Blizzard is really bad at social commentary.
Look at the Defias.
Legitimate major grievance with the Alliance, got frozen out of any real hope of redress, radicalized and is seen as a purely villainous organization everafter.
Instead of treating it as a case of the elites screwing over the common man, they blame it 100% on an evil dragon (because Varian was totes gonna fix it, until his wife got beaned, you see)
Yeah, if they had actually made the story of the Defias out to be the nobles screwin’ over the peasants like it was implied to be…
Nah, that would leave a smudge on the squeaky-clean Alliance theme of bein’ Superman. Can’t have that, now can we? It was all an evil dragon that did it.
The world of this franchise has a heavy medieval/dyspotical steampunk elements where the rulers and authority act as both judge, jury and executioner for silly reasons.
Those “detectives” you saw are likely some movie/book reference like the Indiana and Rambo guy
You’re right, due process as we know it really isn’t given to many. There’s not a very fair treatment. Dalaran is a great example of that kind of shoddy, slapdash government system present in Warcraft.
But I’ve seen a couple Alliance fans say they don’t really care or want fair treatment (or rather proper investigation) in certain circumstances. So that’s just how it is.
Oh,I agree that Vereesa likes the chance to kill her cousins. But, I’m referring to “Fair Trade” were she says “While I can’t say I agree completely with Jaina’s methods, I do understand her motives.”
Clearly, she is say that killing someone so they can’t get their own money is part of what Jaina wants her to do.
Because you can only mock shows that you know you’re wrong but too arrogant to admit it.
That also stand true for a “non Combatant.”
Jaina was acting within her authority as Leader of her city to confront and Arrest someone who has commited a crime within her city, and likewise, she had the authority to remove any force that stands between her and that duty.
Not “Murder”. No matter how many times you repeat that word, it’s not going to be true.
You don’t know much about Law, do you? That literally is a Legal defense in the Court of Law.
If a Cop, in the Course of doing their duty, goes to arrest someone wanted by the law, and if armed guards prevent them from carrying out that arrest, they are interferring with a Police Action and are subject to the same penalties.
Again, the most you can accuse her of is Excessive Force. But you can’t say she didn’t have the Authority.
The more I see people defendin’ Jaina’s and Vereesa’s actions during the PURGE of Dalaran, the more it only reinforces my opinion that the Horde needs to wash their hands of an obvious bias, if not outright racist, government that consistently lies ‘bout it’s “neutrality” while assistin’ the Horde’s long standin’ rival, if not enemy, behind the scenes.
The only time Dalaran can claim it was truly “neutral” is when it was lead by either Rhonin or Khadgar. And since Rhonin is dead and Khadgar has peaced out back to Karazhan, then Dalaran needs to just drop as pretenses and return to the Alliance.
Y’all Horde mages can come chill in Suramar. We’ve got several thousand more years of arcane study and knowledge over the oh-so-special hummies.
In legion, I could never understand why my Horde characters would want to be in Dalaran. The council is still manned by people who let the last purge happen. This includes Khadgar who has never showed any hint he thought it was wrong (his argument for letting the Horde was only “united front”).
I mean how can Dalaran be anything but a ticking time bomb for Horde characters when the people ruling it saw no reason to not purge the innocent for the crimes of a few people?
You need to check again. Two were in a “ready to strike” pose (the same stance we ready in a striking position when we right click on a target in game) with their weapons raised high and the other 3 (female) had their’s pointed AT Jaina (more or less.)
I disagree. They would of had no chance against Jaina at all, but potentially losing their spears would of been the worst option. At least with a weapon in hand, they could still Melee.
(Why they didn’t is still a different issue.)
They were standing between Jaina and her Authority to arrest Aethas. They wouldn’t lower their weapons in responce to that authority. That makes them a hostile force that Jaina had the Right to remove.
The issue with this stance is that codification of law does not exist in Warcraft. So this is merely headcanon.
The greater issue with this is that Jaina and Aethas were of equivalent rank (they’re more akin to a pair of senators than a cop). And Aethas guards are more like different cops (given their guards of a governmental official) than say the Silver Covenant.
Look like staves, don’t believe they have points.
Funny that because Dalaran WAS Neutral until THE HORDE Murdered Rhonin.
Now you’re saying that the Horde should be Lamenting for the Neutrality of a City they assisted in ending?
So, Rhonin breakin’ Dalaran’s neutrality to assist Jaina in Theramore, an Alliance mlitary base, durin’ a time of warfare is now called “murder”? That’s a new one to me. Most would call that a war casualty.
A bit of a troll with loaded terminology, but also simply wrong. The commitment of troops occurred before (to put it in the same type of wording used above) “Rhonin died in an attack on a purely military outpost.”
Dalaran was a self-contained Nation. Any Law is pretty much dictated by the Ruling body.
They had a Council but Jaina still was considered the Leader of the City after Rhonin’s Death.
You didn’t read the book, did you?
Rhonin wouldn’t defend Theramore against Garrosh’s attack BECAUSE of Dalaran’s Neutrallity but only choose to step in at the last minute to save the People from the Mana Bomb.
Truth be told, no. I did not read Tides of War. I was never fond of Jaina’s character to begin with and wasn’t interested.
That still doesn’t really classify Rhonin’s death as a murder. It was an unexpected casualty of war seein’ how he decided to insert himself into a warzone.
You’re suggesting that I don’t know much about the law, but you are arguing that it would be okay for police to execute people guarding someone they were suspicious about.
Oooookay.
But, because it’s a bit fun, let’s unpack your entire argument here.
Jaina is not a police officer in the course of her duties. She is an enraged political leader acting on a hunch. A hunch which is, as we later learn, only semi-correct.
Assuming she was a police officer, no armed guards either prevented or attempted to prevent her making an arrest. She kills the first immediately on entering the room. She kills the last after she’s already teleported Aethas to the Violet Hold (which is sort of like an arrest but given that there was no due process, would legally be considered something like kidnapping and forcible confinement). In any case, nothing was prevented, and she kills people after the “arrest” has already happened, thus obviating any chance of using this as a justification.
And what are these “penalties” to which you refer? Do you think that police officers can just shoot and kill anyone who gets in their way? I can assure you that, if Jaina were a police officer, she would definitely be on trial for multiple murders in this situation, and the case would be a slam dunk. And that’s even if we assume the worst about Aethas.
Police are required to use proportionate force and can use lethal force only in narrowly prescribed circumstances, most of which have to do with self-defence, defence of the public, or preventing the furtherance of a crime where they have good reason to believe there is a public danger. They can’t just go around shooting people.
For example, if a police officer spots you jaywalking, shouts at you to stop, and you run, he can’t legally shoot you. Or, for a closer analogy, police can’t just break into a mafia HQ, start shooting guards without warning, and then execute the surviving guards after they arrest the capo.
Which is not “due process”. The term was created to say governments can’t do things by fiat. Which was the original point of the thread.
That doesn’t provide what those laws were, though. We’ve seen at least a couple times where the Council had to vote on matters. Namely their involvement in Theramore in Tides of War (which Aethas was the deciding vote, I believe) and when the Horde rejoin Dalaran in Legion (when Jaina leaves after). But we still don’t see actual procedures outlined on certain things. "The ‘leader’ can kill and imprison other leaders without trial or investigation is not outlined as you seem to think.
Much like the above point, there’s not really details given what that means beyond that the ‘leader’ cannot merely do whatever they wish.
He’s also leading you down a an irrelevant path. The point where Dalaran abandoned its neutrality is wasn’t Rhonin going the Theramore in first place. Dalaran had already committed troops to the Alliance side at that point.