AnimeGalleries [dot] NetAnimeWallpapers [dot] ComAnimeLyrics [dot] ComAnimePedia [dot] ComAnimeGlobe [dot] Com

User Tag List

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 103

Thread: Code Geass: Did u like the ending?

  1. #26
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AoiKumo View Post
    People don't seem to notice that Lelouch wasn't being evil when he became Emperor just for the sake of evil and world domination. He and Suzaku had planned out the whole thing, even Lelouch's death. The Zero Requiem plan was for Lelouch to act like an evil tyrant to make people see that the world needed to change, and Suzaku became Zero to return Zero's reputation to that of a hero of justice by deposing of the evil King. This brought about the change if the world that Lelouch had initially set out to create: a gentle world where people discuss rather then resort to war to solve their problems, and where there isn't a Darwinian mentality of survival of the fittest and the strong "eating" the weak per se. Lelouch made no mistakes, and he truly wasn't evil. He did the things he did for the greater good.

    I'd go on, but I think I've used up enough space as it is. And I'd rather not start repeating myself or spazzing out.

    P.S. Rebel, C.C. can talk to "dead" people through Geass, I think (ones that have contracted with her). She mused as though having a conversation with Lelouch's mother in earlier episodes, so logically she should be able to commune with Lelouch. Then again, what's logical about Geass?

    The Zero Requiem plan was evil, if it involved restoring Zero's reputation as a champion of justice. the evil Emperor Lelouch should have been killed by Suzaku disguised as an entirely new hero - Infinity, for example, and Zero's reputation should have remained tarnished.

    Zero murdered his rivals for leadership of the Japanese resistance by killing many JLF fighters as well as Britannian soldiers with his landslide at Narita and blowing up the ship with the remaining JLF leaders. Zero came up with a flawed plan for the Black Rebellion since he was counting on the Emperor coming to meet him after Japan proclaimed independence, which would never happen, especially after Zero killed Euphemia which would certainly scare away the Emperor. Then Zero abandoned the rebellion to defeat by the counterattacking Britannians (which probably saved a lot of lives but could be considered desertion).

    In the second season Britannia heavily defeated the Euro Universe and arranged a marriage contract between the First Prince and the Chinese Empress, which could lead to the union of two thirds of the human race. The rest of the world would have to negotiate to become protectorates or client states or something to avoid being conquered and turned into Areas. Then the world would be united for the first time and there would be peace for countless thousands or millions of years. But the harsh Britannian oppression of the Numbers would fade away in generations and centuries as the Numbers and the Britannians gradually merged into one new people.

    And Zero could have sped up that process by assassinating or geassing into obedience enough members of the imperial families and the governments to have princess Euphemia proclaimed co-empress of Britannia-China. Euphie wasn't bossy and would go along with all of Oddysses's plans except that she would fight him over any attempt to retain any of the cruelty and oppression of the old system under Emperor Charles and would demand a kinder, gentler, Brittannia.

    Oops, Zero couldn't do that because he had foolishly wasted Euphemia's tremendous potential for good for no apparent reason during the Black Rebellion.

    Instead Zero blocked the Chinese-Britannian marriage and foiled Britannian attempts at world conquest. Once the exhaustion of the recent wars and the relief from the Zero Requiem wears off, wars would resume and keep up for countless thousands or millions of years, taking the lives of millions or billions or trillions of persons.

    Zero lead an invasion to liberate Japan which resulted in the enemy using F.R.E.I.J.A and killing millions. Of course, if Zero hadn't murdered Euphemia Nina wouldn't have tried to make a F.R.E.I.J.A weapon and later joined the team which succeeded in developing F.R.E.I.J.A, helping them to do so sooner than otherwise and thus having it ready in time for the wars of the second season.

    Zero ordered the Geass Directorate Massacre. He ordered the massacre of many thousands of people instead of using his geass on those of them who were dangerous to convert them into useful followers. Zero ordered the massacre of children. The only thing that made Zero a little bit better than Earth's Supreme Horror, Genghis Khan, or the Terrible Tamerlane, was that he only ordered one terrible massacre.

    I say the world needs a totally new hero, not Zero. If the world accepts Zero as a noble hero and an example to follow standards of conduct are bound to fall.

    I have read that as part of the Zero Requiem Emperor Lelouch confessed that he was really guilty of the Fuji Massacre and used mind control to make Euphemia order the massacre. So that cleared her name and people no longer thought of her as the Massacre Princess.

    But if Lelouch wanted Zero to become a hero again he probably left out important details, such as he had been Zero at that time he made Euphemia order the massacre. Such as Euphemia's struggle against the geass command. Such as the way that Euphemia seemed to break free of the geass command while she was talking to Lelouch/Zero, no doubt because of her super human goodness. Revealing that would reveal that the evil Emperor Lelouch had been Zero at that time. Such as the fact that Zero killed her when it wold have been just as fast, just as easy, and just as safe for him and the Japanese, to capture her -- in short, he murdered her for no good reason and not much of an evil reason either. Yes, the evil emperor Lelouch's confession probably left out all the details which would have made her worshiped as a goddess of goodness who might have saved the world with a lot less death and destruction.

    Making Zero, which the world would think was the same Zero who had killed Euphemia, kill the evil Emperor Lelouch would make everyone think that even though Euphemia was not responsible for the massacre, killing her was the only way to save the Japanese from her. Because if the noble Zero did it, it must have been right and the only thing to do. And so the world would never realize the tremendous potential for good which Zero wasted when he killed Euphemia so senselessly.

    This was no doubt one last act of petty spite at Euphemia and Suzaku. They had tried to reform the world peacefully instead of by violent revolution, and so must remain as discredited as Suzaku could be induced to go along with, so that everyone would believe that Zero's way (secretly Lelouch's way) was the only way to change the world. A belief that would not help to make the new world a peaceful one.

    And I can't believe that Suzaku accepted that just for a chance to kill Lelouch. I say that if Suzaku really loved Euphemia or cared about what was good for the world, he would have whipped off Zero's costume to reveal the costume of Numero Uno, or Infinity, or Googolplex, or whatever, right before he stabbed Emperor Lelouch to death!
    Last edited by proEuphie; 07-06-2009 at 09:51 PM.

  2. #27
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    The ending saved the series... It's one of the best endings I've seen on an anime. It totally made up for having such a crappy character as Sukaku. Without that ending, the series would not have been what it was. It was a necessity to make the point the creators wanted to make. And the fact that in the end Nanally knows that his brother was not all bad, just a little psychotic made, made it great. I only feel bad for C. C., having to live an eternity by herself (No, I don't believe lelouch was alive driving the carriage).
    How can you feel bad for CC?

    In episode 22 Lelouch told Euphemia he was going to make her shoot him which would would spark off his revolution. When Zero revived the Japanese would know that Zero was the true messiah, not Euphie.

    This shows that Lelouch's was planning to take advantage of the Japanese love for Zero to trick thousands of Japanese who wanted to live into dying for his revolution, which would be mass murder of those Japanese. Lelouch was probably planning to kill Euphemia if he got a chance, which would be a foul and treacherous murder of someone who loved and trusted him.

    And Lelouch would be unconscious or faking it for at least a few minutes after being shot and before his dramatic "resurrection" and would not be able to control events during that time. A control freak like Lelouch would have wanted to have someone who knew the plan to try to control the course of events.

    So Lelouch might have involved CC with that plan. CC might have been Lelouch's accomplice in his plot for mass murder of thousands of Japanese and the individual murder of Euphemia.

    Since the accidental geassing of Euphemia was a direct result of Lelouch's earlier evil plan for a bloodbath, everyone who did die in the Fuji massacre was murdered by Lelouch, and by CC if she knew of his plan.

    After Lelouch geassed Euphemia into ordering the massacre Lelouch made his way into the Gawain. CC asked if he geassed Euphemia and Lelouch said it was an accident. So CC knew that Euphemia was innocent and had been forced by a geass to order the massacre.

    If she had been asked by Lelouch, or if she had pity on an innocent and noble girl leas than a thirtieth of her age, CC could have told Lelouch that VV could undo a geass from Lelouch. (and possibly other methods to cure a geass command that we don't know about). so curing Euphie was not a major scientific problem but a minor negotiating problem.

    And CC helped Lelouch kill Euphemia, even though Euphemia was totally helpless once her nightmare was destroyed, except for the machine gun which Lelouch, CC, and Kallen inexplicably let her pick up and keep. Once Euphemia's nightmare was destroyed one of the nightmares could have picked her up in a giant robot hand. If they met Britannian soldiers a Britannian princess in the hand would be a better weapon than any gun.

    Euphemia could have been captured just as fast, just as easy, and just as safely as killing her. And she would have made a great hostage to end the massacre or get Suzaku to switch sides. Not capturing her as a hostage was an act of treason against their cause and a war crime, since Euphemia, in her confused state of mind emerging from the control of the geass, didn't know that Lelouch was now her enemy.

    I don't see how anyone who sees CC help Lelouch take advantage of Euphemia's love and trust to safely and senselessly murder her, and who sees her noble and pathetic death scene, can ever retain the slightest trace of respect or sympathy for Lelouch or CC.

    And how can the Geass Directorate Massacre not take away any remaining love or liking for Lelouch or CC?

    I can't understand why any Code Geass fan wouldn't want CC to suffer as much as possible.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-18-2009 at 11:28 PM.

  3. #28
    Senior Member ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy has a reputation beyond repute ichimoku_fanboy's Avatar
    Gil
    7,420.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    01-09-2010 04:34 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The area formally known as Raccoon City
    Age
    20
    Threads
    5
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    266

    Default

    it was perfect, i couldnt think of a more perfect ending to the series...

    i personally admire Lelouche for taking full responsibility for his actions and even sacrificing his reputation and his eternal legacy to be that of hatred and manslughter, just to make the world a better place... i also admire him for doing such acts as having euphemia shoot him to make him become the messiah, truly admirable...

    i couldnt make myself look evil like that, even if it was for the better good xD
    Last edited by ichimoku_fanboy; 06-19-2009 at 12:51 AM.


  4. #29
    Member Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V's Avatar
    Gil
    1,280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    07-15-2009 12:58 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    California
    Age
    24
    Threads
    3
    Posts
    64
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    Wii Code: Need to check

    Default

    @proEuphie

    We differ too much on our views of both Lelouch and C.C. I won't say they were right, and I won't say they weren't a little crazy. I compare C.C. to Lucy from Elfen Lied. I've never felt more sorry any other character (fictional of course) in my life than towards Lucy, and she was a psychotic murderer.

    Euphemia had to die for Lelouch's plan to work.. does that make it ok? of course not, but it makes her death obvious. C.C had no control (I believe, and this is a subjective matter since it's not stated in the anime) over lelouch's actions. By that time, she was merely an observer of Lelouch's actions.

    Let me explain my views on Lelouch though, as I also felt sorry for him. Lelouch was a man who's humanity went into overdrive. He was a very loving guy, but he deluded himself into believing it was ok for him to take care of a loved one with "any means necessary." His love turned him into a monster. However, this monster became a key to a revolution that was needed. Because don't lie to yourself thinking that the liberators from the real world were all good. It's sucks to believe so, but blood is a necessity for revolution. Huge amounts of it. Lelouch realized this. Lelouch also realized that fear controls people. If you read the Book Dune, you'll see a similar scenario. It's the idea that with world-wide fear, you can create peace. This is seen through the observation that fear works at a small scale, but usually is affected by time. Both in Dune and in Code Geass.. the character realizes that if you create a monster that is big enough to become a symbol of immortality, peace, or at least "percieved peace" is actually possible. Lelouch decides to become this monster in full awareness of his real destiny. Monsters of such a scale are by their own plans, fated to be despised and have horrible lives. Hence, they usually become psychotic by choice. Or I should say, more completely psychotic an detached. Although I believe, personally, that Lelouch felt bad for the people he killed. He was a psychotic, childish little ****, but he had a heart bigger than most people. As I said before, he just had too much love, his emotions went into overdrive. You see this in the real world all the time. Love is dangerous.

    BTW, I understand you like Euphy, so it might be pointless to say this. And I really liked her as she was a symbol of innocence and love in a crappy world. But she was such a tool, and her decisions should have killed her much earlier than they did (although I don't think it was a good thing that Lelouch was so trigger-happy). The only reason she lived was because Lelouch loved her (yes, he was selfish).

    C.C. had a horrible deal. Her selfishness as a kid was understandable because she was exactly that, a kid. Her choices (that were forced upon her) at an age where she shouldn't make any choices lead to the development of her character to become what you see. For god's sake, all she wanted was to die, and the only way to do that was to force it upon someone else. If you live as long as she did, you become more than a human, that's why their deaths wasn't a big deal. Her problem is bigger than death, it's eternal life. She would be ok with anything Lelouch decided, as long as it brought her closer to the peace she seeked and we all seek when older. Maybe you don't see the curse that eternal life is, but I really understand her. I love my life, but I want to have kids, and I don't want to die after them. She didn't have the choice to lead a normal life. She was lucky enough to get to actually love people. Even if they were the ones supposed to kill her.

    I wrote too much, but it boils down to: She was cursed by a horrible fate, no matter what her choices were. I doubt anyone would become something different than her in those circumstances. She rolled the worst possible die. Much worse than any human could ever even understand. So yeah, I feel sorry for her. She never became able to undo herself of that curse. She's probably the most tragic character in the whole series.

    Oh, an btw: taking the Code Geass from Euphemia would have been impossible before she killed all those people. And taking it out after the event would have been the cruelest thing against euphy anyone could ever do. Unless you lie to her like that idiotic, extremely hypocritical murderer Suzaku did. Yes, I hate Sukaku more than Lelouch, he was the worst kind of murderer that could ever exist. His actions were disgusting.. no, he was a disgusting human being (beyond his idiotic, selfish and childish nature).

    Nanally must be one of my favorite character thought. She understood Lelouch's pain even if she didn't accept his actions. Her point of view is very close to mine. Even if she was a tool, and she didn't understand (at first), why Lelouch did what he did. Lelouch didn't have a choice in his actions. Due to his nature, there was no way that he was going to let things go on as they were. Nanally understood in the end, which makes it so much sadder, since all she wanted was to be with him. Nanally understood that Lelouch was not purely evil, he was just a little crazy. At least Euphy died with her heart intact. Lelouch died with his heart stained with blood, in a different circumstance he would have been a better person than most people.
    Last edited by Ipsilon V; 06-19-2009 at 03:10 AM.

  5. #30
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ichimoku_fanboy View Post
    it was perfect, i couldnt think of a more perfect ending to the series...

    i personally admire Lelouche for taking full responsibility for his actions and even sacrificing his reputation and his eternal legacy to be that of hatred and manslughter, just to make the world a better place... i also admire him for doing such acts as having euphemia shoot him to make him become the messiah, truly admirable...

    i couldnt make myself look evil like that, even if it was for the better good xD
    Lelouch did not actually go though with his plan to make Euphemia shoot him but briefly surrendered to her goodness. And Lelouch wasn''t expecting to die when she shot him, but told her that his miraculous resurrection would prove to the Japanese that he was the true messiah. I started a thread to discuss what he meant by that "Why did Lelouch say that he would miraculously revive?"

    My opinion of that plan can be found in my post # 27 in this thread.

    You say that Lelouch sacrificed his reputation and his eternal legacy to make the world a better place. You say that he made himself look evil for the greater good.

    I say that Lelouch was evil and he admitted to his evilness for the greater good. But Lelouch had a loophole. He made his alter ego, Zero, look good by killing the Evil Emperor Lelouch. If Lelouch truly wanted to come clean he would have left Zero's reputation tarnished and had the Evil Emperor Lelouch killed by a new masked hero, who had never committed even one terrible crime (at least not in that secret identity). Maybe Googolplex, or Infinity, or Numero Uno, or Eighty Eight, or Lucky Seven, or whatever.

    My opinion of making Zero the hero who killed the Evil Emperor Lelouch can be found in my post #26 in this thread.

    I saying the ending of Code Geas would have been better if Lelouch woke up and found that it was all a dream and that tens of millions of people hadn't been killed and he had a chance to give up his terrible quest for revenge.

    Or having all the millions who were killed come back to life during the Zero Requiem. Or failing that, at least one person, Euphemia, come back to life. And maybe Lelouch, who murdered her, and his accomplices CC and Kallen, and Emperor Charles and VV who had done nothing to save her and just let Lelouch kill her, were tortured to death in punishment.

    Or perhaps the doctors had given Euphemia a drug which had simulated death,and after she revived she had been secretly imprisoned by Emperor Charles for daring to try to be nice to the Numbers, and she is released at the end.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-19-2009 at 08:48 PM.

  6. #31
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie

    We differ too much on our views of both Lelouch and C.C. I won't say they were right, and I won't say they weren't a little crazy. I compare C.C. to Lucy from Elfen Lied. I've never felt more sorry any other character (fictional of course) in my life than towards Lucy, and she was a psychotic murderer.

    Euphemia had to die for Lelouch's plan to work.. does that make it ok? of course not, but it makes her death obvious. C.C had no control (I believe, and this is a subjective matter since it's not stated in the anime) over lelouch's actions. By that time, she was merely an observer of Lelouch's actions.

    Let me explain my views on Lelouch though, as I also felt sorry for him. Lelouch was a man who's humanity went into overdrive. He was a very loving guy, but he deluded himself into believing it was ok for him to take care of a loved one with "any means necessary." His love turned him into a monster. However, this monster became a key to a revolution that was needed. Because don't lie to yourself thinking that the liberators from the real world were all good. It's sucks to believe so, but blood is a necessity for revolution. Huge amounts of it. Lelouch realized this. Lelouch also realized that fear controls people. If you read the Book Dune, you'll see a similar scenario. It's the idea that with world-wide fear, you can create peace. This is seen through the observation that fear works at a small scale, but usually is affected by time. Both in Dune and in Code Geass.. the character realizes that if you create a monster that is big enough to become a symbol of immortality, peace, or at least "percieved peace" is actually possible. Lelouch decides to become this monster in full awareness of his real destiny. Monsters of such a scale are by their own plans, fated to be despised and have horrible lives. Hence, they usually become psychotic by choice. Or I should say, more completely psychotic an detached. Although I believe, personally, that Lelouch felt bad for the people he killed. He was a psychotic, childish little ****, but he had a heart bigger than most people. As I said before, he just had too much love, his emotions went into overdrive. You see this in the real world all the time. Love is dangerous.

    BTW, I understand you like Euphy, so it might be pointless to say this. And I really liked her as she was a symbol of innocence and love in a crappy world. But she was such a tool, and her decisions should have killed her much earlier than they did (although I don't think it was a good thing that Lelouch was so trigger-happy). The only reason she lived was because Lelouch loved her (yes, he was selfish).

    C.C. had a horrible deal. Her selfishness as a kid was understandable because she was exactly that, a kid. Her choices (that were forced upon her) at an age where she shouldn't make any choices lead to the development of her character to become what you see. For god's sake, all she wanted was to die, and the only way to do that was to force it upon someone else. If you live as long as she did, you become more than a human, that's why their deaths wasn't a big deal. Her problem is bigger than death, it's eternal life. She would be ok with anything Lelouch decided, as long as it brought her closer to the peace she seeked and we all seek when older. Maybe you don't see the curse that eternal life is, but I really understand her. I love my life, but I want to have kids, and I don't want to die after them. She didn't have the choice to lead a normal life. She was lucky enough to get to actually love people. Even if they were the ones supposed to kill her.

    I wrote too much, but it boils down to: She was cursed by a horrible fate, no matter what her choices were. I doubt anyone would become something different than her in those circumstances. She rolled the worst possible die. Much worse than any human could ever even understand. So yeah, I feel sorry for her. She never became able to undo herself of that curse. She's probably the most tragic character in the whole series.

    Oh, an btw: taking the Code Geass from Euphemia would have been impossible before she killed all those people. And taking it out after the event would have been the cruelest thing against euphy anyone could ever do. Unless you lie to her like that idiotic, extremely hypocritical murderer Suzaku did. Yes, I hate Sukaku more than Lelouch, he was the worst kind of murderer that could ever exist. His actions were disgusting.. no, he was a disgusting human being (beyond his idiotic, selfish and childish nature).

    Nanally must be one of my favorite character thought. She understood Lelouch's pain even if she didn't accept his actions. Her point of view is very close to mine. Even if she was a tool, and she didn't understand (at first), why Lelouch did what he did. Lelouch didn't have a choice in his actions. Due to his nature, there was no way that he was going to let things go on as they were. Nanally understood in the end, which makes it so much sadder, since all she wanted was to be with him. Nanally understood that Lelouch was not purely evil, he was just a little crazy. At least Euphy died with her heart intact. Lelouch died with his heart stained with blood, in a different circumstance he would have been a better person than most people.
    In your second paragraph you say, as so many others have, that Euphemia had to die for Lelouch's plan to work. And I can't understand what they or you mean.

    Did Lelouch promise some dark Cthulhuvian god to kill Euphie as a sacrifice in return for victory? Did the god warn him that if Euphie didn't die by a specified time the Black Knights would be defeated?

    Do members of Britannian royalty emit a magical radiation which gives victory to those on their side, a radiation which switches effects after death to give defeat to those on their side?

    Would killing Euphie magically cause hundreds of nightmares to appear at the Black Knight base, and magically give months of training in how to use them to hundreds of Black Knights?

    Would killing Euphie magically cause hundreds or thousands of Britannian soldiers to switch sides as though Lelouch had been able to geass them?

    And I don't see the importance of killing Euphemia to Japanese morale. Euphemia was the only Britnnian leader to offer to be good to the Japanese people, and all the Britannian soldiers had willing obeyed massacre orders from Clovis and Cornelia and who knows else in the past. Once Euphemia went bad, The Japanese would turn to Zero for salvation from Britannia. And Zero would prove his worth by coming with the Black knights to rescue those in the SAZ who were still alive, or by coming with the Black nights to rescue those in the SAZ who were still alive and kill Euphemia.

    Killing Euphemia would be just the icing on the cake of Zero's rescue mission, which no doubt resulted in the deaths of most of the soldiers who took part in the massacre. The Japanese would have a great victory to boost their morale with or without the death of Euphemia, and they would have a great task ahead of them, the liberation of all Japan, which they would have to steel themselves for, with or without the death of Euphemia.

    I say the death of Euphemia would not be a very important part of the morale equation, and that it would be better for Lelouch to trade Euphemia as a hostage for some material or other morale benefit for his cause. I say it was treason to the Japanese cause for Lelouch to kill Euphemia instead of capturing her and trading her for Suzaku and his Lancelot, for example.

    Of course Suzaku would not wait for permission from the Emperor to do whatever he had to do to save the girl he loved. And no matter how little the Emperor loved his children, he probably would not dare to forbid Cornelia to make a major concession to the rebels to save Euphie. Cornelia was one of his top generals, and a valuable counterweight against Schneitzel, one of his other top generals. And Cornelia and Schneitzel were both potential over throwers of Charles. Antagonizing Cornelia could be suicidal. But making a special effort to save Euphie from Lelouch would earn her gratitude. Charles, like Lelouch, seems to have trouble clearly recognizing how much he needed Euphemia's survival.

    For example, Euphemia was the only known Britannian leader who wanted to be kind to everyone. And she was just a few steps away from the throne. Lelouch should have planned to make her Empress, and failing that, he should have realized that he needed to keep her alive no matter what so that she would have some chance to reform Britannia if his plans failed. Euphemia should have been one of his back up plans.

    And Lelouch gloated to CC that the Emperor would have to come meet him once the rebels proclaimed an independent Japan in the Government Center in the Tokyo Settlement. So his big plan to defeat the inevitable Britannian attempts to reconquer Japan was to pretend that they wouldn't happen and that the Emperor would stick his head into a noose instead! Sometimes Lelouch could be even more naive, in an evil kind of way, than Euphie.

    Even with a live Euphemia Lelouch should have expected that the Emperor would consider it suicidal for hm to come to Japan, since he was hated much more than Euphemia and and even people who wouldn't kill a girl like Euphemia would gladly kill Charles. And with Euphemia dead coming to Japan would seem thousands of times more suicidal. Lelouch desperately needed a live Euphemia for his plan to have even the slightest chance to work. And he killed her anyway.

    You say that CC couldn't control Lelouch. But unless there was some kind of geass thing which made her have to support him (VV doesn't seem to have had such a geass thing) she could have tried to influence his actions for the better. She could have told him that command geasses usually wear off in ten years or twenty five years (if they do wear out instead of lasting for life) or that VV could undo the geass command.

    And don't say that Euphemia would be better off dead than coming out of her command and realizing what she did. Euphemia would not remember killing, she would merely be convinced through study of the evidence that her body had done it. She might remember Lelouch giving her the geass. So she would tell herself over and over again that her body had done it when she was insane or possessed by demons or bewitched or possibly controlled by a geass.

    And a girl as innocent as Euphemia probably already feels incredibly guilty. She probably feels the maximum possible amount of guilt already, so she would have to diminish some of her earlier guilt to make room for the new guilt and her total amount of guilt would remain the same.

    And the Emperor would probably reject her resignation from the imperial family and make her a viceroy or something, giving her a chance to atone by doing good on a massive scale. Euphemia would probably want to hide somewhere for the rest of her life and never have her name mentioned in the news -- only a chance to do a lot of good could force her to face publicity and imagine what millions of people thought about her every time she was mentioned in the news -- and she would be the kind of reformer who would be constantly mentioned in the news. I think that the Emperor would be willing to put up with letting Euphemia make millions of strangers happier for the sake of making her, someone he knew, unhappy, embarrassed, humiliated and ashamed.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-20-2009 at 09:55 PM.

  7. #32
    Tieria's girl kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku's Avatar
    Gil
    6,040.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    05-06-2010 06:51 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    In space on Ptolemy
    Age
    21
    Threads
    12
    Posts
    302
    Rep Power
    73

    Default

    @ proEuphie

    Words can't express how out of line your comments are. Zero Requiem is evil? Yeah right.
    Lelouch wasn't trigger happy, he HAD to kill Euphy.
    It seems like you don't like CG, at least to me. You just like Euphy.
    Aw, the wonderful sound of AF.

    Quote Originally Posted by BurntHouse View Post
    Robots one-up "love" simply by "obeying" you. Who needs love and respect when we can get fear and anguish instead? :3
    Quote Originally Posted by Condey View Post
    I can't think of any that come to mind at the moment, but my default response to a personal attack is "Your dog has hepatitas". It doesn't work all the time, but hoo-boy when it does, it works wonders.

  8. #33
    Junior Member Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero's Avatar
    Gil
    280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    06-20-2009 07:38 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Britannia, and sometimes Japan
    Age
    23
    Threads
    2
    Posts
    14
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    @proeuphie.
    You pompous idiot. As much as I love Euphie, believe me, I do, you're denouncing of the Zero Requiem is disgusting. Lelouch, a very not evil person, died for everyone in the world. Sounds Messianic to me. I'd rather have a long chat with Ipsoliln V about how much I suck then listen to your crap. Lelouch never meant to kill Euphie, I've accepted that. I can accept people hating me, but not Lelouch. I almost can't wait to die, so I can talk to Euphie about your ignorant comments.
    Attention haters. Don't flame me or this might happen to you!
    -Suzaku Kururugi

  9. #34
    Member Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V's Avatar
    Gil
    1,280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    07-15-2009 12:58 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    California
    Age
    24
    Threads
    3
    Posts
    64
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    Wii Code: Need to check

    Default

    @kimi no kioku
    Zero's requiem is indeed evil in the practice, not in it's intent. If you don't see why, then you need some growing up to do, you need to understand the value of life (which lelouch did not). He HAD to kill Euphy because of how deranged he was, otherwise he would never had gotten where he did, and he never would have killed Euphy (but the dictatorship would have prevailed). I see what you are trying to say though, and yes.. What lelouch did was ultimately a good thing, but he was still somewhat psychotic (and the creators clearly wanted to show this, since a lot of the scenes point towards that). If you don't see this, then you are as blind to your favorite characters as proEuphy is. And lelouch was indeed trigger happy, not in Euphy's case.. but he killed ANYONE who got in his way (very few exceptions). That's enough to label you as trigger happy.

    @Suzaku Kururugi Zero
    Why do you have to insult people. She might have a biased point of view, but at least she argues in a respectable manner.

    @proEuphy
    I think you don't quite get what people mean when they say Lelouch "had" to kill Euphy. It's not that he was bound by destiny. He was bound by his plan and his mental processes. You need to understand how Lelouch thinks, the idea that he will do ANYTHING for Nanally. Euphy was a serious roadblock in what Lelouch wanted the Japanese people to feel. Euphy wanted people to feel good in Britannia.. Lelouch wanted to make them feel like crap, he wanted them to hate Britannia, to feel like rebelling.

    Another important point. Lelouch wanted a long term effect on his plans, and Euphy's plan did not go well with this. Attaining peace through fear is something that goes beyond living happily with Britannia, so making Euphy the Emperor would have not achieved his goal of ultimate peace.

    Oh, and Lelouch didn't give a **** about Japan. I don't mean he hated them, or could have killed the entire people. But he used Japan as an excuse, he wanted ultimate peace. He wanted the perfect world for Nanally. But at the same time, he was a super weapon for Japan.

    An once Euphy did the killings.. she should never have woken up. Even if she was told of the Code Geass (which they didn't know till later), she would still have been the one who did the murders. It's not something that goes away, she was better off dead. And I mean that, even if I did like her character.

    C. C. was above humans at that point... she was closer to being a god. This is why human life was not the biggest deal to her, and Euphy was just another human. She was not evil, she was just at a different level, for her it was like seeing bugs getting killed. It's not a pretty thing to do, but if it means achieving such a thing as a long awaited death, then a few bugs dying is not going to phase you. If you don't understand this, then you are just much to blinded by your hatred towards her. She was a bigger victim than Euphy was... Euphy had a choice, C.C. did not. The more I talk about it, the worse I feel for C.C.

    You need to get a better grip on what it means when people say that something "has to happen". It's not that we like the fact, or that it's written in stone. It's that when you analyze all the factors that go into the equation, it's an inevitable fact. So it HAS to happen. It's like in science.. you have a law that could be disproven at any point, but until it proves itself to be otherwise, it remains as a fact.
    Last edited by Ipsilon V; 06-20-2009 at 03:05 PM.

  10. #35
    Junior Member Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero has a reputation beyond repute Suzaku Kururugi Zero's Avatar
    Gil
    280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    06-20-2009 07:38 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Britannia, and sometimes Japan
    Age
    23
    Threads
    2
    Posts
    14
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Sorry, I didn't mean to insult anyone.
    Attention haters. Don't flame me or this might happen to you!
    -Suzaku Kururugi

  11. #36
    Tieria's girl kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku has a reputation beyond repute kimi no kioku's Avatar
    Gil
    6,040.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    05-06-2010 06:51 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    In space on Ptolemy
    Age
    21
    Threads
    12
    Posts
    302
    Rep Power
    73

    Default

    @ Ipsilon V
    I hate R1 Lelouch with a passion. He is Light Yagami3 and Sakaki2. He didn't want to kill Euphy. I meant, by the end of the show, Lelouch is a great man. Please just argue with me, do not insult me.
    Aw, the wonderful sound of AF.

    Quote Originally Posted by BurntHouse View Post
    Robots one-up "love" simply by "obeying" you. Who needs love and respect when we can get fear and anguish instead? :3
    Quote Originally Posted by Condey View Post
    I can't think of any that come to mind at the moment, but my default response to a personal attack is "Your dog has hepatitas". It doesn't work all the time, but hoo-boy when it does, it works wonders.

  12. #37
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kimi no kioku View Post
    @ proEuphie

    Words can't express how out of line your comments are. Zero Requiem is evil? Yeah right.
    Lelouch wasn't trigger happy, he HAD to kill Euphy.
    It seems like you don't like CG, at least to me. You just like Euphy.
    I didn't say that the Zero Requiem was evil. I said that that it was evil to make Zero the hero who killed the evil Emperor Lelouch, instead of some new masked hero like Infinity, Numero Uno, Eighty eight, Lucky Seven, Googolplex, or whatever.

    The hero who killed the evil emperor Lelouch was bound to be admired and emulated. Unlike some new hero, Zero had a record. A record which included some evil deeds which were more or less public knowledge. If Zero became the new standard for greatness and goodness and heroism, Zero's evil deeds would be excused, just as so many CG fans excuse Lelouch's evil deeds. And Zero's evil deeds, such as ordering a massacre, would be emulated.

    In most wars and revolutions it is very hard not to accidentally kill innocent people, which is a very strong reason not to have any wars and revolutions.

    If someone is planning to start a conflict that he estimates will have 10,000 violence units and that the method of conflict will have one innocent child killed for every 5,000 violence units, he will estimate that about two innocent children would be likely to be killed in that conflict. If that is the case, he should go back to the drawing board and come up with a revised plan in which the conflict only has 3,500 violence units to reduce the predicted number of children killed to less than one. Or he should use a method of conflict that will result in only one innocent child killed per 15,000 violence units to have the same result.

    But killing someone who you know is innocent face to face, deliberately pointing the gun at him and pulling the trigger, is a much worse thing that fighting a conflict which you know is statistically likely to result in the deaths of one or more innocent persons. It can only be justified under extremely rare circumstances.

    Tom Goodwin's short story "The Cold Equations" http://baencd.thefifthimperium.com/1...498747__19.htm sets up a situation in which a number of people will die unless one innocent person is killed. And see the discussion of the fictional universe of that story here: http://home.tiac.net/~cri_d/cri/1999/coldeq.html

    Suppose that you get into an argument with a stranger, telling her that it can never be right to kill an innocent person. Unknown to you, the stranger is supervillain Ima Devil. So you regain consciousness tied up and able to move only one finger, which can press one button on a control device. Ima Devil tells you that the button will cause a needle to inject an innocent baby with a deadly poison.

    The baby has been left on the steps of an orphanage and will be picked up when they make their scheduled rounds at Nine PM. The baby has a deadly disease which will soon turn into the airborne form and infect and kill all the other babies in the orphanage. But if you press the button now the baby will die and cool off and the disease will die, saving the other babies.

    So if you can trust Ima Devil (a big if) you might decide you have to kill one innocent baby to save others.

    In "The Cold Equations" an innocent person has to be killed because she will die anyway in a few minutes, and other people will die soon if she isn't killed. There is no way of escaping it. The laws of nature make it inevitable.

    In my example, if Ima Devil can be trusted, an innocent baby has to be killed because it is dying of a deadly disease anyway and other innocent babies will die soon if that baby is not killed now. There is no way of escaping it. The laws of nature make it inevitable.

    Is there any law of nature which made it inevitable that Euphemia would have soon died anyway if Lelouch hadn't shot her? No. If she was rescued by Suzaku a few seconds earlier, or if Lelouch captured her and kept her safe as a prisoner, just as Sam Houston keep Santa Anna prisoner after San Jacento, she could have lived for many decades longer.

    Is there any physical law which made it inevitable that Euphemia would kill more Japanese people if Lelouch let her live, perhaps shooting them with the machine gun that Lelouch so inexplicably let her pick up and keep? No. Obviously Euphemia could have been confined which would leave her very little chance of ever killing any more Japanese people.

    The case of Euphemia does not meet either of the criteria for making it necessary to purposefully kill a person you know is innocent. Lelouch did not have to kill Euphy. He chose to kill her for unknown reasons.

    Before I saw episode 23 I read that Lelouch was forced to shoot Euphemia in it. I thought that was a terrible plot development, but I trusted that source and believed that there would be a situation in which Lelouch was forced to kill Euphemia. And I would have hated it but I would have accepted it as a necessary action, like that in "The Cold Equations". But when I saw episode 23 I saw Lelouch shoot Euphemia without having to, without being forced by circumstances to shoot her, while having many options to capture her alive. I saw what I think is one of the worst murders ever shown on tv.

    And after seeing that, I lost all interest in the world of Code geass except as it relates to Euphemia, who I now think is the most interesting thing in that world. I can't enjoy watching evil people fight other evil people. I need at least one leader or follower who never commits or condons a single evil deed.

    You say words cannot express how far out of line my comments are. May I respectfully suggest "nanometer"?
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-20-2009 at 09:51 PM.

  13. #38
    Member Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V's Avatar
    Gil
    1,280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    07-15-2009 12:58 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    California
    Age
    24
    Threads
    3
    Posts
    64
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    Wii Code: Need to check

    Default

    I can't enjoy watching evil people fight other evil people. I need at least one leader or follower who never commits or condons a single evil deed.
    There is no such thing. Euphemia was never a leader, she was a tool. And leaders are supposed to make sacrifices for the greater good of his people. Blood is bound to be shed in the imperfect world we live in. You live your comfortable life because someone out there is dirtying his hands in blood so that you don't. If you don't understand this, then you are lying to yourself.

    @kimi no kioku
    I don't remember insulting anyone, except characters... if I did, please tell me because I really didn't mean to.

    Lelouch has a big heart, hence he is a good person at heart. but as I said.. he loved to much and got the wrong ideas. You can't live making someone happy "by all means necessary" as Lelouch intended to. It makes you evil.. it makes you a monster. He massacred people, and cheated his friends. At the same time, I feel he felt bad for it deep down. I also feel he loved a lot, his morals and ethics were too screwed up. He was also somewhat a kid with too much power, which lessens the evil. Did he die a good man.. I don't believe anyone who dies a murderer, can die as a good man. He did however, lead a life that benefited the world, and died for the people he loved, and even many of those he didn't.

    Personally, I think he was a good person who made the wrong decisions. I liked his intention, and I think he was a great person.. but I could never agree with his choices. As I said, I have the same views of him as Nanally did in the end (With exception of the sisterly love and all that). He was a necessary evil... what he did achieved good, but his means were screwed up. Had I been there, I would have probably helped him (if i were japanese that is), but as an observer, my morals prevent me from making his choices right. It is totally hypocritical, but if we want to be good, we have to be hypocritical, there's no other way. Unfortunately.

    I also don't like the method of using fear to create peace... Were I in his shoes would I make the same choice.. maybe, but it would consume me. And I wouldn't want anyone to consider me a good person, because I wouldn't have considered me as much.
    Last edited by Ipsilon V; 06-20-2009 at 11:45 PM.

  14. #39
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    There is no such thing. Euphemia was never a leader, she was a tool. And leaders are supposed to make sacrifices for the greater good of his people. Blood is bound to be shed in the imperfect world we live in. You live your comfortable life because someone out there is dirtying his hands in blood so that you don't. If you don't understand this, then you are lying to yourself.
    You say that there is no such thing as a leader who never does or condones anything evil? Well, some are a lot more evil than others. Some care much more or much less than others about limiting the death and suffering to achieve their goals.

    And why do you say that Euphemia was never a leader but a tool? Do you limit your definition of a leader to a supreme leader, and leave out all the lesser leaders who are also partly followers of higher leaders? If you admit that a subordinate can also be a leader then Euphemia was a military leader at the Battle of Narita where she made combat command decisions.

    And leaders should not make sacrifices for the greater good of their people. Their real duty is not to their own people but to all people, no matter how foreign. And don't blame bloodshed on this imperfect world. Blame it on imperfect people.

    If there was only one sovereign government ruling all the world, the bloodshed in war would be impossible. If crime could be eliminated, the bloodshed in crime could be eliminated -- and some societies have lower rates of violent crime than others, so violent crime can be reduced, at least. If methods of synthesizing animal protein are invented, the bloodshed in hunting and slaughterhouses can be reduced or eliminated.

    Don't say that there will always be bloodshed, or you run the risk of slightly increasing the probability that the statement will be true, by giving people excuses for not finding ways to reduce bloodshed.

    And do you really think that my (vegetable) food comes mostly from bloodshed, or that my clothes come mostly from bloodshed, or that my money comes mostly from bloodshed, or that anything else that makes my life comfortable comes mostly from bloodshed instead of from hard work, or invention, or the functioning of social organizations, or from the free market, etc.?

    It is true that there are many dangerous people who would like to make my life less comfortable and more dangerous. But I think your comments show a slightly exaggerated view of the danger posed by the menace of the moment. Until Utopia is achieved there will always be at least one menace of the moment, and defeating them or containing them will always be a good thing. But it will rarely be the most important factor in making the world a better place to live in.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-21-2009 at 09:08 PM.

  15. #40
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie

    We differ too much on our views of both Lelouch and C.C. I won't say they were right, and I won't say they weren't a little crazy. I compare C.C. to Lucy from Elfen Lied. I've never felt more sorry any other character (fictional of course) in my life than towards Lucy, and she was a psychotic murderer.

    Euphemia had to die for Lelouch's plan to work.. does that make it ok? of course not, but it makes her death obvious. C.C had no control (I believe, and this is a subjective matter since it's not stated in the anime) over lelouch's actions. By that time, she was merely an observer of Lelouch's actions.

    If Euphemia had to die for Lelouch's plan to work, he should have come up with a better plan. I'm not sure if you mean his plan for the Black Rebellion, or his overall plan to make peace through fear. I say that with the information available to Lelouch Euphemia had to live for the emperor to have even the tiniest chance of coming to Japan after the Black Rebellion.

    As for making peace through fear. Suppose that Lelouch decided that Euphemia's threat of making Britannia kinder was a threat to his plans (as you say he did) but decided against killing her because that was too evil (Ha! Ha!) or would upset Nunnally to much (a more plausible motivation for him) or he still loved her too much (possible, I guess) . If so, he would try to work Euphie into his plans.

    He would get all the rebel groups in Japan to pretend to give up while secretly still arming and preparing. And he would geass important Britannian leaders in Japan to build a 200-foot high statue of Emperor Charles and invite the Emperor to the dedication ceremony. And the Black Knights would emerge from the hidden tunnels during the ceremony and capture the Emperor and all the dignitaries. Lelouch would geass the Emperor, who would then be rescued by Britannian forces secretly under Lelouch's control. He would return to Pendragon and abdicate in favor of Euphemia (and Lelouch would probably have him killed under circumstances which would not point to Lelouch).

    Euphemia would reign with much kindness, and much of the intelligence of her government would be provided by her long-lost brother Lelouch who would emerge from hiding now that he felt safe. Euphemia would never do anything cruel, and with Lelouch's advice she would never do anything stupid or foolish, so her reign would be a happy one. Until Lelouch suddenly seized power and deposed her. Euphie and Nunnally would be thrown into a dungeon and never let out except to be forced to witness Lelouch's mass executions and other acts of cruelty. And when Euphie begged to be whipped or tortured in place of her people he would agree and laughingly call her a fool.

    The evil Emperor Lelouch would build up his armed forces and conquer the world with incredible ease, due to his military genius and secretly geassing enemy leaders to play into his hands. And his reign of terror would sweep over the world. And then he would be assassinated, and the beloved Euphemia would be restored to the Britannian throne.

    And Nunnally would be much safer as the beloved sister and companion of the Empress than as the Empress herself, in danger of assassination. And she would have someone she loved alive.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie
    Let me explain my views on Lelouch though, as I also felt sorry for him. Lelouch was a man who's humanity went into overdrive. He was a very loving guy, but he deluded himself into believing it was ok for him to take care of a loved one with "any means necessary." His love turned him into a monster. However, this monster became a key to a revolution that was needed. Because don't lie to yourself thinking that the liberators from the real world were all good. It's sucks to believe so, but blood is a necessity for revolution. Huge amounts of it. Lelouch realized this. Lelouch also realized that fear controls people. If you read the Book Dune, you'll see a similar scenario. It's the idea that with world-wide fear, you can create peace. This is seen through the observation that fear works at a small scale, but usually is affected by time. Both in Dune and in Code Geass.. the character realizes that if you create a monster that is big enough to become a symbol of immortality, peace, or at least "percieved peace" is actually possible. Lelouch decides to become this monster in full awareness of his real destiny. Monsters of such a scale are by their own plans, fated to be despised and have horrible lives. Hence, they usually become psychotic by choice. Or I should say, more completely psychotic an detached. Although I believe, personally, that Lelouch felt bad for the people he killed. He was a psychotic, childish little ****, but he had a heart bigger than most people. As I said before, he just had too much love, his emotions went into overdrive. You see this in the real world all the time. Love is dangerous.
    Yes, I have also thought that Lelouch's love might have been the weakness that lead him into evil. If the world of Code geass has anything like a devil or tempter, that tempter would probably have used Lelouch's love for Nunnally and/or for everybody to lead him to evil. Because Lelouch turned anti-Britannian but he still thought like a Britannian in many ways, thinking that only war and revolution can make a better world.

    You say that Lelouch's revolution was needed. I don't see why. Britannia had a good chance of conquering the world (with a lot of bloodshed, true). Over the decades and the centuries the Britannians and the numbers would gradually merge into one people and Britannian oppression would be lifted. But the Britannian peace would continue for hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of years.

    You say that huge amounts of blood are needed for revolution. What about the revolution of Jacksonian Democracy in the 1820s, which gave the vote to all white men instead of merely the upper and middle classes? That was a revolution. Can you give any examples of blood being shed in that revolution?

    What about the revolution that created free, compulsary, and universal public education? That was a great political revolution, taking money from the wealthy and the prosperous in the form of property taxes to pay for the education of every man's children, even the children of the poor. Can you point to any examples of bloodshed in
    that revolution?

    What about the political revolution of the Republican Party, with the homestead act, the land grant colleges, and so on? it is true that the anti-slavery plans of the Republicans caused the South to revolt and hundreds of thousands of lives to be lost. But that was a big surprise to the Republican leaders who thought that the South would peacefully go along with the gradual fading away of slavery.

    What about the suffragette movement to get the right to vote for women? That was a revolutionary movement.

    What about FDR's New Deal? Wasn't that a revolution?

    What about the Civil Rights movement and LBJ's Great Society? Weren't they revolutions?

    NO doubt there are many examples of bloodshed in those revolutions, but hardly the massive amounts that you imagine are necessary for a revolution.

    And don't say that the United States is an exception. When the anti-slavery movement started about 1750 there were millions of slaves around the world. By 1900 there were almost none. In the small nation of Haiti the slaves revolted and gained freedom in a bloody revolution. But just about everywhere else, in colonies and independent nations, republics and monarchies, reformers succeeded in freeing the slaves though mostly peaceful means. That was a very great revolution without much bloodshed, except in Haiti and the United States.

    To be continued.

    Continued 6/25/09. You say that massive amounts of blood are needed for a revolution. In 1848 there were revolutions all over Europe. In the Austrian Empire Emperor Ferdinand I abdicated in favor of his his eighteen-year-old nephew Franz Josef, who was committed to restoring absolute monarchy and making it work better than it had in the recent past. Just thirteen years later, in 1861, the Austrian parliament was created and given its first powers, which was not exactly a step forward for absolute monarchy. And in 1907 the vote was extended to all adult males in the Austrian Empire, due to a political initiative of the prime minster and Emperor Franz Josef.

    Some people would say that going from no parliament to one elected by universal male suffrage was a revolutionary change. But were bodies of the slain piled up in the streets, did the gutters drain blood down to the Danube and turn it red? No. Ordinary political processes persuaded Franz Josef to take each step backward from his goal of absolute monarchy in order to solve various political problems.

    I have written that slavery largely vanished in 150 years. Except for the Haitian Revolution, and the American Civil War, it was accomplished mostly by anti-slavery groups building up so much opposition to slavery that colonies and independent nations, republics and monarchies, abolished slavery one by one. There have been plenty of violent slave uprisings and revolts in history, and each of them resulted in a few of the revolting slaves escaping to freedom somewhere. But most of the rebel slaves were killed or sent back into an even harsher slavery. Haiti is the one great example of a successful slave revolt which established a new nation which has lasted for over two hundred years. Other slave revolts sometimes succeeded in establishing even smaller free societies which lasted much shorter than Haiti has, and most slave revolts were dismal failures.

    Between a hundred and a hundred and fifty nations gained independence during the last century. How many of them gained independence though rebellions and violent revolutions? Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Algeria, and a bunch of others, but only about ten or twenty percent of the total, I guess.

    How many rebel groups are there operating today who have been fighting for their cause for more than ten years? How many for more than twenty years? How many for more than thirty years? One of the most famous rebel groups today is the Tamil Tigers, who suffered a big defeat by the Shri Lankan army this year. The Tamil Tigers were founded about 1980, I believe.

    A few years ago Al Qaida killed hundreds of people in Madrid railway stations bombings. But at first they were blamed on the ETA, a terrorist organization fighting for an independent Basque nation since about 1960.

    But the Tamil Tigers and the ETA are not big failures in the world of rebels, freedom fighters, guerrillas, and terrorists. Failing to achieve their goals while remaining in existence for decades makes them a lot more successful than most such organizations, which fail to achieve their goals and disband or are crushed within a few months or years.

    If Lelouch knew that bloodbaths are necessary for revolutions he knew something which is not always true, since important revolutions often happen without bloodbaths, and of course bloodbaths usually don't lead to successful revolutions. So I find it hard to understand why Lelouch makes violent revolutions and rebellions and wars such a big part of his plans when he has the power of geass and could do a lot more with it than he does. I suspect that he still thinks too much like a Britannian and believes that war and rebellion is the only way to do things.

    You say that in the real world love is dangerous. I say the most dangerous form of love is love for your gang, or social class, or ethic group, or religion, or nation. People fight and kill and die for their groups because they love their groups not wisely but too well. That is why the Zero Requiem, which purges the world of hate, will fail to bring peace, because love for your own group,and not hate for the enemy, is the real root cause of war.

    And that is why international organizations like the League of Nations and the United Nations failed to bring peace, because they were more or less attempts by the leaders of the world and the peoples of the world to fool themselves into thinking that they didn't need to give up their beloved nations in order to have peace. And that is why the United Federation of Nations will probably fail too, because the member nations have not have their independence abolished. They haven't surrendered to an invader and been conquered, and they haven't agreed of their own free will to be annexed by a world government. And the individual people of each nation have not each made a break with the past by renouncing loyalty to the old nation and giving their loyalty to the new world government.

    I say that nations behave like the most evil characters in Code Geass. They always have and they always will. The way to have peace is to abolish all nations. People refuse to accept that because they are addicted to their nations and to their feelings of successful patriotism that they get from knowing that their nations still exist.

    But if they are to protect the lives of all the children who will be born in the future, hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of years of the future, they will have to abolish all independent nations and create one world government with sovereignty over all the subordinate governments of the world to keep the peace forever.

    Of course the old national governments of the world could still exist as subordinate dependent governments under a world government. The thirteen original colonies united under the articles of Confederation and later the United States constitution to become dependent governments. And most, though not all, Native Americans are reasonably content that their tribal governments are dependent units of the United States and no longer independent.

    In Star Trek the United States still exists as part of the United Earth which is a member of the United Federation of Planets. In Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Benjamin Sisco is a native of New Orleans in the state of Louisiana in the United States of America in the United Earth in the United Federation of Planets. In one episode a Dominion representative tells Sisco that the Federation can still exist if it joins the Dominion, and Sisco rejects the idea out of hand, like an American rejecting the idea of joining the United Earth or a Virginian rejecting the idea of joining the United States. Sisco doesn't even say anything about trusting the Dominion to keep its promises, he just rejects the idea as being a bad thing, even though he disagrees with the attitudes of those Earth people who opposed joining the United Federation of Planets centuries earlier.

    Eventually the Federation and other powers fight a terrible war with the Dominion. In one episode someone predicts that the Federation will lose the war and six hundred billion people will be killed, so I expect that billions are killed in the war. And nobody ever explains clearly why billions of deaths are better than joining the Dominion. Though many of its representatives are shown to be shifty and cruel, I never heard any propaganda speeches telling people how terrible it would be to be ruled by the Dominion and justifying the war.

    quote=Ipsilon V;2284249]@proEuphie
    uote=Ipsilon V;2284249]@proEuphie
    BTW, I understand you like Euphy, so it might be pointless to say this. And I really liked her as she was a symbol of innocence and love in a crappy world. But she was such a tool, and her decisions should have killed her much earlier than they did (although I don't think it was a good thing that Lelouch was so trigger-happy). The only reason she lived was because Lelouch loved her (yes, he was selfish). [/quote]

    What happened to Ipsilon V's quote box? what did I do to make it dissappear?

    proEuphie's response
    I don't understand why her decisions should have made Lelouch kill her any sooner than he did. Her plan for the
    SAZ was the first thing that she did that angered him. Before that he pointed a gun at her only because she was her father's daughter. I don't know if Lelouch ever even heard that Euphemia was a subordinate commander at the Battle of Narita, which might have angered him.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie
    C.C. had a horrible deal. Her selfishness as a kid was understandable because she was exactly that, a kid. Her choices (that were forced upon her) at an age where she shouldn't make any choices lead to the development of her character to become what you see. For god's sake, all she wanted was to die, and the only way to do that was to force it upon someone else. If you live as long as she did, you become more than a human, that's why their deaths wasn't a big deal. Her problem is bigger than death, it's eternal life. She would be ok with anything Lelouch decided, as long as it brought her closer to the peace she seeked and we all seek when older. Maybe you don't see the curse that eternal life is, but I really understand her. I love my life, but I want to have kids, and I don't want to die after them. She didn't have the choice to lead a normal life. She was lucky enough to get to actually love people. Even if they were the ones supposed to kill her.

    I wrote too much, but it boils down to: She was cursed by a horrible fate, no matter what her choices were. I doubt anyone would become something different than her in those circumstances. She rolled the worst possible die. Much worse than any human could ever even understand. So yeah, I feel sorry for her. She never became able to undo herself of that curse. She's probably the most tragic character in the whole series.
    I say you are wrong. Life is infinitely better than death.

    People commonly imagine that intense pain is the worst thing possible and that intense pleasure is the best thing possible, and imagine that death is halfway between the two extremes and is kind of neutral.

    I say death is the worst condition imaginable, and picture it at the center of an infinite circle. On the circle infinitely far from death and infinitely better than death you will find the worst pain possible and the greatest pleasure possible and lesser pains and pleasures between meeting at a neutral sensation halfway between the greatest pain and the greatest pleasure. And all these types and degrees of sensation are equally and infinitely distant from and better than death.

    If you are a member of the Judeo-Christian-Muslim religious tradition you may have wondered how an infinitely merciful God could condemn finitely evil sinners to infinite punishment in the afterlife. If any kind of an afterlife is infinitely better than death then the infinitely merciful God does not punish even the worst of sinners at all. He rewards saints and sinners equally by giving them eternal life in the afterlife. However, in order to influence the living to be good, he sends the the good to heaven and the evil to hell, which mortals think is infinitely worse than heaven, but which God knows is actually equally as good as heaven, since it is infinitely better than death would be without an afterlife.

    I think that if you want to believe in an infinitely merciful God you have to believe that any afterlife, even hell, is infinitely better than death without an afterlife. And thus that life is infinitely better than death. But if you believe in an afterlife that is infinitely better than death, death is not so terrible after all since it is followed by an afterlife which would be infinitely better than eternal death.

    So I need to make you an atheist who does not believe in an afterlife but who does believe that life is infinitely better than death. However, the only way I have thought of so far to convince people that life must be infinitely better than death is to use their belief (if any) in an infinitely merciful God who created heaven and hell. Sometimes logic can be frustrating.

    Anyway, I believe that life is infinitely better than death and death without some kind of supernatural or technological afterlife is the worst fate imaginable. If CC longs for death she is, in my opinion, insane.

    You say that you want to have children and don't want to out live them. I had an ancestor who lived from 1746 to 1841, who had a lot of children, grandchildren, etc. And in those days a lot of people died in early childhood, so she outlived a lot of her descendants. She outlived all but one of her ten children. she had thirty or forty grandchildren, and many of them died as infants before she did. Some of them died as adults before she did. She had a big bunch of great grandchildren born before she died, as well as many more in the decades after wards. A lot of them died as infants before she did, and probably some of them died as adults before she did. I don't remember, but some of her great grandchildren who died before her might have left children. She had seven great great grandchildren born before she died (one as early as 1835) and many, many more born in later decades (one in 1906 who had younger siblings). Some of her great great grand grandchildren died in infancy before her.

    Did she feel lucky or unlucky to outlive so many of her descendants? Probably both at different times.

    I used to wonder what it would be like if someone I loved died and how I could bear to survive that. Since then three of my grandparents and a parent have died, and I seem to be about as happy as I ever was. Perhaps my desire to escape from human emotion has made me callous and indifferent compared to most people, perhaps most people carry on as well as I seem to have.

    [quote=Ipsilon V;2284249]@proEuphie

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie
    Oh, an btw: taking the Code Geass from Euphemia would have been impossible before she killed all those people. And taking it out after the event would have been the cruelest thing against euphy anyone could ever do. Unless you lie to her like that idiotic, extremely hypocritical murderer Suzaku did. Yes, I hate Sukaku more than Lelouch, he was the worst kind of murderer that could ever exist. His actions were disgusting.. no, he was a disgusting human being (beyond his idiotic, selfish and childish nature).
    You are wrong to say that Euphie was better off dead after the Fuji Massacre. I say that nobody could possibly be better off dead.

    And in Euphemia's case guilty feelings are not all that terrible. Remember that many people who are tortured refuse to end their torture and die by giving the torturers what they want, and that guilty feelings rarely wring screams of agonized pain out of those who suffer them, unlike physical torture.

    Remember that Lelouch told her he would make her shoot him, and later said that he could make her do anything. So she might simply believe that Lelouch used that power on her. And Euphemia believed that she couldn't kill and that killing was terribly evil (not just something she could not do, or she wouldn't have been so upset by the thought of killing) and she loved her sister Cornelia who killed many thousands or possibly even millions of people. I think that if Euphemia can bear the guilt of not killing her beloved sister to save thousands of lives she can bear the guilt of her body killing thousands of people while under someone else's control.

    Didn't you write that leaders make the decisions to commit crimes so that their followers are spared the guilt? Then Euphie might accept that she was just a follower in the Fuji massacre, obeying not through any conscious decision but through an irresistible external force, and that she was more innocent than any other follower ever.

    I think that anyone as innocent as Euphemia who loves people as evil as most of her family either already suffers from the maximum possible amount of guilt, so that any new guilt does not add to her burden, or else has found ways to convince herself, most of the time, that she does not share the collective guilt because she tries to make things better (which can be adapted to convince herself that she is not evil because all the rest of her life she has tried to do good).

    How can you say that Suzaku was the worst kind of murderer who could exist? In "Battle of Narita" LLoyd says that Suzaku fights without killing, and I don't think Suzaku killed anyone in the first season before Lelouch killed Euphemia. I believe that Suzaku killed millions of people using F.R.E.I.J.A. during the second season, because he turned evil and bitter after the murder of Euphemia, or because of Lelouch's geass command to survive. If you say that Lelouch's geass command was not the reason why Suzaku killed millions, then you still have to explain why the circumstances that Suzaku used F.R.E.I.J.A. in were so much worse than the circumstances that Nunnally used it in, to make her the second, third, or fourth, worst kind of murderer.

    And if you mean killing his father to stop the resistance to the Britannian invasion and thus saving thousands or millions of lives, each of them worth more than the independence of all the nations that ever were, are, or will be, then than I say that was probably the most justified homicide in all of anime, and infinitely better than the shot which killed Euphemia and led to Nina joining the F.R.EI.J.A. development tream and helping to perfect it sooner, in time to kill millions in the wars of the second season.

    [quote=Ipsilon V;2284249]@proEuphie

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @proEuphie
    Nanally must be one of my favorite character thought. She understood Lelouch's pain even if she didn't accept his actions. Her point of view is very close to mine. Even if she was a tool, and she didn't understand (at first), why Lelouch did what he did. Lelouch didn't have a choice in his actions. Due to his nature, there was no way that he was going to let things go on as they were. Nanally understood in the end, which makes it so much sadder, since all she wanted was to be with him. Nanally understood that Lelouch was not purely evil, he was just a little crazy. At least Euphy died with her heart intact. Lelouch died with his heart stained with blood, in a different circumstance he would have been a better person than most people.
    As I say elsewhere Lelouch did have a choice, and did choose otherwise in some alternate universes, no matter how few they were compared to the ones in which he did what he did in the series. A person's character does not make his choices inevitable; it merely makes some more probable than others. And though Lelouch was not purely evil, you (or Nunnally) are going too far to say he was just a little crazy. He was very intelligent, but a lot evil, and a lot crazy, and a lot twisted by thinking like a Britannian despite being anti-Britannian.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 07-05-2009 at 08:01 PM.

  16. #41
    Member Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V is infamous around these parts Ipsilon V's Avatar
    Gil
    1,280.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    07-15-2009 12:58 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    California
    Age
    24
    Threads
    3
    Posts
    64
    Rep Power
    0
    Gamer IDs

    Wii Code: Need to check

    Default

    I understand that thinking that something WILL happen, increases the probability that it will. But I also think that it is disrespectful towards the people who lived and died for me to lead the life I do today; to ignore the reality of the human nature. As long as we are all different, there will be violence. I would love to believe in the possibility of a perfect world, but if I live with that dream, and ignore the reality of our current world, I will be a useless human being. Perfection is impossible, and therefore so is perfect peace. All we can strive for is a semblance to it, and as long as we want to be free, we will get further away from such a goal. Nothing is free, and your freedom is at the expense of something else.

    And to answer your question, yes.. your comfortable life is at the expense of blood (of course not in every respect). You know why the U. S. is the biggest economy in America? Well, go check to see if any country used slaves to the extent the U.S. did. Your life is so great because your ancestors destroyed the life of those slaves (This is an example for the U.S. but it translates to any other country with different variables.). And this is a fact of how humanity and society works. It's the reason for why all Utopia's failed, the only way to live in a perfect world is to accept this flawed world as the perfect world. And most people can't do that for obvious reasons.

    Euphy was a dreamer... Leaders are not in a place to be dreamers. They are supposed to see reality and act accordingly for their people. If they don't live for THEIR people, there will be casualties. And it is human nature to put the ones you love before others and yourself.

    And Euphy was not a leader because she did not understand how the world works. She thought short-term.. and one thing Lord Leto has taught us is that we need to think long-term if we want to create real, positive change (Dune). Lelouch realized this too, it's like chess.. you can't think one step ahead.. you need to think all possibilities many steps ahead and act for the good of your team.

    Euphy was never a leader because she didn't understand what it takes to be a leader. And she didn't have the strength to create real change. She was too nice to create real change. She was a tool because she was used all along. And when she made her own choices, she created more pandemonium... she had no place in politics. Her inability to think several steps ahead caused unnecessary and useless death. She wasn't a leader to any extent of the word.. not in heart and not in practice.

    Even nanally was more of a leader than Euphy, she understood the role of a leader. She made the choice to shoulder the death of countless people so that her people didn't have to. It's the same choice leaders in the past have made for us. It is the reason for why our comfortable life is tainted with blood. Leaders in the past have made moral sacrifices, made themselves monsters in order for you to be "pure". But how can we live as such when we know what they did? And lelouch also did this in the end, although his intentions were a little more selfish.

    Lelouch intended Zero to become a immortal symbol of death to any dictator who went out of line. He wanted them to fear that, and make decisions accordingly. This is why Lelouch HAD to die... and also why Euphy HAD to die (Although they had to for different reasons). I have to leave, so if it's still unclear I'll explain later.

  17. #42
    Junior Member Burn244 has a spectacular aura about Burn244 has a spectacular aura about Burn244 has a spectacular aura about Burn244's Avatar
    Gil
    120.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    06-21-2009 11:39 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Age
    25
    Threads
    1
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    It was a proper conclusion to the series, but the storyline seemed to be rushed towards the end.

  18. #43
    Member Sickness is an unknown quantity at this point Sickness's Avatar
    Gil
    760.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    06-25-2009 04:03 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Threads
    2
    Posts
    38
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I agree with Burn244
    anime was really in chaos with lots of idiots in it that can't understand sh1t... Lelush and Suzaku kicked some *** in end, but it failed to satisfy me enough. (there should have been more action with a little humor, could turn out into much better anime, and more pleasant to watch).
    Even the blooming flowers will eventually fade. Even our world is not eternal. The deep mountains of vanity cross them today and superficial dreams shall no longer delude you.

  19. #44
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suzaku Kururugi Zero View Post
    @proeuphie.
    You pompous idiot. As much as I love Euphie, believe me, I do, you're denouncing of the Zero Requiem is disgusting. Lelouch, a very not evil person, died for everyone in the world. Sounds Messianic to me. I'd rather have a long chat with Ipsoliln V about how much I suck then listen to your crap. Lelouch never meant to kill Euphie, I've accepted that. I can accept people hating me, but not Lelouch. I almost can't wait to die, so I can talk to Euphie about your ignorant comments.
    You say that Lelouch was not a very evil person.

    I define an evil person as someone who has, as a matter of historic fact, committed at least one evil deed and has not repented sufficiently of at least one of his evil deeds. Lelouch committed at least two deeds which seem totally evil to me, 1) murderng Euphemia when he could have captured her alive just as fast, just as easy, and just as safely for the Japanese and himself, and 2) ordering the geass directorate massacre when the people there could probably have been captured and the evil ones geassed to do good and/or obey Lelouch in the future.

    I say that murdering Euphemia instead of capturing her, and ordering the geass directorate massacre, were two totally evil deeds which were not necessary for the success of his plans or achieving his goals, and so can not be justified by how good and noble you might think that his goals and/or achievements were.

    And I believe that the Brittannian-Chinese royal marriage in the second season represented the best chance to unify the whole world and end war forever. By preventing the marriage and stopping Britannian conquest Lelouch freed the world from Britannian tyranny which would have lasted for just a few centuries until the Britannians and the numbers gradually merged into one new people, and prevented the Britannian peace which might have lasted for countless thousands and millions of years. And thus Lelouch is responsible for all the millions and billions and possibly trillions of men and women and children slaughtered in all the future wars which would have been prevented by the Britannian conquest and unification of the world.

    This belief is somewhat controversial, but if it is correct Lelouch could be the most evil person ever in the history of his world, though in both his world and ours there have been so terribly many, many competitors for that title.

    So Lelouch has committed some totally evil deeds. And since sufficient repentance should require at least the rejection of the cause or goal for which the evil deed was committed, Lelouch could not have repented of his evil deeds unless he turned against the purposes for which they had been committed. That would mean turning around and helping Britannia to rule Japan and conquer the world and making life more dangerous for Nunnally. Clearly Lelouch did not do that (except that his wars and rebellions endangered Nunnally as part of his efforts to make the world safer for her) and can not be said to have sufficiently repented.

    Thus LeLouch meets my definition of an evil person, no matter how good or evil his other actions and goals may have been.

    I did not say that the Zero Requiem was evil. I said that it was evil if and so far as it involved rehabilitating the reputation of Zero by having Zero be the one to kill the evil Emperor Lelouch instead of a new masked hero such as Googolplex, Numero Uno, Infinity, Lucky Seven, Eighty Eight, etc.

    Zero, the alter ego of Lelouch, committed a number of crimes and failed several times, and some of them were public knowledge. All the Black Knights knew that Zero had ordered the geass directorate massacre. Everybody knew that Zero had failed disastrously in attempts to liberate Japan, proving that he could break eggs a lot better than he could make omelets.

    So making Zero the hero of the Zero Requiem and the new idol of the world was not going to set a good example for those who would idolize Zero.

    You say that Lelouch never meant to kill Euphie. I say that Lelouch meant to kill Euphie for a large part or all of the seven years before 2017, though when he came face face to face with her in in "Black Knight" and "Island of the Gods" he could not make himself do such an obviously evil deed. And in "Bloodstained Euphie" he told her that he was going to make her shoot him, starting a riot which would spark off his revolution. And then he would miraculously revive and prove to the Japanese that he was their true messiah. So he was planning to trick tens, or hundreds, or thousands, of Japanese who wanted to live into dying for his revolution. That seems like a plan for mass murder to me.

    Did Lelouch expect that the Japanese would boo Euphie and throw rotten tomatoes at her? No, he expected that they were going to rush the stage in an attempt to kill her and would be shot down by the Britannian soldiers. They
    would be slaughtered until the Black Knights came to rescue the Japanese and slaughter the Britannians.

    Except that Euphie would come out of her geass command once she shot Lelouch and would do her best to restrain the Britannian soldiers and avert bloodshed. Lelouch had to order her to commit suicide as soon as she shot Lelouch (which would have robbed the Japanese of a target for their anger) or to do something for at least several minutes after shooting Lelouch, so she would not come out of her geass trance and do anything to pacify the situation.

    And if he was going to order her to do something after she shot him, it should be something which would inflame the situation even further and make a peaceful resolution even less possible.

    So perhaps Lelouch planned to order her to gather a bunch of Japanese prisoners near the stage to witness the miracle when his "dead" body came back to life, and to have the soldiers kill thousands of the Japanese and chase the survivors out of the stadium and scatter to hunt them down, which would make the Britannians just as easy targets for the Black Knights as they were in the actual Fuji Massacre. And about as many Japanese would have been killed as in the actual Fuji Massacre.

    What did Lelouch plan to do with Euphemia? If he had any plan to save or protect or spare her, he could have adapted that plan and used it in the massacre which followed to save, protect, or spare her. So he probably intended to kill her. Perhaps he had cameras instilled on the Gawain to record her death. His command to her could have included an instruction to act like she was trying to kill Zero and/or to shoot at the Japanese prisoners when Zero arose from "death", so Zero would seem a great hero when he shot her, and images of the deed could be used in Black night propaganda.

    Lelouch certainly did not mean to kill Euphemia in the few minutes in "Black Knight" after he pointed his gun at her and realized he couldn't make himself kill her and before they parted, and during several hours in "lsland of the Gods" after he pointed his gun at her and realized he couldn't kill her, and during several minutes in "Bloodstained Euphie" after he accepted the SAZ plan and before he geassed her. And perhaps he also did not mean to kill Euphie during many other periods of Code Geass and the seven years before it. But he probably meant to kill Euphie during many other periods of Code Geass and the seven years before it. He probably meant to kill Euphie every time that he thought about her between her announcement of the SAZ plan and his acceptance of it, and every second between reaching the Gawain at the end of "Bloodstained Euphie" and shooting her in "At Least With Sorrow".

    If you ever do meet Euphie she will probably say that Lelouch was not evil but just a little misguided. But if you described actions similar to his worst deeds to her and pretended that someone else did them she would be disgusted and say that person was evil despite all your efforts to justify those actions. She may say that it was right for Lelouch to kill her because she loves Lelouch and can't say anything bad about him. But if you describe the circumstances of her death to her with some disguise of the persons involved, she will say that nobody who could kill someone when it would have been so safe and easy to capture them alive could ever be good, that that was an evil murder which she would never thnk of doing herself in those circumstances.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-27-2009 at 09:42 PM.

  20. #45
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    I understand that thinking that something WILL happen, increases the probability that it will. But I also think that it is disrespectful towards the people who lived and died for me to lead the life I do today; to ignore the reality of the human nature. As long as we are all different, there will be violence. I would love to believe in the possibility of a perfect world, but if I live with that dream, and ignore the reality of our current world, I will be a useless human being. Perfection is impossible, and therefore so is perfect peace. All we can strive for is a semblance to it, and as long as we want to be free, we will get further away from such a goal. Nothing is free, and your freedom is at the expense of something else.

    And to answer your question, yes.. your comfortable life is at the expense of blood (of course not in every respect). You know why the U. S. is the biggest economy in America? Well, go check to see if any country used slaves to the extent the U.S. did. Your life is so great because your ancestors destroyed the life of those slaves (This is an example for the U.S. but it translates to any other country with different variables.). And this is a fact of how humanity and society works. It's the reason for why all Utopia's failed, the only way to live in a perfect world is to accept this flawed world as the perfect world. And most people can't do that for obvious reasons.

    Euphy was a dreamer... Leaders are not in a place to be dreamers. They are supposed to see reality and act accordingly for their people. If they don't live for THEIR people, there will be casualties. And it is human nature to put the ones you love before others and yourself.

    And Euphy was not a leader because she did not understand how the world works. She thought short-term.. and one thing Lord Leto has taught us is that we need to think long-term if we want to create real, positive change (Dune). Lelouch realized this too, it's like chess.. you can't think one step ahead.. you need to think all possibilities many steps ahead and act for the good of your team.

    Euphy was never a leader because she didn't understand what it takes to be a leader. And she didn't have the strength to create real change. She was too nice to create real change. She was a tool because she was used all along. And when she made her own choices, she created more pandemonium... she had no place in politics. Her inability to think several steps ahead caused unnecessary and useless death. She wasn't a leader to any extent of the word.. not in heart and not in practice.

    Even nanally was more of a leader than Euphy, she understood the role of a leader. She made the choice to shoulder the death of countless people so that her people didn't have to. It's the same choice leaders in the past have made for us. It is the reason for why our comfortable life is tainted with blood. Leaders in the past have made moral sacrifices, made themselves monsters in order for you to be "pure". But how can we live as such when we know what they did? And lelouch also did this in the end, although his intentions were a little more selfish.

    Lelouch intended Zero to become a immortal symbol of death to any dictator who went out of line. He wanted them to fear that, and make decisions accordingly. This is why Lelouch HAD to die... and also why Euphy HAD to die (Although they had to for different reasons). I have to leave, so if it's still unclear I'll explain later.
    I will respond to you eventually, and hope to show that Euphemia was probably a much more realistic leader than Charles, Lelouch, Scheitzel, Cornelia, Nunnally, Tinazi or Kaguya.. But I have to finish responding to your post # 29 first.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-27-2009 at 09:54 PM.

  21. #46
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    @kimi no kioku
    Zero's requiem is indeed evil in the practice, not in it's intent. If you don't see why, then you need some growing up to do, you need to understand the value of life (which lelouch did not). He HAD to kill Euphy because of how deranged he was, otherwise he would never had gotten where he did, and he never would have killed Euphy (but the dictatorship would have prevailed). I see what you are trying to say though, and yes.. What lelouch did was ultimately a good thing, but he was still somewhat psychotic (and the creators clearly wanted to show this, since a lot of the scenes point towards that). If you don't see this, then you are as blind to your favorite characters as proEuphy is. And lelouch was indeed trigger happy, not in Euphy's case.. but he killed ANYONE who got in his way (very few exceptions). That's enough to label you as trigger happy.

    @Suzaku Kururugi Zero
    Why do you have to insult people. She might have a biased point of view, but at least she argues in a respectable manner.

    @proEuphy
    I think you don't quite get what people mean when they say Lelouch "had" to kill Euphy. It's not that he was bound by destiny. He was bound by his plan and his mental processes. You need to understand how Lelouch thinks, the idea that he will do ANYTHING for Nanally. Euphy was a serious roadblock in what Lelouch wanted the Japanese people to feel. Euphy wanted people to feel good in Britannia.. Lelouch wanted to make them feel like crap, he wanted them to hate Britannia, to feel like rebelling.

    Another important point. Lelouch wanted a long term effect on his plans, and Euphy's plan did not go well with this. Attaining peace through fear is something that goes beyond living happily with Britannia, so making Euphy the Emperor would have not achieved his goal of ultimate peace.

    Oh, and Lelouch didn't give a **** about Japan. I don't mean he hated them, or could have killed the entire people. But he used Japan as an excuse, he wanted ultimate peace. He wanted the perfect world for Nanally. But at the same time, he was a super weapon for Japan.

    An once Euphy did the killings.. she should never have woken up. Even if she was told of the Code Geass (which they didn't know till later), she would still have been the one who did the murders. It's not something that goes away, she was better off dead. And I mean that, even if I did like her character.

    C. C. was above humans at that point... she was closer to being a god. This is why human life was not the biggest deal to her, and Euphy was just another human. She was not evil, she was just at a different level, for her it was like seeing bugs getting killed. It's not a pretty thing to do, but if it means achieving such a thing as a long awaited death, then a few bugs dying is not going to phase you. If you don't understand this, then you are just much to blinded by your hatred towards her. She was a bigger victim than Euphy was... Euphy had a choice, C.C. did not. The more I talk about it, the worse I feel for C.C.

    You need to get a better grip on what it means when people say that something "has to happen". It's not that we like the fact, or that it's written in stone. It's that when you analyze all the factors that go into the equation, it's an inevitable fact. So it HAS to happen. It's like in science.. you have a law that could be disproven at any point, but until it proves itself to be otherwise, it remains as a fact.

    Making Euphie the emperor after the Zero Requiem would have made Nunnally happier and safer. And I don't see how it would have interfered with the Zero Requiem. I thought that the Zero Requiem was supposed to rid the world of hate and that "everyone" would trust "everyone" else after it, so having a kind Britannian Empress like Euphemia would not interfere with its effects. And wasn't Nunnally going to be a kind Britannian empress like Euphemia would have been, without wrecking the effects of the Zero Requiem? Or was she going to be so tough and cruel that nobody would dare to harm her or Britannia?

    And you are wrong to say that Euphie was better off dead after the Fuji Massacre. I say that nobody could possibly be better off dead.

    And in Euphemia's case guilty feelings are not all that terrible. Remember that many people who are tortured refuse to end their torture and die by giving the torturers what they want, and that guilty feelings rarely wring screams of agonized pain out of those who suffer them, unlike physical torture.

    Remember that Lelouch told her he would make her shoot him, and later said that he could make her do anything. So she might simply believe that Lelouch used that power on her. And Euphemia believed that she couldn't kill and that killing was terribly evil (not just something she could not do, or she wouldn't have been so upset by the thought of killing) and she loved her sister Cornelia who killed many thousands or possibly even millions of people. I think that if Euphemia can bear the guilt of not killing her beloved sister to save thousands of lives she can bear the guilt of her body killing thousands of people while under someone else's control. Didn't you write that leaders make the decisions to commit crimes so that their followers are spared the guilt? Then Euphie might accept that she was just a follower in the Fuji massacre, obeying not through any conscious decision but through an irresistible external force, and that she was more innocent than any other follower ever.

    I think that anyone as innocent as Euphemia who loves people as evil as most of her family either already suffers from the maximum possible amount of guilt, so that any new guilt does not add to her burden, or else has found ways to convince herself, most of the time, that she does not share the collective guilt because she tries to make things better (which can be adapted to convince herself that she is not evil because all the rest of her life she has tried to do good).

    In response to my pointing out how evil it was for CC to help Lelouch murder a girl they both knew was innocent, you explained CC's reasons for doing so. That does not compute. Her reasons and motivations do not make the murder less of an injustice, or make me pity her more. And I don't see how eternal life can be so terrible for CC. I don't ever hear her screaming in agonized pain. And she doesn't even groan or sigh, or complain of slight mental pain the way most people a tenth of her age complain about chronic physical aches and pains. I just don't see her suffering.

    If you are right about CC believing that immortality was a terrible curse, then she was planning to fob it off on Lelouch and do to him what she considered to be the worst thing possible. (By the way, why didn't any of her countless previous geass users ever get to take the geass code from her? What prevented all of them?) And if Lelouch shared that belief he deliberately put a terrible curse on his former best friend after murdering the friend's girlfriend. And people say that Suzaku betrayed his friend when he dragged him off to the Emperor to have his wrist slapped.

    People do not have to do something because of their psychology. Their mental processes do not make their actions inevitable. Code Geass takes place in an alternate universe, so the many worlds version of quantum mechanics should be valid in the fictional universe of Code Geass, and thus countless gazllions of alternate universes should branch out every second.

    Every time you make a decision, countless billions of alternate universes branch out. If you are 70 percent likely to turn right and 30 percent likely to turn left, than you will turn right in 70 percent of the alternate universe and turn left in 30 percent. If you have a 0.00001 percent chance of murdering your mother at breakfast today you will murder her in 0.00001 percent of of the alternate universes and not murder her in 099.99999 percent of the alternate universes.

    So Lelouch had a 75 percent or 90 percent or 99 percent or 99.999 percent, or whatever the correct figures may be, probability of killing Euphemia and a 25 percent or 10 percent or 1 percent or 0.001 percent, or whatever the correct figures may be, probability of not murdering Euphemia. Which would still leave countless millions of alternate universes in which he didn't murder her.

    Lelouch did not have to murder Euphemia. Because he was evil he had a high probability of killing her and did kill her in many alternate universes, but did not kill her in many others.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 06-27-2009 at 11:18 PM.

  22. #47
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    I understand that thinking that something WILL happen, increases the probability that it will. But I also think that it is disrespectful towards the people who lived and died for me to lead the life I do today; to ignore the reality of the human nature. As long as we are all different, there will be violence. I would love to believe in the possibility of a perfect world, but if I live with that dream, and ignore the reality of our current world, I will be a useless human being. Perfection is impossible, and therefore so is perfect peace. All we can strive for is a semblance to it, and as long as we want to be free, we will get further away from such a goal. Nothing is free, and your freedom is at the expense of something else.

    And to answer your question, yes.. your comfortable life is at the expense of blood (of course not in every respect). You know why the U. S. is the biggest economy in America? Well, go check to see if any country used slaves to the extent the U.S. did. Your life is so great because your ancestors destroyed the life of those slaves (This is an example for the U.S. but it translates to any other country with different variables.). And this is a fact of how humanity and society works. It's the reason for why all Utopia's failed, the only way to live in a perfect world is to accept this flawed world as the perfect world. And most people can't do that for obvious reasons.

    Euphy was a dreamer... Leaders are not in a place to be dreamers. They are supposed to see reality and act accordingly for their people. If they don't live for THEIR people, there will be casualties. And it is human nature to put the ones you love before others and yourself.

    And Euphy was not a leader because she did not understand how the world works. She thought short-term.. and one thing Lord Leto has taught us is that we need to think long-term if we want to create real, positive change (Dune). Lelouch realized this too, it's like chess.. you can't think one step ahead.. you need to think all possibilities many steps ahead and act for the good of your team.

    Euphy was never a leader because she didn't understand what it takes to be a leader. And she didn't have the strength to create real change. She was too nice to create real change. She was a tool because she was used all along. And when she made her own choices, she created more pandemonium... she had no place in politics. Her inability to think several steps ahead caused unnecessary and useless death. She wasn't a leader to any extent of the word.. not in heart and not in practice.

    Even nanally was more of a leader than Euphy, she understood the role of a leader. She made the choice to shoulder the death of countless people so that her people didn't have to. It's the same choice leaders in the past have made for us. It is the reason for why our comfortable life is tainted with blood. Leaders in the past have made moral sacrifices, made themselves monsters in order for you to be "pure". But how can we live as such when we know what they did? And lelouch also did this in the end, although his intentions were a little more selfish.

    Lelouch intended Zero to become a immortal symbol of death to any dictator who went out of line. He wanted them to fear that, and make decisions accordingly. This is why Lelouch HAD to die... and also why Euphy HAD to die (Although they had to for different reasons). I have to leave, so if it's still unclear I'll explain later.
    My post # 50 is now my response and I tried to delete this post but couldn't figure out how.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 07-03-2009 at 09:31 PM.

  23. #48
    Junior Member cakelover123 will become famous soon enough cakelover123's Avatar
    Gil
    300.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    06-08-2010 03:01 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Threads
    0
    Posts
    15
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    i liked the ending even though it was the saddest anime ending i have ever seen. when lelouch died i thought of the end of death note but it was a lot different because unlike light lelouch chose death willingly and didn't lose his mind as he was dying and light was pretty much asking to be killled because he was being such a jerk

  24. #49
    Senior Member Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko has a reputation beyond repute Luluko's Avatar
    Gil
    4,680.00
    Gender
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    09-16-2009 12:44 PM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    4chan
    Age
    21
    Threads
    1
    Posts
    234
    Rep Power
    498

    Default

    Yes, I liked the ending very much. Like many people before me said, it was very fitting. It doesn't stop me from feeling sad for Lelouch and Suzaku, to an extent.

    Even though I raged from time to time because of R2's trainwreck-y plot twists, I didn't give up on it, and I'm glad... in a depressing kind of way.
    Pope hat gives you the power to flyyyy!

    Jibun Wooo~

  25. #50
    Senior Member proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie is infamous around these parts proEuphie's Avatar
    Gil
    9,537.87
    Gender
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Latest Post
    12-26-2010 12:10 AM
    User Info Thanks / Tagging Info Gifts / Achievements / Awards vBActivity Stats
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    someplace
    Threads
    19
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    I understand that thinking that something WILL happen, increases the probability that it will. But I also think that it is disrespectful towards the people who lived and died for me to lead the life I do today; to ignore the reality of the human nature. As long as we are all different, there will be violence. I would love to believe in the possibility of a perfect world, but if I live with that dream, and ignore the reality of our current world, I will be a useless human being. Perfection is impossible, and therefore so is perfect peace. All we can strive for is a semblance to it, and as long as we want to be free, we will get further away from such a goal. Nothing is free, and your freedom is at the expense of something else.
    I say you have to be disrespectful to those who killed and died for you. Because a lot of them committed war crimes which you have benefited from. If you are grateful to them you will be an accessory after the fact. I have reason to believe that I would never have been born if World War I and World War II had never been fought, or had been fought differently than they were and had different outcomes.

    But I am not going to be grateful to Adolf Hitler for starting world War II nor for any allied leaders or followers who committed war crimes which may have resulted in me being born. You claim that Euphemia would have been better off dead that living with the guilt she would have felt for the Fuji Massacre, which is nonsense. But guilt can be a heavy burden. I renounce and reject all war crimes which may have been done for me or which may have benefited me, and I reject all gratitude for those who risked or sacrificed their lives for me but also committed war crimes.

    The only way I know to not feel guilt is to not be guilty, and the only way I know to not be guilty for the actions of others is to not be grateful for them, to renounce all gratitude to them for their noble sacrifices on my behalf if those noble sacrifices are accompanied by evil crimes.

    You say that perfection is impossible, and therefore so is perfect peace. A peace that is merely the absence of war is imperfect but perfect enough for me, since war is the worst type of violence. You say you would be useless as a human being if you lived in the dream of a perfect world and ignored the reality. I say you will be far more useful as a human being if you have a dream of a perfect world, see the reality, and try to make the reality more perfect, more like the dream.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    And to answer your question, yes.. your comfortable life is at the expense of blood (of course not in every respect). You know why the U. S. is the biggest economy in America? Well, go check to see if any country used slaves to the extent the U.S. did. Your life is so great because your ancestors destroyed the life of those slaves (This is an example for the U.S. but it translates to any other country with different variables.). And this is a fact of how humanity and society works. It's the reason for why all Utopia's failed, the only way to live in a perfect world is to accept this flawed world as the perfect world. And most people can't do that for obvious reasons.
    You say that the wealth of the United States is due in part to slavery. My father's surname is rare. One family with the same surname are descended from a man who owned more slaves than anyone else in Westchester County, NY in colonial times. But even if my father was descended from that family, he inherited nothing from his father, and thus nothing from that slave owner generations back. And my mother's family was in the tobacco business and may have bought tobacco grown by slaves in the south.

    Anyway, if slavery contributed so much to the American economy, why is it that the slave owning South was so economically undeveloped compared to the North, and that the average white southerner was poorer than the average white northerner? Why did the northerners fear the extension of slavery if it clearly and obviously increased the general prosperity of slave owning areas? They feared the extension of slavery because they believed that it clearly and obviously decreased the general prosperity of slave owning regions.

    Claiming that the present prosperity of the United States is largely derived from the use of slave labor in past centuries is opening up the way for many arguments, pro and con, about the economic history of the US, and the colonies before it. And the same goes for claims that various other forms of oppression were or are necessary for the present prosperity of the United States. There can be a lot of arguments and discussion about such claims.

    Anyway, if we could see back far enough in prehistory, we would all be descended from tribes who survived famines by killing and eating neighboring tribes and taking over their lands for hunting and food gathering. I suggest that the best way to react to such knowledge is not to honor our ancestors for their crimes we have benefited from but to try to make sure that nobody is ever put in a kill or be killed situation again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    Euphy was a dreamer... Leaders are not in a place to be dreamers. They are supposed to see reality and act accordingly for their people. If they don't live for THEIR people, there will be casualties. And it is human nature to put the ones you love before others and yourself.
    You say that Euphie was a dreamer, and leaders should not be dreamers. Wasn't, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. a leader, and didn't one of his famous speeches say "I have a dream."? Wasn't Mahatma Gandhi the successful leader of the independence movement in India and wasn't he a dreamer? Apparently an impractical dreamer, since his independent and peaceful India has turned into just as violent a nation as any other, and has fought a few wars in which hundreds of thousands were killed and now India and Pakistan have tens of missiles with atomic bombs aimed at each other ready to kill tens or hundreds of millions of people. But a highly successful leader despite being a dreamer who hoped that India would not be as evil as other nations.

    You seem to think that the only type of leader is one who leads his people in a violent struggle against other people. You seem to think that life is a zero-sum game, and that nobody gains anything without fighting and killing and taking it from other people. Your philosophy reminds me of that advocated by Gordon Zellaby in John Wyndham's The Midwich Cuckoos. Which was made into a famous science fiction movie, The Village of the Damned (1960) and remade in 1995.

    When I heard that the 1995 Village of the Damned wold be shown in April instead of the fall, the next day I read about the shooting death of Iqbal Masih (1982-April 16,1995) a Pakistani boy sold into debt slavery at the age of four. He was rescued at the age of ten by the Bonded labor Liberation Front which seeks to free the children illegally working in debt slavery. He helped to free hundreds of other children, spoke at the UN, and was killed after receiving many death threats.

    It is easy to imagine that those who had him killed believed that he was taking money away from them and their families by making it harder to run factories staffed by bonded child laborers and thus raising the dread possibility that they would have to hire free adults and children at mutually agreed-upon wages, thus slashing their profits. It is easy to believe that they told themselves that if Pakistan was ever to become wealthy like the United States it would have to go though decades of oppressing the workers before it could finally afford to pay them decent wages. It is easy to believe that they told themselves that Iqbal Masih and the Bonded labor Liberation Front were working against the long-range interests of the Pakistani poor, as well as the killers' own short-range interests, and that the liberators of the bonded workers were really traitors against the economic well being of all Pakistanis. It is easy to believe that they convinced themselves that killing Iqbal Masih was a grim necessity in this tragically imperfect world.

    Just as Gordon Zellaby in the Midwich Cuckoos and the Village of the Damned convinced himself that blowing up a building full of children was a grim necessity in this tragically imperfect world.

    The day after I read about Iqbal Masih's murder the morning news on tv had President Clinton talking with children about the deaths of other children, trying to help them understand. They were talking about the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, 1995, in which 19 children were among the killed, fifteen of them in the America's Kids Day Care Center in the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building (which in hindsight seems like a dangerous location for a day care center).

    Bomber Timothy McVeigh was quoted as saying this about killing children in the bombing:

    "I didn't define the rules of engagement in this conflict. The rules, if not written down, are defined by the aggressor. It was brutal, no holds barred. Women and kids were killed at Waco and Ruby Ridge. You put back in [the government's] faces exactly what they're giving out."

    Clearly McVeigh believed that if person A does something evil to person B, enemies of person A are entitled to do the same evil to person C, even if person C is not the least bit responsible for what person A did. Which is a totally unjust view.

    After those two events in a row I look upon claims that killing children is necessary for the greater good with even greater scepticism than before, and find the philosophy of Gordon Zellaby in the Midwich Cuckoos even more misguided. After all, if it is necessary to kill anyone who is a potential threat to you and your loved ones, then you might as well kill everyone else in the world now, because anyone in the would might someday compete with you or otherwise endanger you. Of course, killing everyone else in the world would reduce you and your loved ones to living a life that was nasty, brutish, and short without any civilization to support you.

    And I can't help worrying that your philosophy is perhaps based on just as inaccurate and illogical assumptions as that of Gordon Zellaby.

    You say that leaders are supposed to see reality and act accordingly for their people. If they don't live for THEIR people, there will be casualties. And it is human nature to put the ones you love before others and yourself.

    I say that no leader or follower can be good unless he, she, or it acts for all people everywhere and in all future ages. I say that if a new leader is asked to swear to fight for the interests of his people against other people he, she, or it should refuse and declare the intention for fighting for the interests of all intelligent beings everywhere and for all time. And perhaps order the arrest or even the immediate execution of whoever asked him to swear to act for the good of only a limited group of people. I say that a world in which every new leader swears to act for the good of all people everywhere and in all future times would be a far better world than a world in which every new leader swears to act for the good of a limited group of people, and that nobody should advocate that leaders should primarily act only for the good of their own people.

    You say that it is human nature to act for the good of your own people over others. I say that being human nature to do something does not make doing it right, and that knowledge of how evil human nature can be should make everyone suspicious about anything that it is human nature to do.

    When i was about ten to fourteen I often read from an old muti-volume history of the great nations of the world by William Sylvester Ellis. And once I noticed that when he told the story of one nation (Nation A) he would say the the era when it was powerful was a good time for that nation and the era when it was weak was a bad time for that nation. And the same for other nations such as B, C, D, E, etc. And when two nations were neighbors, the good time for Nation A might coincide with the bad time for Nation B, and the bad time for Nation A might coincide with the good time for Nation B.

    And since his readers were Americans living centuries after those good and bad times for foreign nations. I wondered which eras Ellis thought were good or bad times times for the world as a whole. I thought it would more important to tell his readers which eras in history had been good and bad for the world as a whole and explain why. I think that even then, when I was younger than you are now, I was beginning to go beyond the concept of duty only to one's own people.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    And Euphy was not a leader because she did not understand how the world works. She thought short-term.. and one thing Lord Leto has taught us is that we need to think long-term if we want to create real, positive change (Dune). Lelouch realized this too, it's like chess.. you can't think one step ahead.. you need to think all possibilities many steps ahead and act for the good of your team.
    So Leto has taught us we have to think long term. Leto is just a fictional character read about by a small percentage of the world's population, not a historical character whose deeds taught the world a lesson. I thought that sometimes he was intelligent but more often a pompous bore who only got people to listen to his pontifications because he was the emperor, and who was only successful because he could see the future.

    By the way, the Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy has a sort of parody of God-Emperor of Dune in the episode "Mandy, the Merciless".

    If no one can be a leader if he doesn't know how the world works, does that mean that there were no leaders in the scientifically backward eras before 1900, or are you referring to knowing how human society works?

    What makes you think that Euphie didn't understand how the world works and thought short term?

    I believe that Euphemia was devastated by the reported deaths of Lelouch and Nunnally in the conquest of Japan, and may have gone though a phase of wanting revenge on the Japanese and/or her father the emperor.

    And when she later learned how many thousands or millions of people were killed in the conquest of Japan, many of them innocent children like Lelouch and Nunnally, she felt guilty for only caring about her own loss, and for being the daughter of Emperor Charles who ordered the invasion, and tried to find ways to free herself of that guilt by preventing the deaths of other children in future wars.
    (to be continued)

    I believe Euphemia considered various ways of preventing the deaths of innocent children in future wars, and finally decided that unifying the world would be the best way to do so. And since Britannia under her father was conquering a lot of countries and might conquer and thus unite the world, she didn't have to do anything but just sit back and watch, at least until such time as the Britannian conquests might falter. Which was a great relief to her considering how much she hated violence.

    But she came to be more and more disgusted by the extreme violence of the Britannian conquests. She told herself that the Britannian leaders such as her father and her siblings such as Cornelia and Schneitzel were surely conquering with as little death and destruction as possible. She told herself it didn't matter how many thousands or millions of innocent children were killed in her own time if it resulted in the unification of mankind and thus saved the lives of countless thousands and millions and billions and trillions of children in future ages.

    Being a reader of science fiction and factual speculation about the future, she knew that the first space colonies would start to be built within a few decades perhaps. She read a writer's estimate that in just a few centuries the population of the space habitats could be as great as that of Earth.

    If it takes ten years to build the first space habit for a population of ten thousand, and the natives of the first habitat start building the second and take ten years, twenty years after the start of building there will be two habitats with 20.000 total population. Thirty years after the start of work there will be four habitats with 40.000 population. 110 years after the start of the first habitat there will be 1024 space habitats with 10,240,000 inhabitants. 210 years after start of the first habitat there will be 1,048,576 space habitats with a total population of 10,485,760,000, which should be about the total population of the Earth at that time. 310 years after the start of the first space habitat there will be a billion habitats with a total population of ten trillion, many times that of the Earth.

    Of course you can assume that the time to build a space habitat is more or less than ten years, and the population of a habitat could be more or less than 10.000, and the habitats can not be populated faster than people can be born, but any reasonable assumptions would make the population of space habitats equal that of the Earth less than five hundred years after the start of the first one, and become trillions in less than a thousand years.

    And if the space habitats were built in the age of the Britannian Empire everyone who migrated to them would expect to be a subject of the Britannian Empire. And only peoplelloyalto the Britannian empire wuld be aloowed to migrate to spac e habitats.

    But if the space habitats were built and colonized by natives of independent nations they would eventually become independent nations. First one, then tens, then hundreds, then thousands, then tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. If the population of the solar system was ten trillion to one quadrillion people and and between one in a thousand and one in a million were killed in wars each year, the total killed each year would be between ten million and one trillion. In a thousand years the total killed would be between ten billion and one quadrillion, in a million years the total would be between ten trillion and one quintillion, in a billion years the total would be between ten quadrillion and one sextillion.

    If humans colonized other solar systems, tens and hundreds and thousands and millions of other solar systems, the total deaths in all future wars would be much, much higher.

    So Euphemia told herself to look at the big picture; that Britannia's conquests would save countless trillions of lives in the next billion years, and not think about how many people were being killed now in Britannia's conquests.
    (to be continued)

    (Continued 07/10/09) But as Euphie came to feel more and more that the Britannian conquests were much too brutal and violent, she was faced with the choice between supporting the Britannian conquests, with all their death and destruction in the present, or opposing them and thus causing more death and destruction in the future - or finding ways of making the Britannian conquests less violent and destructive but just as successful. And thinking of ways that Britannia would benefit from less bloody conquests, so that other Britannians would see the benefit.

    So Euphemia began to discuss military strategy with Cornelia, proposing ways that the conquest of Area One or Area Ten might have been carried out with less bloodshed but just as successfully for Britannia, and with more profit to Britannia with more and wealthier numbers of Numbers surviving to pay taxes so that each new Area would contribute a little to the Britannian Empire instead of being a drain on Britannian resources to keep under control. And Cornelia would point out that Euphemia's strategies wouldn't work.

    And when Cornelia periodically took classes at the Imperial Command School, (which Cornelia felt were largely a waste of time but she attended anyway to show her solidarity with lower ranking generals who could not get out of attending) Euphemia started to tag along wearing a smaller copy of Cornelia's uniform and sit beside her in the classes.

    And Cornelia and her friends thought that Euphemia was growing out of her pacifism. But with everything that Euphemia learned about war she grew more and more into her pacifism. She became more and more determined that the Britannian conquests would be the final wars, the last wars in all of history, that Britannia would conquer the whole world and end war forever, and that she would do everything she could to help the Britannian conquests and also to make them less brutal and violent.

    Euphie posed for a picture in the Journal of the Imperial Command School, with a caption that the little princess seemed to be studying hard and that might be bad news for Britannia's enemies in ten years or so. But she was trying to think of strategies that would be good news for Britannia's enemies as well as for Britannia, that would benefit everyone by helping Britannia conquer the world faster and less violently. And she started to dig up all kinds of reports, plans, articles, and proposals for different tactics and strategies from the library and archives of the Imperial command school.

    And Cornelia found it harder and harder to find flaws in Euphemia's proposals for alternate strategies to reduce the bloodshed in Britannia's conquests.

    (to be continued)


    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    Euphy was never a leader because she didn't understand what it takes to be a leader. And she didn't have the strength to create real change. She was too nice to create real change. She was a tool because she was used all along. And when she made her own choices, she created more pandemonium... she had no place in politics. Her inability to think several steps ahead caused unnecessary and useless death. She wasn't a leader to any extent of the word.. not in heart and not in practice.
    I say that Euphie was a leader because she sometimes gave orders that people obeyed and she sometimes came up with plans that lots of people volunteered to follow.

    You say that Euphie didn't have the strength and was too nice to create real change. Euphie was not just nice, she was also good.

    So can you name some other nice girls in Code Geass? I know Nunnally was nice in the first season. What about Kaguya and Tianzi? They were probably nice girls, though not nearly as much as Euphemia. But Nunnally was evil enough to be a leader who could do evil for the supposed good of her people. Kaguya was part of the Kyoto group which financed all kinds of rebel groups including evil terrorists in the first season. In the second season Kaguya and Tianzi were important leaders helping to make a new and worse world, where devastating wars would be much more likely to occur than if Britannia had conquered and united the world.

    Nice girls can be evil enough to become moral monsters in the hope of helping their people, which is what you claim is necessary to be a leader.

    "_____ was forty years old, a cheerful, friendly, red-faced little man with a reassuring smile for everyone. Frank good nature beamed from his freckled countenance and short-sighted, pominent, light-blue eyes. Red-haired, stout and bustling, he presented a wholly unimpressive figure, and the familiarity of his manners encouraged his courtiers and his servants to take advantage. Friends and enemies agreed that an easier-tempered man was not to be met with. His rule in Styria was conscientious and benevolent; he had started public schemes for the care of the sick and destitute and the provision for free legal defence for the poor in the law courts. His charity was boundless; he had a memory for the faces of his humblest subjects and a kindly curiosity into their private troubles. His two overwhelming passions were the church and the chase; he was punctilious in his devotions and he hunted three or four times a week. His relations with his children and his wife were extraordinarily happy. Only the practice of certain morbid austerities throws an unexpected light on his otherwise ordinary private life."

    Except for the hunting, he sounds a lot like Euphie's kind of person. He was the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II, the most important leader in the Thirty years war in which about 3,000,0000 to 11,0000,000 people were killed, the thirteenth deadliest war in history.




    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    Even nanally was more of a leader than Euphy, she understood the role of a leader. She made the choice to shoulder the death of countless people so that her people didn't have to. It's the same choice leaders in the past have made for us. It is the reason for why our comfortable life is tainted with blood. Leaders in the past have made moral sacrifices, made themselves monsters in order for you to be "pure". But how can we live as such when we know what they did? And Lelouch also did this in the end, although his intentions were a little more selfish.
    I do not approve of making the choice to kill countless people so that her people will not have to. If Nunnally has killed "countless" people she has not saved her people from committing such crimes. If the Britannians accept her as empress despite knowing what she has done (as they accepted Charles for many years) they will become as guilty of those deaths as Nunnally. You say that in the past leaders have sacrificed their innocence and become monsters so that I can be pure.

    Well, I won't be pure if I have any gratitude to them for their crimes which have benefited me. I won't be pure if I ever, like you, say anything the last bit favorable about them. I won't be pure unless I do what I can to prevent such crimes from ever happening again.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ipsilon V View Post
    Lelouch intended Zero to become a immortal symbol of death to any dictator who went out of line. He wanted them to fear that, and make decisions accordingly. This is why Lelouch HAD to die... and also why Euphy HAD to die (Although they had to for different reasons). I have to leave, so if it's still unclear I'll explain later.
    It is very interesting that you talk about dictators getting out of line. You seem to think that all the evil deeds of the world are done by dictators. That is not so. It is perfectly possible for non dictatorial leaders to order terrible crimes. What dictators were responsible for exterminating the Yana Indians and the Tasmanians?

    And what dictators ordered the Indian uprisings in which the Indian warriors tried to exterminate all the Americans they could catch? Most of those terrible uprisings were decided upon by most of the warriors of the tribes involved, and the chiefs were expected to lead the massacres the warriors decided upon, no matter how evil and/or suicidal the chiefs thought the plans were.

    As I remember the autobiography of Davy Crockett tells of the burning of a village during the Creek War and a Creek boy about twelve with a broken leg trying to crawl to safety as the heat from the fires made his body fat bubble and ooze out of him. I bet that boy was feeling thankful that the attack on his village had been ordered by democratically elected leaders and their appointed subordinates instead of by a dictator.

    And what about the air raids by the US Army Air Force, the Royal Air Force, and the Canadian Air Force in World War II which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in attacks on cities? Weren't they ordered by democratically elected civilian governments? I'm sure that the last thoughts of many German or Japanese children trapped under the rubble of collapsed buildings and slowly roasting as the fires got nearer and nearer were thoughts of relief that at least they were not being killed on the orders of evil dictators but on the orders of democratically elected leaders.

    And then there was the British blockage of sea transport to Germany during world War I The British thought that starving the Germans might hasten their defeat, little knowing that the Germans would respond with a submarine blockade of Britain that almost starved the British into defeat and and caused many more British sailors than German to drown in sinking ships. And the Allies kept up the blockade of Germany for six months after the armistice was signed. I am sure that the last thoughts of many German children as they starved to death were gratitude that the blockade had not been ordered by a dictator but by democratic leaders.

    How can scaring dictators be why Euphie had to die? How can you possibly say, in another post, that Lelouch was not trigger happy when he shot her? Lelouch knew that she was innocent and deserved to live. He knew that he could capture her just as easy as killing her. He knew that keeping her a prisoner would be almost as safe for the Japanese as killing her.

    I say that singling out a specific individual to kill when you know that that specific individual is innocent can only be justified if 1) that innocent person is certain to die soon anyway and 2) other people are certain to die soon if that innocent person is not killed.

    Clearly Euphie was not certain to die soon if not shot by Lelouch and nobody else was certain to die soon unless Euphie was shot. According to you the only reason Lelouch had for murdering Euphie was was some goofball theory that fear of Zero might might scare a few dictators into being good and thus might possibly save a few lives in the future.

    It seems to me that Lelouch should have realized that killing himself now, before shooting Euphie, would have a much higher probability of actually saving some lives in the future. It would certainly save one person, Euphie, from immediate death, which would be a much more certain benefit than the possibility that fear of Zero might save even a single life in the future.
    Last edited by proEuphie; 07-25-2009 at 10:41 PM.

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Favorite Anime Opening/Closing themes?
    By Saiyuko in forum General Anime & Manga
    Replies: 196
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 09:51 AM
  2. Best ending ever (film, anime, book whatever)
    By noir in forum Miscellaneous Miscellany
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 08-14-2006, 12:08 AM
  3. Favorite game ending *possible spoilers*
    By Defender in forum Video Games
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 10-20-2005, 11:22 PM
  4. Star Ocean: Till the End of Time ending *warning spoiler*
    By Janus Silverlock in forum Video Games
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-19-2005, 01:53 PM
  5. fullmetal alchemist ending?
    By kamekazekid in forum General Anime & Manga
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2005, 10:54 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts