PT "Obi-Wan Once Thought As You Do ..."

Don't agree.
I think Obi-Wan made a deliberate choice to dismember Anakin.
Obi-Wan had time to get his bearings and he could see what Anakin was going to do.
And he made two swipes with his lightsaber, sewering both legs and one arm.
Obi-Wan was skilled enough that if he wanted to kill Anakin directly, he would have.
He instead choose to dismember Anakin and then leave him to burn.

So my example with the cop above is quite close to what Obi-Wan did.

I also think that Obi-Wan's "I have the high ground.." bit was designed to get Anakin to do something rash. They had been fighting for a good while now and neither one had a clear advantage.
But Obi-Wan knows Anakin and knows how he can get him act in certain ways.
If he said "Hey Anakin, I bet you can't jump over this fire pit." He would know that Anakin would most likely do that just to prove him wrong.

Obi-Wan is goading Anakin into making a mistake and doing something rash like jumping over him and thus he gets an opening to end the fight.

Also, I doubt Jedi are trained to dismember enemies. I would imagine that they are trained to fight only if need be but if lethal force has to be used then a quick kill is what they are trained to do.
Obi-Wan cut Maul in half, pretty much instant death. And he could have done the same with Anakin.
Mace cut of Jango's head, instant death.

So what Obi-Wan did is, I would think, AGAINST Jedi rules.
I have a hard time seeing that the Jedi are trained to dismember their foes and leave them to die slowly as opposed to give them a quick, mostly painless death.

As for helping, Obi-Wan has the Force, use if to lift Anakin away from the lava before his clothes catch fire. Then knock him out. Anakin would be in horrible pain and would not be able to use the Force in any significant way.
Then he can put him on his ship.

@darth-sinister

It is still cruel, evil and sadistic.
And not doing the merciful thing because of rules, that doesn't make it any better.

No, they aren't.
Anakin was DYING from what Obi-Wan did, so by doing nothing, Obi-Wan still KILLS a helpless person.
So ending Anakin's suffering or walking away. In both cases Obi-Wan tries to kill a helpless person.
So the only difference between acting and walking away is the time it takes Anakin to die and how much he suffers.
And Obi-Wan choose to let Anakin die slowly and suffer a lot.
That is cruel, plain and simple.

Inaction with Dooku and Palpatine would not cause them to die, inaction with Anakin will.

Except as I said above, he pretty much already killed Anakin by dismembering him.
So there is no compromise.
He still kills a helpless person, he can just choose to do it slowly or quickly.
So that oath is already broken.

Wow, imagine if murderers on trial tries to use this reasoning.
"I put a bag over his head and he suffocated but I didn't kill him, lack of oxygen did."
"I locked her in a room with no food or water but I didn't kill her, dehydration did."
"I threw her of the building and she fell to her death but I didn't kill her, gravity did."

The hairsplitting here is truly astounding.

Remember that Yoda and Obi-Wan want the Sith DEAD. The Jedi's approach to sith have been a for a long time "Needs a killing." Also they think that the only way for the Force to be balanced is for the Sith to die.
So Yoda wants Luke to kill Vader and he tells him that the only way he can become a Jedi is to face Vader. There could be other ways but Yoda wants Vader dead so why would he give Luke options?
Same thing with Obi-Wan, the sith must die and so he tells Luke to confront Vader.
That is the only way the sith can die.
As long as Luke does not seek them out, he won't be able to kill them.

As for why they send him to face Vader first and not Palpatine.
That answer is obvious, Vader is strong but Palpatine much more so.
A Luke that was not even a Jedi Knight would have no chance against Palpatine, Palpatine would swat him like a fly.
Also, Vader is traveling around, Palpatine is safely on Coruscant, protected by lots of guards.
Thus he is far less easy to get to.

And how would Luke, or Yoda and Obi-Wan for that matter, think that confronting Vader would NOT lead to a fight?
Did they think he could just look at Vader and then run away?
They know that Vader would either try to capture or kill him.
So by ordering Luke to confront Vader, they are pretty much sending him to a fight.

It is also a bit ironic that it is Vader that mentions the "Obi-Wan once thought as you do." and not Obi-Wan. Luke says there is good in his father and Obi-Wan counters with, "He is more machine now than man. Twisted and evil." Not a word about trying to save him.
But Vader mentions it.

First, would Luke know that Vader is on Mustafar?
He would figure that Vader is out hunting for him.

And going to Coruscant, the emperor is heavily guarded and not that easy to get to.

I don't think Luke is running away. He just has a lot on his mind.
He hears about the mission and that his friends are going, so he joins with them.
Both to help them and the alliance. Luke is still a member of the rebellion and he wants to see the empire fall.
Plus if Palaptine is on the DS2 and it gets destroyed. Then he has one less sith to deal with.
Now there is only Vader and with the empire crumbling, Vader has less of a powerbase.
And if Vader's master is dead, then perhaps getting to him would be easier.
So he has lots of reason to go and makes sure this works.

To sum up, the notion that Yoda and Obi-Wan think that Vader can be redeemed is not really supported by the narrative.
In RotS Yoda says that Anakin is gone and given the horrible way that Obi-Wan choose to end Anakin's life, it is pretty clear that Obi-Wan has no hope there either.
And nothing in the OT suggest that they have changed their minds.
Yoda pretty much says that if you turn, that is a one way ticket and you can't turn back.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Which is still running away from his duty which was to confront Vader. He wasn't needed at Endor and didn't make any difference there.

That's after he has had his epiphany that he can save him, instead of killing him.

 

Without Luke, the Ewoks would have incinerated Han and Chewie.

Mind you, without Luke, Vader wouldn't have let the shuttle go by in the first place.

Luke has multiple duties - not just "duty as a Jedi" but "duty as a Commander in the Rebellion" - and that duty demands that he participate in the Battle of Endor in some way. The whole Alliance is there - it's "all or nothing".

 

I've always taken this to mean a worst-case scenario, best-case scenario situation. Luke naively hoped for the best-case scenario, that there was still good in Vader (and as Vader later said, Luke was right), but Yoda and Obi-Wan sound skeptical about this happening. Then there's the worst-case scenario, Luke must kill Vader. In any case, Luke had to be prepared to kill his father, which he didn't want to do. What I'm not sure about is what Obi-Wan expected the Emperor to do to Luke in the event that Luke really did kill Vader. At that time, of course, Obi-Wan didn't know that was what Palpatine wanted Luke to do to. But that's the one variable I can't account for. I suppose even Obi-Wan at least partially hoped that Luke could turn Vader or else he expected Luke to at least neutralize the Emperor as a threat.

Edit: I know Obi-Wan considered the fact that Palpatine would try to tempt Luke with the Dark Side, but what if Luke killed Vader, then resisted Palpatine's temptation. He would have tried to kill Luke and no one could have rescued him. That's what I mean I can't figure out.

 

That's the point in what Lucas was going for. Not that he was evil and sadistic, but that Obi-wan wasn't supposed to be clean cut. That he would have blood on his hands. That the war had tainted him as it did everyone else.

That's the point. The fire will kill him, but the Lightsaber blade won't.

Dismemberment alone won't kill him as the wounds are cauterized. So it is the fire that will finish him. And not according to Obi-wan.

In the end, there was only one choice. It was a choice he had made many years ago, when he had passed the trials of Jedi Knighthood, and swore himself to the Jedi forever. In the end, he was still Obi-wan Kenobi, and he was still a Jedi, and he would not murder a helpless man.

Or they know that Luke cannot defeat the Sith, but if he can get the Sith to turn on each other, then all the better. The Sith have to die, but Luke doesn't have to be the one who kills them.

Confronting does not necessitate fighting him. Confronting means that he must confront Vader about who he is and what he has done, while also resisting the pull of the dark side. He doesn't have to kill him in order to win.

He would check there first. Then go on to Coruscant.

That's why he would turn himself in, just as he does when he went to the shield bunker.

He said that he won't kill his father. That means he won't confront him. He'd rather spend his life running from him, rather than facing him. Only when he realizes that he can save him, does he stop running away.

"This scene where Luke deliberately gets himself captured and confronts Vader sort of defines the rest of the movie in terms of the fact that it’s not a chase, or one trying to escape from the other, but it’s an emotional competition between the two of them. And Luke isn’t going to run away from him, he isn’t going to fight him, you know it’s a whole different twist on where you might expect the movie might go. It becomes a direct challenge that Luke has with his father to say “I dare you—I’m not going to run away from this,” which makes it very different in keeping them as villains or in a villain/hero kind of situation. It’s “we’re going to sit down and talk about this.” And again on a lot of levels there are some nice twists in their relationship and how they confront each other. But it’s not just like in The Empire Strikes Back, where it was actually a physical confrontation and a real, you know, cutting arms off and things like that. This is a more emotional, talking kind of confrontation."

--George Lucas, ROTJ DVD Commentary, 2004.

 

Sorry to quote my own post, but actually, I suppose this would have been the real worst-case scenario. Because in this case, the way I figure, all three of them: Vader, Palpatine and Luke would certainly die. If Luke had to kill Vader (which he did not want to do and incidentally, did not have to do) he'd steel himself against the Emperor, then the Emperor would electrocute Luke, and the Emperor, having underestimated the Rebel Fleet and ground forces, would die anyway when the Death Star blew up. In this scenario, Luke would die. but at least Vader and the Emperor would too, and since Luke told her, there would always be Leia to carry on the Jedi legacy. So Luke had to prepare for what must have been his death mission, but I don't think Obi-Wan was negligent in that regard, because Luke knew it too, and Luke also knew he was right about there being good left in Vader.

 

Luke goes to Endor to fight alongside his friends. He senses and predicts that this puts his friends in danger so decides to do something about it. And the only thing he can do is go to Vader and have faith in his own convictions. I don't know where you are getting the impression that Luke wants to run away from Vader.

Leia is the one who suggests that running away is the best option. Luke would just rather not be compelled to fight him. But that isn't the same thing as running away or refusing to confront him. The confrontation that ensues, the one that matters that is, is Vader being confronted with Luke attesting to the existence of his father as a good man (and only that good man). And Vader being confronted with a dilemma of how his claim to being Luke's father can exist within the context of joining the dark side, which Luke refuse to do because it means killing his father.

 

It was both an all or nothing on both sides including the Empires

 

But the Empire don't believe they are risking anything. This was the Alliance's only chance for victory. And that chance was, in fact, a trap. It only became a chance again thanks to the intervention of the Ewoks.

 

Nice imagination. Do you also walk down the street asking amputees if they wished they were dead?

Then we agree to disagree. But if you ask any fighter/athlete or gamer, in the heat of battle split second decision are made on instinct.

I suppose, but I think he didn't want to have to do it, he utters "don't try it" under his breath almost as if to himself rather than to Anakin.

No his duty was to destroy the Empire and save the galaxy. And as the last active Jedi and the hero of the First Death Star..there was A LOT he could do to make a difference there.

So I'm right. He went to confront Vader.

 

Oops. Sorry,

 

I'm not denying that. I'm simply saying that Luke doesn't want to confront his father, because he only thinks that it can go one way. Leia suggesting his running away is not the same as Luke running away by avoiding his father. She's saying that he should leave because of the mission and that she doesn't want to lose him. What I'm saying is about not wanting to kill him.

But if lethal force doesn't have to be used and the enemy isn't willing to surrender, then dismemberment is required. Obi-wan dismembers Zam because she is going to shoot him and possibly injure someone else with her blaster. Same with Ponda and Evanzian. Anakin disarms Dooku because he's trying to capture him, not kill him. With Mace it was to stop him from killing Palpatine and an emotional outburst that wasn't entirely thought out. As Vader, he does it to Luke in order to end the duel. Luke does it to him in order to end the fight. So each time it is done, it is done with the intent that other options are not workable and these are.

Only well after arriving and when he senses Vader coming planet side. Before then, he was never planning to confront him. If Luke believed that it was possible to confront Vader without killing him, he would have told Obi-wan that he would confront him, but only to try and save him. He only believes it right then, when events have reached a crossroads and he finally has his epiphany.

 

He never utters or even implies that he can't confront Vader. When Obi-Wan tells him he must face, he only retorts "I can't kill my own father." He believes there is good in Vader, his plan was to redeem him. And in order to do that he had to confront him.

 

That's the point. If he won't confront his father, then he cannot kill him. The two are linked together. Luke believes that there is only one path here. If he believed that there was another path, he wouldn't have gone to Endor.

If Luke was that concerned about his duty to the Alliance, he wouldn't have gone to Dagobah and he wouldn't have gone to Tatooine. Luke does have multiple duties and sometimes they conflict. He has to choose what duty is more important. He chooses to ignore his duty as a Jedi to confront Vader, by going to Endor as part of a duty to the Alliance. It's when those duties cross paths, that he chooses to leave the mission and face his father.

 

But he never said he wouldn't confront his father. He said he wouldn't kill him. In fact, most confrontation don't end in death.

But the main duty is saving the galaxy.

 

darth-sinister The only reason Luke thinks confronting Vader can go one way is because Ben and Obi-Wan have lead him to believe this. Realising that Vader can't kill him for the same reason Luke can't kill his father is what enables Luke to confront him.

 

Perhaps you should read what I wrote.

What I am talking about is when a Jedi decides to KILL their opponent, then I think they would try to not make that kill very slow or painful.
And jedi could try to incapacitate their opponent if that is possible.
But if a Jedi has made up his/her mind to end the life of their opponent, then I think they would go for a quick kill rather than a slow, agonizing one.
Like how Mace kill Jango or how Obi-Wan killed Maul.

Obi-Wan knows full well that cutting off Anakin's limbs in the place they are is a lethal strike.

And as I said, Obi-Wan has time to pause and think about the situation.
He jumps ashore, talks to Anakin and has time to ready himself as he sees what Anakin is about to do.
So it was deliberate.

And if he fell back on instinct, again, I doubt that instinct is to cut off the legs and arms of his opponent.
We see examples of Obi-Wan cutting off ONE arm, to stop an enemy.
Besides Anakin, I don't recall him slicing and dicing his enemies.

Also, if what he did was not planned what are the alternatives?
1) He was trying to KILL Anakin but botched it.
2) He just swung wildly with no thought involved.

I find the first unlikely as Obi-Wan has better skill than that. And if he intended to kill Anakin but saw that he didn't quite succeed, then I can't understand why he didn't finish the job.
The latter is also a bit odd, why would he now loose focus and just flail about?
Again, Obi-wan is more skilled than that.

[/QUOTE]

Why else would he say this?
Did he think that Anakin would surrender?
If Anakin just floats further away and jumps ashore, then the fight would go on.
And if Anakin decides to just leave, what then? Obi-Wan is there to stop/kill Anakin.
Would he just let Anakin walk away?

No, I think he saw a chance. He knew how Anakn was like under the best of circumstances and now he is even more volatile. He has a job to do, stop Anakin and I would think he rather not die.
So if he sees an opportunity to end the fight, he would go for it.

So it is an act for Anakin's behalf, some reverse psychology to get him to act one way.

@darth-sinister

Again, I was talking about when the Jedi have decided to use lethal force. Mace simply cut off Jango's head with one swipe. He didn't saw through the neck very slowly, causing horrible pain.
Also I think there is a big difference between cutting of an arm and turning an enemy into a quadruple amputee.

No your point was that Obi-Wan won't kill a helpless person.
But by walking away he does exactly this.
If he slices off Anakin's head or does nothign, he still KILLS a helpless Anakin.
So your bit about a rule of not killing the helpless. Obi-Wan is breaking that.

Yes it will as you can not disregard the environment.
Even if there was no fire, doing this in say a desert or other desolate place, the end result will still be death. Because the person will not be able to move and will die from exposure.

So Luke is no match for either Sith but might cause one of them to kill the other.
That still leaves one sith alive and Luke can't stop him.

Obi-Wan and Yoda would know that Vader or Palpatine would still look to turn Luke to the dark side.
So if Luke shows up, they will either try to capture or kill him.
Once captured, they will try to turn Luke. If that fails, they will try to kill him.
And then Luke either fights or he lets himself be killed.
So either he turns, ends up in a fight or he dies.
Two of those are not good for Yoda and Obi-Wan and the third means a fight.

In what OT film is Luke told about Mustafar, PPOR.

You contradict your own argument.
You say that a confrontation does not have to mean a fight but then you say that Luke refusing to kill his father means he won't confront him.
He CAN confront him without killing him, that is what you said above.
So Luke saying that he won't kill his father, by your own argument, does not mean he won't confront him.
It just mean that he won't kill him.
And after that, Obi-Wan said that then the emperor has already won.
Making it very clear that Obi-Wan wanted Luke to KILL Vader.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

It clearly wasn't a lethal strike. He didn't lose any vital organs, he wasn't bleeding, he was talking, oh and he didn't die.

...or 3) The highly trained monk who has spent a lifetime perfecting lightsaber technique performed an instinctual maneuver to disarm an opponent who is jumping overhead.

 

I agree. I've always agreed. But Luke sees it as the only solution when he's been told that the Sith must be conquered and stopped. If he is to confront him, that means he has to kill him. That's the only outcome that Luke thinks that the confrontation will end. If he had believed that he could save his father on Dagobah, he would have declared it to Obi-wan and not Leia.

And he can only do that by confronting his father.

He cut off the three organic limbs to stop him. If he just cut off his left arm, Anakin wouldn't stop fighting. Obi-wan believed that which is why he added the legs.

To him, he is not killing him by walking away. Just because he could save him doesn't mean that he has to.

And that will kill him, not a killing blow. The distinction is there for a purpose.

Or they both die in the process.

It's not just about winning the fight, but how you win the fight. Luke can defend himself against the Sith, but he should not fight to win. That's why when the fight takes place on the stairs, Luke fights defensively instead of offensively and throughout, continues to whittle down Vader. Yoda and Obi-wan fought to win and failed to stop the Sith.

Weak sauce man. You think that no one outside of the Empire doesn't know about Mustafar?

No, as I've said before, many times, Luke thinks that confronting his father means that he has to kill him. That it is the only way to go. He doesn't consider an alternative approach until it occurs to him that there is one. But if Luke won't even make an effort to confront Vader, then he won't be able to figure out that he can save him. If he won't confront Vader, then Luke can never become a Jedi and thus the Emperor has won as the Jedi Order will never return and will die with Luke.

 

No, in the Final Battle on Endor Vaderhas no bearing. Rewatch the film and tell me if Vader effects the attack on the Death Star at all.

No he has never been told that the Sith must be conquered. Ever.

No, confront DOES NOT mean kill. Those terms are not interchangeable. Nowhere in ROTJ did Luke ever show the intention of killing Darth Vader.

He told Obi-Wan he believed there was still good in Vader. What he never did, was tell Obi-Wan he was going to kill Vader. In fact he outright told him he WOULDN'T kill Vader.

 

OK, let's get a few basic facts here straight.

• Obi-Wan standing over Anakin in the Separatist Council room was in the middle of the fight. This is what's called an opportunity to strike. If the roles were reversed and it was Obi-Wan with his back on the table, you really think Anakin would stop the fight and say something like, "Get up! On your feet!" Or otherwise let Obi-Wan get back up?

• Obi-Wan looking at a dismembered Anakin on the slope of the lava river is the end of the fight. Anakin poses no threat anymore. Now COULD Obi-Wan have tried to get Anakin back to the ship? Maybe, but two things:
--> He's clearly emotionally wrecked, having just dueled his own brother-in-arms, the closest he's ever had to a brother/son after said man committed mass murder and strangled his wife into a coma. Seriously people, put yourself in his shoes. It's easy for us to make a decision because we didn't just have to fight the best friend we've ever had after he killed off/destroyed everything we've ever known and almost kill his own wife. And now he's on fire.

Obi-Wan is EMPTY. He has no fight in him anymore, nothing.

--> The instruction was to "DESTROY the Sith", not apprehend them. Do keep in mind that at this moment, the Republic is gone. There is no jail facility or court system that'll bring Anakin to justice for his crimes. If Obi-Wan tries to arrest Anakin, where is he gonna take him? The Empire would just let Anakin go and give him prosthetic legs and arms.

• Luke was fighting for his life on the sail barge. He didn't take pleasure in it, but it was either fight or die. Not exactly a good time to be a pacifist.

 

Unarmed and prostrate in the middle of a fight is still unarmed and prostrate. No matter how you try split those hairs. They do not represent the dialectics of the right thing and the wrong thing to do.

Obi Wan talks to Anakin for a bit until he eventually catches fire. He knows that he has doomed a man to a fiery death. All he has to do is walk forward a couple of steps and give the mercy blow. It's not like it's going to change Anakin's mind about him.

He can take Anakin to the same place he takes Padme. A limbless body is an ideal prisoner. Perhaps knowing that Anakin was beside her (in some form) and not dead or dying on Mustafar, or back with his evil master, the Emperor, might have belayed Padme's loss of will to live. Perhaps being captive and not being under the Emperor's influence might have had an effect on Anakin. The fact that he was a father of twins would have at least have given him a new perspective (as it did when he later discovered this fact after Yavin).

The rationale for destroying the Sith is because they are considered irredeemable. Yet killing Dooku is considered to be the beginning of the path to the darkside for Anakin.

Luke and Leia are about to make their escape when Luke decides to destroy the entire barge full of Jabba's friends for good measure. Was that necessary? Is it the Jedi way to completely obliterate a barge full of spectators in case they decide to come after you seeking revenge for Jabba?

 

I think everyone who wasn't actively participating in the execution fled at that point. Those who stayed and fought for Jabba had it coming.

 

The ones on the skiffs were the ones doing the executing. They had all been taken care of already. The deck of the barge had been cleared and Luke and Leia were about to escape. But the barge and all its occupants, spectators, slaves and servants like R2 and 3PO had been, was obliterated for good measure.

I didn't see any escapees from within the barge.

If there was an immediate threat remaining from within the barge that justified Luke's actions (in the context of the "Jedi way") it wasn't conveyed in the film.

 

It certainly was because Anakin would have died if not for Palpatine interfering. Which Obi-Wan did not know would happen.
If you shoot someone with a poison dart that will kill in 15 minutes, that is trying to kill.
The shot person might be able to move and talk but will still die because of what you did.
Puttting a bag over someones head doesn't cut off any organs but will kill due to lack of oxygen.

If you bury a person alive, that is trying to kill them. If by chance someone finds them and digs them up before death, that does not change that.

A slow kill is still a kill.
Did Maul make a killing strike on Qui-Gon?
Qui-Gon didn't die right away.
And suppose that some medic and came in at the last minute and saved Qui-Gon, would that change what Maul tried to do?
No.

Obi-Wan tried to kill Anakin and he did in a slow and very horrible way.

[/QUOTE]

Disarm means cutting of the arm or making Anakin loose his weapon.
Obi-Wan went a lot further than that.
Had he just cut of one arm and Anakin lost his weapon, then this scene would be very different.
Anakin would still be able to move and could move away from the fire and to a more sheltered place.

@darth-sinister

Dooku cut off one of Anakin's arms and pushed him back and that knocked him out cold.
Obi-Wan even saw that with his own eyes.
Massive pain interferes with Force users and their ability to fight or use the Force.
Obi-Wan got two small cuts and was down and had a real trouble using the Force to throw his weapon to Anakin.
So cutting of one arm would do the job.
But Obi-Wan goes a lot further and goes for the kill but in a slow and horrible way.

Now you are claiming to be able to read Obi-Wans mind. We don't know what he is thinking about this supposed rule.
I showed that this rule that you talk about, Obi-wan still break it.
He gives Anakiin a mortal injury and leaves him to die slowly. That he leaves means he KILLS a helpless person so this rule is already broken. So that excuse does not wash.

And that purpose is for you to split hairs and try to argue that Obi-Wan didn't try to kill Anakin when he did.
Crucifixion is an execution method that does not involve a killing blow but it is still that, an execution.

Knocking someone out, putting them in a car, put that car in a small garage and turning on the engine. That too will kill.
No killing blow though.

The point remains, Luke will know, as will Yoda and Obi-Wan that Luke seeking out Vader will very likely result in a fight.
So he it is unlikely that he can just confront him and then walk away like nothing happened.

You make the argument, you back it up. Provide movie proof or concede the point.

If he thinks that it is because that is what Yoda and Obi-Wan has taught him.

In ESB he is told that the Sith must be stopped and how only a Jedi can conquer Vader and his emperor. So he was trained to fight and kill the Sith.
But now that he knows that one sith is his father and he feels that there is still good in him, he doesn't want to kill him. He considers other options.
And Luke brings up that there is good in him, suggesting to turn him back. Which Obi-Wan promtply shoots down with his "Twisted and evil." bit.
Yoda said that turning to the dark side was forever.

So they are not giving Luke options here, Confront him you must but decide for yourself how best to deal with him you can." Or give any hope like "I tried to reason with your father but that didn't work, perhaps you might have better luck."
Either they don't believe it is possible, or they do but keep quiet about it. Like they kept quiet about Vader being Luke's father. Again they are manipulating him.

Anakin was trained to be a Sith killer but that backfired.
Luke was also trained to be the same but he found another way and that way saved the day.

And to me, he found it on his own. It wasn't what Yoda or Obi-Wan planned, he alone believed in it.
That makes it a better story to me.

Bye.
Old Stoneface