Having a right to something and actually having it are completely different.
yes, and she doesnt have the right to stormwind or ironforge through conquest or occupation because she has not conquered or occupied either. so saying she has the right to the eastern kingdoms is incorrect.
2 Likes
Not yet, which brings us to this. Do you know what conquest is?
Correct. Sylvanas briefly owned Gilneas in Cataclysm. That does not mean she had any right to it.
Conquest and Rights are two completely separate things. Right of Conquest isnât actually a right so much as itâs just the ability to take something. That means absolutely nothing to the argument you were posing.
If weâre to follow your line of logic, the Legion had a right to Suramar and we posed an unprovoked attack on those poor demons alongside the Nightfallen. Shame on us, right?
Also I like how you cry foul about how I treat you, yet you have no problem being condescending to Puppies. You can dish it, but the second someone gives it back to you, you cry.
Hold on, I missed this part the first time around.
Genn did not âopenly defyâ Anduinâs wishes. He literally says upfront that he doesnât wish to defy Anduin, and Anduin responds by telling him he has his blessing. There is absolutely no defiance going on there.
conquest is the subjugation and assumption of control of a place or people by use of military force.
which is something she has not done to all of the kingdoms of the eastern kingdoms, so she does not have the right to the entirety of the eastern kingdoms, she doesnt even have a right to lordaeron since she lost it.
2 Likes
Right, to help the night elves with their campaign, which Anduin was totally against. Blessing or not, anduin was against it.
Right of conquest was a legitimate right at one point, it means way more than ones ability to take something, but also maintains the status of ownership. But as you said the thread aged poorly, sylvanas gave it all up, and the terrible witing forces me to concede. Let the thread die.
Anduin was not totally against Tyrandeâs campaign at all. Anduin just couldnât spare the forces himself. The Alliance literally went to aid them in the Battle of Darkshore. There is a stark difference between opposing something and not being able to help in it at the time. Show me where Anduin says anything along the lines of forbidding Tyrande from going to Darkshore.
And you were incorrect about what Sylvanas had a right to BEFORE she gave it all up, letâs just acknowledge that as well. Right of conquest or no, she made manifold unprovoked attacks in territories that she had no ownership in.
No, she definitely did, you just dont recognize it, which is your problem.
You have yet to offer me any actual proof of that. I donât get how this is so difficult for you to understand.
Sylvanas doesnât own Gilneas.
Gilneas has never attacked Sylvanas.
Sylvanas attacks Gilneas.
Sylvanas made an unprovoked attack on Gilneas. All of your BS about right of conquest means literally nothing. Did the Legion rightfully own Suramar because of their unprovoked conquest and subjugation? Were we wrong for attacking them in âtheir territory?â
She conquered a lot of thd northern eastern kingdoms. right by conquest. Im done.
The nightborne surrendered suramar to the legion, so yes it was theres.
That means absolutely nothing about her right to Gilneas.
So then the Nightfallen were wrong for attacking the Legion, right? Thatâs the line of logic youâre using.
Except she conquered gilneas. Case closed.
No, stop trying to run away from being wrong, Skippid. Stomping your feet and stating the same incorrect thing over and over again will not magically make it right.
You claim that Sylvanasâs attack on Gilneas was not unprovoked because she conquered Gilneas, and itâs therefore her territory. Yet the attack does not retroactively become any more or less unprovoked because she owns it AFTER attacking out of the blue.
Right of conquest is a weak argument, and youâre not even getting THAT right.
In before the storm, gilneas is referred to as ruins and as a home for the forsaken, the forsaken still held gilneas after cata.
Oh my god⌠it takes WORK to be this ignorant.
Iâm not talking about the current state of the kingdom. Iâm talking about the initial attack in Cataclysm. Before that, Gilneas had never made any kind of move towards the Forsaken. They had kept entirely to themselves, and Sylvanas attacked, unprovoked.
None of what you just said is applicable.
technically i dont think the forsaken would be in gilneas in the current state of the kingdom, because without lordaeron the forsaken canât exactly hold it
1 Like
Is âAll lands are Sylvanas landsâ the new âAll lands are troll landsâ?
1 Like
She was ordered to actually. They were the same humans that killed undead indiscriminately, so unprovoked is laughable, and on her own territory at that.
What good is that at the point that gilneas is hers? Let it die bro, you already fd up with the dwarves.
that got retconned in the chronicles, they changed it to sylvanas convincing garrosh to let her lead the invasion because she wanted it for herself, so she was never ordered
actually the gilneans havenât done anything to the undead before the forsaken attacked, they just stayed behind their wall
All land is horde land.