Are Tuskens All Bad?

The Tuskens who kidnapped Shmi should definitely be punished, but not in the way Anakin did it. You don't cut off every single head in the tribe like that. Since Tatooine was out of the Republic's jurisdiction, I'm not sure exactly how it would be handled. It could be possible that the suspected Tuskens could be taken in a tried and punished.

Tried by whom? Jabba the Hutt? There's no real government on Tatooine!

He deserves condemnation for killing innocent children. This is inexcusable in my eyes. A_G, I highly doubt that you in his position would have killed a single innocent child.

Anakin was influenced by the Dark Side. It's not like he was completely in control of his actions.

So, can I take it that you have no 'good reason' for Anakin's killing of the children?

Dead mom, Dark Side, uncontrollable rage...

Back in the olden days, women were considered nothing. Even today, in certain countries, you have to pay a dowry to get your daughter married. But like gez said, that doesn't make the entire country is wrong. It makes the people who engaged in that practice wrong.

Anakin didn't kill every single Tusken on Tatooine.

 

I don't think we're supposed to kick him in the crotch over and over again screaming "Baby killer! Baby killer! Baby killer!" either.

Yeah, that's Yoda's job.

But you are only telling half the story, the half that makes Anakin look bad, and you are doing that on purpose.

I'm not telling a story. I was just wondering what, exactly, made a person (according to you) an "Anakin-hater". And you never answered my question about that "slaughtered them like animals" line. Anakin did say that, right?

 

I don't think we're supposed to kick him in the crotch over and over again screaming "Baby killer! Baby killer! Baby killer!" either.

Yeah, that's Yoda's job.

I rest my case. If a comment like that doesn't make you an Anakin-hater, I don't know what does.

If wanting Yoda to kick someone in the crotch isn't hating them, then I hope no one ever hates me.

And you never answered my question about that "slaughtered them like animals" line. Anakin did say that, right?

Sure. But what's your point? If you call him a "child slaughterer", you are implying that he goes out to day care centers and hacks off kids' limbs for amusement. You are only telling half the story.

 

I rest my case. If a comment like that doesn't make you an Anakin-hater, I don't know what does.

If wanting Yoda to kick someone in the crotch isn't hating them, then I hope no one ever hates me.

OMG, are you serious? That was a JOKE. Yeah, heaven forbid anyone would wish such a terrible thing on someone as having a two foot muppet who DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST kick them in the crotch.

I mean, you can see that it was a joke, right. I mean, doesn't the image of a little green guy leaping up trying to kick a six foot guy in the crotch with his little green feet...doesn't that image tip you off that the other poster isn't being serious?

**slaps forehead**

If you call him a "child slaughterer", you are implying that he goes out to day care centers and hacks off kids' limbs for amusement.

No I'm not. anakin_girl, don't tell me what I am implying, because you are invariably wrong. I am NOT implying that Anakin goes to day care centers and hacks off kids' limbs for amusement. I was just establishing the fact that Anakin is a self confessed child slaughterer.

 

I think the whole Tusken Massacre was overblown. From everything I?ve seen in the Star Wars films, the Tuskens are indeed dangerous creatures. Cleig Lars said they were animals. Anakin said it too. These are two people who grew up on Tatooine. They should know about these creatures. We saw Tuskens shooting at pod racers. We know they tortured Shmi to death. Who?s to say that in the GFFA there aren?t inherently dangerous sentient creatures whose instinct is to attack, kill, and maybe even eat humans?

Would you have a problem killing a pack of rattlesnakes (including the children), if you walked out into your backyard and found that your mom had been bitten by several of them and died while enjoying her Reader?s Digest and sipping on a lemonade? I know I wouldn?t. I?d load up my Remington 870 and clean out the mess of them. And I wouldn?t bother to check to see whether they were boy snakes, girl snakes, or even baby snakes.

MBJ

 

Mr_Boba_Jango:

My point exactly--no matter how wrong you think Anakin was, his motivation--the fact that his mother had been tortured to death (a fact people love to forget)--makes things a tad more understandable.

 

I seem to recall asking for terms like "baby-killer" and "Anakin-hater" to stop, as this discussion invariably descends into name-calling (or name-calling through fictional characters.)

Your beloved mod seems to have to visit this thread a lot. And answer PMs about it a lot. And post in bold a lot.

If I am forced to lay down modsmack in this thread even one more time -- be it anything from a ban to a simple warning to get on topic and play nice -- this thread will be locked.

Thank you.


Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Mr_Boba_Jango

Except that Tuskens aren't rattlesnakes, and people don't describe rattlesnakes as being "men, women and children", and Cleig and Anakin are hardly neutral observers, and Anakin seems to be upset about killing them, and judging an entire race from the actions of a small group who have about 2 minutes of screen time in the entire saga seems a bit weak etc etc etc.

 

Adam, somewhat off topic but is it ok to bash Rick McCallum, because lately I have just not been feeling the love?

 

Would you have a problem killing a pack of rattlesnakes (including the children), if you walked out into your backyard and found that your mom had been bitten by several of them and died while enjoying her Reader?s Digest and sipping on a lemonade?

That's awesome, Mr_Boba_Jango!!! Great analogy!

I?d load up my Remington 870 and clean out the mess of them.

See, that's where I'd go overkill... and use a grenade.

 

Not in this thread, unless you can make a case that he's a Tusken.

Rick-bashing is okay, but be warned that I expect people who discuss producers to prove they have a basic grasp on the responsibilities of a producer, and on what specific tasks McCallum was in charge of handling on the set.

Bashing Rick because you thought the production could have been better-managed or the budget was mishandled is fine. Bashing Rick because you thought there was too much CGI or didn't like the story will merely encourage people to laugh at you, and I'll probably let them.



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Adam, I was just joking, I got no prob w/ Ricky Mac. I just thought a little levity might lighten the mood in here a bit.

 

I had to give away two things when I became a mod: my sense of levity... and my personal information.



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Hi JenX. Thanks for your comments. Its true that there is very little information on the Tusken creatures in the Star Wars films. The only thing we really have to go on is that for what ever reason, they seem to thrive on killing things. While that may not be enough to judge an entire species, its all GL gives us to judge them by. The Star Wars Databank describes them as ?fearsome desert savages? and that they will ?attack with very little provocation?. Sounds WORSE than a rattlesnake to me. Its seems pretty clear that these things are killing machines. They kinda remind me of the creatures in the movie Alien, only without the slime. I think that maybe one of the reasons that Padme wasn?t too upset was because these critters are probably generally considered more animal than human.

Anakin was too hard on himself. He needs to take a few cues from Ripley.

 

gezvader28: "My point is they're not all from countries with the laws you described."

Why is that relevant? The point is, they were caught in Afghanistan, fighting to defend the Taliban which did practice the acts I described, and they're currently receiving better treatment in Cuba than the people who died at the hands of those they were supporting.

I don't understand why it is relevant to you that some weren't from that country? They were still there fighting, defending it and it's practices.

Am I supposed to feel differently about a prisoner in Guantanamo Bay if he is from the U.K. where they don't have public hangings or stonings for crimes like adultery, even though he traveled to Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban which did?


"'Dozens and dozens' is from the novelization. You don't think the author is biased do you."

I think the novelization is unreliable. As I pointed out, and you ignored, according to the novels, Owen is Obi-Wan's brother. I trust what I see on the screen. I can believe that there were other Tuskens present that I did not see, but I have no reason to believe the numbers you claim.

I think it's a minor point, but you seem to want to emphasize the body count, when I just want to keep the numbers reasonable...

...just as you want to emphasize that "some" of the people fighting for the Taliban weren't actually from Afghanistan, when the significant point is that they are receiving better treatment at the facility in Cuba than they would at the hands of the people they were defending.


EDIT: Adam, I'm sorry if gezvader and I are slightly off-topic. I just wanted to address his earlier comments.

We are being civil. Do we get points for that?

 

OK, the nature of evil:

Meet Bob. Bob is a nice guy, he likes to help people, he wants to make the world a better place. And he likes you. You and your family.

Bob believes, without a shred of doubt, that the world is going to end next Tuesday, and the only way to save the souls of you and your family is to cut-off your heads with a chainsaw while singing the theme-tune to The Dukes of Hazzard. He tells you this, but you say "no thanks, we'll take our chances". Bob, however, feels he is much smarter than you and knows what is best for you and your family, so Monday night he bursts into your house and does the deed.

Bob takes no sadistic pleasure in killing, he doesn't do it for personal gain, he considers himself to be a good man doing the right thing. Bob is a monster. Is he evil though?

I think that you have no right to violate the basic rights of others unless, for example, it is in self-defence. I think Bob is a monster because he feels he is so much smarter than other people he can ignore what they want and force them to live (or not) the way he feels is right. That is arrogant in the extreme, and he must expect to suffer for it at some point.

Whatever their motives, I feel the Tusken males are committing evil acts that they have no right to do, and yes, I think they got what was coming to them. There may be mittigating factors for what they did, but we are not shown them.

I think we are shown what has happened to Shmi so we understand that there are mittigating factors in Anakin's murder of the whole camp. Anakin was in a disturbed state of mind, and while I think he was still sane, his actions were the result of emotional trauma. In my opinion he needed counciling and to be removed from the Jedi order, not prison.

My problem with Anakin is that he doesn't process his guilt or really come to terms with what he has done. He says he is sorry, he cries, he is obviously upset, and yet we know he will make similar mistakes later on.

To use an analogy:

Mike loses his beloved wife in a horrible accident. He goes out, gets horribly drunk to drown his grief, then drunkenly drives home and kills a child on the way. He confesses to a close friend, cries says he's sorry etc.

He has my sympathy. I think what he did was wrong, but his decision to drink and drive was affected by grief.

Mike doesn't turn himself over to the police though. Mike continues to drink and drive, and in fact wants to get a faster car and get a better grade of whiskey. Had his car been more responsive and his drink purer, Mike argues, the accident would not have happened.

At this point I would want to get Mike off the streets. He hasn't properly processed his guilt in the matter, and what was once a tragic accident now is beginning to look like the first step on the road to Hell.

I'm not trying to demonise Anakin, but he really doesn't come to grips with what he's done. He can't handle to power he has, and his solution is to try to acquire more of it.

OK, that's my longest post ever. I hope it makes sense.

 

Bob believes, without a shred of doubt, that the world is going to end next Tuesday, and the only way to save the souls of you and your family is to cut-off your heads with a chainsaw while singing the theme-tune to The Dukes of Hazzard. He tells you this, but you say "no thanks, we'll take our chances". Bob, however, feels he is much smarter than you and knows what is best for you and your family, so Monday night he bursts into your house and does the deed.

Bob takes no sadistic pleasure in killing, he doesn't do it for personal gain, he considers himself to be a good man doing the right thing. Bob is a monster. Is he evil though?

Define "monster" and define "evil." I would say Bob was neither a monster nor evil. He made some very bad mistakes, inexcusable as they are, for whatever reason. He didn't mean evil, he only wanted good - therefore he as a person, himself, isn't evil. But he still committed a "wrong" (in most 21st century societies, anyway) act - at the very least, Bob knew the laws and choose to go against them; therefore, I would fully support and even fight for him being put in jail (just as I would want a person who negligently pulls the trigger and kills someone to be in jail, even though Bob's case isn't negligence), but I wouldn't say that he were evil or that he did something intentionally bad.

I think that you have no right to violate the basic rights of others unless, for example, it is in self-defence. I think Bob is a monster because he feels he is so much smarter than other people he can ignore what they want and force them to live (or not) the way he feels is right. That is arrogant in the extreme, and he must expect to suffer for it at some point.

That's all well and nice, soitscometothis, but we live in the 21st century where most societies hold such "basic rights." Let's look at Alien Planet X where the aliens are identical to humans except that everytime they mates, they produce twenty thousand eggs that hatch instantly into 20,000 little aliens. Because they would die out because of overpopulation in a very short time and because they would never be able to take care of 20,000 little aliens at the same time, the parent aliens kill 19,999 of those children after they are born (as soon as possible) and then raise the 1 kid that they haven't killed. They're violating the 19,999 kids' "basic rights," aren't they? But would you classify those parents as evil or even monsters?

(Maybe humans would, but looking at it from the aliens' point of view, they are simply trying to take care of their children and ensure that their species continues on.)

I like your analogies.

Depa Billaba

 

Why is that relevant?

It's relevant to your comment "THEIR OWN COUNTRY", you said it with block capitols so you obviously thought it was important. And I thought it was important to point out that they don't all come from one country. It's a complicated situation and it's wrong to assume that they all come from one place . Bin Laden doesn't even come from Afghanistan and he was the prime target.
I'm saying it's worth acknowledging that some come from other countries , after all the 'war on terror' didn't end when they beat Afghanistan.


I think the novelization is unreliable. As I pointed out, and you ignored, according to the novels, Owen is Obi-Wan's brother. I trust what I see on the screen. I can believe that there were other Tuskens present that I did not see, but I have no reason to believe the numbers you claim.

Yes I'm well aware of the controversy of whether novels are canon or not, but just because you don't want to use them doesn't mean I and others can't either.
The novel confirms things we didn't actually see, so I think it's useful, I don't insist you have to accept what's in the novel.

I think it's a minor point, but you seem to want to emphasize the body count, when I just want to keep the numbers reasonable...

And yet here you are again commenting on the body count, are you emphasising it?
I'm not the only one commenting on the numbers, you do understand that it's okay for me to respond to those other ideas don't you?
And if you think my estimate is unreasonable then let's hear yours.

...just as you want to emphasize that "some" of the people fighting for the Taliban weren't actually from Afghanistan,

[/rolls eyes] Well I guess if you keep asking me about it and I answer, you can always say I'm emphasising it.
Cleverr.

g

 

gezvader: "I thought it was important to point out that they don't all come from one country. It's a complicated situation and it's wrong to assume they all come from one country."

I never assumed that they ALL come from one country. I made a general statement about the brutal, barbaric practices being committed by the Taliban government that they were fighting for, regardless of whether Afghanistan was their homeland. and you're arguing semantics that NOT ALL of them come from countries that practice those laws.

My original comment was: "People are complaining about the way prisoners in Quantanamo Bay are being treated, yet they aren't being hung by the neck in the public square, their hands are not being cut off, they aren't being publicly stoned as they might if they were prisoners in THEIR OWN COUNTRY."

THEIR OWN COUNTRY - as in, the country they were fighting for.

But I stand corrected. Yes, SOME of the ******s that were fighting for the Taliban come from countries where they don't mutilate thieves, or sentence adulterers to death by stoning. AND SOME DO. They obviously believe in these practices because they were fighting FOR them.

So you win, I guess.

I should have said I don't care about their complaints about being blindfolded, etc. in Guantanamo Bay, whether they practice brutality in THEIR OWN COUNTRY or not. It is still better than being dragged to a public stadium and being stoned to death by an angry mob because someone has accused them of adultery.

"I say it's worth acknowledging that some come from other countries , after all the 'war on terror' didn't end when they beat Afghanistan."

Actually, they didn't beat Afghanistan. They beat the Taliban, which was only one fantatical, fundimentalist segment of the population. Many Afghans hated them.

As far as the dead Tusken body count is concerned, I'm not saying I know the number. I'm saying you don't either, and that your estimate is pulled 'out of the air'.

"The novel confirms things we didn't actually see..."

That's the point. It doesn't confirm. It speculates. You're free to believe it, just as you're free to believe in Bigfoot or U.F.Os. It still doesn't confirm anything.

 

"Well, I guess if you keep asking me about it and I answer, you can always say I'm emphasising it.
Cleverr."

I didn't say you were "emphasising" because you've responded several times. I said you were "emphasising" because you thought that it was IMPORTANT to point out that NOT ALL the Taliban fighters were from Afghanistan.

LLS: "Hey, the other night, a bunch of guys in leather jackets mugged my grandmother."

gezvader: "It's important to point out that they weren't ALL wearing leather jackets."

LLS: "My grandmother will be happy to hear that." *rolls eyes*

 

Well here goes my 5 cents;

Since we aren't their peers and have no understanding of their origin or culture or even vague history it's not our place to judge a race of people. All we can do is judge their actions on a case by case basis. So I'd say no not all Tuskens are bad and maybe none of them are bad.

However, that doesn't seem to be the on going debate in here. As I understand it, Anakin's guilt or extent of evilness is being judged in direct relation to Shmi's death. Somehow Anakin's act is considered less aggregious because his mother was killed by some of the people who killed Shmi.

Two ways to look at it;
1. Yes, Anakin is rightfully upset and enraged by his mother's torture at the hands of some unknown members of the Tusken tribe. Therefore it's understandable that he in his enraged state lashes out and indiscriminately massacres the entire tribe. He is torn up and guilt ridden over it once he comes to his senses.

2. Anakin rightfully upset and enraged (Despite not seeing her for 10 years and never contacting her), strikes out (despite being a jedi) and massacres the entire tribe (of primitives who probably had no real understanding of Western mores) despite their being obvious innocents in the group, namely children (children in any culture are considered sacred and to kill children is the vilest act a being can commit).

Both are correct of course:
My belief would be:
3. That the tuskens were wrong and committed a crime. The particular Tuskens who committed the crime should have been brought to justice, even if that justice didn't include death due to their incapacity to understand our Western values (to be determined). Murder is murder and we have determined it to be a crime across all cultures, barriers and that any society has the right and duty to protect their citizens from such crimes.

The fact that Anakin killed the Tuskens was wrong, but understandable up to a certain point. However, being enraged or impassioned doesnt' lessen the crime. It would only be a mitigating factor. However, the most damning factor is the indiscriminate nature of the massacre and the extent. To be considered a crime of passion, timing and circumstances must meet certain criteria, I think this case fails on several points. There were dozens and dozens of victims, took time. Many would have run or hidden, he had to hunt them down. Many were non threatening, no self defense. He had conciousness of guilt and knew right from wrong.

I'd say, the guilty Tuskens are dangerous and committed a heinous crime and deserved to be punished maybe even killed. However, Anakin didn't just kill the guilty he also killed innocents and those who clearly had no capacity to understand the crime.

Murder is not a tit for tat endeavor. Shmi's murder doesn't automatically make Anakin's crime less heinous or visa versa. I'd say it's harder to find the same level of guilt in the Tuskens because we don't know their motivations or their capacity to understand right from wrong etc.. Though torture is aggregious in and of itself.

But we do know Anakin's capacity to understand right from wrong, and his mores because they replicate our own. That's why I find his murder of the innocent and especially the children a particularly aggregious act and one that cannot be swept away as merely an understandable mistake that was deserved or even caused by the Tuskens actions. Each murder must be judged seperately on it's own merits. His crime was extremely horrifying and evil, and his mother's torture in my mind doesn't mitigate it much past perhaps the first 4-5 Tuskens who rushed forward, after that I'd say he was in full control of his mental capacities and should be held to the full weight of the law for any subsequent murders.

I'm sure now that I'll be labeled an Anakin-hater by the all knowing. That's okay seems to be an illustrious group, so I'm honored.

 

As far as the dead Tusken body count is concerned, I'm not saying I know the number. I'm saying you don't either,

That's why it's called an estimate.

and that your estimate is pulled 'out of the air'.

No it's based on what's in the novel and what I see on screen.

That's the point. It doesn't confirm. It speculates. You're free to believe it, just as you're free to believe in Bigfoot or U.F.Os. It still doesn't confirm anything.

Now whose playing semantics. It's hardly speculation, it's based on the screenplays and the bits I've used aren't contradicted by the film . But you can ignore it if you want.

I didn't say you were "emphasising" because you've responded several times. I said you were "emphasising" because you thought that it was IMPORTANT to point out that NOT ALL the Taliban fighters were from Afghanistan.

Well I'm sorry but I did think it was important, certainly worth mentioning.
Look - when the 'Afghan' war was on there was a lot of concern because Muslims from other countries were going in there with the agenda that they didn't like America and they were trying to paint it as a 'War on Islam', it was a very tricky thing, and it was important because it could've blew up into a Holy War.
Also , as I understand it, a lot of the Guantanemo bay prisoners are those who came in from outside Afghanistan. I'm no expert on this stuff I'm just adding what I know.
You did put "THEIR OWN COUNTRY" in capitals, so you were emphasising it as if it were important, and that's what I commented on.


"It's important to point out that they weren't ALL wearing leather jackets."

Well you know an accurate description is always helpful in catching the culprits.
Sorry to hear about your Grandmother.

g

 

Excellent analysis Knight Mical. The only thing I would add is that Anakin should not be held responsible for the massacre if he was temporarily insane, which legally speaking means that he was not aware of what he was doing while he was acting. But short of insanity, Anakin was both morally and legally wrong in his actions.

Also, for your information acting under the heat of passion merely reduces the charge from murder to voluntary or involuntary homicide, a lesser offense. Only self-defense is the only fully exculpating defense for killing.

 

I'm not trying to demonise Anakin, but he really doesn't come to grips with what he's done. He can't handle to power he has, and his solution is to try to acquire more of it.

True. However, at that moment, he wasn't after power, just vengence.

 

I thought that's what I said, or inferred by saying crime of passion which inplies temporary insanity. Also Provocation actually, has been used to reduce murder to manslaughter, when juries don't want to convict someone of murder.