The Walking Dead Season 6 Discussion

[TREK_GOD_1]

Hold him where and guarded by whom??? It's not like there's a secure CIA rendition facility in the middle of town. It's a group of abandoned cottages occupied by the PTA. Just trying to hold him in one of the houses is inviting escape and mayhem, and you can't spare people to do nothing but sit and make sure a prisoner is healthy and fed and secure until the interrogators are done with him. Why do you think Rick killed Porchdick? The whole rationale was "there's no jail to send him to!" It's not like they've built one since then.

Exactly. They are in a preserved, "normal" neighborhood, where the most security-minded features are a tower and sheet metal walls. This is not Woodbury, where barricades, prisoner / torture rooms and armed guards at every wall exist.

And you're right, just holding one of the wolves is begging for more trouble, since the only people there truly battle tested were few and far between (at the time Morgan caught one), and once again, there's nothing to be gained from crazed killers who have never been demonstrated to offer anything other than a brief word on how they will kill you.

Capture five (coherent) Wolves and interrogate them? What will you learn? That there's more of them in the woods and they want what Alexandria have and will be coming back soon. Carol already knows that.

...and they have previous evidence of their attacks and murderous nature. The Wolves are not a total mystery.

For some reason, the interrogation advocates skip over how removed from sanity the Wolves (encountered so far) are. There's no tactical advantage to basing plans around the ramblings of the insane, or someone being deceptive.

At this stage, the MO is take no prisoners, and this wolf guy probably knows that. He probably has a good idea that he will be killed, so why would he volunteer any information about anything? And what good is this information?

It would be as useful as Terminus Mary refusing to answer Carols demand to know where her friends were. An allegedly same (but malevolent) human refused to give any information--even after being shot--so why would anyone expect more from crazed killers?

 

[Trekker4747]

Hold him where and guarded by whom??? It's not like there's a secure CIA rendition facility in the middle of town. It's a group of abandoned cottages occupied by the PTA. Just trying to hold him in one of the houses is inviting escape and mayhem, and you can't spare people to do nothing but sit and make sure a prisoner is healthy and fed and secure until the interrogators are done with him. Why do you think Rick killed Porchdick? The whole rationale was "there's no jail to send him to!" It's not like they've built one since then.

Rick was held somewhere after his freak-out with Porch Dick and Rick held Morgan somewhere until he determined Morgan was safe, so they have a means to hold people short-term.

The problem with Porch Dick was that there was no way to contain him and keep him away from his family long term, especially since he was their only doctor; so he was needed.

But they had the means to hold people for short periods.

Again, could they have gotten anything from him? Likely not. But they don't know that! They *do* know that some unknown group has just attacked them with unknown motives and intentions. Why not seize that when you have a prisoner who poses no threat anymore? You don't need to put him in a cell and post a guard 24/7 forever, you just need to restrain him tightly -they surely have handcuffs, shackles, rope or other restraints that cannot be easily torn or cut- and there's plenty of people around among our core-group more than capable of keeping watch on him. They don't need to keep him around forever just until they've gotten whatever information out of him they think they can get, hell they don't even need to feed him or give him water.

Why kill a potential resource like that? Especially after he's restrained and not a threat anymore? Kill him, sure, I don't disagree with that given the circumstances of the world they're not in but there's no reason to kill him right away before you've at least tried to get info from him.

For some reason, the interrogation advocates skip over how removed from sanity the Wolves (encountered so far) are.

The characters don't know that! You *do* realize that you're getting a third-person, God's eye, perspective on the events, right? That just because *you* know that The Wolves are group of maniacs with no regard for anything doesn't mean that the characters know that, right? All they know is they were attacked by some unknown group with unknown intents and goals. It'd make sense to find out why and how this happened and where they came from. Sure, they may not get useful information but they don't know that and Carol -apparently- didn't think it was worth trying. You'd think she would have learned something when she senselessly killed two innocent, sick, people in order to contain a virus that wasn't contained and, well, that's not how viruses work.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Rick was held somewhere after his freak-out with Porch Dick and Rick held Morgan somewhere until he determined Morgan was safe, so they have a means to hold people short-term.

Rick was not expected to fight to escape like a wild, murderous man would. Moreover, he was safe enough for his friends to visit him.

Morgan--same situation, so that room is not secure if trying to hold some wild killer.

But they don't know that! They *do* know that some unknown group has just attacked them with unknown motives and intentions. Why not seize that when you have a prisoner who poses no threat anymore?

Did allegedly sane Terminus Mary give up information after Carol shot her? No. she was defiant.

Did allegedly sane Terminus Martin give up information? No. He was smug, plotting and defiant.

Both were in vulnerable positions, yet both remained true to their agenda, so how could anyone expect more from savages?

 

[Trekker4747]

What harm is there in trying? You have nothing to lose. If he doesn't give up any information, kill him. If he doesn't provide good or reliable information, kill him. If you kill him first then you find out nothing and have an unknown enemy out there with unknown numbers, unknown motives at an unknown distance.

I'm sure Rick, Carol, Morgan and Daryl could have found a way to restrain the Wolf and keep him contained.

 

[hux]

That just because *you* know that The Wolves are group of maniacs with no regard for anything doesn't mean that the characters know that, right? All they know is they were attacked by some unknown group with unknown intents and goals.

The characters (and Carol in particular) know that people with no plan, no guns, no great numbers and W's carved into their heads, attacked them indiscriminately without any particular objective and would very probably be slaughtered by them and their guns very quickly in the process. I think it's safe to say you can make a pretty swift judgement about their mental state based on their actions.

Secondly, as I've already asked. What could you learn?

I mean what? Let's assume you don't just end up with a psycho or a liar. Let's say you capture one and he's sane and always tells the truth. What can you learn from him that you aren't already simply going to assume.

 

[Trekker4747]

That just because *you* know that The Wolves are group of maniacs with no regard for anything doesn't mean that the characters know that, right? All they know is they were attacked by some unknown group with unknown intents and goals.

The characters (and Carol in particular) know that people with no plan, no guns, no great numbers and W's carved into their heads, attacked people with plenty of guns who would very probably slaughter them very quickly. I think it's safe to say you can make a pretty swift judgement about their mental state based on their actions.

Secondly, as I've already asked. What could you learn?

I mean what? Let's assume you don't just end up with a psycho or a liar. Let's say you capture one and he's sane and always tells the truth. What can you learn from him that you aren't already going to assume.

Off the top of my head:

1. How far away they are.
2. How great are their numbers.
3. Where their camp is.
4. How they found ASZ.
5. Why they attacked.
6. What kind of defenses and offenses does their camp have?
7. Why they attacked.

They've nothing to lose if they keep him alive, restrained and locked-up under guard using any of the men (or women) in their group who've proven to one-person forces to be reckoned with time and time again.

Any number of ways to keep him isolated and contained. The Wolf is different than Randal, but they had no trouble keeping him tied up and gagged.

Why kill him? Why instantly assume there's nothing at all to gain from or no reason to even try? Morgan had him tied up and gagged (IIRC.) Sharp blow to the head and knock him out, deal with the rest of The Wolves, go back to him and drag him to their holding area and tie him to something. I'm sure they have chains, wires or other things to use beyond rope to restrain him with. Then try and extract info from him. If he doesn't provide it you kill him. If what he provides isn't reliable, you kill him. When he provides it, you kill him.

But if you kill him without ever doing anything then you gain nothing for sure. Keep him alive you stand to gain a lot.

 

[Admiral2]

What harm is there in trying? You have nothing to lose.

Except the people he wounds or kills when he makes his escape attempt.

If he doesn't give up any information, kill him.

If he doesn't give up any information, you've wasted time you could have used shoring up defenses against a threat you haven't learned anything new about anyway. I'd kill him and whoever suggested keeping him alive.

If he doesn't provide good or reliable information, kill him.

The most likely way you'll find out if the information is bad is when the people you send to act on it don't come back, and you can't afford that kind of attrition.

If you kill him first then you find out nothing and have an unknown enemy out there with unknown numbers, unknown motives at an unknown distance.

But you do know they're down by at least one...

I'm sure Rick, Carol, Morgan and Daryl could have found a way to restrain the Wolf and keep him contained.

Yes, if Rick and Daryl weren't already busy trying to contain the much bigger threat, using everyone else who might be useful in restraining said wolf and leaving Carol and Morgan backed up only by the wounded and the useless and one kid protecting his baby sister.

 

[hux]

1. How far away they are.

Doesn't help them.

2. How great are their numbers.

Doesn't help them.

3. Where their camp is.

Doesn't help them.

4. How they found ASZ.

Doesn't help them.

5. Why they attacked.

Because... zombie apocalypse.

6. What kind of defenses and offenses does their camp have?

Only matters if you're hunting them rather than preparing for them.

7. Why they attacked.

Because... zombie apocalypse.

You might get lucky and learn something useful but honestly, all you really need to know is that there is a threat outside. Everyone (in Rick's group) already knew that. Not being prepared for something that was essentially inevitable was the mistake. A mistake Rick has been trying to warn them about since he arrived. Other than the loss of numbers, the attack simply means they'll listen now. Finally.

 

[sojourner]

^ Why not? Is the only valid question to all of your above responses.

LOL, "where are you gonna keep him locked up from escaping?". It's called rope. Or chains. Duct tape. Take your pick. Contrary to how it's portrayed on most tv shows, those are effect means of holding someone.

And again, for everyone couching their answers behind "that's Carol's character". We get that. It's still not a smart move.

Taking an already subdued person prisoner for a short term to see if you can get some information from him before killing him is the smart action to take.

 

[Admiral2]

^ Why not? Is the only valid question to all of your above responses.

And one that completely ignores what the responses are saying which is "It's not necessary."

LOL, "where are you gonna keep him locked up from escaping?". It's called rope. Or chains. Duct tape. Take your pick. Contrary to how it's portrayed on most tv shows, those are effect means of holding someone.

Until they demonstrate illness or a need for the bathroom, in which cases overall safety depends on how compassionate the interrogator is and how good the wolf is at acting.

And again, for everyone couching their answers behind "that's Carol's character". We get that. It's still not a smart move.

But one with an immediate and useful result: the threat is dead. On to the next.

Taking an already subdued person prisoner for a short term to see if you can get some information from him before killing him is the smart action to take.

And if the battle for civilization came down to the barbarians versus the intellectuals, the barbarians are going to win.

Carol is a barbarian. I'll take her side any day.

 

[sojourner]

^ Why not? Is the only valid question to all of your above responses.

And one that completely ignores what the responses are saying which is "It's not necessary."

Please explain why it's not necessary?

Or we can just reduce this all down to "na-uh". If you can't explain your replies then they are not very good replies.

 

[kitik]

Why kill a potential resource like that? Especially after he's restrained and not a threat anymore? Kill him, sure, I don't disagree with that given the circumstances of the world they're not in but there's no reason to kill him right away before you've at least tried to get info from him.

Look, I agree that the smart call would seem to be to at least try to ask some questions and get some intel.

But first, there were literally two people in the whole town keeping people alive, Morgan and Carol. For them to waste even another 10 seconds on this guy means that some other innocent person could have been killed. Carol decided for Morgan that the two of them needed to not waste another second on this guy, and go after the other threats. (Edit: okay, I guess Maggie, Rosita, and Aaron were there too.)

That said, reading what I quoted from you above, it seems to me like the "humane" thing to do is to kill the guy quickly. Leaving the guy alive for a day or two, just to torture him and question him, and then kill him afterwards, seems a bit too nasty and dark. Carol was actually choosing the lighter path here. Not to mention it avoided the inevitable arguments with any whiners that would want to argue the prisoner's cause. Though I suspect the whiner population shrank significantly in this episode. Not just from being killed, but from changing their minds after witnessing the day's events.

As for the list of questions that you could ask the prisoner, who knows how reliable those answers would be. You would still have to go out and verify every single piece of information with your own eyes. Sure can't take his word for it.

But yeah, that said, my initial inclination would be to at least try to get some answers from the guy. But upon further reflection, extracting information from him and then killing him afterwards is far darker than Carol's quick solution.

 

[Trekker4747]

Yes, if Rick and Daryl weren't already busy trying to contain the much bigger threat, using everyone else who might be useful in restraining said wolf and leaving Carol and Morgan backed up only by the wounded and the useless and one kid protecting his baby sister.

It'd have been no trouble for them to have tied the single Wolf up, knock him out and then go deal with the others.

That said, reading what I quoted from you above, it seems to me like the "humane" thing to do is to kill the guy quickly. Leaving the guy alive for a day or two, just to torture him and question him, and then kill him afterwards, seems a bit too nasty and dark. Carol was actually choosing the lighter path here. Not to mention it avoided the inevitable arguments with any whiners that would want to argue the prisoner's cause. Though I suspect the whiner population shrank significantly in this episode. Not just from being killed, but from changing their minds after witnessing the day's events.

It's the Zombie Apocalypse, the Geneva Conventions don't apply. Torture and restrain him all you want, nothing says you have to give him food, water, clean clothes, or a pot to piss in and Rick is certainly past the point of humanity so it wouldn't be a repeat of the Randal situation.

Tie him up using everything you've got and under no circumstances let him go, this isn't a jail cell in a small town where "my cellmate is sick" is going to work. No one has any reason of letting you do anything. The only options you have is to die slowly and painfully from dehydration and/or hunger (or even heat stroke/hypothermia if they leave you exposed to the elements or in the home with any H/VAC system turned off) or die relatively quickly and painlessly by them shooting/stabbing you in the head.

There's no reason to kill him right away when he could be a source of information. Whether than information is good or useful is something to decide later; but there was no need to kill him right away; he was no longer a threat as Morgan had him contained. Knock him out throw him behind a shrub, take care of business, come back for him. (TV conventions telling us he'd be unconscious for exactly as long as he needed to be for the plot to work.)

Killing him was foolish and unnecessary. In character for Carol? Perhaps that doesn't make it right. Had Rick done it, I doubt you guys would be defending his actions since, it seems, Carol can do no wrong.

Seriously, when did this woman become the Bad-Ass Can-Do-No-Wrong character who between seasons went from a woman barely able to fire rifle, and cowered in a closet during the episode where Lori is killed and a few-months later is a cold-blooded person teaching kids how to use guns and seems is able to aim a bottle rocket at a ruptured propane tank?

Rick is at least flawed, makes mistakes, and isn't an invincible bad-ass considering he gets his ass handed to him in pretty much every physical fight he gets into; and I'm willing to admit he makes mistakes when he makes them.

Carol lovers? Apparently she's flawless because between seasons the show decided to make her so.

 

[Admiral2]

^ Why not? Is the only valid question to all of your above responses.

And one that completely ignores what the responses are saying which is "It's not necessary."

Please explain why it's not necessary?

Or we can just reduce this all down to "na-uh". If you can't explain your replies then they are not very good replies.

I thought that your line was a response to hooks, who pretty much already explained why it was unnecessary. You can't get much clearer than "It doesn't help them."

But hey, if you don't want to go back up the thread and actually read it...

Killing him was foolish and unnecessary. In character for Carol? Perhaps that doesn't make it right. Had Rick done it, I doubt you guys would be defending his actions since, it seems, Carol can do no wrong.

Seriously? If Rick had done it I'd have pumped my fist and done the Dog Pound cheer (Aroo-aroo-aroo!) just like I did when he killed Porchdick.

Seriously, when did this woman become the Bad-Ass Can-Do-No-Wrong character who between seasons went from a woman barely able to fire rifle, and cowered in a closet during the episode where Lori is killed and a few-months later is a cold-blooded person teaching kids how to use guns and seems is able to aim a bottle rocket at a ruptured propane tank?

Who cares when it happened? The fact that it did saved everybody's asses. Twice now.

Rick is at least flawed, makes mistakes, and isn't an invincible bad-ass considering he gets his ass handed to him in pretty much every physical fight he gets into; and I'm willing to admit he makes mistakes when he makes them.

Carol lovers? Apparently she's flawless because between seasons the show decided to make her so.

Aren't you Carol haters the ones saying her penchant for final solutions is her biggest flaw? Either she's flawed or she isn't. You can't have it both ways.

 

[sojourner]

And one that completely ignores what the responses are saying which is "It's not necessary."

Please explain why it's not necessary?

Or we can just reduce this all down to "na-uh". If you can't explain your replies then they are not very good replies.

I thought that your line was a response to hooks, who pretty much already explained why it was unnecessary. You can't get much clearer than "It doesn't help them."

But hey, if you don't want to go back up the thread and actually read it...

And once again, without explaining why it doesn't help them, it's not really a useful answer.

 

[Trekker4747]

And one that completely ignores what the responses are saying which is "It's not necessary."

Please explain why it's not necessary?

Or we can just reduce this all down to "na-uh". If you can't explain your replies then they are not very good replies.

I thought that your line was a response to hooks, who pretty much already explained why it was unnecessary. You can't get much clearer than "It doesn't help them."

But hey, if you don't want to go back up the thread and actually read it...



Seriously? If Rick had done it I'd have pumped my fist and done the Dog Pound cheer (Aroo-aroo-aroo!) just like I did when he killed Porchdick.

Seriously, when did this woman become the Bad-Ass Can-Do-No-Wrong character who between seasons went from a woman barely able to fire rifle, and cowered in a closet during the episode where Lori is killed and a few-months later is a cold-blooded person teaching kids how to use guns and seems is able to aim a bottle rocket at a ruptured propane tank?

Who cares when it happened? The fact that it did saved everybody's asses. Twice now.

Rick is at least flawed, makes mistakes, and isn't an invincible bad-ass considering he gets his ass handed to him in pretty much every physical fight he gets into; and I'm willing to admit he makes mistakes when he makes them.

Carol lovers? Apparently she's flawless because between seasons the show decided to make her so.

Aren't you Carol haters the ones saying her penchant for final solutions is her biggest flaw? Either she's flawed or she isn't. You can't have it both ways.

She is flawed. She doesn't know how viruses worked and thought killing Karen and David(?) would stop the spread of Prison Swine Flu and she killed a man this past week who potentially could have had information extracted from him; she killed him when his threat level was lessened or eliminated.

To her credit? Her raid on Terminus was cool (aiming a bottle rocket not withstanding) and her and her ZA Hijab was pretty cool as she fought the wolves.

Her killing the Wolf was a dumb move.

 

[hux]

And once again, without explaining why it doesn't help them, it's not really a useful answer.

It doesn't help them becomes their intention was never to go out into the woods to find bad guys. It still isn't. They already know that bad people are in the woods. Rick and co have been trying to explain that to the people of Alexandria and trying to make them understand that at some point, they will be coming.

They don't need information about them because going out into the woods to find bad people is dumb. The idea was always to let them come... and we will be ready for them and slaughter them as and when required.

I still see no reason for Rick and the group to go out looking for them. What for? What does it benefit them? The point is to make Alexandria invulnerable and to be able to swiftly and effectively see off any and all potential threats.

That's what Rick was trying to tell them. He never had any desire to go hunting crazies in the woods. His only desire was to be ruthless in despatching the crazies when they come to Alexandria.

Likewise, that's why Carol isn't interested in knowing who they are, where they are, what they want. She's interested in killing them... when they come.

Getting information from one is only useful if they intend to go looking for them. Again, why do that? Let them come. Just make sure that when they do... they are no threat to us in the slightest.

Deanna essentially gave Rick dictatorial powers after her husbands death but it was too late by then.

 

[sojourner]

Yep, all those reason worked so well for Rick at the prison when the governor camped out nearby before rolling up with a tank.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Off the top of my head:

1. How far away they are.
2. How great are their numbers.
3. Where their camp is.

Not possible with the tied up killer spewing nonsense, but they do know about the wolves' zombie truck trap location. That is a key piece of information, so why not use that location as a base, since the trap has to be maintained. Track whoever tends to the trap.

4. How they found ASZ.

They know; by now, Aaron should have informed all that his recovered backpack meant the Wolves used the maps and photos to find the ASZ.

5. Why they attacked.

6. What kind of defenses and offenses does their camp have?

Morgan learned a bit about that in his first encounter with the Wolves. Further, without obvious signs of rape or claiming camps so far (which had not happened at Noah's neighborhood, or at ASZ), murder and/or capturing people is their goal.

They've nothing to lose if they keep him alive, restrained and locked-up under guard using any of the men (or women) in their group who've proven to one-person forces to be reckoned with time and time again.

Timing is everything. As the chaos was continuing, and most of Rick's group on the road, there was no safe way to monitor and keep the Wolf secure. Carol, Maggie, Morgan and Rosita had their hands full, so how--exactly--were they going to keep a wild captive and try to restore order at the same time?

Any number of ways to keep him isolated and contained. The Wolf is different than Randal, but they had no trouble keeping him tied up and gagged.

Randal was severely injured when his leg was skewered by the fence. In his injured state, he could be contained. Further, he was not off the charts wild like the Wolves (but the group still the deadly intent of his friends at the bar)

extract info from him. If he doesn't provide it you kill him. If what he provides isn't reliable, you kill him. When he provides it, you kill him.

Were any of the Wolves--from "long hair" in season 5/6 to the axe-wolf coming off like men who would provide any information? The tied up wolf offered nonsense, so what--if keeping him for another hour/day/week would be gained...other than more of the same?

Again, I point you to sane people--Terminus Mary & Martin--and how they remained defiant and uncooperative, even when in a vulnerable position. If sane people will not

 

[theenglish]

I think some of you should look into actual combat tactics. When you pull a gun you shoot to kill, not to wound. Shooting to wound in combat only happens in fiction. These people were in the middle of an attack on the place where they live. They have no idea how many hostiles there are and they have limited resources. They have no way of keeping their opponents under custody and taking time to question someone could allow another to come up from behind. Even if she had time to think about it, Carole made the right decision under the circumstances.