc. Rather, it had several competing factions and ideologies within it which can more or less be identified with various bureaucratic and administrative organs. ISB and COMPNOR generally represent the totalitarian wing, which are a despicable lot. The meritocratic and paternalist wings of the government exist in some forms within the Ruling Council and the Imperial Navy, and have my support, and the traditional Core World aristocracy to a lesser extent.

There were members of the Imperial military and regional governments who seemed to have decent, or at least reasonable goals and principles at heart, as is shown by the Pellaeon-era Imperial Remnant and the vast number of former Imperial administrators who assimilated fairly easily into the New Republic following the fall of Coruscant. However, at its height, the Empire was Palpatine. He filled the upper eschelons around him with zealots, ruthless, barely-contained despots, slavers, xenophobes, and psycopaths, and moderated their actions little as long as they maintained his benevolent public image and furthered his megalomaniacal aims. The Emperor was evil, and thus so were all his instruments of domination until his destruction and, to some extent, for decades after.

The Empire, as it was, is certainly a better choice than the political system the counterrevolutionaries thrust upon the galaxy.

The worlds, species, and cultures enslaved, exploited, abused, and annihilated by Palpatine and his minions might disagree. The chaos that followed his fall was highly undesirable, and may indeed have resulted in more deaths than the sum of his reign and the Clone Wars combined (if one considers the death toll of the Yuuzhan Vong War), but imagine a galaxy where he never fell. Do you think that Palpatine would have moderated his methods in time? Do you think his thirst for power could ever have been quenched? Keep in mind, this is a being that strove for immortality, and near the end of his life, began to view the masses he controlled and hoped to control in the future as fuel for his own personal Force energies.

Dark Flame wrote:Do you have proof?

Firstly, and most obviously, Tarkin was acting far out of his area of jurisdiction. He was Grand Moff of Oversector Outer, not Alderaan or any Core worlds.

Secondly, he did not have Palpatine's authorization to destroy Alderaan.

ANH Radio Drama wrote:TARKIN: You see, Vader? Our third parties, whom we'll threaten, are the entire population of her home planet.

VADER: Alderaan is one of the foremost of the inner systems. The Emperor should be consulted.

TARKIN: Do not think to challenge me! You're not confronting Tagge or Motti now! The Emperor has placed me in charge of this affair with a free hand, and the decision is mine! And you will have your information that much sooner.

I doubt that Vader would allow him to blatantly break Imperial law.

Vader had no authority to stop Tarkin. Tarkin was in command.

Noble Ire wrote:There were members of the Imperial military and regional governments who seemed to have decent, or at least reasonable goals and principles at heart, as is shown by the Pellaeon-era Imperial Remnant and the vast number of former Imperial administrators who assimilated fairly easily into the New Republic following the fall of Coruscant. However, at its height, the Empire was Palpatine. He filled the upper eschelons around him with zealots, ruthless, barely-contained despots, slavers, xenophobes, and psycopaths, and moderated their actions little as long as they maintained his benevolent public image and furthered his megalomaniacal aims. The Emperor was evil, and thus so were all his instruments of domination until his destruction and, to some extent, for decades after.

So the decent and reasonable Imperials simply sprouted from the ground after Palpatine's death?

Further, most of the... morally questionable officials of the Empire (if they existed at all) are generally part of the despicable lot of COMPNOR and ISB lackeys I mentioned as distinct from the Core World aristocracy.

The worlds, species, and cultures enslaved, exploited, abused, and annihilated by Palpatine and his minions might disagree.

Virtually all the actions and atrocities committed by the Empire were done so at an individual basis. Palpatine, the reclusive emperor, was surrounded by the political lackeys of COMPNOR quality who enacted such atrocities in his name, but without either his approval or permission. They were not representative of Imperial policy. The Empire stood for peace, order, and civilization.

The chaos that followed his fall was highly undesirable, and may indeed have resulted in more deaths than the sum of his reign and the Clone Wars combined (if one considers the death toll of the Yuuzhan Vong War), but imagine a galaxy where he never fell.

Where people live in safe, "luxury liner" worlds, content and happy under Imperial rule?

Do you think that Palpatine would have moderated his methods in time? Do you think his thirst for power could ever have been quenched?

He was perfectly content with what power he had before the rather traumatic experience he suffered following his body's destruction at Endor.

Keep in mind, this is a being that strove for immortality, and near the end of his life, began to view the masses he controlled and hoped to control in the future as fuel for his own personal Force energies.

The Dark Empire did not form as an idea within Palpatine's mind until the seduction of Luke Skywalker to the Dark Side. Even then, we are only left with the hypothesis of a New Republic historian on the matter, not any explicit canonical statements, as far as I have seen.

The Radio Drama excerpt you posted seems to say that he did have authority. Being given "a free hand" to do whatever he thinks is necessary sounds to me like he had plenty of authority.

As for Vader, I figured that with his special relationship with Palpatine that he would have some kind of veto power or something along those lines. I guess not.

TC Pilot wrote:

Dark Flame wrote:Do you have proof?

Firstly, and most obviously, Tarkin was acting far out of his area of jurisdiction. He was Grand Moff of Oversector Outer, not Alderaan or any Core worlds.

Secondly, he did not have Palpatine's authorization to destroy Alderaan.

ANH Radio Drama wrote:TARKIN: You see, Vader? Our third parties, whom we'll threaten, are the entire population of her home planet.

VADER: Alderaan is one of the foremost of the inner systems. The Emperor should be consulted.

TARKIN: Do not think to challenge me! You're not confronting Tagge or Motti now! The Emperor has placed me in charge of this affair with a free hand, and the decision is mine! And you will have your information that much sooner.

Now, there may certainly be mitigating context, but the fact that Palpatine placed him in charge of the operation of the Death Star with a free hand certainly seems to indicate that he did, in fact, have implicit authorization to destroy Alderaan.

Surlethe wrote:Now, there may certainly be mitigating context, but the fact that Palpatine placed him in charge of the operation of the Death Star with a free hand certainly seems to indicate that he did, in fact, have implicit authorization to destroy Alderaan.

Not least, that Vader could easily overstep his "bounds" and execute Tarkin on the spot and tell the Emperor he did it to prevent Tarkin from taking power from Palpatine.

The Emperor, has shown from time to time, to allow some degree of vicious rivalry between his subordinates and then pick the strongest. This was no more better illustrated by the Imperial Civil War that happened after the taking of Coruscant from the New Republic.

Dark Flame wrote:The Radio Drama excerpt you posted seems to say that he did have authority. Being given "a free hand" to do whatever he thinks is necessary sounds to me like he had plenty of authority.

He had authority to destroy the Rebels, not anihalate Alderaan. Tarkin justified it as neccesary to coerce Leia Organa into revealing the Rebels' location.

Surlethe wrote:Now, there may certainly be mitigating context, but the fact that Palpatine placed him in charge of the operation of the Death Star with a free hand certainly seems to indicate that he did, in fact, have implicit authorization to destroy Alderaan.

And by that virtue, Tarkin could have had authorization to blow up the Imperial throne world. Vader's protestations make it clear Tarkin was acting beyond the limits of what his authority granted him. At best, Tarkin was given permission to destroy the planet the Rebel headquarters was on.

Didn't Palpatine give Tarkin permission to destroy a Rebel World, when he showed the plans of the Death Star to Palpatine or some other times?

(sources: Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds I believe, Rebellion Era Sourcebook and the StarWars.com databank)

But yeah the Alliance fleet at Endor was small...though that was only the central Rebel Alliance. There were many rebel cells and friendly governments still out there.

EDIT: but yes it could be argued that Tarkin might've overstepped authority.

However, though some weren't necessarily mad at it in the Galaxy. Even the 501st legion knew Alderaan was resisting the Empire all the way, and Tycho Celphu, an Alderaanian knew that his homeworld supported the Rebels. ITtwas public knowledge (or plenty of rumots) that Alderaan was helping the Alliance but Palpatine couldn't just accuse Bail Organa of that in the Imperial Senate and/or they couldn't prove it and/or any such attempts would be politically unfeasible (Ralltiir wasn't necessarily popular in the Senate; doing something like that at Alderaan is MUCH worse given Alderaan's history)

If I understand Tarkin correctly, after he got what seemed like the right info, he BLEW Up Allderaan anyway.

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote:"Dantooine is too remote to serve as an effective demonstration but we will deal with your Rebel friends soon enough."

It is obvious that Tarkin committed an overt act of terrorism. From former quotes it is shown that at this time, Vader did not have the authority to say no. If he did try and blow up Coruscant I'd bet he'd be gasping on the floor.

TC Pilot wrote:So the decent and reasonable Imperials simply sprouted from the ground after Palpatine's death?

Of course not. However, very few, if any, were in a position of power high enough to mitigate the negative aspects of Imperial domination beyond their localized spheres of influence, if those.

Further, most of the... morally questionable officials of the Empire (if they existed at all) are generally part of the despicable lot of COMPNOR and ISB lackeys I mentioned as distinct from the Core World aristocracy.

I find it rather distressing that you would even suggest that there were no "morally questionable" officials within the Empire. Dozens of species, from the Wookiees to the Mon Calamari to the Talz, were enslaved on the Outer Rim by local Moffs and governors. Some more depraved officials even exterminated less technologically-advanced races en-mass. Persecution of all sorts ran rampant from the Core to the farthest reaches of known space; the Empire's crimes were hardly limited to COMPNOR and the ISB's covert coreward operations. These corruptions were well-hidden from many of the largely human populations of the Core, Expansion, and Inner Rim territories, but that does not mean that they did not occur.

Virtually all the actions and atrocities committed by the Empire were done so at an individual basis. Palpatine, the reclusive emperor, was surrounded by the political lackeys of COMPNOR quality who enacted such atrocities in his name, but without either his approval or permission. They were not representative of Imperial policy. The Empire stood for peace, order, and civilization.

What is your proof of this? You actually claim that Palpatine had nothing to do with the workings of the Empire he had crafted single-handedly by the sheer force of his own political skill and willpower? Palpatine may not have approved every single execution and massacre, there were probably millions or billions of them, after all, but he knew the evil and prejudice in the hearts of those he elevated, and did nothing to reign them in. Peace, order, and civilization? Certainly, Palpatine wanted those things, as long as they all dominated by him absolutely. Nothing, no morals, no justice, no respect for basic rights of any kind, else mattered.

Where people live in safe, "luxury liner" worlds, content and happy under Imperial rule?

Some would, certainly, blindly subservient to their wise and benevolent god-emperor, oblivious to the suffering subjugation of countless other worlds and species, absolutely subject to the faintest whims of Palpatine and his psychopathic commanders.

He was perfectly content with what power he had before the rather traumatic experience he suffered following his body's destruction at Endor.

You honestly think that he would have been satisfied to simply stop, if it was within his power to take more? He was ruthless and power-hungry before the day he slew his master and assumed the mantle of Sith Lord. Palpatine was never, ever anything but a brutal, vengeful megalomaniac; his "death" simply stripped him of subtly and patience.

The Dark Empire did not form as an idea within Palpatine's mind until the seduction of Luke Skywalker to the Dark Side. Even then, we are only left with the hypothesis of a New Republic historian on the matter, not any explicit canonical statements, as far as I have seen.

And so, because of a lack of an explicit statement otherwise (and I'm honestly not sure about the canonicity of the "Dark Empire") we are supposed to believe that all of Palpatine's decades of machinations, the murders he orchestrated, the species and worlds he destroyed, the lunatics he trained and unleashed unchecked against the galaxy, all of it was done to form a pure and just galactic government, designed for the betterment and security of its people? Even if Palpatine never conceived of becoming some sort of dark god, he was still a conquer, plain and simple, and a merciless one at that. It is not the nature of conquers to simply stop; they are stopped by something else, be it infirmity, rebellion, or divergent interest. Palpatine had the ability and by all indications the will to keep on conquering and dominating until there was no free sapient left within his power to reach.

TC Pilot:

If blowing up planets to instill fear wasn't a method endorsed by the Emperor, what's the point of the Death Star - especially its superlaser - in the first place? As an anti-ship weapon, it's horribly inefficient (especially in DSI, with its low rate of fire), and the purpose would be better served with a greater number of "conventional" weapons, or at least a weaker but faster superlaser. And if you need to destroy a planet or other fixed installation, well, if a single Star Destroyer can BDZ* a planet, the DS - with its much greater firepower - should be able to handle even a shielded planet with ease just with its normal weapons. I see no purpose blowing a planet to bits will accomplish except pure terror**.

*and even a BDZ is usually overkill
**or demolishing obstructions when building a hyperspatial express route, of course

eyl wrote:TC Pilot:

If blowing up planets to instill fear wasn't a method endorsed by the Emperor, what's the point of the Death Star - especially its superlaser - in the first place?

IIRC By the Imperial Sourcebook It was supposed to be Oversector Command.

As an anti-ship weapon, it's horribly inefficient (especially in DSI, with its low rate of fire), and the purpose would be better served with a greater number of "conventional" weapons, or at least a weaker but faster superlaser.

Actually the Superlaser wasn't intended as an anti-ship weapon, the thousands of HTL dotting it's surface were.

And if you need to destroy a planet or other fixed installation, well, if a single Star Destroyer can BDZ* a planet, the DS - with its much greater firepower - should be able to handle even a shielded planet with ease just with its normal weapons. I see no purpose blowing a planet to bits will accomplish except pure terror**.

Then you fail to understand that even with dozens of Star Destroyers it would take weeks to batter down a planetary shield, even with Torpedo Spheres. However, if denying an enemy a planet is the purpose, the Death Star is more efficient than attempting a BDZ on a target with a Planetary Shield. Cracking a planetary shield and taking a planet of importance was, however, out of the Empires hands until the Eclipse and Sovereign-class Star Dreadnaughts.

The Vortex Empire wrote:

Surlethe wrote:
More damning than the street parties themselves is the lack of police action to stop them. They're out there vandalizing public property, and yet there's no official presence watching the riot.

I believe I remember one of the X-Wing books stating that Stormtroopers opened fire on those crowds to "pacify" them. With blasters set to kill, not stun. Don't remember which book though.

X-Wing Book Six, Iron Fist. A Rebel Cell hacked the local holonet to put the news of Palpatine's death out.

Personally, I'm wondering how many morons got crushed under that statue of the Emperor that they pulled down.

The Rebel Alliance talks a lot of shit about 'rogue operations' and 'Ex-Alliance Extremists' whenever a questionable operation goes sour and they start taking public relations hits, but Wedge Antilles, Hero of the Rebellion, still has a murderous bitch who advocates sniping random civilians as a terror tactic on speed-dial. They also never do a damned thing to reign in their loose cannons.

TC Pilot wrote:

Surlethe wrote:Now, there may certainly be mitigating context, but the fact that Palpatine placed him in charge of the operation of the Death Star with a free hand certainly seems to indicate that he did, in fact, have implicit authorization to destroy Alderaan.

And by that virtue, Tarkin could have had authorization to blow up the Imperial throne world. Vader's protestations make it clear Tarkin was acting beyond the limits of what his authority granted him. At best, Tarkin was given permission to destroy the planet the Rebel headquarters was on.

One presumes it is unnecessary to point out that implicit in "free hand" is "free hand to do anything except overthrow me." The protestation makes clear only that Vader thinks Tarkin is beyond his authority; the fact that the Emperor gave him a free hand in hunting down the rebels and did not remove him in the hours after he ordered Alderaan's destruction indicates that he was not, in fact, insubordinating against the Emperor's wishes.