WildWeasel
Spaceman
That's like saying, "I believe the sky is blue."
Do you think it was correct that Confed destroyed Kilrah?
- Thread starter Jochen
- Start date
That's like saying, "I believe the sky is blue."
WildWeasel
Spaceman
Whether his feelings were obvious or not isn't the issue.
This is contradictory. You say that you don't understand, yet you disagree with me in your last sentence. How can you disagree with a point that you don't even understand?
This is contradictory. You say that you don't understand, yet you disagree with me in your last sentence. How can you disagree with a point that you don't even understand?
If you ask me, Confed had more than enough justification to destroy Kilrah. Putting aside the fact that Confed had no other choice, don't you guys think the Kilrathi had earned it? I know that revenge isn't a good thing, but let's look at the facts:
A) The Kilrathi are an aggressive, violent, savage race. This fact is indisputable.
B) The Kilrathi are violent because their culture perpetuates a narrow view of the universe, in which only the Kilrathi are allowed to exist.
C) The Kilrathi have a long history of wars with everyone they've encountered. The only races that have survived contact with the Kilrathi are those races that have fought the Kilrathi to a standstill.
Since we're so keen to assume the moral high ground, obviously we're going to want to dissuade the Kilrathi from their genocidal rampage. The only credible way to do this is to inflict some grossly massive injury to the Kilrathi psyche. Something that completely convinces them that change has to occur. Nothing less than the destruction of their symbols of war and aggression (Kilrah) would do the job.
With Kilrah annihilated, some Kilrathi at least, have begun to consider the possibility that they don't have to fight everyone. That mutual co-existence is a feasible and beneficial option. Therefore isn't it more moral to seek the option which turns the Kilrathi away from violence, than to use kid gloves and not repudiate the symbols of their aggression?
A) The Kilrathi are an aggressive, violent, savage race. This fact is indisputable.
B) The Kilrathi are violent because their culture perpetuates a narrow view of the universe, in which only the Kilrathi are allowed to exist.
C) The Kilrathi have a long history of wars with everyone they've encountered. The only races that have survived contact with the Kilrathi are those races that have fought the Kilrathi to a standstill.
Since we're so keen to assume the moral high ground, obviously we're going to want to dissuade the Kilrathi from their genocidal rampage. The only credible way to do this is to inflict some grossly massive injury to the Kilrathi psyche. Something that completely convinces them that change has to occur. Nothing less than the destruction of their symbols of war and aggression (Kilrah) would do the job.
With Kilrah annihilated, some Kilrathi at least, have begun to consider the possibility that they don't have to fight everyone. That mutual co-existence is a feasible and beneficial option. Therefore isn't it more moral to seek the option which turns the Kilrathi away from violence, than to use kid gloves and not repudiate the symbols of their aggression?
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
... no.
Wow!
I never expected this thread to last so long when I started it at Feb 2!
I agree with Penguin and I don't agree with Ghost's last post...
The Kilrathi have just shown too clearly that...
"The Kilrathi do not coexist..." (Angel)
And by that they "sealed their fate" because otherwise I think confed would not have *chosen* the option to destroy the homeworld of another species to save it's own one.
I never expected this thread to last so long when I started it at Feb 2!
I agree with Penguin and I don't agree with Ghost's last post...
The Kilrathi have just shown too clearly that...
"The Kilrathi do not coexist..." (Angel)
And by that they "sealed their fate" because otherwise I think confed would not have *chosen* the option to destroy the homeworld of another species to save it's own one.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
... but none of those three points applies.
OK, but I think this is not a point here because you have to compare the *actual* behavior of the species...
furthermore (according to the CIC's WC timeline) the Kilrathi evolution began 6 million years before human's evolution, but nevertheless the Kilrathi did not "make enough progress" to learn (or "be willing") to respect the right of other species to exist but (even after such a long time) still extinct other species "in cold blood"...
compared to that, the timeline shows that humanity (and the other races belonging to confed) "made this progress" between the 20th and the 27th century (if not even earlier, it depends on the "point of view")
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to say that confed is perfect and never does something wrong, but at least they were/are not that much ruthless as the Kilrathi...
I'd agree that humans are savage, while the other points may not apply, the first does. In any event, I don't really see as how the Kilrathi had earned it, I think it just was something humanity did. After all, we didn't earn the destruction wrought from the Battle of Terra did we? (Although by their standpoint, we may have, having fallen for the false peace treaty.)
It's all just a matter of perspective, but it gives neither side the higher moral ground, we're just trying to justify an action. (Albeit one that was, tactically, necessary.)
It's all just a matter of perspective, but it gives neither side the higher moral ground, we're just trying to justify an action. (Albeit one that was, tactically, necessary.)
And I'd counter with this argument.
Posit a peace situation, reachable from a starting point of Blair's arrival on the Victory, that didn't end with either one side or the other as a race broken and shattered forever (which the Kilrathi were not following the destruction of Kilrahi), and that didn't involve the use of the Temblor, Behemoth, or anything similar, on the part of humanity.
Battler Hawke
Spaceman
forgive me but the kilrahi want the total distuction of the human race from the milky way mean. that would mean the distuction of one or the other.
I don't really think there would have been a way for a "plain" peace treaty. Unless it involved the death of the Royal Family, without the destruction of Kilrah. And even then, you'd need a family willing to end the war to become Emperor. Even that's an unlikely outcome, given the mindset of the Kilrathi as a people. (Although there are some families who thought the war should be conducted differently, they weren't entirely opposed to it as a generalization.)
Although I don't really think that it would mean the destruction of one or the other, so much as the defeat of one. (After all, in Confed winning, the Kilrathi are still around, had the Kilrathi won, humans would still be around, albeit in slavery. If not the project that, somewhere I heard about, of Earth debating about sending a shuttle in the opposite direction of the Kilrathi for hopes of recolonizing for humanity. Anyone got any data on that one I can use to spur my memory? Unless I'm confusing different games.)
Although I don't really think that it would mean the destruction of one or the other, so much as the defeat of one. (After all, in Confed winning, the Kilrathi are still around, had the Kilrathi won, humans would still be around, albeit in slavery. If not the project that, somewhere I heard about, of Earth debating about sending a shuttle in the opposite direction of the Kilrathi for hopes of recolonizing for humanity. Anyone got any data on that one I can use to spur my memory? Unless I'm confusing different games.)
Wedge009
Rogue Leader
Well, I wasn't sure what's your point against me, and I am still unsure now. What are you saying?
I thought the war had been going for so long that it reached the point where the Kilrathi no longer desired submission from Humans, but complete annihilation (ie genocide).
First (and only) newsbrief in WC3. I believe it was only supposed to have been a rumour.
That may be very true, that the had wanted humanity destroyed, but as I can't remember I can't really say. In any event, I still think humanity would have persevered in some way shape or form, if not hiding from the Kilrathi in some distant galaxy, then raiding as pirates. Still, I don't think they could have exterminated all of mankind's worlds. That'd be like destroying Kilrah, then hunting down each Kilrathi world and killing all the people. I don't think either side had the resources for such an operation. (Unless your assuming bioweapons/nuking worlds. Then there may be difficulties to this argument. Which, the Kilrathi had used, so I wouldn't be suprised.)
Lelapinmechant
Spaceman
Er, saturation bombing, anyone?
Civilians are never representative of their government. I'm sure not every five or six year old little kilrathi boy was going "Let's kill some terrans!" I'm sure that there were a whole bunch in economic depression. I'm sure their women had to wear flea collars. I'm sure... wait a minute! This is fantasy! In real life, total war is wrong, sure. BUT THAT'S WHY VIDEO GAMES EXIST! With video games we can actually have a TOTALLY evil group of people, a war-monging race. Granted, Vagabond has his little concientous objector "Confed says these are military installations, but...," and the very existance of Hobbes as a good guy questions the morality of obliterating the entire race. But vagabond doesn't say "let's get rid of the Empirical regime and ruthlessly throw pop-tarts and dollar bills at the civilians!" It's still a game. It's a world in which very large cats walk and talk and even though they have their own civilization, talk in ENGLISH amongst themselves. In this environment, in any video or computer game environment, we have the right--No! The INALIENABLE right-- to blow up fuzzy aliens.
Civilians are never representative of their government. I'm sure not every five or six year old little kilrathi boy was going "Let's kill some terrans!" I'm sure that there were a whole bunch in economic depression. I'm sure their women had to wear flea collars. I'm sure... wait a minute! This is fantasy! In real life, total war is wrong, sure. BUT THAT'S WHY VIDEO GAMES EXIST! With video games we can actually have a TOTALLY evil group of people, a war-monging race. Granted, Vagabond has his little concientous objector "Confed says these are military installations, but...," and the very existance of Hobbes as a good guy questions the morality of obliterating the entire race. But vagabond doesn't say "let's get rid of the Empirical regime and ruthlessly throw pop-tarts and dollar bills at the civilians!" It's still a game. It's a world in which very large cats walk and talk and even though they have their own civilization, talk in ENGLISH amongst themselves. In this environment, in any video or computer game environment, we have the right--No! The INALIENABLE right-- to blow up fuzzy aliens.