Is Palpatine correct about civil war?

In ROTS, after Anakin turns and Mace is slain, Palpatine tells Anakin
that if any Jedi are left alive, there will be endless civil war.
Considering that Obi Wan and Yoda do survive, is Palpatine actually
seeing the future, rather than making an offhand comment?

Palps is usually off about what he forsees as coming true, but in this case,
it appears as though he might be correct.

As a follow up question, do you really think that Palpatine needs Vader
after ROTS? Most of the Jedi are dead. The great jedi purges we all
envisioned of suited Vader killing Jedi were inaccurate at best.
Does he keep Vader around because Yoda and Kenobi escape? Insurance policy?

Thoughts?

 

Palpatine lied to make everything seem more serious and dangerous. He wanted Anakin to kill the entire Jedi Order, so he had to make the entire matter sound like it was "kill or be killed." Yoda and Obi-Wan survive, but they aren't the leaders of the Rebellion. The Alliance is formed by political leaders from across the galaxy, the Jedi have little to do with it.

Why does he keep Vader? A Sith needs an apprentice, Vader goes across the galaxy doing Palpatine's dirty work, doing his bidding, and leading the military (in some cases.) Darth Vader is also used to spy on Imperial military leaders. As in ROTS, Vader becomes the "eyes, ears, and voice" of the Emperor.

-Seldon

 

In it's entirety, that passage of Sidious' dialogue is revealing and speaks to how he has manipulated Anakin. Sidious says, "We must move quickly. The Jedi are relentless; if they are not all destroyed, it will be civil war without end." The Jedi are relentless? Apparently not: a Jedi (Anakin) has just relented utterly to Palpatine. He is trying to make Vader perceive a complete separation between his Jedi self as Anakin and his new Sith reality as Vader. He wants Vader to feel as one with Sidious, a symbiotic circle, if you will, (although it's quite the opposite of symbiotic)in which they rise to legitimately rule the galaxy against the traitorous threats of the Jedi, brining "peace, freedom, justice and security" to the new Empire. They'll feed on each other to survive, but each doesn't truly care for the other beyond self-interest and wouldn't truly care if the other died. The Emperor, especially after Mustafar, would cut off Vader if he could find a replacement with higher potential, which he does when Luke surfaces. Vader would do the same to rule the galaxy, as demonstrated in ROTS and ESB.

Thus, the true "civil war" Sidious is trying to prevent is the one between two Sith trying to keep power, in the case of Sidious, or gain it, in the case of Vader. That is the essence of the rule of two. In addition, if the Jedi remain alive, there is still a hope that Vader can be redeemed. This is also what happens in ROTJ: with the training of two surviving Jedi, a new Jedi, Luke, emerges and Vader comes back to the light. With the return of the Jedi, there is indeed a struggle, but it's the struggle of the Sith to retain and gain power which ensues because a Jedi has come forth to again provide hope to Vader that he can rule and, in turn, for Sidious to gain a new apprentice.

Later in that passage Sidious says, "Once more the Sith will rule the galaxy, and we shall have peace." This is rhetorical nonsense intended to mollify Anakin and make him do his bidding. The "rule the galaxy" and "we shall have peace" line fits perfectly with Sidious' "civil war" dialogue about wiping out the Separatist leaders on Mustafar and the Jedi purge. I wrote the following in another thread:

"Palpatine, on the other hand, knows by this point that all his enemies are on the verge of defeat, the Jedi with Anakin's attack on the temple and through Order 66, and with the Separatists on their knees with only the remaining leaders waiting to be wiped out. He has control of the Senate (he is the Senate )and the courts as well. Sidious has an underlying meaning to this in that the peace to which he refers is between Vader and him. He knows Anakin wanted to kill him, and still does. That's especially true now that he is a Sith, because it is in their nature to try to kill the master, as Sidious once did to his master, presumably. Thus, Sidious wants peace enough between Anakin and him so that Anakin doesn't overthrow him, since he has so much potential. Kenobi in ROTS rids Sidious of the threat of Anakin, at least for 20 plus years, when Luke rekindles his desires for rule and yet another end to a destructive conflict. So, Sidious does get his rule and his peace, at least for a while."

 

On one level, I think Sidious did envision a literal civil war because the Jedi have already been branded as outcasts and generally disliked by the citizens of the galaxy. Although he undoubtedly lied (or least stretched the truth) to Anakin/Vader, there was enough plausibility to make it convincing.

Also the previous post describes what's going pretty well.

 

Did he not just mean the Clone Wars would continue?

 

I think that's what he intended to mean to Anakin, yes.
But it appears, given the birth, longevity and ultimate victory of the Alliance,
that he was correct without knowing it.
2 Jedi (at least) did survive and they galaxy was plauged with civil war.

 

I think he was very much correct. But it's a pretty obvious statement.

The key is why there will be endless civil war. Whose fault is it? For comparison, you should note that Osama Bin Laden is constantly saying in his tapes that "your security is in your hands" and suggests that conflict will be endless till we bow to his demands. Is he telling the truth? Sure. He does intend to fight until the West surrenders or he dies. But does that mean that he has the morally correct position, or that what he's asking is at all reasonable? No.

Similarly, yes, Palpatine is telling the truth. If the Republic is run by someone that openly declares himself to be a Sith, and he leads the Reupblic to declare all the Jedi traitors, the Jedi will fight him to the death. It will be a long, bitter, war. There's just no way around it. The Sith and the Jedi are dedicated to each others destruction--of course they are going to fight.

But does this mean that what Palpatine is doing is moral, or that he's on the right side of the issue? No. He framed the Jedi, and was lying and misrepresenting the facts when he called them traitors. His plans to betray them predated anything they ever thought of doing. He is still absolutely evil, and he has still manipulated and corrupted Anakin. But none of this means that what he said isn't true, nor does the truth of what he said negate the wrongness of what he's doing.

In conclusion, it's as if Palpatine had said "It's night time right now" or "We're on Coruscant." It's true, but somewhat irrelevant, in that it doesn't justify what he's asking Anakin to do.

 

Palpatine was definitely correct about it but clearly he was trying to prevent it by send Anakin to the Temple to wipe out the Jedi and Order 66. The master manipulator has done a great job of seizing control, yet civil war eventually because a reality for his Empire. Certain events that transpire at the end of Episode III that he does not forsee ultimately lead to this civil war.