PT Anakin's Turn : Did you like it? What would you have changed?

Luke and Anakin's actions are NOT comparable because Luke had no choice while Anakin had plenty of choices. The stormtroopers are guilty by association because they serve Darth Vader and they followed his commands. Plus, the stormtroopers did nothing to Luke???? They've killed Owen and Beru, chased Luke off of Tatooine, and were shooting at him ever since he came onboard the Death Star so he had every right to shoot back at them. His life is already at risk from the start and even when Luke was upset over Obi-wan's death, he didn't attack the stormtroopers until they fired the first shot. You can't fault Luke for just standing there because he wanted revenge for everything that has happened to him. Sure, the stormtroopers had nothing to do with Vader killing Obi-wan but that didn't stop them from wanting to gun down Luke, Leia, and Han. Another thing, saying that the stormtroopers were doing their jobs is insulting because its like saying Osama Bin Laden was doing his job when he asked his followers to hijack some planes so they can crash them into both the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. If someone shoots at me, I'm not going to let them make a direct hit because I'm going to shoot them before they kill me.

As for the Tuskens, despite what they've done to Shmi, Cliegg Lars, and the rescuers that tried to save her, they were no threat to Anakin. What I mean is he has the power to demolish buildings and break bones with his mind but he knows that a Jedi never abuses his/her powers like that. 1 Jedi alone can eliminate 50 bad guys either by waving their hand or slicing them up with their lightsaber. The Jedi are similar to the gods of Mt. Olympus who can wipe out the human race just by snapping their fingers but they chose not to because they need the humans to gain their strength. Plus, Anakin said it himself that a Jedi never attacks an unarmed prisoner and the Tuskens were unarmed and defenseless until they saw him decapitate their fellow Tuskens. As upset as he was over his mother's death, Anakin could've chosen not to walk out that tent and murder those sandpeople because he snuck into their village without being seen so he could've taken Shmi's body out the same way. There was nothing to stand in his way of getting back to the Lars homestead and no point to killing the women and children but he massacred them all anyway.

Anakin could've stopped himself at anytime but he didn't while Luke's only options are to stay alive and get off the Death Star.

No, Luke had a choice -- he could have left on the Falcon. See that video I posted. I outlined precisely the opportunities Luke had to simply run onboard and leave. Why else would Han and Leia tell him to "come on" and run onboard themselves?

Guilt by association!? Then why is it wrong for Anakin to kill the Tuskens? They are all part of the same tribe that kidnapped, tortured, and killed his mother! They are all far more closely associated as a tribe of a few dozen at most than the Imperial military, which must span at least millions of troops! If you are going to condemn the stormtroopers for "guilt by association" when you don't know the individual circumstances of their service, then why is it wrong to condemn all the Tuskens due to "guilt by association"?

Those particular stormtroopers on the Death Star are not confirmed to have killed Owen and Beru or chased Luke. They are not responsible for the conduct of other people. They shot at Luke, yes, but the Tuskens also attacked Anakin -- that doesn't justify him killing them all, though.

Moreover, the stormtroopers at least have the excuse of having Darth Vader at their back. If they refused to do their jobs, they might very well have been killed themselves.

Yes, that's my point -- Luke wanted revenge. Just, as I'm sure, Anakin wanted revenge. The problem is, both of them attack people who likely didn't do anything to hurt the one they loved. Those stormtroopers didn't kill Ben and certainly not all of the Tuskens harmed Shmi, and yet both Skywalker men attacked them regardless. Luke had a choice -- he could have departed with Han and Leia. Instead, even after the blast doors are closed and Luke can't get at Vader, he keeps killing the stormtroopers when he could simply let them go. The stormtroopers are not at all equivalent to Osama Bin Laden. Bin Laden was a leader, the mastermind behind the operations. The stormtroopers are the grunts -- they have no say in their orders and live under the oppression of the Empire. That's what happens when you live under a totalitarian regime -- you follow marching orders or you are killed. Some, like Luke, can go and join the Rebellion, but many people have families that they aren't willing to risk by going against the establishment.

Likewise, if the Tuskens attack Anakin, does that make him slaughtering them all justified? Especially when he, like Luke, could simply have fled?

And the stormtroopers would have been no threat to Luke if he would have just left -- gotten on board as Han and Leia did so that they could leave and head to the Rebellion. That's the whole point of my argument -- that Luke and Anakin both engaged in the unnecessary taking of life due to emotional responses. It doesn't matter the power disparity because both of them had the opportunity to leave but chose not to. The Tuskens were also not unarmed -- we see plenty of them running towards him with clubs. And just as Anakin could have chosen not to kill the sand people, Luke could have chosen not to kill the stormtroopers by walking onboard the Falcon and leaving. There was nothing preventing him from doing as Han and Leia did and ascending the ramp. Standing still is actually putting him in more danger.

Like Anakin, Luke could have ended the killing earlier by simply fleeing, as I outlined in the video. It is only when Obi-Wan calls out to him (after ignoring Han and Leia's repeated pleas) that Luke finally gets onboard and they leave.

I feel a difference between Anakin's and Luke's actions, though. I think it is this: the tuskens were in their own camp, milling around and (for the moment) individually minding their own business (they weren't engaged in torture, etc, when Anakin went to the camp, unless tying Shmi up counts... which it might). The stormtroopers were actively trying to kill Luke right then. Anakin sought out a confrontation, while Luke found himself in the middle of one.

And the stormtroopers were on their own base, milling around, minding their own business until an armed man (who had previously killed several of their members) started yelling. Note also that as this is a military base, Luke's presence would hardly have been uncommented on/unnotified. Nor would I say the Tuskens were minding their own business -- the first two Anakin killed actively guarded Shmi's tent. But the thing is, even if you think Luke didn't seek out a confrontation (which I doubt, considering he kept killing after Vader had left), he still had the option of leaving, just as Anakin did. That he chose not to is a result of his rage and pain.

@PiettsHat: How the stormtroopers got there is completely irrelevant. However they got into the corps, they're professional soldiers who are armed and firing with intent to kill and, if I remember ANH correctly, they fired first to boot. Luke has every right to return the favour until the troopers surrender, retreat, or are all dead. The stormtroopers could have withdrawn, too, so why is the burden on Luke to do so? The only reason he needed to leave was a tactical one: the longer he stayed and fought, the more likely it was that one of the troopers might hit him or call in reinforcements.

Anakin, meanwhile, attacked a village and killed everyone in it. Had he just killed the warriors outside the tent, and then defended himself against any that attacked him and stopped when they did, he might have been justified. But killing everyone in the village, civilians included, is entirely different to Luke killing enemy soldiers. Even if the women or children had tried to defend themselves, they would be doing exactly that: defending themselves against Anakin, whereas Luke and the stormtroopers were in battle against each other. The same rules don't apply.

We see three Tuskens get cut down by Anakin, one of them seemed to have his head chopped off. Later we hear Anakin say that he SLAUGTHERED them like ANIMALS. Both of these facts are evidence that some and possibly all Tuskens did get cut to pieces.
Whereas there is ZERO movie evidence that Anakin used the Force in any way. Plus as I said, you and others argue that Anakin is out of controll, enraged, not thinking rationally or thinking at all. If so then his use of the Force will be more or less gone.
If you argue that Anakin is in charge of himself enough to concentrate and focus to use several different Force powers, to be able to look around for big rocks, lift those big rocks, aim it at specific tents. That to me indicates that Anakin is far more rational and in control and this makes the killing of ALL the Tuskens into a far more deliberate and concious act.

Other question, you said earlier that you found the idea that the Tuskens, who were involved in Shmis death and torture, NOT be punished to be unacceptable. They commited a horrible crime and they MUST be punished. But then what about Anakin?
He also commited a crime, what he did was basically Genocide and yet I have not heard you argue that Anakin MUST also be punished for his crime. If your logic is that crime MUST be punished then that applies to both the Tuskens and Anakin.
The law or lack of thereof on Tatooine? Not relevant with Anakin as he is a Jedi and the Jedi has rules of what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. And what Anakin did was most certainly NOT ok in the Jedi's eyes. What the law said on Tatooine would not matter to the Jedi, their own rules would take precedence. So shouldn't Anakin face the judgement of the Jedi Order?

Bye for now
Samuel Vimes

Well, it is true that under Tatooine law(or lack thereof) Anakin's actions wouldn't be looked down upon. But the same goes for the Tusken Raiders, and the slave masters in Tatooine for that matter. In any of those cases, it's not fair. You're saying that Anakin, unlike the other criminals, should face judgement as a Jedi. I agree with this, but it's not fair for the other criminals to get away with it just because they happen to live outside the Republic. Anakin's deception may have been wrong, but if Tatooine weren't such an anarchy Shmi maybe wouldn't have been tortured to death in the first place.

And how do you know that Anakin's lack of rationality would make it impossible to use the Force? He wasn't completely rational in ROTS, such as during the Mutsafar scene, but he still used it then.

And the Tuskens attacked Anakin as well instead of retreating -- we see several of them run and attack Anakin after he has killed the first two. Note that Luke himself has been going through the Death Star killing stormtroopers as he goes. Justified of course. But from the stormtroopers' perspective (like the Tuskens) Luke is an invader who has been killing them. Luke has every reason to leave as well.

And wait, if the Tuskens attack Anakin, then they are merely defending themselves? But if the stormtroopers attack Luke, then they are engaged in battle? This doesn't make logical sense to me. In both cases, the original perpetrators are the Tuskens as a group and the stormtroopers as a group -- they are holding the women that the Skywalkers want (Shmi or Leia). Both Skywalkers arrive on their "land" (either their camp or military base) and proceed to begin the hostilities by killing. You can argue that the first few were justified -- Luke had every right to kill the stormtroopers when it was necessary to escape. Anakin likewise had the right to kill the individual Tuskens keeping his mother captive in her tent and those that attack him. Where it becomes problematic, though, is that both of them keep killing, even if their opponents are not impeding their progress to escape or have done nothing in particular to them.

The Tuskens Anakin continued to kill were not keeping his mother captive and he could have easily fled. Likewise, once Luke was at the Falcon, he also could have left with Han and Leia. Both men, however, were angered and hurt by the loss of a loved one and thus attacked people that likely had never done a thing to personally harm them.

I also have a problem with just dismissing the stormtroopers' personal situations out of hand. They are all individuals. And if they were coerced into service, I don't think it's fair to hold them accountable for the Empire's actions against Luke. Likewise, not all of the Tuskens harmed Shmi and I feel it would be unfair to hold each one individually accountable for the actions of their fellow tribesmen. The only Tuskens to have directly harmed Shmi, as far as we can tell, were those keeping her captive by guarding her tent. Others might have played a part, but again, we don't know.

There are several BIG differences.
1) Luke did not start the attack but Anakin did.
2) Anakin had a risk free escape route and could leave without incident but he choose to attack and kill Tuskens.
Luke did NOT have any risk free alternative, shooting back, taking cower or running away ALL had risk. The risk might not be equally big but there still IS a risk.
3) Luke had many chances to shot AT Vader, the person who was directly responsible for Obi-Wans death and yet he did not do so.
Luke ONLY shot at those who were shooting at him. ie self-defence and yes shooting back even when you could try to run away is still self-defence, it is not wantom killing.
Anakin killed everyone, regradless if they posed any threat to him or not.
4) Anakin killed everyone in the village, that implies a methodical search for those that try to hide and chasing after those that try to run. Luke did not run off to look for more stormtroopers to kill, he only shoots at those that try to kill him.

Finally, we see ONE Tusken attack Anakin, the other two we see him kill did not have time to move. So we do not know that MANY of the Tuskens tried to attack Anakin. We do know that Tusken are easy to scare and they have the ability to run away. So it makes no sense to argue that ALL Tuskens would have charged Anakin, some yes. But others would have tried to hide or run away. Since Anakin said he killed them ALL he would have had to chase after those that ran away and searched all of the twenty or so tents in the camp for those that hid. Also you said that trying to KILL Luke isn't doing anything personally to him? Very much disagree, if someone tries to kill me I am going to take it rather personally.

Luke was not very smart and yes he took a big risk. But that is very different from Anakin and what he did.

Bye for now
Samuel Vimes

Well, Luke wasn't just shooting those stormtroopers in defense, he was also doing it because he believed that, by association, they were guilty of Obi Wan's death. Those stormtroopers seemed to be armed(can't really remember) but if they weren't Luke still may have done it because they are apart of the Empire.

nute/ Padme: you assume too much

I'm not assuming. I'm just saying he could maybe do it. After all, he almost killed Vader. A New Hope, to me, was just like this: it's good guys vs. bad guys, the Rebels are the good guys and the Empire has all the bad guys. Because the stormtroopers are apart of the Empire, then by this reasoning they are bad guys. The Rebels view the Empire as evil(probably including the stormtroopers) and vice versa.

Part of the deal is that Anakin killed children while all of those Luke killed were armed soldiers/guards. Quite a big difference there...

I will give you that. But to be honest, I didn't really sympathsize with Luke in that scene. I don't demonize him for it, but he barely knew Obi Wan when he died. So I don't really know why he got so angry, even if Obi Wan was a friend of his father. I can actually understand Luke losing control in ROTJ---when Vader threatened Leia. He was much closer to Leia than he was to Obi Wan. In fact, I think this scene can be compared to Anakin's situation more. In this scene, someone Luke cares about is threatened. It made him angry, just like that would make Anakin angry. I think that's the main point.

In the TPM novel, Anakin liked Tusken Raiders. He'd heard bad rumors about them from villagers, but didn't believe them because he was never hurt personally by them. But when he helped an injured one out in the novel, he was afraid. He was scared that they would hurt Shmi. Maybe he remembered helping a Tusken Raider when she died, and the fact that a couple of them hurt him in such a personal way even after he helped one of them must have made things worse.

And yes, it is selfish. Anakin heard of Tusken Raiders doing bad things to other people, but it wasn't until they hurted someone who was close to him that he felt any anger toward them. It's easier to forgive a person if they didn't hurt *you* but someone else.

True, but Ben is all Luke had left. He didn't really know Han or Leia so he didn't feel connected to them. Ben was virtually Luke's future at that point. He was a Jedi and was going to teach Luke the ways of the force. Ben had also been a close friend to Luke's father. Ben was as close to family as Luke had at that point and Vader took it away. Vader the villain who had, according to Ben, long before killed Luke's father had now taken away his mentor and friend. I could see why Luke would be pissed.

Yeah, I guess that's true in A New Hope. In that movie, he wasn't too close with Leia or Han yet. That's why I made a comparison with Luke's loss of control in ROTJ--he was more close to Leia then, and he found out she was his sister. And unlike the stormtrooper situation, Vader had an arm chopped off for a moment. But it's still murky because he was somewhat more evil than the stormtroopers were.

Hang on. You expect Luke to stop and ask his enemy for their life stories before fighting them? I mean, seriously?

Let's just extend your argument for a moment. Luke and co. escape the Death Star, run to Yavin, and the Death Star pursues. Now, the Rebels have two choices: they can either evacuate Yavin, or stay and fight the Death Star. They had the time to analyse the Death Star plans, devise a strategy, and then ready and deploy a large wing of fighters, so they probably would have had enough time to at least get their personnel out. Instead, they stay and fight. The Death Star comes, Rebels engage it, Luke torpedoes it, Death Star blows up, battle over.

Now, there were likely millions of people aboard the Death Star. By your logic, the Rebels are responsible for the murder of everyone aboard it who didn't actively support the Empire. There may have been thousands of such people, but by the time the battle starts it is irrelevant. The Death Star is a legitimate target that needs to be destroyed at any cost. I'm sure all would agree on that. Anyone aboard it when it goes up is a justified death, or at worst collateral damage.

Similarly, by the time they start fighting with Luke, the stormtroopers' personal stories are irrelevant. They're enemy soldiers, and if that isn't enough justification they even start the fight. Luke has every right to return fire as much as he likes until they stop fighting back. When and even if he retreats is not a matter of right and wrong, but a matter of tactics.

Now, onto Anakin. To me, Anakin's actions are murky to start with, then clearly monstrous. Where Luke is defending himself against soldiers who are firing on him, Anakin is the aggressor and doesn't limit himself to Tuskens who fight back. He starts the fight, killing the two Tuskens outside the tent. That might be justified, as could taking down any of the Tuskens who come at him after that. But Anakin crosses the line when he begins hunting down the Tuskens not fighting back. For Luke to cross that same line would involve him firing at a non-combatant, say a technician cowering in the corner or a trooper who had surrendered. Exchanging fire with the stormtroopers is not wrong, no matter what options Luke had to end the fight.

To put everything into a couple of sentences: to me, Luke v Stormtroopers is a military action, so neither side has any requirement to be worried about the other. Anakin v the Tusken warriors could have been similar, if a little less clear cut, but when he starts killing non-combatants he crosses the line to outright murder.

Okay, I see what you're saying here but even if Luke's actions were technically military ones, I don't know if it should be called that because his motivations were not just about war. I wouldn't call his actions equivalent to Anakin's, but I think his intentions are important.

I suppose you are seeing this from a more consequentialist point of view---it doesn't matter that he was shooting them because he was angry over Ben's death, because the results are the same. And from the consequentialist point of view, Anakin's actions also can't be sympathetic because even if his actions were motivated by his mother's death, that doesn't erase the results of his actions. These speculations of mine might not be accurate, however.

Any number of the Rebel fighter pilots might have joined up because they passionately hate the Empire, and then carried that into the battle. For them, shooting down enemy fighters and killing pilots would be a personal thing, but by itself that doesn't make that pilot's actions any more right or wrong than a pilot who joined up for any other reason. If however, said pilot strafed surrendering soldiers because he hates the Empire, it would be wrong.

Because they all watched Obi-wan die and they were telling Luke that it was too late to save him. It had nothing to do with Luke standing around shooting stormtroopers because they were still in danger even after they left the Death Star.

So your suggesting that if Luke understood why the stormtroopers do their jobs, he should accept it and let them gun him down? Sorry, but when your life is threatened, the concept of your enemy's job description shouldn't mean crap because either they die or you die. Luke is not going to care why the stormtroopers do what they do because his life is on the line and he's not going to let them end his life. It also doesn't matter which stormtroopers did what because they are just as responsible as the leaders themselves for how they govern their Empire. As for Anakin, he wasn't attacked at all because the Tuskens had no idea that he was in their village and it is only until after Shmi died and Anakin started killing Tuskens did they became aware of his presence. He was the attacker, not them and what made Anakin's actions wrong is that he went after the women and children...who had no involvement whatsoever with his mother's abduction and murder. The actions of a few Tuskens should not mean that the entire village is responsible for one woman's murder. Its like the civil rights era when white men would go into black neighborhoods and burn down houses, bomb churches, and beat up, hang and murder black people just because they're not white. What's worse is that these crimes go unpunished because the police and the court officials are white as well and they share the same racist views that all blacks are the "N" word who act like animals just like how Anakin views the Tuskens as animals.

Again, it doesn't matter to Luke why the stormtroopers do what they do because when it comes to war, if you work for the enemy, then you become the enemy...no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Even when Luke got aboard the Falcon, he and the gang were still not safe because they were chased by TIE fighters so no, Luke still doesn't have a choice but to gun down those fighters. Anakin, on the other hand had plenty of choices because there was nothing to block his escape, noone knows he's hiding in their hut, and he had nothing to gain from killing the Tuskens.

If the Tuskens were aware that Anakin was in their village, then yes, it would justify him slaughtering all of them. However, they were NOT aware at all, hence, they're not a threat to Anakin and there was no justification to murder an entire village.

But the stormtroopers are still a threat to Luke even after he leaves the Death Star. Remember the TIE fighter chase? The Death Star's assault on Yavin IV? The Battle of Hoth? The rescue attempt on Bespin? And the speeder bike chase on Endor? As long as Luke is with the rebels, he will never be safe from the Empire or the stormtroopers which is why he has to fight them. The Tuskens only charged at Anakin with clubs AFTER they saw him decapitate 2 of their people but before that, they weren't aware of his presence so if Anakin had just stay out of sight, he could've gotten his mother and left the village without anyone knowing but instead, he chose to become the "Jason Vorhees" of Tatooine.