Chris Roberts

[Delance]

I believe it was more than just branching missions... it had branching units. Each mission changed depending on how many Japanese carriers were still in the war at that point. (The 'all wingmen can die' aspect Quarto mentioned is part of this, too... and yes, it's very frustrating.)

Well, now that you mention it I remember somewhat. The result of a mission would have an impact later on. That was cool, and yet frustating.

Erm, the 'pastoral life seems to agree with you' line is Tolwyn calling Blair fat.

Fun. Now, why did Tolwyn ask Blair back? It's like a terrorist mastermind getting Jack Bauer out of retirement, it's self-defeating. Did Tolwyn's strong sense of duty made him subconsciously want to be defeated?

Eh, I think you're glossing over Wing Commander 2. The idea that Jazz was the traitor has simply become accepted, partially thanks to the addons that treat it as history. That wasn't how we saw it in 1991.

I remember it to be a big surprise. But I was surprised with Tolwyn as well. Maybe WC2 was more of a surprise.

Wing Commander 2 goes through some lengths to throw you off of Jazz's trail.

All that is true, but Stingray get semi-cleared when Blair rescues him. Jazz, on the other hand, is more likely to be the bad guy because he gets to be Blair's wingman on the last stage of the game, the stalge the plot surprise is supposed to take place. But yeah, WC2 does a good job of making it hard to guess.

Wing Commander IV doesn't do this *at all*.

It was still a shock, after all those games. Jazz was a wingman for an expantion pack of the pervious game. Tolwyn is a whole different deal. Besides, there were no hints there another carachter close to the player was a traitor. Both Hobbes and Jazz were traitors that were onboard the same ship, doing specific things that the play knew. We know someone aboard the Victory sends classified intel to the Kilrathi, as we know there is a traitor aboard the Concordia. All those actions are shown to the player by special cutscenes. The same doesn't happen on WCIV.

And Tolwyn tries to sound like someone interested in peace, saying the Border Worlds were their "loyal allies", acting surprised by Blair's "defection", and even throwing Blair some tidbits about the G.E. program. He did look guilty, but in retrospect it could just be something to throw the player off like Stingray's wings.

Wing Commander II ends up being a revenge fantasy (and it ends up rubbing it in in the addons, portraying a very strong hate for Jazz on the part of your character)... but it's a good amount more subtle than Wing Commander IV.

And they let Jazz, the murdering traitor, play the piano. But, really Blair had every reason to hate him.

 

[AD]

Fun. Now, why did Tolwyn ask Blair back? It's like a terrorist mastermind getting Jack Bauer out of retirement, it's self-defeating. Did Tolwyn's strong sense of duty made him subconsciously want to be defeated?

I don't really think tolwyn expected blair to uncover anything. Tolwy was trying to make blair his pawn by sending him out to "report" on events that he himself was instigating. It was exactly their rocky relationship why he wanted blair to provide third-party verification to claims of border-worlder insurgency.

He really wanted blair to blindly look and say "yeah, this must be border-worlder thugs. They attacked us here, here, and here. " To which Tolwyn would say: "See? Its not just me after all. Even the hero of the kilrathi war (who doesnt really like me much) agrees. Can I have my war now please?"

For example, The orlando depot hit was done specificaly because blair was there where they could get his attention in preparation for Blair's meeting with tolwyn. There was no real stategic value otherwise for the black lance to hit the depot.

 

[Edfilho]

Tolwyn also expected Blair to join him on a later stage of his plan. He explicitly states he was disspointed to see Blair join the UBW. He believed that someone like Blair would love war above anything else.

 

[Delance]

I don't really think tolwyn expected blair to uncover anything.

Of course not. But why take the chance? It's not like Blair never did an Special Operation before.

Tolwy was trying to make blair his pawn by sending him out to "report" on events that he himself was instigating.

Pawns Tolwyn has no shortage of.

He really wanted blair to blindly look and say "yeah, this must be border-worlder thugs. They attacked us here, here, and here. " To which Tolwyn would say: "See? Its not just me after all. Even the hero of the kilrathi war (who doesnt really like me much) agrees. Can I have my war now please?"

I'm not sure if his relationship with Blair was of so much public interest. Either way, Tolwyn is not the kind of guy who thinks he needs approval, especially not approval from Blair.

Tolwyn also expected Blair to join him on a later stage of his plan. He explicitly states he was disspointed to see Blair join the UBW. He believed that someone like Blair would love war above anything else.

Even tough he was a famous war hero and a living legend, Blair gives up military life to live on a farm on backwards planet. Yeah, that’s a guy who loves war above anything else.

 

[Mace]

maybe he liked farming better then just flying patrols.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Fun. Now, why did Tolwyn ask Blair back? It's like a terrorist mastermind getting Jack Bauer out of retirement, it's self-defeating. Did Tolwyn's strong sense of duty made him subconsciously want to be defeated?

Well, the problem there is that we assume Blair is perfect... but lets face it, we don't really know much about him. Tolwyn wanted a 'war hero' on his side and he believed Blair could be convinced (through a carefully orchestrated show - witness the Orlando Depot). We know he selected Eisen for the assignment first specifically because there was a belief that he would support Tolwyn's goals... Blair was the second try, the replacement hero when that didn't work out. Remember Paulson's attempt to convince Blair that the Border WOrlds were savages? Tolwyn wanted a symbol he could point to as supporting his cause for war and he ultimately wanted to sell Blair on the project.

All that is true, but Stingray get semi-cleared when Blair rescues him. Jazz, on the other hand, is more likely to be the bad guy because he gets to be Blair's wingman on the last stage of the game, the stalge the plot surprise is supposed to take place. But yeah, WC2 does a good job of making it hard to guess.

I'm not sure what the precedent there would be -- Hunter wasn't the bad guy in the original game. In fact, it's the three 'finale' wingmen from the original game who didn't reappear in WC2 -- Hunter, Knight and Maniac. Going into Wing Commander 2 in 1991 you would have known that in the past the person you're paired with for the end game *wasn't* important.

Even tough he was a famous war hero and a living legend, Blair gives up military life to live on a farm on backwards planet. Yeah, that’s a guy who loves war above anything else.

... and promptly becomes an alcoholic. That's just bad rhetoric.

 

[Delance]

Tolwyn wanted a symbol he could point to as supporting his cause for war and he ultimately wanted to sell Blair on the project.

I know, but it's still funny that Tolwyn got back the only guy who could beat him. Blair did defeat Tolwyn on a personal basis. Not only did he have the prestige to bust into the senate and confront Tolwyn, but he had to get past Seether. If Hawk or Maniac wandered into the senate with the uniform of an enemy military force they would probably not be able to present a case. So the 'war hero' part backfired.

And also he had to be good enought to defeat Seether, who, at least in the plot, was a extremily good pilot with ridiculous comm lines. Anyways, was Seether a genetic mix of other good pilots, including Blair? Like Serpentor or something?

I'm not sure what the precedent there would be -- Hunter wasn't the bad guy in the original game.

There was no traitor plot on WC1, no big revelation in the end. So, there's no precedent.

However, it seems at least logical that the traitor would be revealed at the same time he's flying missions with Blair, for the same reason, say, that Spirit's plot have a conclusion when she's his wingman. Well, it's nothing big, just a deduction that is made easy by the fact we already know how it plays out.

 

[TopGun]

And also he had to be good enought to defeat Seether, who, at least in the plot, was a extremily good pilot with ridiculous comm lines. Anyways, was Seether a genetic mix of other good pilots, including Blair? Like Serpentor or something?

I always thought that Seether was "enhanced" not artificially created like Serpentor

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I know, but it's still funny that Tolwyn got back the only guy who could beat him. Blair did defeat Tolwyn on a personal basis. Not only did he have the prestige to bust into the senate and confront Tolwyn, but he had to get past Seether. If Hawk or Maniac wandered into the senate with the uniform of an enemy military force they would probably not be able to present a case. So the 'war hero' part backfired.

I think it's silly to try and reduce Wing Commander IV to 'Blair saves the day', both on a historical and a theoretical level. The latter is far too vauge to ever be claimed properly; the fact that Blair did something does not mean no one else could. In fact, we know that Tolwyn did percieve exactly that threat from other people whom he specifically had removed. Jason Bondarevsky was sent to the Landreich so as not to threaten the development of Tolwyn's project.

In the historical sense... yes, it's great that Blair debated Tolwyn in the Senate and he'll be famous for it forever -- but he got there because of the efforts of thousands of people on both sides. Heck, it doesn't even work on a 'hero worship' level... because Blair's involvement would have faltered several times without Captain Eisen's work to prove the conspiracy, to defect in the first place, to capture the Mt. St. Helens...

And also he had to be good enought to defeat Seether, who, at least in the plot, was a extremily good pilot with ridiculous comm lines. Anyways, was Seether a genetic mix of other good pilots, including Blair? Like Serpentor or something?

Seether was "enhanced" with an "optimal [genetic] template" put together from the genetic information of various sources considered ideal by The Project; we know that Blair was included among that but we don't know about other pilots.

I always thought that Seether was "enhanced" not artificially created like Serpentor

That's correct, the GE programme was not cloning, it was a process of... well, genetic enhancement. Seether was an existing person modified, not a tube person.

 

[Delance]

I think it's silly to try and reduce Wing Commander IV to 'Blair saves the day', both on a historical and a theoretical level.

I agree. I was merely pointing out that, in the end, Blair had a rare combination of two things imperative to win:

a) Celebrity war hero status, so he can just waltz in the senate and tell them their Star Marshal is a traitor
b) Supreme dogfighting skills, so he can defeat who is, in theory, the best pilot confed can produce.

WCIV is more than that, just like all other WC games. Hunter is on his wing when he assaults the Kilrathi sector HQ on Venice. Without spark's cumplicity, he would lack torpedos for his revenge on WC2. Even maniac gives him a helping hand on WC3.

He's central do the events, because, after all, he's the player charachter. But it's more than just about him, he fights as part of a team. Actually, he do make speeches about how important wingmen are to him, and how he needs to depend on them, rely on them. In gameplay, it's all about him, but not in the storyline.

Seether was "enhanced" with an "optimal [genetic] template" put together from the genetic information of various sources considered ideal by The Project; we know that Blair was included among that but we don't know about other pilots.

All right, thanks for that. Now, the fact that Seether is utterly amoral and heartless was part of this genetic makeup, or the training and conditioning? Is this a Nature vs Nuture thing? They wanted him to be a murdering sociopath, or was that a side-effect? He's more like a Kilrathi than a Human in respect to human lives.

 

[Mace]

If you can kill without remorse, you can concentrate more on the matter at hand, completing your mission.

take for example, the movie firefox, the main character suffers from a condition in which he partially loses contiousness, his russian opponent is briefed on this, both pilots appear to be equal in skill, then the "condition" occurs, the russian counterpart
does not fire, but pulls up to his wing to verify he is okay, and then re-engages, only to be blown out of the sky a few seconds later.

say this would happen in the battle between seether and blair, blair, or the character he would be in my hands, would go for the fair fight and let him recover,
to engage in a fair conflict. seehter would line up and drain his guns and empty
his missile bay on blair.. and win..

this, would make seether more effective in any situation, never thinking about lives he takes of what he does, more like machine then man.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I agree. I was merely pointing out that, in the end, Blair had a rare combination of two things imperative to win:

a) Celebrity war hero status, so he can just waltz in the senate and tell them their Star Marshal is a traitor
b) Supreme dogfighting skills, so he can defeat who is, in theory, the best pilot confed can produce.

WCIV is more than that, just like all other WC games. Hunter is on his wing when he assaults the Kilrathi sector HQ on Venice. Without spark's cumplicity, he would lack torpedos for his revenge on WC2. Even maniac gives him a helping hand on WC3.

It's more than just Johnny needing someone to have built his rifle in this case -- it's equally important that Eisen show up to save Blair's life with the Mt. St. Helens several minutes before all this takes place.

(Tolwyn is a *Space* Marshal).

All right, thanks for that. Now, the fact that Seether is utterly amoral and heartless was part of this genetic makeup, or the training and conditioning? Is this a Nature vs Nuture thing? They wanted him to be a murdering sociopath, or was that a side-effect? He's more like a Kilrathi than a Human in respect to human lives.

It's because he's not much of a character.*

Seriously, though, I don't think we can even ascribe this to Seether -- he's a bad guy so everything he does must be evil! isn't a good way of thinking, though I'll admit it's how Wing Commander IV's scriptwriters originally formed the character.

... but then look at the novel. My mind keeps coming back to the passage where he arrives on the Lexington and feels that having Paulson onboard has disgraced a proud ship's military tradition. There's an interesting, almost sad, third dimension to the character character that peeks out there.

* - or an actor.

 

[Delance]

It's more than just Johnny needing someone to have built his rifle in this case -- it's equally important that Eisen show up to save Blair's life with the Mt. St. Helens several minutes before all this takes place.

Not sure of what that first part meant, but of course it was important that Einsein showed up. I'm not sure in which way this mitigates what Blair did afterwards.

At that time and place, even more than on the decisive moment on previous games, Blair was the only guy who could do the job, for the aforementioned reasons.

(Tolwyn is a *Space* Marshal).

Oh yes, that's true.

Seriously, though, I don't think we can even ascribe this to Seether -- he's a bad guy so everything he does must be evil

I have to agree. His stereotypical laughter killing Paulsen was plain stupid.

... but then look at the novel. My mind keeps coming back to the passage where he arrives on the Lexington and feels that having Paulson onboard has disgraced a proud ship's military tradition. There's an interesting, almost sad, third dimension to the character character that peeks out there.

Yes and no, since he shot prisoners, is willing to murder civilians and get along on all kinds of criminal stuff the military is supposed to prevent, not cause. So while he probably held a sense of military honor, it was a twisted one. But it’s historically correct. In times past, cultures with a strong military culture of honor and duty would commit atrocities. On WC, we see that on the Kilrathi, and not so much on the Confed.

I guess this in fact makes the Black Lance really an attempt to be "more like the Kilrathi". Not only the genetic stuff, but a shift towards the Kilrathi way of life and cultural values. Now that I think of it, this is much more complex than a mere coup (I’m not saying they were trying that). They were not fighting just for control of the confederation, but its very essence.

Allright, I'll stop.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Not sure of what that first part meant, but of course it was important that Einsein showed up. I'm not sure in which way this mitigates what Blair did afterwards.

At that time and place, even more than on the decisive moment on previous games, Blair was the only guy who could do the job, for the aforementioned reasons.

Eh, I don't know -- the argument could certainly be made that Maniac is a superior pilot to Blair (he wins the contest in 'Red and Blue', he continues flying consistently, etc.) and that he could also have beaten Seether in a one on one fight. (And the novel claims Maniac was necessary as a decoy to distract Seether in the first place).

I think it's also reasonable to argue that Eisen is a superior orater and an equally important war hero who could have addressed the senate (he was even Tolwyn's first choice over Blair as someone the public would look to for guidance in deciding whether or not to support the war).

Yes and no, since he shot prisoners, is willing to murder civilians and get along on all kinds of criminal stuff the military is supposed to prevent, not cause. So while he probably held a sense of military honor, it was a twisted one. But it’s historically correct. In times past, cultures with a strong military culture of honor and duty would commit atrocities. On WC, we see that on the Kilrathi, and not so much on the Confed.

I guess this in fact makes the Black Lance really an attempt to be "more like the Kilrathi". Not only the genetic stuff, but a shift towards the Kilrathi way of life and cultural values. Now that I think of it, this is much more complex than a mere coup (I’m not saying they were trying that). They were not fighting just for control of the confederation, but its very essence.

Well, I think we have to throw out the shooting prisoners incident, loathe as *we* may be to do so. I (nor, more importantly, Blair) have no reason to doubt the technical legality of the act as explained by Paulson.

As for murdering civilians, he seems to be under specific orders to do so at every point -- as was Blair at Kilrah. Are they different in anything but scale?

 

[Quarto]

As for murdering civilians, he seems to be under specific orders to do so at every point -- as was Blair at Kilrah. Are they different in anything but scale?

Absolutely - in much the same way that bombing Berlin in WWII is considered different to using live ammo in order to suppress a demonstration on the street.

If the planet is considered a part of the Confederation, then its citizens are considered a part of the Confederation, and as long as they do not resist (which we can be sure the *civilians* on Telamon didn't), they have certain rights. Merely blowing them away is obviously illegal, since no attempt was even made to prove that they were rebels (I'm willing to bet not everyone on every Border World supported the rebellion).

On the other hand, if the planet is not considered a part of the Confederation but a member of the independent Border Worlds, then the order to attack them is obviously illegal, given the lack of even a unilateral declaration of war. So, one way or another, the act of bombing Telamon is very, very clearly different to the act of bombing Kilrah. An even bigger difference is made by the objective to be accomplished in both cases - in one case, we're talking about an attack intended to deal a vital blow to the enemy, and in the other case... an attack with no actual goal other than testing a new weapon.

(and I very, very much doubt that Confed's view of "I was just following orders" would be any more positive than the view presented at Nuremburg - it has long been established that a soldier is in fact under *obligation* to disregard illegal orders and to help bring to trial the person who gave such orders)

 

[Delance]

Eh, I don't know -- the argument could certainly be made that Maniac is a superior pilot to Blair

In his dreams.

But let's assume Maniac could defeat Seether, but not talk in the senate, and Eisein could do the later, but not the former. Blair had the right combination for that situation. That's what I was saying. It doesn't mean he did it all on his own.

After all, it's Eisein who orders Blair to go there and make the case, so he knew that was the right move. He couldn’t go on his own. Any other pilot would not be able to present a case.

Well, I think we have to throw out the shooting prisoners incident, loathe as *we* may be to do so. I (nor, more importantly, Blair) have no reason to doubt the technical legality of the act as explained by Paulson.

I'm not sure Confed has laws allowing executions of unarmed prisoners without trial. They seem to follow traditional western ethic values forbidding it. Being “technically legal” is not even the case, as later own the Black Lance actions were found illegal and treacherous.

As for murdering civilians, he seems to be under specific orders to do so at every point -- as was Blair at Kilrah. Are they different in anything but scale?

Of course they are. Blair bombed a valid military target as last ditch effort to save his own planet. It was a do or die situation, the only way to stop the Kilrathi invasion of Earth. It was a military mission with the purpose of defeating the enemy fleet. His action saved Earth and the Confederation. The purpose of the mission was not to murder civilians. And, most importantly, there was no other course of action available. This is paramount. Confed had no choice but to nuke Kilrah. The Kilrathi started the war, sued for peace, betrayed Confed, used all sorts of illegal weapons, committed numerous atrocities, and were about to enslave and even destroy all mankind. It was a justifiable action. It was a legal order.

Destroying Kilrah:

a) A credible threat not caused by the agent – The Kilrathi Fleet, Kilrathi declared war, Kilrathi sued for peace but betrayed
b) Immediate danger – The Fleet was preparing to assault Earth in a very short time
c) A valid military target – Destroying Kilrah would destroy destroy the Fleet
d) The lack of any alternatives – Confed had no realistic hope of winning a conventional battle
e) The use of the minimal force possible – He caused no more damage than what was required to stop the unjust aggression. Confed did not kept killing Kilrathi after they surrendered and posed no further threat.

Seether executed unarmed prisoners who posed no threat. He murdered innocent unarmed civilians who offered no resistance. He used bioweapons on a defenseless planet. More importantly, Seether was in fact the commander of a renegade criminal force that caused the conflict. The criminal force under his command was also involved in other illegal activity, including the development of bio-weapons and the use of the G.E. program. He was the agressor, and his action did not serve a valid purpose. The orders he gave and received were cleary not legal or justifiable.

Using bio-weapons against Telamon, executing unnarmed prisioners:

a) No credible threat - In fact it was a phantom treat caused by the agent who, indeed, was the commander of a reneage force inside Confed, which is illegal on itself
b) No immediate danger – The Border Worlds did not have a fleet capable of harming Confed, nor the real desire to do so. In fact, Seether and the Black Lance were the danger both to Confed and the Black Lance.
c) No valid military targets – Murdering unarmed, defenseless people who pose no threat in an action that doesn't accomplish anything of military value. Targets were, in fact, selected for their lack of strategic value.
d) The availability of alternatives – Not being a criminal would be a good start.
e) The use of force where it was completely unnecessary – The was no real need to do any of those things

Seether was not following his duty to Confed. He was betraying it. Blair might have defected, but, in the end, was more loyal to Confed and mankind than Seether and Tolwyn. Blair is a hero, Seether is a criminal. The senate agrees. The tribunal agrees. Actually, it was Confed who found all those actions illegal, so this isn't a case of the "other side" writing its version of history.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

In his dreams.

But let's assume Maniac could defeat Seether, but not talk in the senate, and Eisein could do the later, but not the former. Blair had the right combination for that situation. That's what I was saying. It doesn't mean he did it all on his own.

After all, it's Eisein who orders Blair to go there and make the case, so he knew that was the right move. He couldn’t go on his own. Any other pilot would not be able to present a case.

We know that Eisen does go there, though, and that he arrives by the time Blair is able to give his speech. Again, this is silly hero worship -- we don't know by any means that Blair is the only person who could possibly talk to the Senate. After four decades of war there have got to be plenty of war heroes and politicians lying around...

I'm not sure Confed has laws allowing executions of unarmed prisoners without trial. They seem to follow traditional western ethic values forbidding it. Being “technically legal” is not even the case, as later own the Black Lance actions were found illegal and treacherous.

Paulson, though, does seem to be sure of this... and he is willing to cite the specific legel precedent, which convinces Blair. I'm not a pretend space lawyer, but I can't see any way around this.

a) A credible threat not caused by the agent – The Kilrathi Fleet, Kilrathi declared war, Kilrathi sued for peace but betrayed
b) Immediate danger – The Fleet was preparing to assault Earth in a very short time
c) A valid military target – Destroying Kilrah would destroy destroy the Fleet

Well, first, in point of fact the Confederation declared war.

Second, though, the fleet was a coincidence. There's nothing about a major fleet in the mission planning and Covert Ops deployment beind Kilrah that took *years*. The Confederation was putting together the T-Bomb at the same time it was riding high at Enigma -- it was not a weapon built out of desperation. The entire operation is written specifically around crippling Kilrathi *culture*. The fleet just happened to be there when Blair arrived.

d) The lack of any alternatives – Confed had no realistic hope of winning a conventional battle

Really? Because I'm hard pressed to come up with a significant conventional campaign that the Confederation *lost*. Deneb, I suppose, out of two dozen I can name.

We certainly hear the same rhetoric about our chances at Vega, Dolos, Goddard, Firekka, K'Tithrak Mang, Ghorah Khar, Ayer's Rock, Vukar Tag and Earth... and the Confederation always managed to win.

How many times was Blair told that the mission he was about to fly would be the most important of his career and that he would be saving the Confederation?

e) The use of the minimal force possible – He caused no more damage than what was required to stop the unjust aggression. Confed did not kept killing Kilrathi after they surrendered and posed no further threat.

That's why no one ever debates the atomic bombings of Japan, right?

Seether executed unarmed prisoners who posed no threat. He murdered innocent unarmed civilians who offered no resistance. He used bioweapons on a defenseless planet. More importantly, Seether was in fact the commander of a renegade criminal force that caused the conflict. The criminal force under his command was also involved in other illegal activity, including the development of bio-weapons and the use of the G.E. program. He was the agressor, and his action did not serve a valid purpose. The orders he gave and received were cleary not legal or justifiable.

Using bio-weapons against Telamon, executing unnarmed prisioners:

Well, we've already excepted the unarmed prisoner (interesting how you're so excited about pluralizing Provisional Lieutenant Lee, though, isn't it?). I'm not aware that Seether had any command over weapons development -- he was leader of four fighter wings and (nominally) an infantry battalion.

a) No credible threat - In fact it was a phantom treat caused by the agent who, indeed, was the commander of a reneage force inside Confed, which is illegal on itself

Can Seether be reasonably expected to know this? There's no expectation that the soldier on the battlefield question the overall strategic value of the hill he's being asked to take (rather, the expectation is that such an order will specifically *not* be questioned).

b) No immediate danger – The Border Worlds did not have a fleet capable of harming Confed, nor the real desire to do so. In fact, Seether and the Black Lance were the danger both to Confed and the Black Lance.

Tell that to the factory workers who died at Speradon. The Border Worlds aren't the unequivocable good guys.

Ask yourself what a Border Worlds battle group was doing operating in Confederation space at the start of the game in the first place. A battle group whose very existence, according to the President of the Senate, is reason enough to declare war!

The Border Worlds, rebels all, got *lucky* - the fact that Tolwyn inflicted war crimes on them gave them political leeway to gain the independance they wanted... but they were running a crash program to build a military (to force secession, one assumes hopefully -- at worst for common terrorism) long before anyone ever found evidence of a conspiracy.

Given the chance to strike the Confederation they were happy to seize territory, installations and to slaughter civilians.

c) No valid military targets – Murdering unarmed, defenseless people who pose no threat in an action that doesn't accomplish anything of military value. Targets were, in fact, selected for their lack of strategic value.

That's an erroneous assumption on your part. In fact, we know that there were military forces at FT957... the local garrison is happy to try and shoot Blair down if he arrives flying a Lance.

d) The availability of alternatives – Not being a criminal would be a good start.

Seether is a criminal? That's news to me - I believe you have to be convicted of a crime to earn that title.

e) The use of force where it was completely unnecessary – The was no real need to do any of those things

I think that charge can be levied at elements of any human conflict ever... but we don't go declaring all soldiers war criminals.

Seether was not following his duty to Confed. He was betraying it. Blair might have defected, but, in the end, was more loyal to Confed and mankind than Seether and Tolwyn. Blair is a hero, Seether is a criminal. The senate agrees. The tribunal agrees. Actually, it was Confed who found all those actions illegal, so this isn't a case of the "other side" writing its version of history.

You're completely misrepresenting the situation, though, because - and this is key - Seether is *not* prosecuted. He is *not* declared a criminal... Tolwyn is.

We know that the man *giving* the orders was a criminal, but there has been no such declaration about the men who were required to follow them.

(And it is *very much* an example of the winners writing history -- you don't prosecute Blair for winning at Kilrah or here... but you *could*.)

Absolutely - in much the same way that bombing Berlin in WWII is considered different to using live ammo in order to suppress a demonstration on the street.

At the same time, we demonize strategic bombing and find Napoleon's "whiff of grapeshot" rather romantic. (And let us admit, the allegory intended in the 't-bombing' of Kilrah is decidedly not America's awkward, good faith attempt at bombing German factories...)

If the planet is considered a part of the Confederation, then its citizens are considered a part of the Confederation, and as long as they do not resist (which we can be sure the *civilians* on Telamon didn't), they have certain rights. Merely blowing them away is obviously illegal, since no attempt was even made to prove that they were rebels (I'm willing to bet not everyone on every Border World supported the rebellion).

That's an awkward distinction because we can be sure that the civilians in Berlin didn't resist either. We know that there were garrison forces at the planet -- they were happy to try and shoot down Blair... I even seem to recall civilians with guns being willing to shoot Blair when he landed.

The legality issue isn't so simple, either. We know that a court case *did* declare the status of the rebels ("The Admiralty Court has ruled that the rebels have rejected the Confederation's authority. Therefore they are not entitled to the privileges of citizenship."). This must apply to every colony that chooses to leave the Confederation -- not each individual person in these colonies. The fact that FT957 is part of the Union of Border Worlds presumably means that its legislature met and voted to become so.

One imagines that not everyone in Atlanta was a fan of the Confederacy, one knows the city itself did not resist... and yet Sherman is not a convicted war criminal for burning it to the ground.

On the other hand, if the planet is not considered a part of the Confederation but a member of the independent Border Worlds, then the order to attack them is obviously illegal, given the lack of even a unilateral declaration of war. So, one way or another, the act of bombing Telamon is very, very clearly different to the act of bombing Kilrah. An even bigger difference is made by the objective to be accomplished in both cases - in one case, we're talking about an attack intended to deal a vital blow to the enemy, and in the other case... an attack with no actual goal other than testing a new weapon.

An attack with no actual goal other than testing a new weapon, I suppose I can see that. So, what you're saying here is that were we to assume that in the case of an independant Border Worlds that Seether destroying FT957 was legally and morally more like, say, Blair destroying Hyperion?

(and I very, very much doubt that Confed's view of "I was just following orders" would be any more positive than the view presented at Nuremburg - it has long been established that a soldier is in fact under *obligation* to disregard illegal orders and to help bring to trial the person who gave such orders)

I agree, I'm not questioning that -- I'm just saying that it could be applied to Blair as well, who has certainly not refused some fairly questionable orders.

 

[Edfilho]

LOAF, you argue the matter at hand very well. But I think you are missing the point. Blair is supposed to be a big, big Hero. The player is supposed to feel special. Granted, Blair is far from flawless... But he IS the Savior of Confederation, the only man capable of endind the war and stopping tolwyn... because that is the point of the game all along.

It is not that your points are wrong (they're not). But you're going into a different direction. If WC was a non-interative-fiction universe primarily, then you would be 100% on the money (kirk was a bastard, Han solo was a mean guy, etc). but you are forsaking the game aspect of WC.... Remember the Avatar.

 

[LeHah]

If WC was a non-interative-fiction universe primarily...

As opposed to the books, movies, strategy guides, cartoon series, tech manual, press releases and other "non-interactive" sources he's been citing?

It seems more like people want to "split" the whole morality of the series down the center which is almost as bad an idea as arguing that the books or movie are not canonized.

The games are the way they are as a matter of interactiveness - not because they should be that way, but because they need to be so the player feels the ability to have the freedom to make choices. It's a matter of storytelling nessessity. That same nessessity for the games isn't the same for the other forms of media that WC appears in - otherwise we'd have Choose Your Own Adventure books and a Captain Power-esque TV series instead of what we have now.

 

[Delance]

We know that Eisen does go there, though, and that he arrives by the time Blair is able to give his speech. Again, this is silly hero worship -- we don't know by any means that Blair is the only person who could possibly talk to the Senate. After four decades of war there have got to be plenty of war heroes and politicians lying around...

Who is workshipping Blair? I just think he was a good pilot, a good guy who did a good job. That's about the exent of it. And half the time he had important missions just thrown at him, it's not like he was searching for it.

The only thing truly exceptional about Blair is provided by the movie, and it's not something I particulary care about.

Because he is the Player Character he gets to play the most important missions in the war, gets to be one of the best pilots, and has the highest score in killing aces. The guy gets to be a celebrity even amongst his enemies, what is kind of cool. But I think you are reading me wrong. The Kilrathi have more reference to Blair than I do.

But I really like what Blair did on WCIV. Could someone else do it? Of course. Blair is not a religious figure. He's not the "chosen one", there was no prophecy around him, and that's one of the things that make WC great, it doesn't require such narrative devices to make the the protagonist interesting. Blair starts bland, but the character builds up in time into someone interesting in the end.

And as a protagonist of an action adventure story, I admire the fact that he is able to present his case by talking instead of simply shooting stuff. I now the debate is just a gimmick, but I appreciate that the final battle was between ideas. Not guns, or ships, not blowing things up. And not empty rethoric, which Blair was able to cut right trought.

Blair has moral fiber. The scene where he faces the firing squad is great. He makes the soldiers respect him. He faces it standing up, without blindfolds.

But he's just a guy. Who wanted to be a farmer. Like Cincinatus. Only he was happier as a simple soldier.

It’s not like he never screws up. He should have let Dekker handle Tolwyn on WCIV. No Mr. Nice guy interrogation.

Well, first, in point of fact the Confederation declared war.

Right. But we can agree that the Kilrathi caused the conflict. Or now Confed is the bad guy?

Second, though, the fleet was a coincidence.

Yes, but you don't know for sure that they would use the T-Bomb if they could win the war in a conventional way. Besides, coincidence or not, the fleet was there, and that's what matters. More importantly, Blair doesn’t see the point of the mission until he finds out that it would effectively destroy the Kilrathi fleet.

Really? Because I'm hard pressed to come up with a significant conventional campaign that the Confederation *lost*. Deneb, I suppose, out of two dozen I can name.

Confed had solid reasons to believe they were goint to lose the war and there was no way of stopping the Kilrathi fleet. And that was a major plot point. We know for a fact that if Kilrah is not destroyed, the Kilrathi destroy Earth, because that's how the game plays. The story makes it clear that Confed lacked any alternatives.

How many times was Blair told that the mission he was about to fly would be the most important of his career and that he would be saving the Confederation?

"Most important of his career" - a lot
"Saving the Confederation" - not that often. in that case it was literal.

That's why no one ever debates the atomic bombings of Japan, right?

Not the same thing. Japan was losing the war. The US was winning it. Japan had no hope of winning. Japan did not have a fleet about to wipe out the US from existence. There were other ways to win the war.

I'm not aware that Seether had any command over weapons development -- he was leader of four fighter wings and (nominally) an infantry battalion.

He was the "commander" of the Black Lance, wasn't he?

The formal position of Seether is irrelevant. He doesn’t act like a normal Confed officer, but like a gangster, killing even a Confed official for failing him. That might be acceptable on the Kilrahi Navy, no not in Confed.

Can Seether be reasonably expected to know this? There's no expectation that the soldier on the battlefield question the overall strategic value of the hill he's being asked to take (rather, the expectation is that such an order will specifically *not* be questioned).

That’s not a good comparison. Seether was not an average soldier in the battlefield given illegal orders. He was one of the top commanders of a conspiracy. He was one of the leaders of a renegade faction that was carrying out terrorist attacks against both Confed and the Border Worlds. Of course he knew all that. He's the second main bad guy of the game.

Tell that to the factory workers who died at Speradon. The Border Worlds aren't the unequivocable good guys.

The established plot point is that the conflict was caused by elements within Confed, namely the renegade faction lead by Tolwyn. The terrorist actions were perpetrated by Tolwyn and Seether, not the Border Worlds. It's they who blew up Confed bases and civilian transports.

Given the chance to strike the Confederation they were happy to seize territory, installations and to slaughter civilians.

Yeah, so Tolwyn was right, he should've used bio-weapons against the barbaric inferior races after all.

Or maybe they were just trying to find a way to defend themselves. War has civilian causalities. But that doesn’t make it moral equivalent to the specific targeting and assassination of innocent people.

That's an erroneous assumption on your part. In fact, we know that there were military forces at FT957... the local garrison is happy to try and shoot Blair down if he arrives flying a Lance.

How does that justify using bio-weapons against it? What kind of threat did the garrison at FT957, three guys with guns, pose to Confed security? And they didn't try to shot Blair, they were pretty much calm after what happened. It has no strategic value, and that’s why it was selected.

Seether is a criminal? That's news to me - I believe you have to be convicted of a crime to earn that title.

Oh, semantics. That’s a purely legalist terminology. I was of course mentioned the fact that he committed horrible crimes, even tough he was killed before he could be tried.

You know, since the legality of war crimes tribunals is almost universally put into question, you could arguably claim that war criminals doesn’t exist. What that would accomplish, I wonder.

I think that charge can be levied at elements of any human conflict ever... but we don't go declaring all soldiers war criminals.

Not all soldiers use bio-weapons against innocent people, or execute an unarmed prisoner (in singular!).

You're completely misrepresenting the situation, though, because - and this is key - Seether is *not* prosecuted. He is *not* declared a criminal... Tolwyn is.

That's if you cling to the formalist definition of the word "criminal", since it can be used to refer to people who knowingly committed a crime. Seether is not really a "suspect", we know for a fact that he committed actions that later were found to be of criminal nature in a court of law.

We know that the man *giving* the orders was a criminal, but there has been no such declaration about the men who were required to follow them.

Seether was, however, a commanding officer. He was no mere follower. That can be saind about, perhaps, the rest of the Black Lance, but not him. And you are assuming Tolwyn ordered him to kill Paulsen?

(And it is *very much* an example of the winners writing history -- you don't prosecute Blair for winning at Kilrah or here... but you *could*.)

You *could* potentially prosecute Blair, or anyone involved in the military for that matter, but that doesn't mean there's a moral equivalency between destroying Kilrah and using Bio-weapons on Telamon.

At the same time, we demonize strategic bombing and find Napoleon's "whiff of grapeshot" rather romantic.

I don't. Strategic bomber might be a necessary evil or justifiable action in some situations. Napoleon was a criminal, in the same sense of Stalin, Mao, or other dictators who commit horrible crimes, but are never tried. (Napoleon was sentenced to exile, but that doesn't matter much).

Hey, since criminal bugs you for the formalistic approach, just change it to murderer.

(And let us admit, the allegory intended in the 't-bombing' of Kilrah is decidedly not America's awkward, good faith attempt at bombing German factories...)

The allegory intended is the Death Star, trench run and all. A military target! Even if you mean the nucelar bombings in Japan, the situation is very, very different. Confed was about to lose the war. The US was not.

That's an awkward distinction because we can be sure that the civilians in Berlin didn't resist either. We know that there were garrison forces at the planet -- they were happy to try and shoot down Blair... I even seem to recall civilians with guns being willing to shoot Blair when he landed.

Telamon was not a valid military target. The whole point was to test a bio-weapon on innocent people. If the US was bombing Berlin for the sake of killing helpess german civilians, it would be a crime indeed. But that was not the case.

"The Admiralty Court has ruled that the rebels have rejected the Confederation's authority. Therefore they are not entitled to the privileges of citizenship."

If you murder someone who is not a citzen, it's still murder.

Tolwyn himself acknowledges that. His response is not "Hey, the people there were not citizens, I had a legal right to kill them".

There's no way the use of bio-weapons against civilians would be legal. Tolwyn has right to order Seether to kill Confed pilots, destroy civilian transports, and bomb Confed stations?

An attack with no actual goal other than testing a new weapon, I suppose I can see that. So, what you're saying here is that were we to assume that in the case of an independant Border Worlds that Seether destroying FT957 was legally and morally more like, say, Blair destroying Hyperion?

Hyperion was purely military target. Blair did not use a bio-weapon against it.

There's no moral equivalency between Hyperion and FT957, not even from a purely rhetorical point of view.

This moral equivalency rhetoric games can be fun, but that doesn’t really work that well.