View Single Post
Old 2016-06-23, 00:32   Link #76
Triple_R
Senior Member
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Age: 42
Send a message via AIM to Triple_R
Quote:
Originally Posted by karice67 View Post
With the implication that bombing a city/civilian population/cultural artefacts as retaliation (if that is how Windermere's Prootculture Ruins were destroyed) is ok?

By implication, isn't that akin to saying that what Union forces did during the American Civil War (destroying food and supplies that the South needed, by targeting the people) was ok? That the carpet bombing of cities on both sides of WW2 was ok?
No, I'm not saying that it's "ok". Of course it's not "ok". But it's precisely because none of this is Ok that people should be very cautious about declaring war, and why the horrible results of war are almost always a shared responsibility between all sides.

With Windermere, I see a people (or at least its government) that are trying to completely blame others for everything bad that has happened to their world and on their world. And I see the Windermere side repeatedly talk about eradicating and annihilating their enemy, with peaceful coexistence being treated as an impossibility.

Do you really think that these attitudes are sympathetic? Are these the sort of attitudes that should be justified?

I see some very unfortunate implications if Windermere is ever presented as right in feeling the way they do.
__________________
Triple_R is offline