He always resorts to insults and goalpost moving when people bruise his extremely fragile ego and call him out on his bad takes. 
1 Like
I am always ready to talk.
For starters, what hypocrisy am I being accused of?
Yeah I am fallible. Never pretended otherwise lol.
When Rom pointed out my error I took the L, why double down if you are wrong?
If that is something that I do then why would I admit I was wrong to Rom? Wouldn’t I have moved the goal post or jumped to a different topic or subject?
You’ve demonstrated that to be false.
You think killing innocents is bad, unless the innocents being killed are Horde. Then it’s OK.
But, I guess that makes sense when in your own words, Horde civilians are not innocent due to guilt by association.
I mean, you even say ridiculous stuff like this to justify your hypocrisy:
Lol we are talking now.
Hm… can you quote that specifically that I was having in a serious discussion?
No I said Horde cannot hold up their civilians as this moral barrier against reprisals.
Yes Orgrimmar is a valid military target… why you don’t think Alliance has the right to attack it? They have laid siege to it twice now. So even the writers in their infinite wisdom agree with its targetibility.
Even Teldrassil was a valid target. The only problem with the burning though was the Horde already had the city firmly in their control and decided to torch their captives. Thats different than “Yeah Alliance can attack Orgrimmar in any way they see fit”
If we were discussing what the Alliance should do with a defenseless captured Orgrimmar then we will have a different discussion.
Was it really, though? I feel like the finale of the zone helped ruin the intent when it straight up turns into Good Genn VS Bad Sylvanas. It makes me think that the narrative itself wanted to justify what he did.
Uh huh.
Funny. You make your account private so it’s harder for people to find certain stuff you post and then set a standard of “serious discussion” so that when you do get called on something you wrote you can just wave it off as not serious.
No, you literally said Horde civilians, unconnected to the WoT are just a guilty as those that loaded catapults used at Teldrassil 
this is your definition of a war criminal.
False. Teldrassil belonged to the Night Elves at the time it burned.
The denizens of Teld at the time of the Burning were not Horde captives.
Which is basically what you think when you post stuff like this
But, go ahead and explain how you only want to target the military assets (personnel, equipment, etc.) when going after Orgrimmar. I’m sure you are so so concerned about minimizing collateral damage in your quest for justice given your previous comments about the innocence (or lack thereof) of Horde civilians.
Well when they are throwing their lot with Sylvanas as loyalists they are suddenly still unconnected? They made their allegiance clear, the Horde started arresting them when Sylvanas left… so by definition they are connected now.
When you throw your lot with a tyrant war criminal blue or red you have some degree of guilt. If Alliance and horde rebels invaded orgrimmar any of those that took up arms would be treated as combatants and when the city is captured they should be captured and imprisoned… just as Blizzard did as I said earlier.
Delaryn says to Sylvanas the city was defenseless. The Horde could have literally just walked in.
Now who is moving the goal post?
“Why you already won! Only innocents remain” Yeah that definitely sounds like Teldrassil was ready for a long prolonged siege.
No actually I am not concerned with minimizing collateral damage in a story to have some cheap moral high ground so that even if my faction does something “bad” its actually not.
To answer your question precisely because Orgrimmar is a military base then it should be targeted and whatever war story we can tell from both sides about the invaders and the invaded it will create an interesting narrative.
My point is I don’t want Andiun to be clutching his pearls at the war table and saying “Oh will someone please think of the civilians!!!” Just invade and let us see what happens.
On the Contrary, that makes him come off even more Moral. He was willing to risk his own King’s life to ease the suffering of his people. Any King worth being called a King would of respected that and supported it.
I always got the impression that Prince John got blamed whereas Richard was, well, lionized by the Robin Hood story, which just reads to me as people getting duped. Sure, John was an idiot, but he wasn’t the source of the taxes.
Richard also more than earned the ire that got him imprisoned in the first place.
1 Like
Since Tryande didn’t decide the she was entitled to commit genocide (thank god, I don’t now how many posts I could take trying to justify it), it is off topic.
Unless someone wants to try and argue that “vengeance” can only mean genocide. I mean, I would put it past this forum.
This is such a distraction.
At no point, ever, has any Night Elf character put genocide on the table. That is a player-constructed straw man that has been constructed to deny this playerbase an opportunity to hit back against their faction rival - a faction rival that HAS committed genocides.
Taking Ashenvale back is not genocide.
Having a stance that the Horde as a political entity must be destroyed is not genocide.
Choking Sylvanas out instead of having her get away is not genocide.
2 Likes
Its because people keep talking about having the right to kill civilians (not just the necessity, the right). That is going to attract responses. If you don’t want to see these posts, you would be better to try and dissuade those posts.
No, that’s not fair. When I say that I think the Night Elves should hit back, people immediately turn up with an assumption that such necessarily is genocide - because that’s just the sort of bad faith straw man attack that they WOULD elevate to deny any kind of victory for the “free kill” race. I do not construct this narrative, my opponents do.
2 Likes
I haven’t been tracking you posts, I can’t characterize what you have said.
OTOH, there are plenty of posts talking about the “guilt” of Horde civilians to justify targeting theme. As long as that doesn’t go away, the responses won’t either.
The Horde citizenry is responsible for elevating, promoting, and calling for militaristic fascists to lead them into these conflicts, and providing them with the ability to wage those wars. That is the nature of the Horde as a political entity, and why if I was speaking from within the narrative, I would say that they should not enjoy self-governance, or the ability to have a military. That is what dismantling the Horde means.
Again, however, it is a common, bad faith tactic to equate that to genocide, which is done to deny any standing for the Alliance to fight back against the Horde. I am not responsible for the propagation of this tactic - stop pretending otherwise.
1 Like
You do realize that had explicitly said I wasn’t referring to what you had been posting?
Yes, but you are also imposing a requirement on me to police the argument:
I was merely pointing out that complaining about the effect is pointless if you ignore the root cause.
The root cause is the bad faith straw man attack that’s leveled against substantially all claims that the Night Elves should be allowed to hit back, as I explained previously.
I mean, there was talk of how Tryande didn’t kill innocent Horde civilians and about how that would have been an evil act. When that if followed by fervent denials that Horde civilians shouldn’t be considered innocent, the response is predictable.
And no, I’m not talking about your posts. Claims I am mischaracterizing them are, in fact, a straw man.