Kilrathi on Assassinations

[Mekt-Hakkikt]

How far does that go though? I'm sure that there are many Kilrathi across the empire, both noble and lowborn who could take Thrakhath in hand to hand combat (not to mention the elderly Emperor), but it's not as though they can get a crack at them simply by issuing a challenge to a duel.

Like Miracynonyx100 wrote, you have to keep in mind that most Kilrathi believe in the "born leader" thing. The Emperor is Emperor because he was born to the imperial family.

Yeah, I think the English one says something similar - but I'm thinking that it refers more to the formal system that allows challenging a superior to attain his position rather than the 'lone nut with a sniper rifle' sort of a thing we assosciate with the word.

Ok, that could work as an interpretation. So that's one thing that bothered me for some time that is solved.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

How far does that go though? I'm sure that there are many Kilrathi across the empire, both noble and lowborn who could take Thrakhath in hand to hand combat (not to mention the elderly Emperor), but it's not as though they can get a crack at them simply by issuing a challenge to a duel.

I'm sure they have a working system that involves position, prestige, birth right, etc. Their elaborate system of castes and social classes exists for a reason. You can very easily imagine that Thrakhath would lose no face refusing a challenge from a low-born peasant (if they were even allowed to make one)... but that he would have a harder time getting away with refusing to battle a nobleman or a close relative. (You can also imagine all sorts of complex rules - like the fact that you probably don't challenge the sitting heir for the same reason that Congress avoids impeaching the President, no matter how much they may dislike him...)

(Also, keep in mind that the Kilrathi who are in power now are the ones who've come as a result of countless generations being on top of the fight-for-power game... Thrakhath probably does have both bred and trained advantages when it comes to the types of combat necessary to keep him in power.)

Thrakkath strikes me as a psychopath.

NO! That would be extremely lazy writing. 'Oh, the bad guy is crazy' isn't interesting at all. They went through some great lengths to show that Thrakhath was a fairly good general who does seem to follow his own code of honor...

 

[Shaggy]

Most of what has been listed here as against Kilrathi code - Goddard\Locanda attacks, genuine assassination attempts, executing ejected pilots\POWs, etc. - has come about after long contact with humans, there's some social commentary for ya. Hobbes, and I believe even Jukaga, have said between the books and the games.

Since we were the first race to really give them a good challenge, at least after the Mantu and the Nephilim, they had to start learning some of our ways to better understand our ways of making war and, consequently, some of those "dishonorable" ways became legitimate maneuvers with some members of the aristocracy. Even Hobbes said that the Locanda attacks were odd but were sign that the Empire knew it had to change its tactics

Also, since they do not have a hive mind, like the Borg, a Kalralahr within the fleet may view one colony\ combatant\ opposing fleet as prey whereas another may not. In that case the ethics change as well.

 

[Quarto]

Most of what has been listed here as against Kilrathi code - Goddard\Locanda attacks, genuine assassination attempts, executing ejected pilots\POWs, etc. - has come about after long contact with humans, there's some social commentary for ya. Hobbes, and I believe even Jukaga, have said between the books and the games.

I don't think any of that, except for assassination, has ever been described as being against the Kilrathi code of honour. The Kilrathi may, or may not, disapprove of executing prisoners - but this does not apply to animals, in the same way and for the very same reasons that humans have no problem opposing capital punishment while eating animal meat. So, if they disapprove of executing prisoners, this would apply to Kilrathi prisoners - as opposed to humans or any other animals.

(bear in mind, though, the Kilrathi may in fact have no objection to killing even Kilrathi prisoners, because the Kilrathi seem to have objections to the very idea of surrendering and being taken prisoner - so for them, the problem of moral treatment of prisoners may never have existed)

As for Locanda... it was described as odd by Hobbes, but not in the sense that it was a crime against Kilrathi honour - merely that it was a crime against economics. The Kilrathi were fighting a war of conquest, in order to gain land and slaves - and Locanda showed that they had stepped away from that and settled on total extermination instead.