Admiral Yularen will get "promoted" to colonel??

Discussion in 'Star Wars TV' started by Hoggsquattle, Nov 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    It's implied by what we see and hear, there is no evidence to the contrary on screen that the Imperial military is "sub divided" - generals and admirals wear the same uniform, certain specialties or ranks require different apparel. as to how would an army get around without the navy? it can't so maybe they are all one.

    as to "non-movie" sources, they are not canon. what is canon is what is seen on screen, nothing on screen says they are separate enities. after all, a navy has pilots that are not part of the nation's airforce. Historically the marine forces are infantry forces that are part of the country's navy. perhaps it is so with stormtroopers.

    as to the bickering in the Death Star, the reference you quoted is merely a statement that one of the officers is the commander of a fleet of ships - just like each Jedi general
  2. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    The movies don't give evidence of either. We have all sorts of uniforms and stuff, so from the movie they could be branched or they could be unified. If the EU says it is branched and that doesn't contradict the films, my personal opinion is the EU explanation remains valid and canon enough.
  3. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    quite true. :)
  4. The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 10
    The different uniform designs are, as far as I can recall, used consistently- except in the case of the Death Star where you have all the branches stationed together. And though the basic dress uniform is the same style for officers, there's obviously distinctions in branches with different colors (black, grey, green, etc).
  5. Darthbane2007 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2007
    star 4
    If I may so..

    In the US military, Uniforms look essentially the same, from the army to the navy to the marines to the air force, except they are of a different color and design..
  6. Darthbane2007 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2007
    star 4
    Let's say for instance i'm a Lieutenant Colonel ( Which is a 0-5 Rank) in the Army/Marines/Air Force, and by some unexplained change in venue, I was allowed to switch to the navy. But they don't have Colonels or Lieutenant Colonels in the Navy, the only rank comparable to LCs or Cs are Commanders, the Navy's 0-5. Anyway, Yularen joined a different branch and moved up in their ranks to colonel..
  7. DanikKreldin Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2007
    star 1
    http://www.marines.mil/units/hqmc/cmc/PublishingImages/GenConwayHR.jpg

    http://www.army.mil/-images/2006/12/14/1375/army.mil-2006-12-22-152303.jpg

    One is a Marine General, the other an Army General. Not a huge difference in uniform. Also note that the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force (in the US) all use the same exact rank insignia (emblems, whatever you wanna call them) for all their officer ranks. A second lieutenant wears one bronze bar, a first lieutenant wears a silver bar, a colonel wears (or captain in the navy) wears a silver eagle, etc, a general (or admiral) wears four silver stars. It's all the same. So if you were to see a US Marine and a US Army General, same rank insignia, standing side by side, would we have to assume that, having not been told that they are separate, that they are in the same organization, even though we know that one is a Marine and the other an Army man? It's a silly assumption to make based on the fact that we never explicitly are told that the branches are separate. If we know that one man is an Imperial General who commands an army of troops, and the other man is an Imperial Admiral who commands a fleet, why must we assume that they in the same organization? I mean, in a way, they are all members and officers of the Imperial Military as a whole, but any military is broken up into all its various sub-organizations, branches, divisions, etc. Imagine the logistical nightmare if everything was bunched up together under one chain of command. And it would go against Palpatine's very nature - he purposefully created all these sub-organizations and pitted them against each other, to ensure no one man under him became too powerful. Hence why you have ISB and Imperial Intelligence always at each other's throat, or, in the case of ANH, the Imperial Navy Admiral arguing with the Imperial General in the Death Star conference room.

    And now, I'm not talking about Stormtroopers. I'm just talking about the Navy and the Army. There is no evidence whatsoever that an Army General like Veers would have had to answer to a Fleet Admiral like Piett in the Navy; under your idea, where they are all bunched up together under one chain of command, Veers would have been subservient to Piett. But it just doesn't work like that. General Patton wouldn't answer to Admiral Halsey.
  8. Andersonian Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 5, 2009
    star 1
    Well that is your personal opinion on canon, but certainly not one shared by Lucas Licensing.

    If we go by just what's on screen then they're just a bunch of unspecified officers of some sort.

    If you care about what their ranks actually are, then that is what the EU exists for.
  9. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    But, Andersonian, the EU is not canon. Only the movies, Clone Wars and the live action series are canon.

    There are several instances where the Star Wars on screen overwrites the EU. Force ghosts for example.

    I've read that George Lucas pays little heed to the EU, apart from the odd glance to approve something or such.

    The EU could easily be erased with a few lines in a movies or TV episode.
  10. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    That's where you're mistaken. The EU IS canon. It's just a different level of canon from the movies. So if the films don't contradict something written by the EU, then the EU version stands as canon.

    Personal canon is a whole different matter, but as far as Lucasfilms is concerned, that's how it goes.
  11. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    Very true, but but no sillier than assuming the opposite because we are "explicitly told" anything. There is no mention in the three movies of an "army" or "navy". It's a massive military organization with different specialties. The stormtroopers are infantry but also provide ship security. The Imperials with the oversized helmets appear on Star Destroyers, Death Stars and Endor.

    We know nothing either of Palpatine's "nature".

    The EU goes into depth on the structure of the Empire. Fair enough, but that is to suit the writers needs. They needed things fleshed out and they based the Empire on the military in the real world.

    But nothing in the movie says it is structured like that. Or isn't, as was pointed out above.

    However, both you and DarthBane are correct about military uniforms (I think it's funny that you use the US military as a comparison to the Empire:p - sorry couldn't resist [face_peace] .) Seriously though, yes, military unforms most countries arte basically the same between the airforce, army and navy.

    I'm looking at stills from EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. Is Veers uniform a slighty different colour to Piett's and Ozzel's? I can't tell because it could just be lighting and the pictures aren't great either. I had always thought they are the same.

    Can someone clear this up?

    The argument in the conference room is a whole other kettle of fish that I need cleared up. Danik, you said one is a general and the other is an admiral so I assumed you meant one is army and the other navy so I got curious and googled it.

    The two arguing officers are not named "on screen", but one refers to the other as a "commander".

    In the credits they are named General Taggi and General Motti.

    In the radio play, Motti is Tarkin's right hand man. I don't recall the "choke scene" and it's been years since hearing it and I always assumed that the "choking" officer is Motti because in both he is a complete lick.

    I assumed the other to be Taggi.

    Wookiepedia agrees with you Danik. Motti is navy and Tagge is army - and a general.

    But there is the problem. In the movie, Motti refers to the Tagge character as "commander" and to Tagge's "star fleet".

    If the Imperial military is indeed sub-divided then the movie is clearly showing that Motti and Tagge are officers in the Navy.

    This is from the Continuity section of the Cassio Tagge page on Wookiepedia :- "Though Motti references Tagge as head of the Imperial Navy, he is actually an Army commander. Motti is a commander in the Navy."

    How can this be? In the movie he is the commander of a fleet of ships. And if movie credits are also canon, then in the Empire a general can command a fleet, just like a Jedi General in Clone Wars. Perhaps Tagge also commanded ground forces. Perhaps Veers also commanded a fleet of ships but was seconded to assist Vader and outranked by Ozzel.

    However, the movie is law and unless George Lucas redubs the scene, Tagge is a fleet commander.




  12. DanikKreldin Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2007
    star 1
    Well, the problem with Motti and Tagge is that their names and lines kept on getting switched around in the early scripts. In fact, in the novelization of the novel released before the movie, it is Tagge who gets choked and Motti isn't even present, based on an earlier script. I don't know why they kept on getting switched around, but it ended up with the admiral saying the lines a general would say and so forth. The only thing people came up with was that perhaps Motti was referring to Tagge's private starfleet or Motti was just generalizing in order to explain the discrepancy that evolved from their lines being mixed up. Also, him being called a commander does not mean a naval position; he was referring to Tagge as a commander in his role as commander of all Army operations aboard the Death Star. It's in the same vein as Darth Vader calling Moff Jerjerrod "Commander" when greeting him aboard the Death Star; now we know that Jerjerrod is a Moff from the screenplay/novelization/everywhere else, but he's also Commander of the Death Star, and that's why he's called Commander. Leia calls Tarkin "Governor" but we know his rank is Grand Moff, but it's because he's Grand Moff that Leia calls him Governor; same thing with Tagge and Jerjerrod. So Commander does not automatically make a naval commander.

    But, more importantly, your entire argument is based on the fact that the movies do not come out and say the military is a multi-branch system. But the same argument can be used against you; not once in the movies do they come out and blatantly say that the military is a one-branch system. So you're at a bit of a stalemate. You're basically saying that due to the lack of direct evidence (ie, them saying that the military is multi-branch) than it must be a single branch military. But the lack of such evidence does not mean that it is a single-branch military, same as there is no direct evidence to suggest it is a multi-branch system, but just because it has neither it is silly to suggest that it must be a single-branch military. So what do we do? We have to look at ancillary evidence, something that may not come directly from the movies.

    First, we know that Lucas drew a lot of his inspiration for the movies from real-life examples. We know that Palpatine was based on figures such as Hitler, Caesar and Richard Nixon. We know that the Imperial Military was largely inspired by both the British Empire and Nazi Germany; hell, Imperial officers all speak with a Queen's English accent and Stormtroopers are a clear reference back to Nazi Germany. So we know that a large part of Star Wars draws its inspiration from the real-world. And what do we know about real world militaries? Every single one is a multi-branch system. They each have a separate Army and Navy under the umbrella of the state's military.

    Secondly, we know that in the Expanded Universe, the Imperial Military is a multi-branch system. And since the Lucas company policy is that as long as it does not contradict the movies, then it is part of the SW continuity, and since the Empire being a multi-branch system in the EU does not conflict with the movies, then...

    So since the movies do not say it is a single-branch system, and since every military in the real-world is a multi-branch system and the Imperial Military in the EU is a multi-branch system, I just don't see how your argument can be valid nor do I know why you seem to think it is. Your entire argument is based on the fact that the movies don't say it is single or multi branched, and that in of itself is a pretty weak argument to make for it being a single-branch system.
  13. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    It seems like what you are saying is that some of the EU is canon until it isn't anymore!!!! something is either canon or it isn't!!

    EXAMPLE: Jedi turning into Force Ghosts or communicating from beyond the grave is a common occurrence according TALES OF THE JEDI. Yet the PREQUELS state clearly that Qui-Gonn is the first ever.
    Timothy Zahn made several references to events surrounding the Clone Wars that do not fit in with how the movies and series portray these. I cannot recall specifics at the moment.

    I do not know what you mean by personal canon? please explain.
  14. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    True, so all we can rely on is what we see and hear on screen.

    Yes in the evolution of the script characters were jumbled about, but in the end Motti is Motti and Tagge is Tagge. I see no discrepancy in what Motti says to Tagge. Motti clearly references Tagge's "fleet", there is no generalization.

    However, I do see a discrepancy in non-movie reference material about Tagge. It does not match with what we see in the movie.

    But Motti does not call Tagge "a" commander, he refers to him by his rank - "dangerous to your star fleet, Commander..." - not "dangerous to a star fleet you are the commander of, General..."
    Yes, the novels, etc, say that Jerjerrod was a Moff is the evolving script, but in the shooting script Lucas (or someone else in authority) saw the need to reduce his rank, so he was no longer a Moff but a Commander.
    Moffs and Grand Moff are Governors, so Leia was correct in calling Tarkin a Governor.

    I'm not saying that the rank of commander automatically makes a character a naval officer.

    I'm no military expert but I've never seen an Admiral or General called Commander in any book, movie, etc.

    Gry said that earlier and he is correct. the movies do not specify one way or the other how the military forces are structured. yes, the EU authors to expand on that assumed them to be like those in the real world. that's fair enough.
    However, in the CLONE WARS, the GRAND ARMY OF THE REPUBLIC clearly unites infantry, airforce and navy under one authority and the Jedi Generals command both the sailors and infantry under their command. it's not much of a stretch to assume its likely the Empire followed this structure.

  15. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    Yes, that's pretty much what I'm saying. All EU is canon, unless it is contradicted by something higher up in the "canon hierarchy". It was canon that Boba Fett's real name was Jester Mereel and he had been a Journeyman Protector, until Episode 2 came out and overwrote all that. Star Wars is a universe that is always being created and expanded, so it makes perfect sense that the canon is always evolving as well. Think about it as the Catholic Church. Up until some point it was canon that the Earth was the center of the universe. Then, some new information comes out and now all of a sudden the canon is that the sun is the center of the universe. Canon changes, it's no biggie.
  16. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    but what is in the movie cannot change (unless Lucas adds new scenes or re-dubs, etc), so therefore what is in the movie is "fact" - in a manner of speaking.

    therefore, if Motti calls Tagge "Commander" and says he has a "star fleet" then this is fact.

    therefore the sources which call Tagge a General are incorrect. his rank is Commander.
  17. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    Ah, personal canon is the thing that blows all this argument out of the window. In the end of the day, what does it matter what I tell you about canon? What does it matter what Lucasfilms oficial policy is regarding canon? All that should really matter for you is your Personal Canon, meaning, it is canon whatever you like to consider canon. Face it, Star Wars is not real, so you can pick and chose what you wish to include in your vision of the universe. Even though you might consider GL's vision to be the utmost canon, in your personal canon Han can still shoot first. In my own personal canon EU books and RPG sourcebooks play a huge part, except for those that I find lame. If something sucks, it isn't canon. Simple as that.

    Exactly. If some EU source says Tagge is a General, while the films say he's a Commander. That EU source is not canon (unless they write a retcon that says that Tagge held the rank of General for a brief period, or something like that). However if the EU source goes on to explain which fleet was under Tagge's command, what battles he fought, and all sorts of info that the movies never dealt with, that's all canon.
  18. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    I get you now. Well, I think it's more fun to try work it all out into one smooth history. I like it all. I'd love some of the old Marvel stories to be retconned to fit the proper timeline. Some good tales were told in the "years" between EMPIRE and JEDI. we know now that it was only a matter of weeks/months (how long exactly?) but they could be made to fit the pre-TESB years.

    I consider such things to be mistakes to be rectified at some later point.
  19. The2ndQuest Tri-Mod With a Mouth

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 10
    It's not usually so much a case of "something is canon or isn't". The way Star Wars is set up is to adapt to it's changes to accomodate new material. The canon heirachy is used to determine what sources to favor when retconning a perceived error.

    This usually means that the films take precedence (not always the case, as there are exceptions of the EU overwriting smaller elements of the film, like Greedo in TPM), but just because they do doesn't mean the Eu material in question is invalidated.

    Even though the films are at the top, sometimes you need the EU to resolve conflicts within the films themselves and can't take the films at their literal face value.

    Just because Han uses the term "parsecs" as a unit of time doesn't mean a parsec is a unit of time and not distance in the SW universe (sure, you can speculate he's making crap up, but at face value, the films don't establish that he is).

    Same goes for the Republic being both 1,000 years old and "a thousand generations" old, Admiral Motto and General Tagge, etc.

    Also, in your Force Ghost example, that is not a contradiction. They had long established the Jedi of thousands of years ago had different knowledge and abilities and traditions that the prequel-era Jedi differed from or lost- this included Force ghosting, as well as master and apprentice rules and Jedi having families and attachments. The Jedi change over time, as do the Sith. And much of that TOTJ stuff came from info from Lucas, so it all falls into that grey area where something has to set things straight.

    Not to derail this thread into a canon debate, but the bottomline is- the SW EU isn't Star Trek or most other media franchise spin-off material. It's not seen as non-canon by the controlling interests and has had varying degrees of influence over the top canon material for over a decade, so while it is subservient to the films, it's also not something that can be outright ignored in discussion, even if one chooses not to take it as 100% face value.

    And, quite frankly, there's a huge difference between the names of characters and other background info from the films and actual EU prose. Lucas tends to abide by most of the former (Twi'leks, etc) and usually has a hand in at least some of it.


    Didn't you cite the film credits as listing Motti as a General to be evidence that Motti wasn't an Admiral? Yet you'd ignore Tagge being called a General in the same credits to support him being a "Commander"? You can't have it both ways- it isn't reconcilable from the films alone and so you have to look to other background sources.
  20. Andersonian Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 5, 2009
    star 1
    I'm pretty sure "Commander" is both an actual naval rank and a way to refer to someone in charge.

    The President of the United States is "Commander in Chief" of the Armed Forces, and I don't think that means "commander" in the sense that he is a naval commander. I'm also sure that does not mean he is a "chief" in the sense of being a non-commissioned officer.

    I also think that the fact that all these branches are working together and being overseen by a single person like a Jedi does not really indicate that they are not separate, it just means they are having their efforts coordinated under a single leader. It would be kind of weird after all if you had to have Admirals and Generals arguing with each other over what the plan is going to be when you can just have one guy in charge who makes the decisions for what all the branches are doing.

    Now the part I find weird is the whole thing about Jedi being Generals by default and Padawans being Commanders, which is bizarre since one is a naval rank and the other is an army rank.

    It could be worse, we could have the Battlestar Galactica system where Naval and Army ranks are merged, so you have Colonels and Commanders in the same command structure, and "Captain" isn't as high a rank as you'd think, because they are using it in the sense of army captains and not navy ones.
  21. Andersonian Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 5, 2009
    star 1
    And in actual practice, rather than just having one source trump another, the trend in the EU lately has been to to find ways to use retcons to explain away the inconsistencies as not being inconsistencies at all.

    For instance, I think just about everything that Boba Fett does that makes no sense was actually Jodo Kast impersonating Boba Fett.

    I also remember that in The Force Unleashed Campaign Guide they have an entry where they explain what the relationship between Spaarti Clones (from the Zahn books) and the Clones from the movies is, and why the Republic/Empire ever started using them.

    I'd say the biggest example of this would be when they explained away why in the EU, not all Stormtroopers are Clones, even though AotC seems to imply this is the case. Which in this instance is that clones are still used, but were being phased out and supplemented by "natural birth" recruits.
  22. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    can you please explain the "Greedo onerwrite"?

    I see no "conflicts within the films".

    Lucas admitted years ago that the use of "parsecs" was a mistake on his part. However, rather than redub the scene he left it because Alec Guinness expression in reaction to the statement can be viewed as both doubt in Solo bragging or a look that says he knows Solo is talking rubbish. It's a goof, but a fun one.

    That is not what the film says? It's clearly obvious that Jinn is the first.

    not following what you mean? there a many, many STAR WARS fans who don't have any interest in the EU. the films stand on their own. the EU is just a bonus for fans who what to get into it more and a source of income for George.

    do you mean EU authors rename things?
    Also, George "abides"? I think not. it's his creation. he decides.

    Not looking for it "both ways". you misunderstand.
    I focused on Tagge as an example because his rank is spoken on screen. Motti's is not.
    I thought I was being clear, yes I said the closing credits listed them as generals but in the scene he is "Commander". this overwrites the closing credits as it does the Wookiepedia entry. As I said in a previous post I look on Tagge rank in the credits as a goof.
    Since Motti's rank is never mentioned on screen, then it is possible that he is intended to be a general.

    Also, I would like to point out that when I mentioned their ranks in the closing credits, I did also say that I wasn't 100% sure that I was right.
  23. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4
    Once again I never said that the rank of commander was automatically a navy rank. Only that Commander Tagge commanded a fleet.

    This is further evidence that the GRAND ARMY is one single military organization. Remember in the movies that the two cells that Luke and friends are a part of are commanded by generals with Dadonna commanding starfighter pilots and Riekann commanding infantry and pilots. Plus Lando is a general and in charge of a unit of pilots. Plus there's Commander Cody. it does indeed seem closer to BSG than the real world military..[/quote]
  24. Gry Sarth Ex 2x Banhammer Wielding Besalisk Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 24, 1999
    star 5
    In the Ep1 DVD there's a scene of Anakin fighting a young rodian who's identified as Greedo. However, since Greedo has always been credited as being quite young at the time of his death in Ep4, the EU retconned it so that it was actually "Greedo the Elder" in that scene.

    Yes, a mistake that was fixed by the EU explanation, making it a canon that works alongside the film.

    It's not clearly obvious that Jinn is the first. That's your reading of it. All Yoda said is that Jinn has learned it, and Obi-Wan looks all amazed. That doesn't mean he's the first to ever do it. And the EU explains to us that he's just the first to do it in a looong time.

    Nobody is saying that a SW fan MUST know the EU, just as a SW fan doesn't need to watch TCW or whatever else he choses to ignore. It's all part of the official canon, though.

    No, EU authors name things that the films left unnamed. And most of the time GL does abide to those EU terms, even though he didn't create them. If he wants to, he could decide to change the name of something, but what would be the point of that? Case in point, he isn't known to overwrite EU names.
  25. Hoggsquattle Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 7, 2009
    star 4


    it's time for Sunday dinner.

    |I'll be back later.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.