View Single Post
Old April 3 2013, 07:27 PM   #115
Locutus of Bored
Furfallin'
 
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
 
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Re: Defending Admiral Cain from Battlestar Galactica(mentions Dick Che

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
With regard to the torture of the prisoner. The prisoner had aided and abetted in a genocide. Let us not forget this.
You know who else aided and abetted a genocide? Admiral Cain, by murdering civilians, crippling their ships and abandoning them to die, separating families who could be having more children, and pursuing a hopeless war of vengeance that already got a third of her crew killed and would have killed the rest had it kept going.

Above all Cain wanted information. One of the ways she wanted to accomplish this was by psychological torture and degradation. Torture has been used by both "good guys" and "bad guys" throughout history.
It was as much about getting revenge on the Cylon woman who hurt and deceived her as it was about getting information. Probably an element of embarrassment at being tricked since she's a raging egomaniac as well.

And torture is wrong regardless of who uses it. It doesn't become okay just because you consider yourselves the good guys. Everyone considers themselves the good guys.

With regard to raiding the civilian ships...in a lot of wars throughout history including WWI and the Civil War (the good guys...the Union did this), there was a common tactic utilized called scorched Earth where an army would destroy anything - food, homes, etc. that could be considered useful to the enemy. Lots of civilians died as a result of these tactics. At least Cain was just scavenging for things she needed. Judge her not to harshly.
Raiding the ships for parts and personnel has nothing to do with scorched Earth warfare, it was about prolonging her pointless vengeance war and being a sociopath who doesn't care about how her actions affect others.

As you say, scorched Earth is about denying the enemy resources, either by destroying their resources if you're on the offensive (Sherman's March to the Sea) or destroying your resources if you're on the defensive (the USSR during the German invasion). But the Cylon's weren't interested in taking human resources and tech, they were interested in killing all humans at that point. So your comparison to scorched Earth warfare makes no sense. Nor does your defense of Cain's strategy and tactics, since she was so blinded by hate that she actually aided the Cylons in their goal of destroying humanity.

So, yeah, I'll judge her harshly.

I think the end of the Pegasus arc and Razor pretty much vindicates her. At her funeral Starbuck says the fleet is less safe without her and everyone on Pegasus pretty much agrees with this. Towards the end of Razor Adama acknowledges that he can't find anything wrong tactically with anything Cain did and refuses to render a moral judgement on her. And I think what symbolically vindicates her is that her protege Kendra Shaw is promoted to XO in Razor and sacrifices herself in battle at the end. Adama recommends posthumous commendation for Shaw despite the self-righteous objections of Lee. Adama also tells a shaken Lee that his decision to sacrifice Starbuck, Shaw and the away-team (overruled by Adama) wouldn't have been the wrong decision implying Cain would have made that decision in a heartbeat.
The fact that Adama and Starbuck complimented Cain keeps getting mentioned as if that should close out the argument or something.

First of all, since when are Adama and Starbuck unimpeachable paragons of virtue? They've both done some pretty morally questionable things themselves. Nothing even close to being on par with what Cain did, but their hands certainly aren't clean, nor are they infallible.

Secondly, it's a lot easier to judge someone less harshly when she's dead and no longer a constant threat hanging over you and your crew.

Thirdly, they were trying to integrate a hostile crew who had nearly been in a firefight with them days earlier into their command structure. Badmouthing their former commander at her funeral doesn't seem like a great way of building a bridge between the crews, especially since that hostility still existed two years later and boiled over into mutiny for many of them.

Lee is self-righteous for rightly pointing out that Kendra Shaw was a murderer? Jesus Christ.

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
Consider waging a guerrilla war (many examples throughout history where a small guerrilla force has beat back a superpower) and fighting for your home vs. a pilgrimage to a mythical planet. In hindsight the choice might be wrong, but in reality the first choice is the more rational option that most people will take and many have previously succeeded in. Thus, you have to judge her based on that.
Fighting for what home? Their home was destroyed. The two ragtag fleets were all they had left to call home, and Cain crippled hers and left them to die. How did she fight for them?

In case you forgot, at first Earth was just something Adama said to give the people hope and keep them pacified until he could figure something out. It was only later that the search for it became serious when they started finding clues. The goal initially was just to get clear of the Cylons and possibly find a habitable planet to settle on where they might start over again. Adama and Roslin were fighting for a home, in the form of saving the surviving humans of the fleet and rebuilding their society. Cain was fighting for pointless vengeance.

So, yeah, I will judge her for that. Her tactics and strategy were stupid, pointless, and immoral.

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
I've addressed the other abuses. The only argument I got in return was a fulfilling of Godwin's law.
randomfan86 wrote: View Post
I've addressed the other abuses. The only argument I got in return was a reference to Hitler.
randomfan86 wrote: View Post
I've addressed the other abuses. The only argument I got in return was a reference to Hitler.
You know, Godwin's Law doesn't really apply when you're discussing things that Hitler and the Nazis actually did, like committing war crimes and genocide. It's not meant to be a ban on mentioning Hitler or the Nazis even when they're relevant to the discussion.

Also, repeating the same thing over and over again doesn't make it so. You've done that a lot.

Case in point:

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post

2) By arguing that it was "guerrilla war tactics" then that argument basically says "it's okay to rape and torture" the "good guys" so long as the other guy is using "guerrilla war tactics"
Talk about strawmen...
It's not a strawman if that's an actual argument you've been making throughout the thread, which it is. You've been an apologist for her war crimes throughout the thread based on the flimsiest of reasons, such as (paraphrasing) "other countries have done it, so it's okay" "Adama complimented her tactics, so it's okay," "if your people approve of you, rape and torture are defensible," and "she was fighting a guerrilla war, so the ends justify the means."

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
I think everything has to be looked at in context and if you look at what Cain did in the context of war, it was pretty mild.
She left thousands of her own people to die when the entirety of the human species was only measured in the thousands itself (and even less from her perspective than from others since she didn't know about the Adama/Roslin ragtag fleet). That is unforgivable, and certainly not "pretty mild" in any context.

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
As the President, he understand even if you find it morally reprehensible and do not engage in it yourself, an executive should be immune from prosecution in order to exercise the full extent of power when at war. It was found constitutional for FDR to intern 100,000 of US's own citizens based on ethnicity.
That's a pretty repugnant viewpoint. Just because something's legal at the time doesn't always make it right. Justifying FDR's racist internment of innocent Japanese-Americans simply because it was found to be constitutional is disgusting.

Someone as tactically competent as Cain made the right call by consolidating power and preventing mutiny.
Why do you keep calling her tactically competent? She walked into an obvious trap on the Cylon relay and was so blinded by rage that she continued the attack anyway and wound up losing a third of her crew.

She murdered the only officer willing to stand up to her, thus scaring everyone else into submission and making sure she would never get an honest assessment of a battle plan or her orders again.

She was willing to go to war with her own people over her favorite rapist accidentally being killed.

She left a third of what was left of the human species at that point to die at the hands of the Cylons so she could pursue a vengeance war that could never possibly be won.

Not only was she morally bankrupt, she was an idiot.

Mind you, this is no reflection on Michelle Forbes or her performance, which was superb.

randomfan86 wrote: View Post
My point is that the torture/oppression/murder can be overlooked if you have a good leader.
One would think those things should disqualify you from being a "good leader," but hey, what do I know?
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Locutus of Bored is offline