Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,668
# 51
03-30-2014, 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by revandarklighter View Post
Which doesn't make any difference from Cs point of view.

Hurting someone who did hurt you... Well that's understandable.

But hurting someone unrelated... Especially killing him... For that is the lowest of all forms.
That's putting your own wrath over the live of someone complete unrelated.
C's point of view is the most biased point of view in the whole mess! If we listened to C's point of view as Gospel, then all German's are guilty for the actions of Adolf Hitler. All Americans are responsible for the actions of Truman, etc.

C has a tendency of blaming the group for the actions of the individual. C also has a tendency to be unreasonable when faced with the truth of events.

Welcome to the real world, enjoy your stay.
My Fan Fictions

"Logic and War are old enemies"

Vice Admiral Soval - Commanding Officer, U.S.S. Bunker Hill
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,894
# 52
03-30-2014, 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan218 View Post
C's point of view is the most biased point of view in the whole mess! If we listened to C's point of view as Gospel, then all German's are guilty for the actions of Adolf Hitler. All Americans are responsible for the actions of Truman, etc.

C has a tendency of blaming the group for the actions of the individual. C also has a tendency to be unreasonable when faced with the truth of events.

Welcome to the real world, enjoy your stay.
I don't think you got who c is. You are speaking about b.

c is blaming nobody, c is just there, c just happens to be there and gets killed. Because a was bad to b and be wants to take revenge in the world,... Or doesn't care about collateral damage (c) when coming back at a.
Support more story content in STO
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,668
# 53
03-30-2014, 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by revandarklighter View Post
I don't think you got who c is. You are speaking about b.

c is blaming nobody, c is just there, c just happens to be there and gets killed. Because a was bad to b and be wants to take revenge in the world,... Or doesn't care about collateral damage (c) when coming back at a.
Yes, C was there just to get killed. Therefore, C is the most biased in their position that B is a monster and that everyone associated with B are also monsters. That's what I was trying to say. C has the most biased and unreliable view of the three.
My Fan Fictions

"Logic and War are old enemies"

Vice Admiral Soval - Commanding Officer, U.S.S. Bunker Hill
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,894
# 54
03-30-2014, 11:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan218 View Post
Yes, C was there just to get killed. Therefore, C is the most biased in their position that B is a monster and that everyone associated with B are also monsters. That's what I was trying to say. C has the most biased and unreliable view of the three.
Nope. That's not what necessarily happens. It can happen, but it's not a rule.

The point is that c is drawn into a and bs conflict and has nothing to do with it. And c doesn't care how nasty a was towards b, that doesn't make it redeemable to kill c. C doesn't care what a did to b and he doesn't need to.
Support more story content in STO
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,086
# 55
03-30-2014, 12:02 PM
The fact that Khan killed civilians--even if we attribute it to being so narrow in his focus that he ignored the risk that he would do so when otherwise he might arguably care enough to avoid it--is one of the reasons that were there to be some sort of Khan redemption, I would have to see some SERIOUS penance on his part, much more than just an "I'm sorry." Because that is a really huge thing. I mean, it was one thing to target the Kelvin Archives, the Enterprise, and that Starfleet meeting room. Bad, but military targets. People who knew the risks they were taking when they signed up and from Khan's POV could be designated enemy combatants. These were at least not people who had no chance to fight back. But the civilian deaths in San Francisco...that for me would be the hardest thing by far, to try to overlook.



Off-topic: you know what will really improve the Jar-Jar films? Seriously, put on the foreign audio tracks. I have seriously never heard dubbing done that well in any other movie, n my life. I typically listen to those movies in Spanish, which is my second language. Which also means I know how to say a lot of really geeky things in Spanish, like Que la Fuerza te acompaņe. The two best voice actors: the guy that did C-3PO nailed it dead on. And the guy who did Palpatine's voice in the Latin version managed to sound seductive and scary all at once. Which is perfect considering how Palpatine seduced Anakin to the Dark Side.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM me for more. :-)


Sig by gulberat. Avatar credit to balsavor.deviantart.com
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,247
# 56
03-30-2014, 01:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by revandarklighter View Post
Nope. That's not what necessarily happens. It can happen, but it's not a rule.

The point is that c is drawn into a and bs conflict and has nothing to do with it. And c doesn't care how nasty a was towards b, that doesn't make it redeemable to kill c. C doesn't care what a did to b and he doesn't need to.
This is not about redemption though...

I understand that the story was the story, but the fact remains, that had Starfleet officers not betrayed and manipulated Khan, he would not have committed the acts which he did.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 73
# 57
03-30-2014, 10:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grandnaguszek1 View Post
How do you think Khan in the J.J verse should have died?
In his sleep, falling into a star, before that movie ever had a chance to exist.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,837
# 58
03-30-2014, 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusdkane View Post
This is not about redemption though...

I understand that the story was the story, but the fact remains, that had Starfleet officers not betrayed and manipulated Khan, he would not have committed the acts which he did.
nah he just try and take over the feds like the real khan did but he tried to take over kirk ship
Quote:
Originally Posted by macronius View Post
This! Their ability to outdo their own failures is quite impressive. If only this power could be harnessed for good.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,529
# 59
03-31-2014, 12:57 AM
Marcus could not have done a tenth the things he was doing, without support-likely quite a bit of it-in the Command Staff at Starfleet.

We don't know what all s31 was up to (including implementing designs from Khan's own mind?), but it's likely they weren't exactly making things to improve the lives of puppies and kitties at the London facility.

This makes SFC and the London office not merely viable, but legitimate military targets.

Khan's appearance- It also seems likely that Marcus would, before waking him up, do something to sabotage him, or at least, to prevent him from using his image with any other augments that are wakened. Cosmetic Surgery changes aren't that far out of the question in 23rd Century Starfleet, and would be necessary if, indeed, "Khan Noonien Singh" were still on the rolls of "Wanted: Dead or Alive".

In effect, Marcus held his people hostage, and stole his identity from him.

All that said, Khan in "Into Darkness" could have benefitted from re-reading the Evil Overlord list-he made one critical mistake:

He tried to kill Kirk and the Enterprise in the most inefficient way possible, and didn't check to see if the torps were armed.
"when you're out of Birds of Prey, you're out of ships."
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:45 PM.