CT A question for Imperial sympathizers.

Using Ozzel logic is not going to sway me.

But you are using Tarkin's actions after the fact to create an idea of his military tactics. That is being omniscient. You should only be using his tactics before that scene with Leia.

It wasn't "rational" though. Rational is an act within reason. Blowing up a inhabited planet was not reasonable, except in Tarkin's world. It may have been effective, but it wasn't reasonable. Blowing up a moon, sure. Blowing up an uninhabited planet, maybe. Blowing up a densely populated planet, not reasonable. Not matter what way you spin it.

 

Assuming the character considered it 'rational' is spinning it as well.

 

Maybe we have different definitions of reasonable, because to me (and my dictionary) a reasonable action is fair and moderate. Blowing up a heavily populated planet is not either of those.

 

But shows that it isn't unreasonable to make that conclusion.

And we come back to the notion that Leia is going off of what she knows military commanders will do. You don't need to be omniscient to know what protocol is. Hell, Han even says so in TESB.

LEIA: "What did you have in mind for your next move?"

HAN: "Well, if they follow standard Imperial procedure, they'll dump their garbage before they go to lightspeed, then we just float away."

LEIA: "With the rest of the garbage."

And about a minute later, they do just that. In military tactics, there are always procedures. Checks and balances. Only the most rogue of soldiers will deviate from that and Tarkin is not rogue.

As you said, reasonable is "in the eye of the beholder."

Tarkin considered it rational and reasonable. As did Palpatine. That's why the Death Star exists.

 

darth-sinister

Ozzel isn't exactly tactically smart though, and that was part of the point of that scene.

Tarkin isn't rogue, but he's also not following procedure. He's also not beneath other officers. Remember he doesn't ask the Emperor at all before destroying Alderaan. Leia may be smart, but she's not psychic.
Also, the protocol for every Imperial ship to empty their garbage is very different from what a guy would do with a superlaser. Pretty sure there aren't protocols for what they do to planets when they acquire a functional superweapon.

----
AF/sinister:
Well, reasonable to me is the definition of rational, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I agree it's planned and not irrational in the way of "makes no sense", but it isn't exactly a good idea nor is it an acceptable idea.

 

No, but it also shows that the Alliance isn't the only ones to dabble in them. This was also supported in "Rebels" when the crew of the Ghost steal six generators to give to the Alliance, but Lando bargains for three in order to help them secure passage off Lothal.

Tarkin is the superior officer, but as we see, he's not above following procedure. You don't have to be psychic. You just have to be knowledgeable. As to Han, that was the point I was making. The Empire is nothing if not efficient and predictable. As to following it, the procedure is verifying the location of the base. In Ozzel's case, it wasn't so much that he was stupid as he was underestimating both the Alliance and Vader. The latter of whom has the Force and has had a habit of not following procedures.

 

But she would have had to be psychic to know exactly what Tarkin was planning to do with Dantooine. We're going in circles. Believe what you will, but I guarantee you in that situation she couldn't have said "Tarkin's going to do this, I'm sure of it".

Efficient and predictable in many ways, but they are not predictable to a fault. We can see multiple times they don't have any set plans to follow for most situations, just military protocol for a lot of basic things.

He was stupid, though. He underestimated the Rebellion twice instead of using caution, and he didn't investigate suspicious activity. "It could be smugglers" was not an excuse for not investigating. Do you forget about the other officer standing right there, who thought it was suspicious and worth investigating? "It's the best lead we've had", was because a supposedly abandoned planet has a massive shield generator on it. Yet, Ozzel was content to find excuses for why it couldn't be the Rebellion. It could have been smugglers, but the chance was also there (and fairly high) that it was the Rebellion. It wasn't like there was a 0% chance of the Rebels being there.

Vader doesn't accept failure, and the only way to avoid failure to the highest percentage is to examine every possibility thoroughly. Which, Ozzel didn't do.

 

To change the subject, because this one has been repeating itself for several pages...

I know sinister had a certain context in mind, but the Empire is not efficient. There's nothing efficient about blowing up life supporting planets. There's nothing efficient about building two massive Death Stars that were no doubt absurdly expensive, and then having them blown up before they're put to much use. There's nothing efficient about slaughtering innocent farmers and Jawas. There's nothing efficient about executing officers, even noble officers, for making a mistake.

People mistake brutality for efficiency (Just kill them! Efficient!), but there's nothing efficient about being so brutal that you provoke violent rebellion in response, violent rebellion that defeats you. It's self-defeating. There's nothing efficient about defeating yourself.

Efficiency and defeat, especially when you are the stronger body, are basically mutually exclusive. I guess you could come up with examples of those who are efficient even in defeat, but we don't normally relate efficiency with losing.

So I think it's time to stop calling the Empire efficient. They were anything but. This goes for many such governments.

 

I thought he meant efficient in that they have a lot of streamlined procedures and protocol that was followed, and that all those serving the Empire knew what was expected of them and most of them completed it well.

Efficiency isn't related to morality in a governmental standpoint, nor a military one. It's related to order and organization.

 

Yes, he was, which is why I said I knew he had a different context in mind.

This is sheer idiocy and I cannot entertain it.

Efficiency is related to morality in government and military.

Being so immoral that your own subjects rise up and destroy you is not efficient, and it is absolutely relevant from a government and military standpoint. A government seeks to govern it's people. A military seeks to protect its people. The Empire failed on both fronts due to its lack of morality. To say it's not related is idiocy, as it directly caused the destruction of said government and military.

And, not all my points were moral ones. Blowing Alderaan is not efficient, even if you put aside morality. Alderaan, as a life supporting planet, represents a huge amount of resources. Destroying those resources is not efficient. You know what would be more efficient? Not destroying those resources. Not being so terrible and hated that you cause rebellion. Not putting yourself in the position where blowing up a planet seems like an efficient method. An efficient method would have been to not cause rebellion in the first place.

The Empire didn't have any order, either. There's nothing orderly about your own people rising up and destroying you. That is a complete lack of order.

 

Oh wow, thanks. Sheer idiocy. Nice.

Everyone protests things they don't agree with in the government. You don't have to be immoral to have people rise up against you. You can be moral and still be assassinated. Padmé had attempted assassinations. Was she immoral? No.

Using the argument that a rebellion existing means you aren't efficient is not a very strong one. Rebellions just exist because someone doesn't agree with the government. Whether that's because they outlaw the import of guavas or because they are authoritarian, doesn't matter. There would be a rebellion even if some of the acts hadn't been committed, simply because the Empire was a dictatorship. They would not have any control over a rebellion that formed because of their government style.

Well that was my argument about Tarkin not following the Empire's model and being unreasonable. You did read that, right?

See the above for the last sentence.

They had more order than most governments do, despite the rebellion. They had more order than the Republic, which was fraught with corruption and such. You are free to point out a government that has more order, fictional or otherwise.

 

Padmé had attempted assassinations. Was she immoral? No.
----------

yes

Anakin: I'm tired of all this deception I don't care if they know we're married

Padme: Anakin don't say things like that...

be-bada-bing

CT: I don't think it's fair to say someone's opinion is sheer idiocy...unless it is of course sheer idiocy we're all friends here or I'd like to hope.

 

There's a huge difference, but that wasn't the point. The point was that anything can incite a rebellion. Absolutely anything. It's not exactly fair to say that any government that incites rebellion or protest is inefficient.

 

To play Devil's Advocate for this one: sometimes it's the REBELLION that's immoral. See the Confederacy of the United States. They were in the wrong from the minute the seceded from the Union and waged war on the United States. Not that the Rebellion was the CSA, of course not. Just that sometimes the rebels are the bad guys and the ones doing the enforcing of the laws are the good guys.

In 'Star Wars', it's pretty clear who the good guys and bad guys are.

 

Btw, that rebellion lost.

The Empire failed to put down the rebellion.

There is no efficiency in defeat.

 

No, but there can be efficiency before defeat.

 

I didn't say that she would think that. She would think that, "If I tell him it is Dantooine, then I can buy time for Obi-wan to get to Alderaan and get the Death Star plans to my father. He won't destroy Alderaan and at the very least, he'll want to check it out." You don't have to be psychic.

Captain Piett spoke up because he knew better than to anger Lord Vader and felt that anything that they find, would be better than dismissing something out of hand. Admiral Ozzel points out that there are many uncharted settlements, which is why he was willing to dismiss the notion. Had Vader not been on the bridge of the Executor at the time, Ozzel would have dismissed it. Whether or not Piett or General Veers would take it to Vader later, is uncertain. Also note what Veers tells Vader when he reports to him.

VADER: "What is it, General?"

VEERS: "My Lord, the fleet has moved out of light-speed. Com-Scan has detected an energy field protecting an area around the sixth planet of the Hoth system. The field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment."

Standard procedure was to verify. They scanned the system and determined which planet had the base and discovered that the shield generator was active.

 

But she was wrong that he wouldn't destroy Alderaan in that situation, unless of course you meant Dantooine.

My point is essentially the same as yours. I'm not arguing against that it would have angered Vader to dismiss something that later turned out to be a Rebel base. But I don't see Piett as "felt that anything they had" would be better. His explanation and his confidence point to the fact that he thought it was suspicious and worth investigating. Ozzel, on the other hand, tried to dismiss it.
My last sentence

That's pretty much my paragraph summed up. Ozzel was dense because he knew what Vader expected. Watch his face in the scenes. When he spoke up to Vader and was corrected, there was fear. When Piett was right and he was wrong, Ozzel glares at him. He knows perfectly well what Vader expects of them, yet he was still dismissing it. Whether he's so headstrong he's stupid (most likely IMO) or he chooses to ignore Vader's expectations (also stupid), there is stupidity in there.

As for your last point, they were monitoring the system because Vader knew it was the Rebel base. They already should have known where the shield generator was, since they had a probe dispatched to the system. Veers' point was that there was no shield, and now there was. The Rebels knew they were coming. Of course they were going to scan the system, to see if there were more bases or decoys (for example). But the point was Ozzel screwed up again, and paired with his unwillingness to follow Vader's expectations (which Vader saw as stupidity), he had failed too many times.

It proves nothing about your point except that they have protocol and use strategy. Which, I agreed already. I know the Empire. I know they have set steps and protocol in place. I know they use checks and balances, but they are also thinking human beings - which means that you can't account for everything just by reading a book. Half the movies are not based on set protocol. You can assume that Vader does his own thing, but who says that the other admirals/captains/generals don't also use creative strategy? It doesn't make sense that everything they do would be by the book. They have basic protocols in place, and for the most part everything works like a well oiled machine. I am almost positive that they do not abide by strict step by step instructions for everything, though.

Tarkin, on the other hand, has a huge superweapon and destroys a planet without even asking the Emperor. That's not exactly following the book. For all we know, Palpatine wanted a moon destroyed instead. Or a planet in the mid-rim. Or, he just wanted it as a symbol of power - not an actual weapon. Maybe Palpatine wanted to capture the Rebel leaders, versus kill them. Perhaps he figured that destroying Alderaan would only incite more rebellion. The movie doesn't give his perspective, so I can't say. All I can say is that the Death Star and its use were not emptying the garbage or checking for other bases in a suspicious system.

It was something new, something unique, and controlled by someone who had no remorse over killing thousands or billions. There is no protocol that would predict what Tarkin would do.

 

No, I meant Alderaan. She was looking to spare Alderaan from being destroyed, even though she didn't know that he was going to do it anyway. But with regards to Dantooine, my point remains.

Ozzel's expectations was proof, not a possible lead that might not go anywhere.

OZZEL: "I want proof, not leads!"

Mainly because he feared that Vader could get angry at leads and not proof.

Ozzel screwed up because he arrived too close and not outside the system. But again, you miss the point, they verified that it was the base. Even if Vader was confident that it was.

The film proves that Tarkin followed protocol. He sent someone to investigate. You cannot deny that he did that. Basic protocol is to investigate before attacking. ANH and TESB prove that. Leia knows what Imperial procedure is, regardless of there being a super weapon or not. As to using the Death Star, Palpatine wasn't against letting Tarkin do as he wont. The whole point was to have a weapon that could be used to keep them in line. Whether it was an inhabited world or not, the Death Star was designed for use. Life matters little to Palpatine. In the deleted scene in ROTJ, he is willing to kill his own troops to achieve his goals. He would send a million troopers to die if it meant that he won, or maintained his absolute authority. The reason for building a new one was that Palpatine was satisfied with the results and he would blow up Corellia, Lothal, Tatooine, Geonosis, Kashyyyk, Cato Niemoidia, Jakku and Ryloth if it meant that he was in charge at the end.

 

Ozzel still knew what Vader expected. It doesn't change that fact if he wanted proof vs leads. He knew that if they found a good lead, then Vader would expect it to be followed. Vader wanted the Rebels, not excuses or mistakes. Proof would make his chances of a mistake less, but a huge shield generator on a planet that's supposed to be devoid of life (and then the probe droid being destroyed) is more than they could have expected.

I'm not denying that he investigated in the end and followed protocol. I am saying that you could not predict what he would do. If Leia would have known what Tarkin would do, she wouldn't have even said anything to try to defend Alderaan. She would have known he would destroy it. If she knew Tarkin as well as you are saying she did, that would have been obvious. She would know he is cold and calculating. She would know he would not be swayed by her "Alderaan is peaceful, we have no weapons" speech. He could have flat out not believed her (even though we know that's not true, she didn't). There is simply no way she could have known everything about him, she didn't know his plans and couldn't have known them even if he was following protocol.

Another thing, since smugglers and other people like shield generators (as you pointed out), it is possible that someone would inhabit the base in the absence of the Rebellion. Likely? Maybe not. But possible. What would have happened then?

Leia did not have enough knowledge to say Dantooine. She simply didn't. She wasn't stupid or anything, I will always say she is one of the most intelligent people. But she didn't have enough information to rule out that her words endangered Dantooine.