Whatever happened to the focusing iris?
It was taken by Xylem (artifact challenge for some classes), then returned to Dalaran.
Are those the NPCs of Siege of Orgrimmar or the hallucinations created by Gorak Tul to appeal to Jainaâs greatest remorse/fears?
There is a point when i personally grow tired of the same stuff over and over again.
You can laugh or be disrespectful in whatever way you want. Donât expect me to keep track of it and give it more than a cursory glance when i grow tired of trying to address it civically.
Thatâs the point where you should stop making claims about what I said then, if youâre not willing to put the work in. But I know, you wonât, thankfully, so I will still have my opportunities to show just how much I respect you.
1 Like
I mean, thats quite a threat. One that spurned or burdened most of the conflict that raged across most of middle Kalimdor. Ranging from Durotar to The Barrens.
Even in said book, its described as a heavily militarised harbour.
To be fair, Theramore wasnât really that centric regarding civilian casualties in said trial.
The way said attack was delivered and portrayed for players, emphasised on the nuke itself. And gave additional emphasis on how said attack affected Jaina specifically.
Like brought from one of those crude museums regarding the aftermath of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, players were supposed to empathise with Jaina. Regardless if they were Alliance or not.
The nuke was the issue. Not the civilians.
What Jaina personally felt like loosing was the problem. Stretching it to say that Garrosh also wanted to murder children, is taking it unnecessarily ahead of what it really was intended to deliver.
And several quotes already point at that not being the case.
No need to lift the var even higher when you are already demonising the character for using what was dreaded throughout the whole Cold War in RL.
Iâll clarify: Iâm unwilling to put the work about wading my way in a disrespectful or immature speech.
If thatâs the way you talk about stuff, fine with me. But donât expect me to tag with it ad infinitum.
I donât. I expect you to stop, when you want to stop. These discussions do absolutely nothing, if you arenât having fun with them. Thatâs the reason I donât try to keep the mockery out when talking to you, since that is often the only fun part. If you donât like that game, donât play it. But you just canât stop yourself. You never can.
2 Likes
Theramore was a war crime. Pure and simple.
Well yes, Theramore had to be a war crime. Couldnât have the Horde ever best the Alliance on equal terms, oh no. Instead they had to use a big old plot device that makes them look like monsters, and makes Horde players feel bad for playing minions of the expansionâs big baddy, until theyâre arbitrarily allowed to fight against him.
The war crime of Theramore is faultless evidence of Blizzardâs Horde bias.
3 Likes
Most importantly it was totally unnecessary. After cata there really wasnât a lack of reasons for the Alliance to keep up their commitment to fight the Horde. But I guess⌠Jainas âcharacter developmentâ came out of it. So that justifies it all.
2 Likes
Same reasoning why teldrassil happened first too. Blizzard never changes a running concept.
1 Like
Look. It is a question of scale. Its not -what- he did, its -how- he did it. Would we class it as a War Crime if he had used conventional weaponry? I mean how conventional does the weapon have to be, before in some peopleâs minds it is not a War Crime?
Garrosh was pretty heedless of Civilian welfare, but they were not his targets, the military assets were. I mean he directly states that. The whole thing with Theramore was -kind of- like some sort of âBait and Switchâ The Alliance was encouraged to act a certain way, then the game changed and it massively damaged them.
But then weâre coming back to War Crimes. What level of weapon -is- it âacceptableâ to destroy a city with? Mana Bombs are apparently out of the question -despite the Alliance being perfectly happy to use stolen ones themselves on the Isle of Thunder- So, hmm, Napalm? High Explosives? High Explosives must be alright, surely, Horde and Alliance have used those on each other⌠Maybe bullets? Sappers? No? Hammer and Chisel?
The Method is key here, not the outcome. I mean the -Alliance- have done some of the things Garrosh is formally accused with, yet they do not seem to be treated as War Crimes, thereby really giving truth to the Axiom that the Winners decide the Terms. Which is -fine!- (I mean, not morally fine, but, it makes sense) Theramore was our worldâs Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Was the US President hauled before a War Crimes tribunal for that? No. Why? Because they Won. Was âBomber Harrisâ put up for War Crimes over the firebombing of Dresden? No. Why? Because they Won.
âBut Briganteâ you may say âWHat about those soldiers accused of War Crimes during the Iraq War, who -were- on the winning side? What about the Mai Lai Massacre in the Vietnam War?â
Television. With the advent of mass produced Television, war has become a spectator sport. It is funnelled into our homes and we can watch it all, safely. In a world before Television, we would never have heard of Mai Lai, or any of the atrocities in recent wars. Does that make them less of a War Crime? Is ignorance of a fact the same as Innocence?
The Pandaren court laid charges against Garrosh that the world had no precedent for (Again, I canât believe I am defending Garrosh, I loathe him) so could not possibly have decided were War Crimes. They laid charges against him that are not even physically possible.
Christie Golden went on record as saying âAll of the things Garrosh was charged with, are real life War Crimesâ
She is talking utter -rubbish-. She is 100% incorrect. Under the Geneva convention, or in the sternest court of The Hague, a person cannot be accused of a crime that they did not commit, did not order, were unaware of, and that it was impossible for them to even have suggested, due to physically not being present during any aspect of the decision making process.
Sheâs talking nonsense. This is the equivalent of trying to put Angela Merkel in the dock for âThe Final Solutionâ Is she a War Criminal by virtue of her nationality? No. Of course not. Nor Was Garrosh. He did loads of bad things, and was undoubtedly a War Criminal, but for Christie Golden to go âNo, these are all legit War Crimes in our Worldâ is simply factually Incorrect.
The reason it is regarded as a War Crime, is because a) The Scale of the destruction, and b) The Horde did it.
2 Likes
Iâll laugh by exercised butt off when in the next âQ&Aâ Blizzard claims that Theramore isnât canon anymore and all this discussion is pointless.
3 Likes
Oh Gawds, can you imagine that!
2 Likes
Many would, yes, if it lead to the same death and destruction. Indeed, with more controllable weaponry the death of the civilians might even be judged even harder.
My point above still stands: Without a clear definition of a war crime to measure the facts against, this discussion is utterly pointless. RL-comparisons only make you learn more about what people think about RL-events, not the war crime status of Theramoreâs bombing.
2 Likes
I think that is essentially what I was driving at about Christie Golden saying âThese are all War Crimes IRLâ whenâŚâNo, some of them are -not- War Crimes.â
Brigante hates that Mana Bombs exist, his childhood sweetheart and ten year old son who he had never met, both died when the Mana Bomb fell. He hates having the Mark I âAnnihilatrixâ Tactical Mana Bomb at his disposal for his unit, he hates himself every time he looks at the ring on his finger that is one of the two âKeysâ needed to unlock the crate and activate the weapons. He hates them, he hates them. ButâŚTheyâre not a War Crime. If they were a War Crime thenâŚSo is Khadgar, so is Jaina, so is Aethas, and Rommath, so is basically -any- Mage or Warlock with the ability to affect multiple people at onceâŚ
I think that is the problem. There isnât a clear definition, and Golden swung and missed with her attempt to provide oneâŚ
And I am saying there are different definitions and interpretations of definitions out there, even IRL. So you canât assume that everyone uses the same, and if you talk about it without defining it, donât be surprised when youâre not talking about the same thing as your discussion partner.
As did you.
2 Likes
UmmâŚNo. I gave a direct statement as to something she said was a War Crime, that is not in fact a War Crime.
Following which definition? There are no facts ablout the objective meanings of words. There are only terms and their usage in language.
2 Likes
Do we really have to? I find the subject distasteful, and whilst it is a War Crime, it would be -Impossible- for Garrosh to be accused of it. Forced Pregnancy. Basically the âRâ word ( I really do find it distasteful so am trying to avoid it). It is categorically -not- a War Crime if the person accused was not present, did not order it, was not aware of it, and was not physically -able- to order it.
All of those apply to Garrosh. The world, the cosmos did not even know that he existed. You canât accuse someone of a War Crime for being the same -Race- as a person who committed the War Crime. Especially when they were not involved in any way, shape or form.
So yes. Christie Golden is talking rubbish. Whilst that is a crime, she is 100% incorrect in saying that Garrosh could have been charged with it.
1 Like
I had always thought the implication was that this action was caused by the Korâkron SS under his command.