Is it wrong to be Pro- Alliance ?

POSTED BY: Booksword
UPDATED: Sunday, March 28, 2010 01:34
VIEWED: 35713
PAGE 5 of 10

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

SPACEANJL

Thursday, July 10, 2008 7:00 PM

Of course, there could just be a tragic accident at a school. Either a disgruntled student goes a bit Columbine, or the shuttle taking them on a field trip crashes...hell, could even be an atrocity prepetrated by some of those pesky 'Independents' still floating around, disseminating their lies and doctored videofeed. Recently, a group of officers were even massacred when a criminal gang raided a hospital, brave men giving their lives to defend the patients.

Boros, Whitefall...It's so very sad when a civil war erupts on any planet - it would be much better if they were under the secure rule of the Central Planets, so much safer for them.

It's all about the spin, baby. You can bet that that vid-feed got shut down damn quick, and disowned fast. Any housecleaning after that would have been internal and swift. Not sure how they would spin the vast loss of troops against the reavers, without having to admit that the things were real...but I'm sure something would be found to explain it. I mean, it's the perfect opportunity to put troops on some planets, to protect against the reavers, isn't it? Hell, I'm just surprised they don't keep a box of them somewhere to unleash on worlds as an excuse to get called in. (Who knows?)

And the Miranda wave. Sad fact is, this is the bit that has never made sense to me in the BDM. The media is such a tricksy animal. I'm sure one broadcast could be squelched, dismissed, dumped down the schedule in favour of a sports match or a reality show. Sure, you could break in across a number of channels with it, but what happens afterwards? Was it a hoax? Lies? Opposition propaganda? I think Mal's cynical assessment is spot on. Folks will forget it and move on.

Except those politicians who spot a good opportunity to move in on opponents and accuse them. Those who decide to stand on a platform of morality and probity. Those who have corporate sponsership from companies who would love to asset strip Blue Sun.

I'm sorry. Am I ranting in a particularly cynical way? So tell me that I don't have a valid point.

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, July 10, 2008 7:22 PM

All your points are vaild; probably more true to life than mine. Sometimes I forget that there is no reality....there are only individual perceptions of reality.

Yep, oppressive regimes are usually quite good at cleaning up their messes, and eliminating anybody that saw anything. After all, who's gonna believe a bunch of space thieves led by a scumbag Independent against the word of Parliament. The Tams certainly wouldn't.

SPACEANJL

Thursday, July 10, 2008 7:29 PM

I think if the Tams let themselves believe what they saw, what Simon tried to tell them, then their world would collapse. How could they live with the knowledge that they had done that to their own child/children? Better to bluster and rage, and toe the party line.

I've now started a weird chain of thought in my own head, about who might pick up on that broadcast and have the power to do something about it...

I love the 'Verse.

RALLEM

Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barticus:
Wow it's been a while since i thought about firefly (blasphemy i hear you cry) but to add to the thread and after thinking about it for a couple of years i have absolutely gotta say that if anything i am even more anti alliance than ever. I'm often surprised to see Americans supporting the alliance when it's obvious the founding fathers would be on the side of Mal and co...it doesn't matter if the Alliance has some good points, (i'm sure the British empire had a few - for the elite mainly) but overall the Alliance (like the British empire)is restricting, controlling and willing to put anyone to the sword who does not agree with their world view. This inability to even think that THEY might be wrong thus condemns them.
Hope this helps!

I would like to state my opinion that I think the alliance was right in forcing the border worlds into submission because it was the Alliance who terra-formed those moons and planets into Earth like bodies for their own people to settle. They did not go through all of the trouble and expense for people to move there and start their own governments. Were the rebels entirely at fault for wanting to rule them selves? No! I am sure the Alliance could have and should have done more to ensure the survival and success of the people who colonized the border planets and should have provided a sense of belonging to the alliance by placing on each of those planets a Governor who would be responsible for laying an infrastructure and for defense of those rocks, but they didn’t and the people on those rocks decided since they were on their own they should rule them selves.. With that said I think it may have been important for the rebels to have fought the war because by doing so they were able to voice their concerns so that even after the Alliance squashed them it had to address the many discrepancies so that everyone would have to accept their rule.

http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

SPACEANJL

Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:50 PM

There's nothing to say that Governors were not appointed, and then decided to secede, is there?

The argument that the Alliance went to trouble and expense to terraform planets - Of course, this could all go a bit 'Battlefield:Earth', with the Alliance turning up to repossess a planet that has not met it's quota of production (yeah, I read the book - out of sheer disbelief.)

And I don't think any discrepanies will be addressed. Rebuilding on planets with natural resources, oh yes, but the dirtballs will just get left.

RALLEM

Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Never saw this thread before.....very interesting. The Alliance uses "agents" that leave trails of dead bodies; dead bodies all over the place..ie..Hands of Blue guys just wipe out an entire Alliance squad of police, leave them to fester in their own blood on a Core Planet...and no one is supposed to notice that? The Operative in the BDM wipes out people at the Academy...does anybody care? Who cleans up that mess? The "young miss" that the Operative addresses, what happens to her? Was she killed too, or does she just come back to work tomorrow? Come back and do what? Then the slaughter on Haven, and all of Mal's hangouts....is the citizenry all ok with this? Of course not, they're petrified, just like those living under the oppresive rule of the Nazis, or even the Empire from Star Wars. It is wrong to be pro-Alliance, unless you condone indiscriminate murder of innocents.

This sort of stuff probably happens all the time in our world today, but I think these types of incidents would be spun into being the faults murderous Tam's, by the Alliance and the Hands of Blue so that outrage would be leveled against the brother and sister and not the actual agents. Aren't the Tams responsible for all of those policemen's deaths by going onto the core planet though, when they must have known the Hands of Blue would do that to anyone who was in contact with River?

http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

RALLEM

Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SpaceAnJL:
There's nothing to say that Governors were not appointed, and then decided to secede, is there?

The argument that the Alliance went to trouble and expense to terraform planets - Of course, this could all go a bit 'Battlefield:Earth', with the Alliance turning up to repossess a planet that has not met it's quota of production (yeah, I read the book - out of sheer disbelief.)

And I don't think any discrepanies will be addressed. Rebuilding on planets with natural resources, oh yes, but the dirtballs will just get left.

I did not read Battlefield Earth, so I cannot speak on that half, and maybe the Alliance did appoint Governors who decided to secede, but if they did appoint Governors then they didn’t do a very good job. Now to your quote, I would like to point out that it was spoken by Mal, that it was spoken by a bitter man who no longer was apart of the common man, so how can he speak for them? If it were a statement true before the war, then I think that quote shows that my scenario of the Alliance not providing any form of Government to lay the infrastructure of provide defense was probably more accurate.

http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

SPACEANJL

Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:31 PM

?? What quote? I'm confused. I've lost the plot here (a not uncommon phenomenon). 'Cos all the rant is my very own.

WYTCHCROFT

Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:34 PM

LOL!!!!!!!!!

RALLEM

Friday, July 11, 2008 10:40 AM

So you're telling me that last line of your previous post wasn't a quote? I assumed it was and that was the only way I could understand what you meant.

http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE