Lie. They had no idea she was up to anything. They went out to kill her for revenge.
I apologize then for misreading your post.
1 Like
Whatever is easier for you to believe man. You are wrong regardless. Vol’jinn started the war in Ashran, and Genn was stopping Sylvanas from doing something wicked.
But hey, keep pretending like the Horde is innocent, while simultaneously complaining that they are villainized too much. Because that isn’t contradictory at all.
Hard canon fact is indeed easier for me to believe, thank you.
3 Likes
at legion start was an Armistice. Ashran was an fought, but varian and vol’jin put their disagreement beside and sign an armistice again.
No their wasn’t. An unspoken ceasefire, perhaps. But there is no evidence of a signed armistice.
i´m pretty sure it was an armistice
It is certainly a valid interpretation. However, there is no official lore that says so. We can just assume from circumstance. Which is probably by design.
For me? I would say I feel compelled because I can assess the impact (not even purely consciously, but that being a biological creature has instilled various emotional responses in me to stimuli, be that from development or socially). But to me, that’s just looping right into the idea that right and wrong are how I should act.
I understand the process you’ve described of this innate ability based on things such as empathy and so on. To me though, such judgments are around how to act based on outcome. But to you, you’ve described a situation where outcome is irrelevant to judging their rightness or wrongness.
If someone says sometimes we should do bad things for a greater good, describing the action as bad just looks like a useless middle man to me. Because good and bad are devoid of meaning when lacking relation to how one should act. It doesn’t inform us of anything or describe the world is an measurable way.
That’s what I mean by middle man phrasing. I’ll take it a step further. Let’s say Alleria torturing those people was the only way to save the entire universe. I’m fine still calling the torture thankless (I doubt she enjoyed it) and ugly (in-so-far as various things that instill emotional reactions). I’d be ascribing various descriptors to it. But I don’t know either the use or meaning of right and wrong if we’re agreeing she should have done it.
If your argument is that we should be wary about the language used to describe dangerous actions, I’d understand and agree. But not when I haven’t been given your definition of right and wrong. Even something like ‘wrong means un-idyllic or generally undesirable’ would follow, but that hasn’t been clearly said.
I think that is fairly accurate. Though, I think defining right and wrong as “What we should or should not do” is problematic. And actually, you saying identifying something as wrong when it ultimately serves a good purpose, as useless, is also problematic.
That implies you don’t recognize the moral ambiguity of your actions. That it doesn’t so much matter if that woman was tortured as long as it was something that should have been done in the service of the greater good.
I have an issue with that definition because I don’t my own moral compass to degrade. I want to know what I did was wrong, and come to terms with it, regardless of outcome.
Even if I recognize that it was something that I absolutely needed to do to protect millions of lives… I don’t want to write off morally ambiguous action as anything but that.
Then we just use the words differently.
Why? Per your below comments, your concern is about moral degradation. I’ve already agreed with the idea that we should be careful about the language regarding these actions. Even that we could use various negative terms towards them.
I can call torture ugly, un-idyllic, and generally undesirable all the same while still accepting it was what I should have done (assuming that’s my judgment based on all available evidence, I’m not pretending mistakes don’t happen and we can only ever judge on the information accessible to use). This accounts for moral degradation in that I’m accepting the distasteful nature of a dangerous act, acknowledging the necessity, and honestly assessing my future actions.
These don’t seem different aside from the fact we’re putting the same meaning behind different words. You say ‘absolutely needed to do’, which I say ‘good’. You say ‘bad’, which I say ‘un-idyllic or generally undesirable’. The result is the same with a different linguistic path.
Per the above, I’m willing to accept mistakes or lack of information to make the best decision. To which I would say I either don’t know what the right/wrong decision is or I screwed up.
Wow.
“Hey guys. Let’s tortures these peeps in front of others so that when we release them they won’t make up stuff about us. Wouldn’t want to ruin our reputations with the opposite faction, would we?”
As if telling the Horde about torture is ok, yeah, we don’t want anything untoward coming out this.
This “logic” and reaching are flawless…
6 Likes
Did you watch the cinematic where Genn attacked Sylvanas? He wasn’t there as a knight in shining armor to stop the BBEG. He even says he’s going after her while she’s more vulnerable to get revenge for Varian, his son and Gilneas.
5 Likes
She hadn’t even landed in Stormheim when they attacked the Horde fleet.
9 Likes
Don’t bother. Genn didn’t even Know about Sylvanas plan.
This is this still going on?
4 Likes
It’s more a shame Vol’jin and Saurfang didn’t hold Sylvanas accountable for her crimes against Horde laws, and instead let her be Warchief. That would have nipped this all in the bud even before Legion started. The Horde doesn’t even hold itself to your standards.
3 Likes
I have also explained that the Alliance knew that Sylvanas was up to something before the attack in Stormheim. So, Genn’s other motivations are a moot point.
Just like everything else, the Horde can talk about Alliance wrong doings when they first acknowledge why there were necessary. Which is almost always cleaning up the mess the Horde created.
Except they didn’t.
Greyman spots sylvanas ship and he goes ‘grrr sylvanas. She must be up to something!’ Bombs away.
4 Likes
They did though, and I already explained how.
You’re wasting your time. I provided canon proof that Akiyass was wrong, but she’s essentially Elessana. Also, you know how Night Elf Posters are on average.
5 Likes
Declarations of your own head canon is not proof.