While they would demand Darnassus, they Alliance couldn’t take it (because of lacking ships). That does put them in an unclear position of what to do. Hence why they are hypothetically blocking motions to attack other cities. If it makes you feel better, I can rephrase that the Night Elves would demand Darnassus but, being unable to take it and unsure if they can attack elsewhere without retribution, the Alliance in general would be unclear of how to proceed.
I don’t reference it that often, do I? Anyway, I just see it as the same plan, considering she thinks it to herself.
It gets addressed by the fact that destroying Teldrassil clearly doesn’t get Genn to leave the Alliance. But according to both planners, satisfies their need for a wound. When they come for us, they will do so in pain, not in glory. To weaken their moral, create inner conflict, working to split them apart in different hypothetical ways. They never give a reason the Dwarves might go back in the original conjecture, but it is still noted as part of their eventually plan for the individual nations to go defend their own lands. (Because it is given as something years down the line.) That’s why Gilneas is clearly not necessary to them.
But to you, that they feel this way about the burning is just evidence they are lying to themselves.
Is this comment a joke? I need to know if you are serious before I address it seriously.
He should blame himself.
Those lines can refer to a number things outside this speculation that he somehow doesn’t blame himself for Teldrassil. The second and third line could as much killing her own troops/raising them or the Lordaeron bomb trap.
I don’t know what the lines are necessarily saying. But it is hardly clear your interpretation is right.
I agree that if we both do not accept each other’s point, there’s no progress. I don’t think either of us has engaged in that fallacy. I can agree to disagree if you want. I don’t think I can convince you at this point.