The morality of superweapons and the way they are used...NJO Style!

Discussion in 'Literature' started by JediMasterAaron, Aug 22, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JediMasterAaron Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2000
    star 5
    Hey everyone,

    Now I'm absolutely positive that this argument has been brought up before, but I figured I'd give it another go.

    So what do you think?

    Obviously there is the Anakin/Jacen/Centerpoint issue, which I'm sure will be discussed at some point if this thread makes it anywhere. But what about Daeshara'cor? What if she had been feeling like she did at the end of Ruin (Calm, collected, able to see that hatred and anger and vengeance are all wrong) when she was in search of another superweapon to use against the Vong? Would that have made a difference? Would she have been acting of the Light Side, even while using a superweapon?

    Which brings up another question:

    Are superweapons in and of themselves evil, as I'm sure Jacen Solo contends?

    Whaddya guys think? If this topic is too old and moldy, tell me, and I'll see if Darth Ludicrous will lock er up. The issue was touched upon in another thread, and I thought I'd see what you all thought on the issue.

    JMA
  2. chissdude10 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Jul 26, 2001
    star 5
    First i must say this is my first post on superweapons.

    They are not evil if yoused for defense. More people died then if anakin would have fired it.
  3. Dodonna Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2001
    The morality of a superweapon depends on when it was built. If you built it in a time of realative piece to keep your any potential enemy thinking twice its not necassarily bad (a good defense is a strong offense). However, if the weapon is built with the fore-knowledge that it will be used to kill a certian group, as would be the case if built during a time of war (Death Stars) then it is inherintly evil. Its all about your motives.
  4. PrinceXizor Former TF.N Foreign Book Cover Staff

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 2001
    star 5
    Yeah, but the problem is more complex... In general a superweapons has, by definition an overwhelming power... So, even if you use it for defense, you'll probably slaughter a whole bunch of innocents, which is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddd !!!!
  5. Dodonna Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2001
    well right. But the idea behind using a superweapon in defense is that to make it so that your enemies don't want to fight you in the first place. Thus stopping the entire war. Or if you have to use it, it puts a quick end to the war. Similar to the Nuclear weapons of WWII.
  6. PrinceXizor Former TF.N Foreign Book Cover Staff

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 2001
    star 5
    Right, and everyone knows that Nukes are baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddddd !!!
  7. Dodonna Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2001
    Nukes are only bad if they land on you. Besides who knows how many people would've died on both sides in that war if the Japanese wouldn't have surrendered.
  8. I-poodoo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 1, 2001
    star 4
    If a superweapon is indeed built during peacetime it's called a deterent...for example The U.S.A.'s "Nuclear deterent."

    That is alright...Like a big mean dog in your front yard to deter burglars.

    However it's all about attitude. A bully with a superweapon is a bad combination. (i.e. Tarkin and the Ds, Issarde and the Krytos virus, Palpatine and the galaxy gun, Thracken and Centerpoint-the correlian trilogy.).

    Deterents say: I'm strong don't attack me.
    Superweapons say: I'm strong so you better do what I say.

    So the weapon is just a tool, it's the user of that weapon that's the danger.
  9. PrinceXizor Former TF.N Foreign Book Cover Staff

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 2001
    star 5
    If the nuke wasn't used, maybe more people would have died, but mostly soldiers, who did their job, not innocent people that had done nothing.

    But I-Poodoo is right it's not the actual weapon that is bad, but the 'user'.
  10. Dodonna Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2001
    I agree also, it is the user that makes the difference. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying dropping the nuke was necassarily a good thing, it just ended the war. Which is exactly what it was supposed to do. But when building a "superweapon" or a "deterrent" you're still trying to come up with a way to kill people, only the name is different.
  11. JediMasterAaron Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2000
    star 5
    ok, so what about in Daeshara'cor's situation? What if she had indeed FOUND another Eye of Palpatine, or Sun Crusher, or whatever, but had been doing it only for the good of the galaxy, with only pure thoughts in her head? Does it become right to use it against the Vong then?

    JMA
  12. Dodonna Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 2001
    When it becomes a situtuation of me or them, then I say them. When forced to make a choice between millions of your people dying of millions of your enemy's people dying by your hand who would stand there and let their people die just so they didn't have to kill anybody?
  13. suncrusherX Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 3
    if people had open minds they'd see how much good superweapons would be. Just think if everything was made out of the suncrusher armor. No more accidents, collisions or fighting. A superweapon is only super if it's wielded by 1 megalmaniacal party.
  14. -Vergere- Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2001
    star 4
    I think some people know my feelings on this subject from the "Why is everyone so down on my man, Jacen?" thread (read towards the end).

    But I'm not against the NR using superweapons. I am however strongly against jedi using superweapons. Jedi principles are a religion emanating from a LIFE Force. Superweapons are symbols of instant massive LIFE destruction. I cannot reconcile the notion of instant massive life destruction to a good jedi. And even though YV cant be detected through the Force now, that doesn't mean they won't later in the future. And it also doesn't make it any more right for a jedi.
  15. DarthGanner Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 10, 2001
    star 1
    (up two) yeah it would be nice if no more people got hurt in spaceship crashes, but remember how that armor was made? by putting one layer of atoms down at a time. it would take just a little while to make and would be so expensive that only the rich people who have bodyguards to do the same job would be able to afford it. the whole world devastator idea was a good one, only it shouldn't be controlled by the emperor or be used on inhabited planets
    nuff said :)
  16. JediJSolo Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2001
    star 4
    I agree with ?Vergere-. I don?t think that Jedi should use super weapons. The people in the NR military simply don?t have the same temptations to over use power the way Jedi do.
  17. KansasNavy Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2001
    star 4
    I say sensible super weapons would be a good idea. There is no need to destroy an entire planet. That is unpractical, and ammoral. But a superweapon designed to take out an entire battle fleet, shipwomb, etc. is a good idea. Centerpoint was a great weapon if used correctly in Fondor. A weapon that can speed across space in an instant to smash a whole fleet, not exposing your troops to destruction. You wouldn't even need to wipe out whole fleets, just anything that would threaten you directly.

    Toned down galaxy gun projectiles would be great. Practical ones able to be fired consecutively from a modified or specialized carrier ships. Each could wipe out a war cruiser in one shot.

    Basically, anything practical. Planet destroyers, star crushers, etc. are dumb terror weapons.

    World Devastators, toned-down Galaxy Gun projectiles, and Ceneterpoint are sensible. (Though, Centerpoint would need to be used VERY carefully, so another Fondor doesn't happen).
  18. PrinceXizor Former TF.N Foreign Book Cover Staff

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Jul 4, 2001
    star 5
    The problem with the use of superweapons is the response. Initially, both side hesitate to use superweapons, but as soon as one side decides to use it anyway, the other side doesn't hesitate any more and uses its superweapons in turn. Of course, this is assuming each faction as superweapons.
  19. -Vergere- Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2001
    star 4
    Thanks for the vote of confidence, JediJSolo! :)

    Someone said superweapons are ok if they are only used by the good side. There is absolutely no guarantee it can and will stay that way forever.
  20. Grand Admiral Wettengel Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Jan 10, 2000
    star 4
    Since the Jedi in and of themselves are superweapons, perhaps Jacen should get them all together and have a mass suicide.

    And Kyp could just be in a corner watching and laughing at the misguided idealistic oafs.
  21. -Vergere- Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2001
    star 4
    Even if you actually believe "good" jedi are superweapons in and of themselves, that is all the more reason for jedi NOT to use superweapons. What are they so pathetic that they can't fight for themselves?

    Only dark jedi can be considered anything remotely like superweapons. Even then the analogy miserable crumbles in a very big way.
  22. Streick Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 2001
    I say having a superweapon is okay as long as it is not used to quell minor threats. It should only be used when the whole galaxy is threatened as in the case with the Vong.
  23. III_Vir_RPC Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 14, 2001
    star 1
    Many of you contend that a superweapon is ?inherently evil.? This is incorrect. A superweapon is, by definition, a weapon of superior performance characteristics, just as a superman is a man with superlative qualities. There is nothing inherently evil about a weapon designed to destroy planetary masses, or stellar bodies, &c., any more than it is inherently evil to design a weapon to terminate lifeforms.

    A superweapon is, therefore, simply a superlative weapon (hence the name). A weapon is not inherently good or evil. It is predicated upon the use of said weapon---a weapon used in unprovoked aggression may be said to be evil, but ultimately, it is not the weapon, but the executor of the action who is in fact morally responsible.

    For example, the use of the DMIBS to destroy Alderaan was unjustified, but the use of the Galaxy Gun to destroy Da Soocha V. was not unjustified; it is the question of application of overwhelming force against civilians versus overwhelming force against a viable military target. The Grand Moff Tarkin was morally unjustified, but HIM was fully morally justified in his actions.

    The use of the Centrepoint Station or, if one may be obtained, an Eye of Palpatine would be fully justified, and in no manner evil, if applied in a responsible and appropriate fashion against the Yuuzhan Vong.
  24. suncrusherX Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 3
  25. LanceJade Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 4
    Super weapons do not kill people. People kill people.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.