greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I'll give you that the Ultras are more understanding when compared to some other Chapters, but they're still genetically engineered brainwashed killing machines, their sole purpose being the protection of Mankind through any means necessary. The deaths of millions are acceptable to protect billions. In 40K the end definately justifies the means. then you need to read the ultramarine novels... urile fought against extermiantus to save any innocents.. even if it meant putting himself and his warriors in harms way. "any means necessary" means different things to different people.. ultramarines dont kill children They stopped being worthy of protection when they turned from the Emperor's light. where is the proof that these children turned from the emperors light?.. they are children for gods sake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkchild130 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 correction, they are spawn of a woman who attacked an astartes in enemy (and therefore heretic) territory. They are enemy. Being children means nothing. Darkchild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I am being difficult? You ignore everything we say when it does not fit your views. Have you answered me about these children being a threat? No, you have not. Yes, they are one. In the position of that space marine, there is no way to know whether they will destroy humanity. Ok one final time, its not my views, but graham mcneills and ultimately GWs... the children arent a threat, they are unarmed and are children.. bottom line. you can argue they may turn out to be a threat, but so can any human alive, you dont see marines killing everyone 'just in case'.. its nonsense.. the supposed theeat will be enough for some chapters, but not the ultramarines.. and before you vontinue to accuse me of ignoring viewws and twisting fluff, i challenge you to show me examples of ulotramarines killing unarmed children.. i have stated examples that shopw the ultramarines edicts.. counter me with actual fluff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkchild130 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Show me an example of ANY astartes bypassing a potential threat. Darkchild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Show me an example of ANY astartes bypassing a potential threat. Darkchild prove the children are a threat, were they carrying weapons?, did they have visible mutations? space marines will clear the area, killing all enemy soliders, the rest of the populace they leave for other forces to deal with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Priest Haelaeif Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I can absolutely relate to the thought of children being killed as horrid, and I can understand that this thought must be especially hard for you if you have children of your own, just like it would be extremely hard for me to find the thought of my loved girl being killed acceptable. But if you differentiate between reality and fiction, it stops being connected. UMs killing children is not real. It will never be real. There is no danger of it becoming real. If you identify with UMs too strongly, I understand this differentiation is difficult. But then maybe you should rather find something other than genetically enhanced superhumans made for killing to identify with in the first place. Grow up. Your children would certainly benefit from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinks Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 AGAIN as ive stated its not my failing thats the problem here, 40k is bloody and horrible i get it.the issue here is the failing of you guys to understand the edict of the ultramarines.. courage and honour, every one of the imperiums citizens should be protected if possible.. Astartes do not think as we do. Yes they have courage and honour, but they will see duty and sarcrifice as something far more complex than a mere human does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 first off dont tell me to grow up.. your not a mod and your certainly not in any position of respect to tell me what to do.. that comment says more about your maturity than it does mine im not identifying with ultras too much, im telling you that established fluff shows ultras would not kill innocent children.. again if you want to argue come at me with more than your opinions and inflammatory responses... Astartes do not think as we do. Yes they may have courage and honour, but they will see duty and sarcrifice as something far complex than a mere human does. this argument goes both ways, we can therefore only trust established fluff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkchild130 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 They are a threat merely by being there, in hostile territory. Their mother signed their death warrant. Here are some fluffy thoughts for the day. "Hatred is the emperor's greatest gift to humanity." "Zeal is its own Excuse." "There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt." Darkchild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 They are a threat merely by being there, in hostile territory. Their mother signed their death warrant. Here are some fluffy thoughts for the day. "Hatred is the emperor's greatest gift to humanity." "Zeal is its own Excuse." "There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt." Darkchild again none of these quotes are ushered from ultramarines.. the bottom is an inquisition quote... next... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Priest Haelaeif Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Okay, I am sorry for telling you what to do. It is only that I do not see anything but opinions and desperate, dogmatic statements without any arguments from you, either. And you tell me what to do, too, in saying that I should provide proof. Why can I not just keep my opinion? Why are you so upset? I do not get it. It is all just a fiction. Why is it so important to you whether a group of fictional guys would kill those children or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Fisting Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Well, maybe this one Ultra was having a bad day and just felt like killing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinks Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 this argument goes both ways, we can therefore only trust established fluff I am with you on that one, definately. Look at it from a different angle though - foot and mouth for example. Authories sweep in once they find a farm that has a case of foot and mouth, what do they do? They put an immediate end to all the livestock on the farm, then they will cull animals from farms surrounding the infected farm to stop the risk of foot and mouth spreading. They don't kill the animals for fun, they kill the animals to stop a potential spread of infection. That is how the Astartes would view the situation in the story with the mother and children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkchild130 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The important part is they are Imperial quotes. Show me the quote that tells you not to kill children of heretics just in case they turn out alright. "Compromise is akin to treachery " "Faith, Hate and Ignorance" Darkchild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 this argument goes both ways, we can therefore only trust established fluff I am with you on that one, definately. Look at it from a different angle though - foot and mouth for example. Authories sweep in once they find a farm that has a case of foot and mouth, what do they do? They put an immediate end to all the livestock on the farm, and then they will cull animals from farms surrounding the infected farm to stop the risk of foot and mouth spreading. They kill the animals not because they want to or because the other farms are infected, they kill the animals to stop a potential spread of infection. That is how an Astartes would view the situation in the story. the ultramarines dont see themselves as 'above' the humans in thier care.. they see their existence as there to protect and serve these people.. culling animals is a far cry from killing humans.. when people started falling over with bird flu did we kill everyone nearby? Why can I not just keep my opinion? Why are you so upset? I do not get it. It is all just a fiction. Why is it so important to you whether a group of fictional guys would kill those children or not? I said in the beginning you were entitled to your opinion, just that it wasnt supported by fluff.. tbh i get more invloved in an argument when multiple people try to gang up on me... when i know im right im fight to the death to be vindicated.. my unwillingness to budge is a direct result of the counter arguments The important part is they are Imperial quotes. thios means nothing, ultramarines are noted for thier dislike of things thats go against thier own teachings, the mortifactors are a good example, captain uriel came to blows with the chaplain astador becuase he was disgusted by thier ways and practices.. despite being on the same side. SM chapters are like clans, each has its own set of laws/rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinks Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 the ultramarines dont see themselves as 'above' the humans in thier care.. they see their existence as there to protect and serve these people.. culling animals is a far cry from killing humans..when people started falling over with bird flu did we kill everyone nearby? Actually in China that was actually considered beleive it or not. But that is not the point i am making. The point is although Ultramarines are there to protect they are not above killing people if they are thought to be tainted. If you don't beleive that then you really have no idea about what 40k is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkchild130 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 yes but they serve the Imperium, and the quotes reflect the Imperium's stance on heretics and life in general. Read: if there is any slight, infinately small possibility that someone/thing is a threat, annihilate it with extreme prejudice. Darkchild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Priest Haelaeif Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Why can I not just keep my opinion? Why are you so upset? I do not get it. It is all just a fiction. Why is it so important to you whether a group of fictional guys would kill those children or not? I said in the beginning you were entitled to your opinion, just that it wasnt supported by fluff.. tbh i get more invloved in an argument when multiple people try to gang up on me... when i know im right im fight to the death to be vindicated.. my unwillingness to budge is a direct result of the counter arguments But you aren't right. Telling me I were entitled to my opinion while saying you were right is rubbish. Either you respect my opinion and consider it equally valid to your opinion, or you do not respect my opinion. You can't respect my opinion and at the same time say it were a fact that my opinion was wrong. Also, while I still can see no proof. Ventris and all that - sorry, but he certainly isn't the typical UM; he was sent on a penance for not being the typical UM, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoneface Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 According the to 3rd Edition Space Marine codex all space marines are pretty much cold killers, they are a last resort and once you call for their aid they will wipe out all enemies, objectors and even undesirables. Also in the back of that codex it gives a 24 hour Space Marine routine, FOR ALL space marines, which is basically made up of pro-Imperial indoctronation and combat. U'r evidence comes from a novel written by a guy who wants the Ultramarines to be amazing, and perhaps choosing ultramarines was a controversial choice on my part, however the codex backs me up, certainly the 3rd ed one. Basically Grahem Mcniell does not mean the same as GW. There are some god awful GW novels, should we consider them undeniable canon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ktan Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Am I not right in thinking that the people of Ultramar leave weak infants to die, as they did in Sparta? I've never seen a direct quote, but The Emperor's Champion frequently mentions this. I've sent a PM and am currently seeking out an official source for this. That kinda blows the whole 'Ultramarines not killing unarmed children' idea out of the water. Sure, not all citizens of Ultramar are Ultramarines, but almost all Ultramarines were, at one point, Ultramar-ians. If the citizens of Ultramar are willing to leave children to die for no reason other than illness or deformity, then it seems bizarre to assume all the Ultramarines happen not to believe this, or have it bred out of them. Ergo, infanticide is not completely abhorrent to the Ultramarines. Statements about the Ultramarines caring for all humans need context too. Is this a line of dialogue from one character? Is it presented as hard fact by the prose? Is it said of one character, such as Ventris, and not explicitly stated for others? If you're going to argue from the Ultramarines books, you need to provide the quotes from them for people who don't have access to them. Context could change what GC08 is arguing entirely. Also, 40K is a collaborative effort. Graham McNeil does not have complete control over the Ultramarines' fluff, otherwise Matt Ward would not have been able to write fluff for Codex: Space Marines. He merely presents his views on them. For what it's worth, I'm an Ultramarine who feels we should have had more work like this piece in the Codex rather than the ego-massaging we received. The more my Chapter is portrayed as perfect by GW, the more I am turned off by it. Also, the killing of the children in the piece is necessary, I feel. It makes an important point. If it were for no reason, I'd be against it, but it's a very strong message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravenguard2010 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The problem with citing Uriel Ventris is that he is purely Graham Mcneil's representation of an (unusually) moral Space Marine the 40k universe. There's a section at the beginning of my trilogy collection where he talks about how challenging it is writing an Astartes novel because it's hard to write a book about unfeeling and dogmatic soldiers, so he acknowledges he brings out some personalities more than the average marine representation simply to make it interesting to the reader. Take his representations with a pinch of salt in my opinion. As nice as it is to think ALL Ultras are nice and friendly all of the time, it's probably not true. I think that if it was ordered of them, they would kill anything. If it makes it more acceptable to you, imagine in this situation one of the chaos born plagues had taken hold of the planet, and to contain it they wiped out any suspected carriers on sight to save the un-infected populace... Surely you agree that in this circumstance at least the Ultras would comply? It would be hard for them sure, but they would see the sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoneface Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 Exaactly ravenguard, people seem to be quoting Graham Mcneil's books like their canon, their not, their just novels published by Black Libary. Like i said before, i dont like the 40K universe uber dark, it gets dull after all, but when it comes to indoctronated genetically superior super soldiers that darkness works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Juan Juarez Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Grimdark is synonymous with 40k, though obviously we can all judge how much we wish to take from the universe. On another note: As I'm sure we've all noticed, you guys are not going to agree so why not go back to telling the OP what a nice job he has done, in the style he has done it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Black Shadow Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Show me an example of ANY astartes bypassing a potential threat. Darkchild - Salamanders protecting refugee columns rather than taking the fight to the orks in 2nd war for Armageddon. These were a logistical nightmare, millions of refugees from hives. In this imaginary compassionless grimderp 40k universe, they would have been left to their own devices or even summarily destroyed as an impediment to battle. - Celestial Lions publically condemning inquisition for exterminatus, taking their complaints all the way to the High Lords of Terra. Sure, the Celestial Lions were later mysteriously inserted into impossible battles and eliminated to a man, but they didn't just stand by, and they definitely did not kill innocents themselves. - First war for Armageddon - inquisition sterilizes the imperial guard and puts them into work camps after they witness the existence of chaos. Space Wolves have been at odds with the Inquisition ever since (note, the innocents weren't even killed, they were just sequestered). By the argument that space marines will kill anything that is a potential threat, the Space Wolves should have argued for the death of these warriors as "potential threats", not their release. Surely fully-grown humans had a better chance of falling to chaos than the children of a random crazy woman. I can keep going, the fluff is rife with this stuff. Space marines are totally knights of the crusades revamped for a crazy futuristic milieu. That means that they come in all stripes, from honorable, chivalric warriors to bloodthirsty savages. I would posit that Ultramarines are decidedly in the former group. The author would be better served using a chapter with a history for this kind of stuff in the fluff, say the Marines Malevolent, or the Flesh Tearers (or to a lesser extent any other BA successor), or the Iron Warriors, or any of another dozen chapters that have this justified in their fluff. Can you give an example from extant fluff of a space marine killing a child? We're missing the point here, though. There are people in two camps and they're both ignoring what the other side is saying because they're arguing for the sake of arguing instead of discussing the story. What it comes down to is that the author made a decision to use the murder of disheveled children (the only cliche that better personifies innocence is a tail-wagging puppy) to portray something about the nature of Space Marines. It's a very stark portrayal of a merciless, robotic killing machine, devoid of thought or reason, intent only on clearing an area of life. Juxtaposed with the narrator's voice of disbelief, the space marine is set up as something inhuman, unfeeling, unreasonable and horrific to human understanding. However this does not relate to the dichotomy set up in the first paragraph, the difference between showing emotion and not showing emotion, between the space marine's businesslike war-making, as opposed to war as part of the human experience. There is no motive established for murdering the grubby urchins, something that, in a narrative sense, can only lead to the assumption that the marine is not only merciless in his death-dealing, but also indiscriminate. Whether or not we agree that's how Ultramarines behave, it's certainly not what the rest of the story is talking about. And there is no way that anyone can view indiscriminate, unjustified child killing as remotely heroic, in any universe. Perhaps there was justification, but the reader has to have that justification as well, otherwise it just seems empty. I would suggest the second draft of this story actually delve into the emotionless vs emotional dichotomy that has been established. Give a justifiable reason for the marine to kill the rugrats, and have him follow orders to do so without batting an eyelash. The imperial guard might follow the same order if it were given to him, but hesitantly, and it would haunt him for the rest of his life. The space marine does it because it is necessary and justified, and loses no sleep over it (not just because). Both the reader and the guardsman can agree that the scene is horrific. But the difference to be illuminated is the reaction to the horror of war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ktan Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 A solid critique, Vincent, one I happen to agree with. I shan't expand on your point because I don't feel I can add much else to it other than to suggest that Stoneface does it xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.