Rogue One The Moral Choices/Dilemmas of Rogue One

One mans Freedom fighter is another mans terrorist!

 

Thanks for the thinly-veiled insult there.

 

this is the same way we don't want to know what our countries do - America in particular- do to 'keep the republic safe'

this is because if you're that naïve to think the Rebellion is lead by dogooders and its all rainbows and sugar plumbs then apparent you're not acting like an adult . and your reply speaks volumes to the fact.

 

The Empire wanted control of the galaxy, the Rebellion wanted freedom. The difference is one did horrible things to maintain control, meanwhile the other did these things for better change. Any kind of war, even the good side will have to do bad things to try to win. The key difference is, the rebels were fighting for a good cause.

 

The Rebellion is responsible for a fairly massive loss of life in the destruction of both Death Stars. Just watch Kevin Smith's "Clerks" if you're not sure.

However -- they made it quite clear that the Rebels are NOT the same as the Empire when Cassian did not shoot at Galen. Amongst others. "Just as bad as the Empire" is completely unnecessary hyperbole.

The Empire destroyed 2 cities -- including one of their own -- just because... and then went on to blow up planets just to prove a point.

False equivalency.

 

if you read the battlefront novel, you'll see that the Rebellion while not as stark bad as a the empire, has lots of 'corner cutting' done. They are simply going planet to planet Bsing the populace into joining the Rebellion. War is horrible and horrific, the naiveté of some of your posters is astounding! Please read up more on world war history.

to Quote Akbar

'War has no winners'

I cant remember the rest

 

That's the problem with the movie. It didnt show the rebels working with seedy types. It showed the rebellion forcing people to do seedy stuff in the name of the cause.

That's not how the rebellion has been picture before. I knew this is new canon they are building but this is not the type of stuff i like to see in this franchise.

 

Alternatively

"War does not determine who is right, only who is left."

 

Screw it. I'm not falling for your bait. Nice try, though.

 

Don't see how its a problem. It might be for you, and that's cool. But for me? Awesome.

 

The problem, like i said, is that it changes how events can be seen because that's not how the rebellion has been pictured.

That changes Luke volunteering and them accepting him because they didnt have enough pilot to probably accepting him because they use him to take hits from real pilots. Basically the rebellion isnt a rebellion, the rebellion is just a faction that wants to be in power.

 

Rouge One didn't change anything. They clearly accepted Luke because they lost a ****-ton of their pilots at Scarif and had almost no one left who knew how to fly. If anything, it explains why they would actually give an X-Wing to some kid who just showed up at the base earlier that day who had never flown a star-fighter before. They were THAT DESPERATE for pilots.

 

Given how many pilots were lost at Scarif, their motive for accepting him doesn't have to change.

Similarly - a little extra ruthlessness doesn't change that Mon Mothma doesn't want to be the next galactic dictator - she wants dictatorship to disappear. Hence reducing the size of the military after the war to something small when compared to the old Empire.

 

Yoda summed it up perfectly in Empire Strikes Back: "Wars don't make one great."

 

Martoto77 and Granek, I want to wish you both a merry Christmas and a happy new year. Sincerely. Tis the season. ​

 

Nobody's hands are completely clean in war, and to suggest the Rebellion's hands should be is unrealistic. That's just terrible writing.

 

Perfectly explained for me. Cheers guys

 

Yes I think a morally just fight can be clouded by morally unjustifiable acts. To get rid of fascism sometimes you need to drop a nuke or two yourself.

But war crimes are all about perspective. Pretty sure the residents of Dresden didn't see the British the same way the occupied French saw them.

I saw RO as an honest view of the Rebellion rather than a character assassination of its virtue.

 

It's a desperate time. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an official source that came along and said something to the extent of not all the Alliance leaders knowing about the shady **** that was going on in their ranks.

Either way, I don't think going forward that this is how the Alliance will be portrayed. The whole message of Rogue One is that the Alliance is given a new hope and a new start to not fall into becoming what they are fighting against.

Sent from my Who Cares **** You

 

We dont know but because of R1 it gives you a different possible view. Apparently the rebellion uses some people, instead of just accepting people to fight for the cause they kind of pressure some.

I didnt say that the rebellion just wants to be the next Empire but that they may be going to get freedom in a similar how the Empire ended up getting full control. Basically the only difference being that they are not the Empire, that's it.

I mean, they kind of come off as the First Order, here.

This is SW, this isnt Battlestar Galactica.

They swung to much to the other side.

 

Well what is the issue then? You don't believe or comprehend moral ambiguity in the context of a war, don't like it in a war movie or don't accept it in a movie set in the Star Wars universe?

Merry Christmas by the way.

 

The swinging door has been moving that way for a while though.

GL was making those swings back in Clone Wars and supposedly in Underworld.

 

I haven't read the topic responses at all...but isn't the objective of every war to kill the enemy (unless they surrender) and destroy their military targets etc etc

The only scene I raised an eyebrow at was when Cassian shot the informant in the back...but this was because he knew he would get tortured and would cough up vital info etc. He sure didn't look happy about it. The Galen assassination job, once again Galen (as far as the Rebellion were concerned) was an enemy. You can't capture every soldier in war...

Now Saw was a completely different beast. Reminded me of Col Kurtz from Apocalypse Now! He had obviously got sick of the endless debates and non decision making and went off on his own. He seemed to have lost the plot a little also... Wouldn't count him as a member of the Alliance anymore.

If you think back to the OT - Luke blew up the Death Star with thousands of people onboard! How do we know there were no Rebellion prisoners in other cells near Leia?? The rebels dressed as Imperials occasionally to trick the Empire to achieve certain goals (something banned under our world rules of war) Obi Wan (whether he admitted it or not) went to confront Vader and kill him...and so did Luke! (You could argue both were trying to bring him back) Han shot Greedo to get out of being taken before a guy he owed money. Luke tried to shoot Jabba before he truly exhausted all negotiation options etc etc etc

I'm not saying I care about any of these examples - Only that RO hardly muddied the waters - It's war! The Empire killed civilians on regular occasion and were ruthless when people didn't get in line with their way. The Alliance for the most part (being the 99%) were all about human rights, bureaucracy etc

I walk around with a gun every day for work and only pull it out in extreme circumstances. In a perfect world I wouldn't need to. But if you are not allowed to use it - Why give it to me??