Sylvanas isn't morally grey.

General Discussion
Prev 1 5 6 7 8 Next
07/10/2018 09:35 PMPosted by Withpuppys
07/10/2018 09:33 PMPosted by Sevenplagues
When was the last time you’ve been to Hillsbrad? It’s like the plague-iest non Plaguelands area.
recently in fact, and it is as lush as i remember, even more so since a group of paladins are purifying southshore in bfa


I had to fly back there right now just to see if I missed something and, nope, a 1/3 of it is a diseased wasteland. And another significant chunk is a giant crater. Real logistical coup there.
The Alliance never put anyone into internment camps. That was actually the Forsaken.

How curious that you acknowledge the Forsaken's claim to Lordaeron when it conveniences you, and only when it conveniences you.

Then maybe you shouldn't have purposefully settled in said wasteland. Or maybe you should have made better use of your resources, like building adobe structures like the Mag'har -- the resources for which are plentiful in Durotar -- instead of immensely wasteful metal and wood ones.

I agree, we shouldn't have settled in Durotar, we should have continued onward deeper into Ashenvale and settled there. We would have been better off.

07/10/2018 09:48 PMPosted by Kelrexia

We cleaned up significant portions of the Plaguelands in about two years. Jes' sayin'.

Do you not somehow see this as a major investment that detracts from your war effort?
07/10/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Sevenplagues
07/10/2018 09:35 PMPosted by Withpuppys
...recently in fact, and it is as lush as i remember, even more so since a group of paladins are purifying southshore in bfa


I had to fly back there right now just to see if I missed something and, nope, a 1/3 of it is a diseased wasteland. And another significant chunk is a giant crater. Real logistical coup there.
im there right now, and i still see a lot of grass and fertile farmland, the worst being southshore but as i said paladins are purifying it in bfa
The Alliance never put anyone into internment camps. That was actually the Forsaken.


You never have read the books have you? The Humans put Orcs in internment camps and forced them into slavery and forced them to fight each other for money.

Where do you think Thrall learned Common?
07/10/2018 09:57 PMPosted by Narakh
How curious that you acknowledge the Forsaken's claim to Lordaeron when it conveniences you, and only when it conveniences you.


Oh? Quote where I've ever disputed the Forsaken's claim. Go ahead, I'll wait. Or are you going to chicken out and say that was a generic "you"?

I agree, we shouldn't have settled in Durotar, we should have continued onward deeper into Ashenvale and settled there. We would have been better off.


I completely agree. Azeroth would be much better off if the orcs had been to a man flayed and had their spines removed.

Do you not somehow see this as a major investment that detracts from your war effort?


No, why would I? The Cenarian Circle and Earthen Ring are the ones spearheading that initiative.

You never have read the books have you? They put Orcs in internment camps and forced them into slavery and forced them to fight each other for money.


No, the Alliance never put the orcs in interment camps. The people of Lordaern did.

Who, ya'know. Are the Forsaken. Learn your lore.


No, the Alliance never put the orcs in interment camps. The people of Lordaern did.

Who, ya'know. Are the Forsaken. Learn your lore.


The Alliance of Lordaeron whom imprisioned the Orcs in Camps included the seven human kingdoms. Turalyon was the Commander.

You don't know the lore
07/10/2018 10:10 PMPosted by Cattibrie
The Alliance of Lordaeron whom imprisioned the Orcs in Camps included the seven human kingdoms. Turalyon was the Commander.


Turalyon was Supreme Allied Commander after Anduin Lothar was killed, which meant he had authority over the Alliance's military forces and no direct control over political policy. So bringing him up is completely without merit.

You don't know the lore


Better than you, obviously.
07/10/2018 10:03 PMPosted by Kelrexia
Oh? Quote where I've ever disputed the Forsaken's claim. Go ahead, I'll wait. Or are you going to chicken out and say that was a generic "you"?

No, it wasn't a 'generic' you, it had a very specific target: the Alliance. If you're going to disagree with your own faction I can't take the rest of your comments with any legitimacy.
07/10/2018 08:46 PMPosted by Withpuppys
07/10/2018 08:45 PMPosted by Squirrels
A lot of truth here. Real war is really ugly.

Winston Churchill was not a kind man to anyone that didnt serve his interests--but he was the man needed by his side at that place and time. His "big picture win" of WW2 buries atrocities (including the deaths of millions of Indians) that lay squarely at his feet. This doesnt even touch his world view that was frighteningly similar to Hitler in many key ways, just with a British flavor. Google "churchill bad things" and take a look at a few top 10 lists for starters

Still without him WW2 would have been lost and he is undoubtedly a hero for that.

Sylvanas is this type of leader IMO
i dont recall winston churchill murdering his own people because they had hope for a better life with their loved ones


The loose example sugests the british play the undead, so lets take that to its end.
British = Undead
Germans = Living humans

Interpretation for Churchill could be his support of eugenics and his very narrow view of who "his own people" was and what the british empire did and didnt include or allow. Undead hanging out with humans would be an awful lot like a british !@#$ sympathizer situation in WW2. Whatever the "reality" is in either case, the entity with the most power will decide the outcome. What happened to %^-* sympathizers? yeah...
07/10/2018 10:22 PMPosted by Narakh
No, it wasn't a 'generic' you, it had a very specific target: the Alliance. If you're going to disagree with your own faction I can't take the rest of your comments with any legitimacy.


I find it amusing that you demand mindless lockstep with the overarching political faction when the official position taken by the orcs as outlined by their species leader Varok Saurfang is to oppose Sylvie.
07/10/2018 10:28 PMPosted by Kelrexia
I find it amusing that you demand mindless lockstep with the overarching political faction when the official position taken by the orcs as outlined by their species leader Varok Saurfang is to oppose Sylvie.

At no point does Varok Saurfang ever advise any other orc to follow his path.
No, the Alliance never put the orcs in interment camps. The people of Lordaern did.


lol you can’t be serious?
07/10/2018 10:27 PMPosted by Squirrels
<span class="truncated">...</span>i dont recall winston churchill murdering his own people because they had hope for a better life with their loved ones


The loose example sugests the british play the undead, so lets take that to its end.
British = Undead
Germans = Living humans

Interpretation for Churchill could be his support of eugenics and his very narrow view of who "his own people" was and what the british empire did and didnt include or allow. Undead hanging out with humans would be an awful lot like a british !@#$ sympathizer situation in WW2. Whatever the "reality" is in either case, the entity with the most power will decide the outcome. What happened to %^-* sympathizers? yeah...
i would remind you that around 10 thousand germans took refuge in english territories and fought against hitler, so even then your comparison doesn't hold up, as sylvanas would never allow something like that. she would just kill them if the living tried that. because she would not want the forsaken to know that not all of the living will reject them.
07/10/2018 09:22 PMPosted by Withpuppys
07/10/2018 09:21 PMPosted by Cattibrie
Umm yes Churchhill would murder his own troops if they spread poisonous ideas like friendship with Germans during WW2.
what about the ones who remained loyal, did he kill them too like sylvanas killed the forsaken who were loyal to her?


Ughhh...

If you think individual soldiers and MASSIVE groups of soldiers didnt die by the orders of Churchill (or any soldier that dies in virtually any war for that matter) in the name of an overarching world view that stood at immediate odds with the soldiers' desires to live and see their families again...you need to find a war veteran for a reality check.

D Day is a super example, but pretty much any military conflict ever fits the bill here

Again, I'm not saying Sylv is Churchill, Im saying that leaders can be hailed as heroes and villains and they arent mutually exclusive. It's virtually required.

The definition i looked at for morally gray was literally "between good and bad--in the middle." To argue over whether someone does or doesnt fall into a category defined this way makes me embarrassed to have spent so much time here tonight.
Alliance players are always wondering why the Horde has so many victories and territorial gains over the Alliance in game. This thread is your reason. The Horde fights wars with the intent to win, while the Alliance consults the Carebear King to make sure nobody takes any action that might result in a stubbed toe or tummy ache.
Sylvanas is one of the few leaders in game that actually saved her people. That should be enough for most to understand that despite what she says, she actually gives a damn about what happens to the people she is responsible for.
07/10/2018 10:38 PMPosted by Sevenplagues
lol you can’t be serious?


Why not? Go read Rise of the Lich King. Touring and inspecting the camps was one of Arthas' princely duties.

I'm mostly just expecting ya'll Hordies to not be hypocrites and place the blame where it rightfully belongs. If you're constantly on about how the current Horde can't be blamed for the sins of the Old Horde, how can you say that the current Alliance should be blamed for the sins of one of your own members?
07/10/2018 10:50 PMPosted by Kelrexia
07/10/2018 10:38 PMPosted by Sevenplagues
lol you can’t be serious?


Why not? Go read Rise of the Lich King. Touring and inspecting the camps was one of Arthas' princely duties.

I'm mostly just expecting ya'll Hordies to not be hypocrites and place the blame where it rightfully belongs. If you're constantly on about how the current Horde can't be blamed for the sins of the Old Horde, how can you say that the current Alliance should be blamed for the sins of one of your own members?

Arthas was an Alliance prince.
07/10/2018 10:46 PMPosted by Squirrels
D Day is a super example, but pretty much any military conflict ever fits the bill here
d day is a battle, the massacre at stromgarde wasn't. in fact she knew which ones were loyal and which ones werent, she sees the forsaken running back as commanded, but she killed them anyways

07/10/2018 10:46 PMPosted by Squirrels
Again, I'm not saying Sylv is Churchill, Im saying that leaders can be hailed as heroes and villains and they arent mutually exclusive. It's virtually required.
and that is the problem, sylvanas is not a hero by any standard, she is just a straight one dimensional villain. if we were to compare sylvanas to historical leaders she is more of a hitler than a churchill
07/10/2018 10:54 PMPosted by Narakh
07/10/2018 10:50 PMPosted by Kelrexia
...

Why not? Go read Rise of the Lich King. Touring and inspecting the camps was one of Arthas' princely duties.

I'm mostly just expecting ya'll Hordies to not be hypocrites and place the blame where it rightfully belongs. If you're constantly on about how the current Horde can't be blamed for the sins of the Old Horde, how can you say that the current Alliance should be blamed for the sins of one of your own members?

Arthas was an Alliance prince.


Not the point they were trying to make.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum