"A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack"

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by CrAsHcHaOs, Apr 6, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Master_Starwalker Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2003
    star 6
    It was both. His fear is what caused him to feel the need to attack. If Luke hadn't been afraid then he wouldn't have seen Vader as in that sequence Vader simply represents all of Luke's worst fears.
  2. SomeRandomNerd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 20, 1999
    star 4
    Why is it that whenever this subject comes up, the "uses the Force" part of the quote always gets forgotten?

    I think it's interesting that we see Qui Gon and Obi Wan attacking droids with the Force in TPM quite a few times. It's that blurring of the lines that I think the PT is all about. As though you're allowed to attack droids with the Force, but not living creatures...
  3. Darth-Stryphe Former Mod and City Rep

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2001
    star 6
    Wait... SRN!!! :eek: When did you return!

    Anyway, "attacking" can be done for defensive purposes, thus not crossing the dark side line. The droids were acting against the Jedi and the Republic. The driods were attempting to kill the Jedi and sieze control of Naboo illegal. The Jedi attacking them was a defensive reaction.
  4. SomeRandomNerd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 20, 1999
    star 4
    Oh, just passing by- thought I'd stick my head around the door?
    :)
  5. Wester547 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2004
    star 4
    I feel it's a matter of how one defines "attack" - or perhaps the rules changed somewhat over the years as Yoda was hiding about on Dagobah. Jedi do attack literally, but they don't attack because it's their purpose to attack. They attack in a defensive way. It also depends on how one contrasts "attack" and "defense" and "light" and "dark"; The Force may also act when it's needed and how it's needed and just that. Hence that The Balance of the force needs both the forces of "good" and "evil"; they need one to the other.
  6. Darth_Davi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 29, 2005
    star 4
    How about acting defensively because Palpatine systematically wiped out his entire Order, and Anakin joined him? Obi-Wan was fighting for his right to survive. How is that not defensive? He didn't need to fight for the Republic to be acting defensively, Anakin's new master was actively trying to kill him. Self preservation!
  7. Darth-Stryphe Former Mod and City Rep

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2001
    star 6
    It's true that it's never stated that the Jedi only use the Force for self-defense. However I don't buy that Obi-Wan was acting defensively on Mustafar simply because he fights for the Republic.

    Well, that begs the question did Yoda, who told Luke not to use the Force for attack, contradict himself by telling Luke he had to confront Vader again. Essentially, Yoda and Ben wanted Luke to do what Obi-wan failed to do on Mustafat.
  8. Master_Starwalker Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2003
    star 6
    There is no contradiction, because Yoda was speaking about defense in the larger sense, imo.
  9. DarthApocalypse Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2007
    star 3
    No. Obi-Wan was not fighting for his right to survive by attacking Anakin, because Anakin had no intention of killing him. In fact he even gave him the chance to leave, until Obi-Wan drew his saber and stated his intent to kill. In fact you could even say that Order 66 is merely the Sith defending themselves against the Jedi hunting them down. But I digress.
  10. Darth_Davi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 29, 2005
    star 4
    I wasn't simply referring to it being self-defense in a direct confrontation with Anakin, but also it being self defense as a way of preserving his way of life. Whether he actually fought Vader on Mustafar or not, he would still have to spend his life hiding from the Empire, because he was a marked man. As Palpatine and Darth Vader are actively hunting him down, he has a right to try to take them out first. Kill or be killed. Whether it was there, on Mustafar, or some other planet, at some other time, Kenobi had to fight.

    Go back and rewatch the scene on DVD. I think the scene clearly demonstrates that even on Mustafar, Kenobi is clearly acting in self-defense against Anakin. After Vader discovers Kenobi, and they begin their pre-fight banter, it is Vader who removes his robe, in preparation to fight first. It is Vader antagonizing Kenobi, as Kenobi checks on the condition of Padme, it is Vader who says "don't make me kill you", "If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." Kenobi calmly says "I will do what I must", and then Vader aggressively says "you will try." Vader is clearly itching for a fight, just because Kenobi is smart enough to figure it out, and raise his lightsaber before Vader can attack doesn't mean he still isn't acting under self-defense. He saw the danger, he prepared for it. Then, it is Vader who makes the first move of the actual fight, doing the backflip/strike combination that actually begins the physical duel.

    Just because a cop draws his or her gun, because they understand they are going into a very dangerous situation doesn't indicate they are looking to shoot someone with it. It just means they are intelligently preparing for the worst case scenario. Its being prudent. Just because Obi-Wan Kenobi draws first, in preparation for an attack he was 100% certain was coming, doesn't make him the aggressor, it just means he had his lightsaber already up to defend against Vader's initial attack. That isn't being aggressive, that's being smart.
  11. DarthApocalypse Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2007
    star 3
    That explanation doesn't wash for me since Jedi have been killing Sith (and vice versa) for generations. Neither side is acting in self-defense, but both are simply preserving their lives and traditions for their respective philosophies. If you believe that Obi-Wan was acting in self-defense by going after Vader, then you must also believe that Vader attacking Kenobi was self-defense since Yoda and Obi-Wan were actively hunting Sith just as Sidious and Vader were actively hunting Jedi.


    I don't see what you are seeing. Obi-Wan came to Mustafar to kill Anakin. Anakin did not hunt down Kenobi, Kenobi hunted down Anakin. Anakin, knowing Obi-Wan wasn't there for a tea and a scone, took off his robe in preparation. To use your words "He saw the danger, he prepared for it." Obi-Wan then takes off his robe as well, then states his allegiances (which makes it clear whose side he is on). Anakin then gives Obi-Wan a chance to walk away (which Obi-Wan did not give Anakin) and Obi-Wan refuses, then draws his saber. Anakin, in reaction to Obi-Wan having his saber out and ignited, attacks. What I see is both men itching for violence and both men making aggressive actions. To use your cop example, do you think if someone pointed a gun at a cop they would just stand there letting their attacker get the first shot, or would they draw their weapon and shoot first?
  12. xx_Anakin_xx Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 9, 2008
    star 4
    The bottom line is that the Jedi were aggressive - they attacked left and right. Justifications, rationales and excuses for their actions don't change the action. They were attack crazy; Yoda's "certain point of view" notwithstanding.
  13. Darth_Davi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 29, 2005
    star 4
    Obi-Wan's first goal was to confront Anakin, see if he could talk some sense into him. The possibility that he would have to fight him to the death was certainly there, but, if given the chance, do you honestly believe that Kenobi would have preferred killing him rather than talk him back to the Light side of the Force? Vader did not hunt Kenobi down, personally...YET. He would have. And, he did hunt down every single Jedi that was in the Jedi temple. Kenobi had no reason to believe that he would be spared. You are a fool if you think Vader's offer to Obi-Wan was genuine. Its like a drug dealer offering the cop money to just walk away. What do you suppose would have happened had Obi-Wan accepted the offer? Do you really think Vader is going to just let him go, and never bother him? What do you think Palpatine would think of his apprentice intentionally failing to kill the Jedi? You think Vader's master would be okay with Vader having Obi-Wan Kenobi right there, in the grip of his hands, and then simply let him go? Vader knows Palpatine is all he has anymore, and he knows that Palpatine wouldn't tolerate him showing a sign of weakness by simply letting Kenobi go. He offered it knowing full well it would be refused.

    Using my cop analogy, if they are going into a drug dealers house on a raid, they come in with guns out, ready to fire...not with guns blazing already firing. Its not who has their lightsaber out, its who attacks first. Vader attacks first. If Vader doesn't do his backflip thing, they stay 20 feet apart from each other, and the fight doesn't begin. They just continue to talk.
  14. DarthApocalypse Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2007
    star 3
    1. Your theory would make sense, except for the fact that in ROTS both Obi-Wan and Yoda believed that people were incapable of being converted once they were Sith. So therefore Obi-Wan could not have been there to talk sense back into Anakin. In addition, remember that Obi-Wan had a chance to save Anakin's life. But instead he let him burn.
    2. Then I guess I'm a fool, because I think Anakin was being serious. Out of respect of their past friendship Anakin was going to let Obi-Wan walk away. If Anakin didn't hunt down Obi-Wan after Obi-Wan crippled him, then why would he hunt him down before Obi-Wan did anything to him? You would think that after Obi-Wan maimed him he would be itching to hunt him down. But he didn't, before or after the maiming.

    1. How would Palpatine know that Anakin let Obi-Wan go?
    2. You forget that Anakin was already planning to overthrow Palpatine in ROTS, so he really wouldn't give a crap if Palpatine didn't like his actions.



    aggression
    Noun
    1. violent and hostile behaviour
    2. an unprovoked attack [Latin aggredi to attack]

    I don't believe Anakin's attack was unprovoked since Obi-Wan drew his weapon first and stated his intention to kill. I find it curious that if someone draws a weapon on you and is within attacking distance, you would give them the first strike. Your cop analogy doesn't work because when they are raiding a house they are going there to make arrests and bring people in alive. They weren't given orders that these drug dealers had to be killed because they can't be rehabilitated.
  15. Darth_Davi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 29, 2005
    star 4
    Obi-Wan doesn't say he is going to kill Anakin. What he says is "I will do what I must". How you choose to interpret that line is up to you, but it is not automatically indication that Obi-Wan wanted to kill Anakin. Merely that he would do what he could to stop the menace that Vader represented.

    Further, considering Obi-Wan has the opportunity later to kill Vader, and intentionally doesn't, your point is lost on me. If Obi-Wan intended to kill Anakin the entire time, he would have done so after crippling him later. Obi-Wan would have been perfectly happy not to have to kill Anakin. Its amusing that you use Obi-Wan's NOT killing Anakin as proof that he was trying to kill him. He let fate decide whether Anakin lived or died. He couldn't bring himself to kill Anakin, so he walked away. And yet to you, that means he somehow he was trying to kill him? Obi-Wan warned Anakin not to do it, knew what would happen if he did, Anakin did it anyway, and paid the price. Obi-Wan could have then sliced off Anakin's head, but, didn't. You have it wrong. Obi-Wan spared Anakin's life. It isn't him refusing to save Anakin's life, its him saving Anakin's life by refusing to kill him.

    Why would Vader hunt Obi-Wan? Are you serious? Little thing called Order 66 ring any bells? How about Vader burning the Jedi temple? How about post ROTS lit, in which Vader hunts down all of the surviving Jedi, and kills them? Obi-Wan survived because he stayed hidden, not because Vader/Palpatine/The Empire weren't looking for surviving Jedi. Same reason Yoda survived the Jedi purge. They laid low.

    How would Palpatine know? This is tough...gee, perhaps when he simply asked his apprentice if Kenobi was killed on Mustafar? If Vader lied to him, Palpatine would know. He would know whether or not Vader killed Kenobi, so Vader couldn't lie about it without Palpatine knowing the truth.

    Vader may have been plotting against Palpatine...but, not then, not until after he learned everything he thought he needed to know about the Dark side. As it was, it took him another 23 years to get the courage to do it, and that courage was given to him only by watching Palpatine torture his son, with the intent on killing him.

    Your arguments make very little sense. You want to argue that Obi-Wan was a killer, despite sparing Vader's life, you want to argue that Obi-Wan was the aggressor, when Anakin struck first, you want to argue that it wasn't self-defense, despite Vader and his master engaging on a galaxywide mission to kill every Jedi they could find...Already by their duel on Mustafar, Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker is a mass murderer. He has the blood of hundreds, if not thousands on his hands already, and that isn't even counting war casualties. Yet, somehow Kenobi is the bad guy?
  16. DarthApocalypse Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2007
    star 3
    Let's see. Obi-Wan and Yoda believe Sith cannot be redeemed. The Sith have to be stopped. If the Sith can't be redeemed the only way to stop them is by killing them. What other way was he going to stop Anakin considering that Obi-Wan thinks of Anakin as a Sith?


    ??? Kenobi left Anakin on the lava bank with the intention of killing him. Do you think that after seeing Anakin burst into flames Obi-Wan thought he was going to survive? If Obi-Wan wanted to save Anakin he would have pulled him away from the lava instead of leaving him to burn. Unless you're telling me that Obi-Wan knew Anakin would survive being burned alive, knew Palpatine would come and knew Palpatine had a cyborg suit ready to go. If Obi-Wan thought Anakin was going to survive, then why was he so surprised in Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader when he realized he was alive?


    If Obi-Wan laid low, Anakin would leave him alone, which is why in ANH he told him he should not have come back. However if Obi-Wan came to him, (like he did in ROTS and ANH) then he would have no choice but to fight him. Obi-Wan was the one picking the fight with Anakin. If he stayed away, there would have been no confrontation. There was nothing stopping Obi-Wan from going into hiding before Mustafar. Instead he choose to fight violence with violence.


    Vader lied to Palpatine about not wanting to help Luke overthrow him and he bought it. I see no reason why Vader couldn't lie about killing Kenobi, especially considering Palpatine wouldn't know Obi-Wan was there unless Anakin told him.


    And why did it take 23 years? Because Obi-Wan crippled him. If we operating under the assumption that Anakin has Obi-Wan at his mercy and lets him go, then that mean
  17. Wester547 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2004
    star 4
    I agree with this. The Sith and Jedi are rudimentarily upholding traditions and adhering to the Force, one way to the other. I think when the Force is with a Jedi or Sith - it's just that - with them - there's no dark or light side to be with them or anything of the such. It's only up to how the Force is used, hence where the terms "light" and "dark" stem from.
  18. MOC Yak Face Classic Trilogy and Saga Co-Mod.

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 6, 2004
    star 4
    The contradiction between the Jedi's words and actions when it comes to combat is one of the most infuriating aspects of Star Wars for me. I wish Lucas had never included those quotes about them not being soldiers and not being able to fight wars and then having them accept the title of Generals in the Clone Wars. It's ludicrous and makes them look like a bunch of hypocrites.

    As someone has already said, the Jedi having been fighting and killing Sith for millennia. Why can't they just be portrayed as warrior monks who will kill for the cause when necessary, without forcing us to have to try and reconcile all the contradictory pseudo-pacifist stuff? I really think the Jedi character has become quite confused over the years.
  19. GrandAdmiral_Frank Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 26, 2003
    star 4
    That part about accepting the titles of Generals is something you can easily diss on. However from the Jedi POV they are keepers of the peace however when that peace is endangered then they must step up to keep it hence why they become generals as the situation escalates out of control. Mace is emphasizing that they are not soldiers even though they have the skills to be because they do want to have peace.

    The part about the Jedi being portrayed as warrior monks who kill for the cause when necessary I like. It won't ever be that way however look at Rambo. He is a peaceful guy until you **** with him and then it's on. Perhaps Stallone should have handled the Order:

    Mace Windu: It's over Rambo

    Rambo: NOTHING IS OVER!

    or

    Palpatine: Good Anakin, Good. Now, kill him.

    Rambo: When you're pushed over the edge killin's easy as breathin'.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.