Post Invasion Ethics & Morality

[The Romulan Republic]

The Empire may be evil, but they generally aren't choatic stupid. If there are two options and one doesn't require their troops dying, they will take the second one.

I merely meant that they don't go to extraordinary pains to minimize casualties. I don't see them deliberately wasting troop's lives in general.

Though they are tactically stupid on numerous occasions, like most sci-fi militaries. We all know the examples, but I can list the main ones if its deemed nessissary.

Are you sure they did stupid things in all those occasions? Or did they go in with insufficient knowledge of the situation and made a few bad calls? That can affect any military, even real ones. It's easy to watch a movie where you know what both sides are doing and when one side makes a mistake go, "That's so stupid! I could've done better!" I'm not implying you did it in this example, but it's easy. Could you please provide a few examples?

Well for a start, their was that utter debacle on Endor. Those Ewoks didn't set up all those traps in five minutes. Weren't they doing recon? And what about the dipshit of an officer who opened the bunker door apparently without a proper ID from Han?

Then there's the lack of support units on Hoth. They might be mentioned in the EU (I'm not sure), but I didn't see any anti-aircraft weapons for example. The Empire can certainly be criticized for poor combined-arms tactics. Note also the apparent lack of an interdictor at Hoth, despite the fact that they exist prior to that time according to canon. In short, the Empire deployed inadequate forces, perhaps because they counted on surprise and brute force. Some interdictors and some more anti-fighter units, and a mere victory could have become a crushing blow from which the Rebellion never recovered.

I'm really busy now and I don't own much EU material, so I only have film examples at present. However, I'll try to find time to look up some more examples later.

[Darth Hoth]

It's actually quite hilarious that you believe nationalism is a positive thing, when the last two hundred years have shown how it can be used just like religion to control a population.

You can say that about any philosophy. If a country adopted Secular Humanist Universalism or whatever as its state religion, it could be used in the exact same way.

It's sad that you misunderstand the point, however. If there's a war, and you're decisively losing and persisting will only cost more lives and ruin your country more before you're defeated, what's the point even WITH nationalism? Keep grinding up your population to no end? Cripple your country and peopel for generations? The Germans in WWI were well aware of their strategic situation - it's part of the madness of war that many DO believe that it's better to be obliterated than reach a negotiated peace. People like Hitler, lol.

Hitler and the leading Nazis were collectively delusional by that point, and held crazy hopes of a reversal (the kind of insane optimism that is often even worse than fatalism - "So now it looks like we'll be annihilated, but MAYBE if we hold out long enough the tide will turn!"). The Social Darwinist theory that Hitler wanted Germany deliberately destroyed once its "inferiority" had been proven comes from Speer, an unreliable source at best. Many others who continued to fight did so in the hope that it would give people time to flee and thus escape the worst ravages of the invaders. One should also consider the impact of such things as the Morgenthau Plan - if the enemy is intent on your total destruction, it is better to fight and take a few of them with you than to surrender and die anyway.

That said, the "Spectre of 1918" was also a powerful motivating force, especially in the Party and SS.

[Baffalo]

I merely meant that they don't go to extraordinary pains to minimize casualties. I don't see them deliberately wasting troop's lives in general.

Though they are tactically stupid on numerous occasions, like most sci-fi militaries. We all know the examples, but I can list the main ones if its deemed nessissary.

Are you sure they did stupid things in all those occasions? Or did they go in with insufficient knowledge of the situation and made a few bad calls? That can affect any military, even real ones. It's easy to watch a movie where you know what both sides are doing and when one side makes a mistake go, "That's so stupid! I could've done better!" I'm not implying you did it in this example, but it's easy. Could you please provide a few examples?

Well for a start, their was that utter debacle on Endor. Those Ewoks didn't set up all those traps in five minutes. Weren't they doing recon? And what about the dipshit of an officer who opened the bunker door apparently without a proper ID from Han?

Then there's the lack of support units on Hoth. They might be mentioned in the EU (I'm not sure), but I didn't see any anti-aircraft weapons for example. The Empire can certainly be criticized for poor combined-arms tactics. Note also the apparent lack of an interdictor at Hoth, despite the fact that they exist prior to that time according to canon. In short, the Empire deployed inadequate forces, perhaps because they counted on surprise and brute force. Some interdictors and some more anti-fighter units, and a mere victory could have become a crushing blow from which the Rebellion never recovered.

I'm really busy now and I don't own much EU material, so I only have film examples at present. However, I'll try to find time to look up some more examples later.

All three very good examples of your point. Thank you. Though I would like to point out a few things:

1) The Ewoks were a local indigenous species who lived in the trees and had, up to that point, posed no serious threat to the Empire. Their belief that the locals would stay out of the way means that even if recon had spotted them building those traps (which could have been done at night), they probably chalked it up to the Ewoks planning to hunt some local game animal.

2) With no way to see outside, and the assumption that the Imperials vastly outnumber the rebels, it can be easily surmised that after a few minutes, with no shooting going on within the pick-up of the comm, that the Imperials have won. Yes, he should have demanded authorization from Han, but he didn't because he probably assumed the Empire had won. Can't really fault him there for jumping to a conclusion.

3) The lack of air support at Hoth is one of those things where we just don't have enough information. We don't know if the shield was a complete bubble around the generator, or if it was a dome. If it was a dome, there was no excuse for not having air support, but if it was a bubble it's possible that the shield has some effect on repulsorlifts (I only saw walkers moving around). Also, if you'll notice it was General Veers, the man who built the AT-ATs, who was leading the ground assault. He might have ordered fighters to stay behind in order to test the effectiveness of his new weapons, which would've been skewed if air support helped bomb the base.

4) The existence of interdiction cruisers doesn't mean they were in large numbers at the battle of Hoth. There might have been only one or two prototypes, with more under construction when the battle was launched. There might have even been an interdictor at Hoth, but on the other side of the planet and thus unable to respond in time.

But yes, I agree that if the Empire had chosen to deploy anti-air and a few interdictors, the Rebellion might not have made it off that frozen Hell. Oh well.

[Ghost Rider]

Well for a start, their was that utter debacle on Endor. Those Ewoks didn't set up all those traps in five minutes. Weren't they doing recon? And what about the dipshit of an officer who opened the bunker door apparently without a proper ID from Han?

Ewoks posed no threat until...oh wait the Alliance convinced them to fight the Empire? Holy shit, I guess the Empire should've scorched every fucking Ewok village just to make sure.

And the Alliance was in full rout, until Han talked to a junior officer. Which was lucky that Chewbacca was able acquire the AT-ST in the first place.

Then there's the lack of support units on Hoth. They might be mentioned in the EU (I'm not sure), but I didn't see any anti-aircraft weapons for example. The Empire can certainly be criticized for poor combined-arms tactics. Note also the apparent lack of an interdictor at Hoth, despite the fact that they exist prior to that time according to canon. In short, the Empire deployed inadequate forces, perhaps because they counted on surprise and brute force. Some interdictors and some more anti-fighter units, and a mere victory could have become a crushing blow from which the Rebellion never recovered.

I guess the moron forgot that they had to come up with Veers’ plan on the fly because Ozzel did what? Oh wait, came in too close and alerted the Alliance. Again cherry picking.

I'm really busy now and I don't own much EU material, so I only have film examples at present. However, I'll try to find time to look up some more examples later.

You could also try and fucking analyze rather then doing your half assed assumptions.

[The Romulan Republic]

All three very good examples of your point. Thank you. Though I would like to point out a few things:

1) The Ewoks were a local indigenous species who lived in the trees and had, up to that point, posed no serious threat to the Empire. Their belief that the locals would stay out of the way means that even if recon had spotted them building those traps (which could have been done at night), they probably chalked it up to the Ewoks planning to hunt some local game animal.

Hunting with catapults? And what about traps that close to a base where any patrol might stumble into them by accident? Still, I see your point.

2) With no way to see outside, and the assumption that the Imperials vastly outnumber the rebels, it can be easily surmised that after a few minutes, with no shooting going on within the pick-up of the comm, that the Imperials have won. Yes, he should have demanded authorization from Han, but he didn't because he probably assumed the Empire had won. Can't really fault him there for jumping to a conclusion.

If they actually couldn't see outside, then either something took out their cameras/sensors, or the Empire has worse security than I thought and didn't even have security cameras or anything watching the entrance to a crucial military base.

However, I can see how an officer might assume that the Empire had won with no evidence to the contrary. Plus I suppose he might have had little choice but to respond to a request for reinforcements.

Still, the thought that after all the Rebel's luck courage and skill, and all the Empire's overconfidence, the entire battle might have been salvaged if that man had kept the doors shut...

3) The lack of air support at Hoth is one of those things where we just don't have enough information. We don't know if the shield was a complete bubble around the generator, or if it was a dome. If it was a dome, there was no excuse for not having air support, but if it was a bubble it's possible that the shield has some effect on repulsorlifts (I only saw walkers moving around).

I didn't say fighters. I distinctly recall the presence of anti-air guns mounted on walkers in Empire at War, and last I heard even game-only units are considered canon. Don't know if its showed up elsewhere though.

Though I fail to see why they couldn't have taken the fighters under the shield on sleds or something, and then launched.

Also, if you'll notice it was General Veers, the man who built the AT-ATs, who was leading the ground assault. He might have ordered fighters to stay behind in order to test the effectiveness of his new weapons, which would've been skewed if air support helped bomb the base.

I have a feeling that Vader would not have been pleased with Veers fucking up the effort to capture Luke in order to test his pet project.

4) The existence of interdiction cruisers doesn't mean they were in large numbers at the battle of Hoth. There might have been only one or two prototypes, with more under construction when the battle was launched. There might have even been an interdictor at Hoth, but on the other side of the planet and thus unable to respond in time.

Vader has an interdictor in the novel Dark Lord as I recall, which is set shortly after RotS. There's also Malak's ship in KotOR. So they are not, canonically, a new invention at this point chronologically. They've even been featured in the Imperial arsenal before.

And nowhere is their any evidence that I've ever heard of for an interdictor was at Hoth.

[Baffalo]

Hunting with catapults? And what about traps that close to a base where any patrol might stumble into them by accident? Still, I see your point.

Remember, the rebellion was there with them the night before the battle, which means that you had lots of strong and able hands to assist the Ewoks once it was learned what they were doing. Julius Caesar himself used his army to construct a bridge across the Rhine in a few days, using only brute strength. I don't see how difficult it would be to construct a few simple catapults at night, given the resources available.

Also, the rebellion used the Ewoks as a distraction. In the confusion of the fight, the commandos got away, and used their camouflage and training to hide in the jungle and take out stormtroopers in their bright white armor. Things had been going well up to that point for the Empire, but it was that critical distraction that proved the defeat of the Empire.

If they actually couldn't see outside, then either something took out their cameras/sensors, or the Empire has worse security than I thought and didn't even have security cameras or anything watching the entrance to a crucial military base.

However, I can see how an officer might assume that the Empire had won with no evidence to the contrary. Plus I suppose he might have had little choice but to respond to a request for reinforcements.

Still, the thought that after all the Rebel's luck courage and skill, and all the Empire's overconfidence, the entire battle might have been salvaged if that man had kept the doors shut...

Or what if the rebels had never encountered the Ewoks? Or the fleet hadn't discovered the shield was still up? Don't assume the entire battle rides on one event. Multiple events have to happen in a particular sequence to ensure victory. We don't know how strong the shield was, or if they'd had to lower the shield to allow the Death Star to fire. What if the Executor had been knocked out and crashed into the shield, bringing it down?

I didn't say fighters. I distinctly recall the presence of anti-air guns mounted on walkers in Empire at War, and last I heard even game-only units are considered canon. Don't know if its showed up elsewhere though.

Though I fail to see why they couldn't have taken the fighters under the shield on sleds or something, and then launched.

Uh huh... so because a game, produce over 30 years after the film, has anti-air units to balance out some of the gameplay, then George Lucas must go back, completely rewrite and remake the film, just so that we can keep everything canon? That's a little far fetched man. Especially since the walkers were built to withstand withering amounts of firepower. Combined with the spur-of-the-moment battle plan, maybe it got overlooked? Or they didn't have anti-air. If you're in a rush, you don't have time to think of every tiny detail, and something usually gets left out. Besides, the rebels were evacuating, meaning that the only resistance would've been those buying time for the people inside.

I have a feeling that Vader would not have been pleased with Veers fucking up the effort to capture Luke in order to test his pet project.

Vader knew the plan had gone to shit when he killed the Admiral that brought them in too close. Vader may have been fucked up in the head from time to time, but even he knew that the plan they'd agreed upon was no longer viable, and that they had to work with what they had. Remember, Vader had to answer to the Emperor, and he still wanted to keep Luke a secret. So he's not going to blow his cover by telling Veers to be careful.

Vader has an interdictor in the novel Dark Lord as I recall, which is set shortly after RotS. There's also Malak's ship in KotOR. So they are not, canonically, a new invention at this point chronologically. They've even been featured in the Imperial arsenal before.

And nowhere is their any evidence that I've ever heard of for an interdictor was at Hoth.

Again, you assume that because someone wrote about it in the EU, and that it is considered canon, that it automatically must appear within the movies. The movies trump the EU, that much is certain, because George Lucas can come out today and say that no, Interdictors are not in Star Wars. He didn't come up with them, but he's fine letting people say they exist. If he chooses to use them though, that's up to him. And since no one had written about Interdictors when he made the movie, then that's out of the picture.

[The Romulan Republic]

[Remember, the rebellion was there with them the night before the battle, which means that you had lots of strong and able hands to assist the Ewoks once it was learned what they were doing. Julius Caesar himself used his army to construct a bridge across the Rhine in a few days, using only brute strength. I don't see how difficult it would be to construct a few simple catapults at night, given the resources available.

Maybe. I'm not going to argue it.

Also, the rebellion used the Ewoks as a distraction. In the confusion of the fight, the commandos got away, and used their camouflage and training to hide in the jungle and take out stormtroopers in their bright white armor. Things had been going well up to that point for the Empire, but it was that critical distraction that proved the defeat of the Empire.

Maybe, but not really relevant to the rest of this discussion.

Or what if the rebels had never encountered the Ewoks? Or the fleet hadn't discovered the shield was still up? Don't assume the entire battle rides on one event. Multiple events have to happen in a particular sequence to ensure victory. We don't know how strong the shield was, or if they'd had to lower the shield to allow the Death Star to fire. What if the Executor had been knocked out and crashed into the shield, bringing it down?

You see, that's what funny about Endor: Had any of numerous factors gone differently, the Rebels would have lost. They got incredibly lucky. The bunker example just sticks out to me though.

However, your examples are flawed. They clearly didn't have to lower the shield to fire, any more than ISDs have to lower there's to fire. And its doubtful that the Executor colliding with the Death Star could have brought it down. And obviously, the shield was strong enough to repel the Rebel attack. Hence the whole point of attacking the bunker.

Uh huh... so because a game, produce over 30 years after the film, has anti-air units to balance out some of the gameplay, then George Lucas must go back, completely rewrite and remake the film, just so that we can keep everything canon? That's a little far fetched man.

Out of universe, the unit hadn't been invented yet. As an in-universe explanation, its utterly irrelevant.

Especially since the walkers were built to withstand withering amounts of firepower. Combined with the spur-of-the-moment battle plan, maybe it got overlooked? Or they didn't have anti-air. If you're in a rush, you don't have time to think of every tiny detail, and something usually gets left out. Besides, the rebels were evacuating, meaning that the only resistance would've been those buying time for the people inside.

So because the enemy was fighting a delaying action, the Empire didn't need to bother with combined arms tactics? And if they didn't have anti-air units available, that would be an example of tactical incompetance would it not?

However, the Empire's walkers were able to take quite a pounding, and its doubtful the Empire anticipated the tripping tactic. So maybe its not such a huge oversight.

Vader knew the plan had gone to shit when he killed the Admiral that brought them in too close. Vader may have been fucked up in the head from time to time, but even he knew that the plan they'd agreed upon was no longer viable, and that they had to work with what they had. Remember, Vader had to answer to the Emperor, and he still wanted to keep Luke a secret. So he's not going to blow his cover by telling Veers to be careful.

Why would that stop him from telling Veers to use a proper force, presuming one was available? (Obviously if they had no anti-air units available they couldn't use them, but that's another matter.)

As I see it, you suggested that Veers might send down an incomplete force to test his new toys, and now you're trying to suggest that Vader would allow that to keep a low profile, when really it would be a non-issue. He doesn't have to explain it to Veers. He can just say "obey or die."

Again, you assume that because someone wrote about it in the EU, and that it is considered canon, that it automatically must appear within the movies. The movies trump the EU, that much is certain, because George Lucas can come out today and say that no, Interdictors are not in Star Wars. He didn't come up with them, but he's fine letting people say they exist. If he chooses to use them though, that's up to him. And since no one had written about Interdictors when he made the movie, then that's out of the picture.

I assume nothing of the sort, and do not appreciate my position being so grossly misrepresented.

I'm sorry, but this is absurd. While you have a perfectly valid out-of-universe explanation for the absence of interdictors, this does not work when discussing Imperial tactics from an in-universe point of view. Your attempt at a condescending lecture has demonstrated nothing at all. And the fact that Lucas could declare interdictors non-canon is irrelevant to this discussion, because he has not.

[Ghost Rider]

All three very good examples of your point. Thank you. Though I would like to point out a few things:

1) The Ewoks were a local indigenous species who lived in the trees and had, up to that point, posed no serious threat to the Empire. Their belief that the locals would stay out of the way means that even if recon had spotted them building those traps (which could have been done at night), they probably chalked it up to the Ewoks planning to hunt some local game animal.

Hunting with catapults? And what about traps that close to a base where any patrol might stumble into them by accident? Still, I see your point.

Given we've seen evidence that Endor has critter far in the excess of the Ewoks aka the Gorax? We can conclude those were for those predators.

2) With no way to see outside, and the assumption that the Imperials vastly outnumber the rebels, it can be easily surmised that after a few minutes, with no shooting going on within the pick-up of the comm, that the Imperials have won. Yes, he should have demanded authorization from Han, but he didn't because he probably assumed the Empire had won. Can't really fault him there for jumping to a conclusion.

If they actually couldn't see outside, then either something took out their cameras/sensors, or the Empire has worse security than I thought and didn't even have security cameras or anything watching the entrance to a crucial military base.

However, I can see how an officer might assume that the Empire had won with no evidence to the contrary. Plus I suppose he might have had little choice but to respond to a request for reinforcements.

Still, the thought that after all the Rebel's luck courage and skill, and all the Empire's overconfidence, the entire battle might have been salvaged if that man had kept the doors shut...

And done what? Ignore an order for help that would've maintained as pure and abject stupidity? What was he going to do? And given that they had cleared the outside of any showing of troop, y'know the ambush? Again what was he supposed to think given he had knowledge that they had superior firepower and positioning.

And do not use your "I wouldn't...", thank you for providing the proof that an omniscient 3rd person perspective is better then a single perspective.

3) The lack of air support at Hoth is one of those things where we just don't have enough information. We don't know if the shield was a complete bubble around the generator, or if it was a dome. If it was a dome, there was no excuse for not having air support, but if it was a bubble it's possible that the shield has some effect on repulsorlifts (I only saw walkers moving around).

I didn't say fighters. I distinctly recall the presence of anti-air guns mounted on walkers in Empire at War, and last I heard even game-only units are considered canon. Don't know if its showed up elsewhere though.

Though I fail to see why they couldn't have taken the fighters under the shield on sleds or something, and then launched.

Oh wait, so you're going to use your unfounded supposition. Glad to see that providing some evidence that they had the capabilities to take the time to land aircraft, modify them for Hoth(remember the Alliance problem with their own aircraft) and do this within a small window was accomplishable and would've made a difference.

C'mon, let's see this.

Also, if you'll notice it was General Veers, the man who built the AT-ATs, who was leading the ground assault. He might have ordered fighters to stay behind in order to test the effectiveness of his new weapons, which would've been skewed if air support helped bomb the base.

I have a feeling that Vader would not have been pleased with Veers fucking up the effort to capture Luke in order to test his pet project.

And look what happened to Ozzel when he FUCKED up the initial plan. Oh wait, Veers did succeed. That's why Vader landed and LEAD THE GROUND ASSAULT on the fucking base. Jesus fucking christ, you're an evasive goal post moving twit.

4) The existence of interdiction cruisers doesn't mean they were in large numbers at the battle of Hoth. There might have been only one or two prototypes, with more under construction when the battle was launched. There might have even been an interdictor at Hoth, but on the other side of the planet and thus unable to respond in time.

Vader has an interdictor in the novel Dark Lord as I recall, which is set shortly after RotS. There's also Malak's ship in KotOR. So they are not, canonically, a new invention at this point chronologically. They've even been featured in the Imperial arsenal before.

And nowhere is their any evidence that I've ever heard of for an interdictor was at Hoth.

Or maybe just maybe Death Squadron didn't have it available for the Hoth assault since there was a last minute change in plans for a short range assault.

Thank you for not thinking.

[Samuel]

You can say that about any philosophy. If a country adopted Secular Humanist Universalism or whatever as its state religion, it could be used in the exact same way.

Secular Humanism and Unitarian Universalism are two different philosophies. Given that neither embrace the idea of a central authority calling the shots I don't see how exactly they can be exploited by the state.

[Darth Hoth]

Secular Humanism and Unitarian Universalism are two different philosophies.

I know, thank you. I was attempting to compress the least exclusive and religious, most politically correct cause possible in one term.

Given that neither embrace the idea of a central authority calling the shots I don't see how exactly they can be exploited by the state.

You could say the same about some fairly influential historical interpretations of Christianity, or even Communism. Nationalism, which Stark singled out, started as a liberal (yes, left-wing) reaction to oppression by multi-ethnic empires and cosmopolitan elites before the right hijacked it. Any ideology can be made to serve the State's interest once adopted as its own.

[Thanas]

And nowhere is their any evidence that I've ever heard of for an interdictor was at Hoth.

Or maybe just maybe Death Squadron didn't have it available for the Hoth assault since there was a last minute change in plans for a short range assault.

Thank you for not thinking.

FWIW, Interdictors were present at Endor, or at least according to a WEG sourcebook.

[Ghost Rider]

And nowhere is their any evidence that I've ever heard of for an interdictor was at Hoth.

Or maybe just maybe Death Squadron didn't have it available for the Hoth assault since there was a last minute change in plans for a short range assault.

Thank you for not thinking.

FWIW, Interdictors were present at Endor, or at least according to a WEG sourcebook.

I could easily see them at Endor. Palpatine had both Death Squadron and a Sector Fleet. It's part of the standard order. At Hoth? I don't see it given the last minute changes they had to do because of Ozzel.

Hoth was supposed to be for the Empire nothing more then fire turbolasers, knock out shields to ensure the Alliance had no way of covering their asses, and rush in with superior force. While Interdictors could make that easier, it would be a primary target always and for a roaming fleet, an unusual strain of resources.

[Stark]

It's actually quite hilarious that you believe nationalism is a positive thing, when the last two hundred years have shown how it can be used just like religion to control a population.

You can say that about any philosophy. If a country adopted Secular Humanist Universalism or whatever as its state religion, it could be used in the exact same way.

Is that a deliberate non-sequitur? Yes, things can be used for good and bad ends. So... what? Nationalism has motivated people to do terrible things, and crying about humanism doesn't change shit. Baffalo's idead that nationalism is great because it makes people die by the shitpile in an unwinnable war is fucking odious, particularly in a SW vs ST context where the Empire would probably be happy to simply take over bloodlessly. One nationalist (let's call them terrorists) could cause untold suffering to other civilians in reprisals (which would simply start more terrorists) and thus nationalism fucks over shitloads of people for no reason other than arguably to propagate itself. YAY NATIONALISM!

Hitler and the leading Nazis were collectively delusional by that point, and held crazy hopes of a reversal (the kind of insane optimism that is often even worse than fatalism - "So now it looks like we'll be annihilated, but MAYBE if we hold out long enough the tide will turn!"). The Social Darwinist theory that Hitler wanted Germany deliberately destroyed once its "inferiority" had been proven comes from Speer, an unreliable source at best. Many others who continued to fight did so in the hope that it would give people time to flee and thus escape the worst ravages of the invaders. One should also consider the impact of such things as the Morgenthau Plan - if the enemy is intent on your total destruction, it is better to fight and take a few of them with you than to surrender and die anyway.

Which is all relevant to WWI somehow, I'm sure. The difference between an enemy you can negotiate with and one you can't is obviously beyond you; the Soviets knew the Germans could never stop them, so why would they negotiate? The situation was totally different for both sides in WWI.

[Darth Wong]

Any ideology can be made to serve the State's interest once adopted as its own.

Do you deny that some ideologies are better-suited to the State's use than others? Or are you really so wedded to this interpretation that you would seriously claim they're all equally vulnerable?

[Samuel]

Secular Humanism and Unitarian Universalism are two different philosophies.

I know, thank you. I was attempting to compress the least exclusive and religious, most politically correct cause possible in one term.

Given that neither embrace the idea of a central authority calling the shots I don't see how exactly they can be exploited by the state.

You could say the same about some fairly influential historical interpretations of Christianity, or even Communism. Nationalism, which Stark singled out, started as a liberal (yes, left-wing) reaction to oppression by multi-ethnic empires and cosmopolitan elites before the right hijacked it. Any ideology can be made to serve the State's interest once adopted as its own.

Except all interpretations of Christianity require subservience to an eternal source. Having a group decide what the source says is a natural progression. As for communism... how can it not be easily abused by the state? The whole point of communism is to increase the power of the state!

For an ideology that CANNOT be taken over by the government, you merely need to look at anarchism.

[Darth Hoth]

Is that a deliberate non-sequitur? Yes, things can be used for good and bad ends. So... what? Nationalism has motivated people to do terrible things, and crying about humanism doesn't change shit. Baffalo's idead that nationalism is great because it makes people die by the shitpile in an unwinnable war is fucking odious, particularly in a SW vs ST context where the Empire would probably be happy to simply take over bloodlessly. One nationalist (let's call them terrorists) could cause untold suffering to other civilians in reprisals (which would simply start more terrorists) and thus nationalism fucks over shitloads of people for no reason other than arguably to propagate itself. YAY NATIONALISM!

In this context, yes. Historically, it does not make sense to single out nationalism in particular among the various state ideologies that have caused war or suffering.

Which is all relevant to WWI somehow, I'm sure. The difference between an enemy you can negotiate with and one you can't is obviously beyond you; the Soviets knew the Germans could never stop them, so why would they negotiate? The situation was totally different for both sides in WWI.

When you brought up Hitler and fighting to the end, I assumed you were referring to the Second World War, not the First.

Do you deny that some ideologies are better-suited to the State's use than others? Or are you really so wedded to this interpretation that you would seriously claim they're all equally vulnerable?

Oh, I would certainly agree there; one need only look at and compare the various religions. But any ideology can be co-opted for such purposes, even if some are so more easily than others.

[Thanas]

Oh, I would certainly agree there; one need only look at and compare the various religions. But any ideology can be co-opted for such purposes, even if some are so more easily than others.

Not really, not when the ideology itself is so vague or unusable that the state would self-destruct adopting it.

Anarchism has already been brought up, I'll add cynicism and pacifism to that list.

[Darth Hoth]

Is cynicism an ideology?

But alright, conceded. Extremely vaguely defined ideologies without appreciable political aims would be very difficult to use as described.

[Thanas]

Is cynicism an ideology?

Certainly.

1: visionary theorizing 2 a: a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture b: a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture c: the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program

Cynicism fits all of these.

[Samuel]

Is cynicism an ideology?

But alright, conceded. Extremely vaguely defined ideologies without appreciable political aims would be very difficult to use as described.

Pacifisms political objective is the end of war. Anarchisms political objective is the end of the government. As long as an ideology directly conflicts with how the state works it cannot be exploited by the state. Non-violent resistance might go on the list as well.

[Logos]

I could easily see them at Endor. Palpatine had both Death Squadron and a Sector Fleet. It's part of the standard order. At Hoth? I don't see it given the last minute changes they had to do because of Ozzel.

Hoth was supposed to be for the Empire nothing more then fire turbolasers, knock out shields to ensure the Alliance had no way of covering their asses, and rush in with superior force. While Interdictors could make that easier, it would be a primary target always and for a roaming fleet, an unusual strain of resources.

How is one Interdictor an "unusual strain of resources" for an Empire that can churn out more than two million of them per second if it wants, without even having to go to a wartime economy? Since Vader's goal was to catch a guy known to have a hyperdrive-capable X-Wing fighter, it's pretty stupid of him not to have an Interdictor on hand, isn't it? As far as we can tell from the movie, Luke just breezes right on out without even getting shot at.

It's also pretty stupid for Vader to just assume that he'll get surprise and end up flailing around with "last minute changes" (and coming up with a poor plan as a result) when he doesn't get it. No concept of "Plan B?" How does he know that the Rebels don't have a network of sensors in space that will pick his fleet up even if Ozzel doesn't screw the pooch? Or that some X-Wing on patrol or transport hypering in with supplies wouldn't be within sensor range when his ships come out of hyperspace. Or that Luke won't have a moment of Force precog?

Vader's task force had TIE fighters, didn't it? At more than 2KT per shot, one TIE could have erased the Rebel trench line with one squeeze of the trigger. Likewise, for the Ewok resistance in the forest at Endor.

Yes, Ozzel fucked up the original plan, as the Ewoks fucked up the original plan for the ground fight at Endor. All this shows is that the Imperials have forgotten that no battle plan survives contact with the enemy, and that they have no capacity to adapt to changing circumstances.

As for the Imperial "victory" at Hoth, it's not much of a win. The Rebels were able to get away with their leadership and whatever they had in those transports. They failed to capture Luke or achieve any significant military objective other than ownership of an ice-planet they hadn't wanted to begin with. While the Rebels lost a couple major assets (the theater shield generator and the big Planet Defender ion cannon), but if they have even a tiny fraction of the Empire's productive capacity they can replace those without difficulty.

At Hoth, the Rebels were at least as stupid as the Empire. They're on a planet of ice, fighting against walkers with a ridiculously high center of gravity, that die when they fall. The Rebels had X-Wings on hand, with multi-kiloton blaster yields.1 Since the "hog tie 'em like a calf at a rodeo" tactic worked, the AT-AT's did not have repulsors or gyros or any other gadget that would prevent them from falling if a large enough crater in the ice was made under them by a blaster shot. Then there's the fact that the Rebels invested good money in all those silly low rate-of-fire fixed weapon emplacements that make no sense in a universe where a fast, maneuverable, well-shielded personal spacecraft can loiter over a battlefield indefinitely and dish out 2KT per shot.

One Federation shuttle, attacking from behind or from the side (out of the AT-AT's firing arcs) with a tractor beam could have cow-tipped the whole Imperial heavy armor force or used phasers or photon torpedoes to melt the snow from under their feet. If the Rebels lose a ground fight even Trek could win, they're Doing It Wrong.

This can be explained, I suppose, by the fact that the Republic was a quiescent peaceful utopia for a thousand years with no need for a standing army, and people are having to figure out how warfare works again. But piss-poor strategy, tactics, and weapons procurement is piss-poor strategy, tactics, and weapons procurement.

NOTES:

1. I'm ignoring the snowspeeders because they can be seen hitting snow during the first attack run as they miss the walker--and having no effect. Judging by what happens when the AT-AT's hit snow compared to when they hit a snowspeeder, their armor and shields are pathetic.

[Batman]

Learn to read time/date stamps.

[Ghost Rider]

Second necromancy, Logos...and both are you nearly jizzing over supposition. Spectacular start here.