I'd support Ceasars Legion except [Insert answer here]

Bad_Karma said:
Sure a lot of historic persons first wiped their foes and tried to wipe the identities of the one he conquered. But as far as i'm aware, it never functioned without giving them something new, something better.
Click to expand...

I really don't get what do you mean by "it never functioned without giving them something new/better".


Spaniards completely destroyed colossal and magnificent civilizations like Incas and Aztecs, turned them into half-slaves and and turned their empires into loot farms. Explain to me what exactly didn't "function" in that conquest and what was the "new/better" thing Spaniards did to make it "function".


Mongols destroyed numerous ancient civilizations and turned the surviving people into slaves and/or assimilated them into a roving horde.

Barbarians destroyed the Western Roman Empire and brought dark ages wich lasted for the next one thousand years.
 
Green Gecko said:
Bad_Karma said:
Sure a lot of historic persons first wiped their foes and tried to wipe the identities of the one he conquered. But as far as i'm aware, it never functioned without giving them something new, something better.
Click to expand...

I really don't get what do you mean by "it never functioned without giving them something new/better".

Spaniards completely destroyed colossal and magnificent civilizations like Incas and Aztecs, turned them into half-slaves and and turned their empires into loot farms. Explain to me what exactly didn't "function" in that conquest and what was the "new/better" thing Spaniards did to make it "function".

Mongols destroyed numerous ancient civilizations and turned the surviving people into slaves and/or assimilated them into a roving horde.

Barbarians destroyed the Western Roman Empire and brought dark ages wich lasted for the next one thousand years.
Click to expand...

I'm speaking about ruling a country and it's inhabitants after conquering it.
You can't rule a country for a long time, without improving the lives of enough people in that country - because they'll remember what destruction you brought them and will try again and again to drive you out.

Please read a bit more recent research on how the Spaniards and Protugese conquered South America. They did so through cooperating with other indogenous peoples.
They brought these folks more power and support to overthrow the biggest powers there. So they were welcomed and not conquerers in the classical sense. Not to forget the Spaniard were technological more advanced. And while they surely mistreated the natives, they also brought improvement with them.
Sure you can try to argue there was only abuse, but that's highly unlikely.
But there's also another special thing about it. A lot of natives died because of diseases brought (partly unknowingly) by the europeans.
Than again the first countries gained independence 'only' 250 years later.

Get your picture on the Mongols right....
They established good administrations in most of the countries they conquered and introduced quite good laws.
Under them trade between China and the Middle-East and Western world became more common than before.
Just one example the Mongols used chinese blackpowder weapons while entering the middle-east which was later used by the middle eastern countries and helped them at least for some time against their foes.
So really, please read a bit more up on them. They weren't only some 'babaric horde' but also helped a lot in advancing quite a few countries.

No Barbarian conquered the Roman Empire for a longer period.
And what you generalize as Barbarians were often peoples with more knowledge in certain fields than the Romans ever possesed. One example would be metal casting.
It's by the way the other way round. What did the Romans bring their neighbours while conquering them so that they accepted their rule?
Seemingly not enough for some germanic tribes, so they pushed back again and again. Because their 'civilization' wasn't seen as and advancment over what they lived in themselves.
Not to mention that Romans bought their peace, made pacts and whatnot with others. They got problems with a certain chief? So they paid another to help them destorying him... So they brought the chief they hired something of worth.
-> Not to mention, i didn't read any uncontested explanation as to why the Roman Empire crumbled and so much wisdom was lost.

In the case of the Roman Empire you can even see how Rulers who weren't able to please the roman citiziens, or the roman soldiers went down often quite fast.
 
Bad_Karma said:
I'm speaking about ruling a country and it's inhabitants after conquering it.
You can't rule a country for a long time, without improving the lives of enough people in that country - because they'll remember what destruction you brought them and will try again and again to drive you out.

Please read a bit more recent research on how the Spaniards and Protugese conquered South America. They did so through cooperating with other indogenous peoples.
They brought these folks more power and support to overthrow the biggest powers there. So they were welcomed and not conquerers in the classical sense. Not to forget the Spaniard were technological more advanced. And while they surely mistreated the natives, they also brought improvement with them.
Sure you can try to argue there was only abuse, but that's highly unlikely.
But there's also another special thing about it. A lot of natives died because of diseases brought (partly unknowingly) by the europeans.
Than again the first countries gained independence 'only' 250 years later.

Get your picture on the Mongols right....
They established good administrations in most of the countries they conquered and introduced quite good laws.
Under them trade between China and the Middle-East and Western world became more common than before.
Just one example the Mongols used chinese blackpowder weapons while entering the middle-east which was later used by the middle eastern countries and helped them at least for some time against their foes.
So really, please read a bit more up on them. They weren't only some 'babaric horde' but also helped a lot in advancing quite a few countries.

No Barbarian conquered the Roman Empire for a longer period.
And what you generalize as Barbarians were often peoples with more knowledge in certain fields than the Romans ever possesed. One example would be metal casting.
It's by the way the other way round. What did the Romans bring their neighbours while conquering them so that they accepted their rule?
Seemingly not enough for some germanic tribes, so they pushed back again and again. Because their 'civilization' wasn't seen as and advancment over what they lived in themselves.
Not to mention that Romans bought their peace, made pacts and whatnot with others. They got problems with a certain chief? So they paid another to help them destorying him... So they brought the chief they hired something of worth.
-> Not to mention, i didn't read any uncontested explanation as to why the Roman Empire crumbled and so much wisdom was lost.

In the case of the Roman Empire you can even see how Rulers who weren't able to please the roman citiziens, or the roman soldiers went down often quite fast.
Click to expand...

Your view of logic and history is so contorted i will just give up.
 
Bad_Karma said:
Get your picture on the Mongols right....
They established good administrations in most of the countries they conquered and introduced quite good laws.
Under them trade between China and the Middle-East and Western world became more common than before.
Just one example the Mongols used chinese blackpowder weapons while entering the middle-east which was later used by the middle eastern countries and helped them at least for some time against their foes.
So really, please read a bit more up on them. They weren't only some 'babaric horde' but also helped a lot in advancing quite a few countries.
Click to expand...

But they burned,looted, and raped Almost all of India! They made Baghdad (a center of learning and culture) a smoldering ruin! They started the black plague! And they made sure that the western world would rise unopposed to world prominence!


At least the Nazis only lasted 10 years and did minimal damage culturally. The Mongols are history's greatest villains
 
We've got a lot of 'nations' destroying other nations and even cultures - that what i said directly at the start - but their rulership when they conquered a region, only lasted if they won a majority of that population for them, or at least enough people with power.
Why do i say that? Look again at the Mongols, most writtings i know, say that the 'Horde' didn't take a lot of time to install 'govenors'. So the ruling mongolian class was quite thin in the captured regions. Such a small class isn't able to opress a big mass of unhappy inhabitants.
So you need to have people who are cooperating with these 'oppressors', but you hardly will get someone cooperating, if you don't give them any advantage or improvement over the situation before. And even less taxes than before can be an improvement.

The Mongols were quite liberal in terms of religious freedom. Which might have been a big upside for some inhabitants of the conquered regions.
They had some laws which - as far as i know - made less difference between upper classes and lower ones - which also might have been an upside.
Their laws and mail systems and such lead to safer roads, and trade got promoted by the Mongols -> A plus for some traders.

I'm not speaking about a cultural superiority, i'm speaking about a plain pragmatic view for a lot of individuals.
More people gain something than people loosing something = it will get most likely be accepted.

And that's the point where i don't see the Legion having any upside. They're talking about upsides, but you see nothing of that.
And don't get me wrong, neither do i think that the Spaniards nor the Mongol were right in killing so many people.
 
Sabirah said:
They started the black plague! And they made sure that the western world would rise unopposed to world prominence!
Click to expand...

That's a bit of long shot. The Mongol Empire, for all intents and purposes, collapsed and splintered halfway the 13th century. The Black Plague happened over a century after that, and the 'Rise of the West' only really starts in the 18th century, over half a millennium later.
 
Jebus said:
Sabirah said:
They started the black plague! And they made sure that the western world would rise unopposed to world prominence!
Click to expand...

That's a bit of long shot. The Mongol Empire, for all intents and purposes, collapsed and splintered halfway the 13th century. The Black Plague happened over a century after that, and the 'Rise of the West' starts in the 18th century, over half a millennium later.
Click to expand...
Yeah, historians still argue about that.
However, the conquest and destruction of all the major powers in the middle east by the Mongols set back the emerging muslim empires quite a lot, enabling western Europe to build up undisturbed.
And well, it's known that the Mongols used the bubonic pague as a weapon, and the Golden Horde catapulted plague-infested corpses into Kaffa in 1346 and it is possible that the Plague spread from there over to Europe.
 
Hassknecht said:
However, the conquest and destruction of all the major powers in the middle east by the Mongols set back the emerging muslim empires quite a lot, enabling western Europe to build up undisturbed.
Click to expand...

While I'm sure the people of Merv or Bukhara would disagree, I don't think the Mongols had quite that much of an influence on the long-term development of the Muslim world. The oppression of Ijtihad (litteraly, independant thinking in Islamic law; in essence, critial thinking), declaring mathematics to be the 'work of the devil', etc. had far more far-reaching consequences. The stagnation and decline of the Spanish muslim empires, for instance, can hardly be blamed on the Mongols. The rise (and decline) of the Ottoman and the Mughal Empires, too, happend *after* the mongol invasions. And these empires, at least in the pre-modern times, were way wealthier, more advanced and more powerful than anything Europe had to offer at the time.
And aside from the Islamic empires, the Mongol invasion had even less long-term effects on the Chinese empire. It, too, started to decline (in relative terms to the west) because of mainly internal reasons.

Hassknecht said:
And well, it's known that the Mongols used the bubonic pague as a weapon, and the Golden Horde catapulted plague-infested corpses into Kaffa in 1346 and it is possible that the Plague spread from there over to Europe.
Click to expand...

That's quite something else than 'causing' the Black Plague (I don't even see how that's possible); plus it's silly to assume that the Black Plague wouldn't have spread to Europe either way: there were solid trade links between southern Europe and the Middle-East (and, hence, the Far East) regardless, so it would've gotten to Italy no matter what.

(Maybe this particular discussion should be moved to the General Discussion Forum?)
 
Mainly beacuse they're total assholes that enslaves and slaughter people wherever they go.

Being a total dick to everyone isn't acceptable.
 
I despise the legion because they are basically raiders, but won't admit it.
Click to expand...
The same could be said about the Brotherhood and the NCR, everyone forces uses force to get what they want in the wasteland, the real question is what do they want to achieve.

Because of the backward social views and idiotic superstition about the God of Mars I can't support them. But the Legion aren't pure evil. Its not like the NCR are particularly humane, didn't they kill a whole bunch of kids at bitter springs, I bet there were kids at Navarro too. Don't they send the Khans into the desert to die even if they side with them. Yes the Legion kills off everyone over certain age but they don't kill the kids.

This is why I go with an independent ending with a Brotherhood allied Enclave Remnant friendly Vegas.
 
1. NCR military strength is sizable enough to win a war of attrtion against the BoS and are geared up enough to pacify all of California. It also posses enough logistical capability to expand its borders (albeit its stretched currently due to political resistance back home) past its home state into the surrounding areas. NCR forces have gained valuable battlefield experience in engaging both a technologically superior enemy (BoS), and conventinal forces (raiders and various warlords).

2. Legion strength relies on primarily a technologically backwards military. While it does have the logistical capability to mount and maintain a continuous and exhaustive campaign, Lanius states that Caesars military has been stretched to its limit (unlike NCR, which has the resources but doesn't have the political support to authorise its use, the legions ability to fight is literally exhausted). Legion combat experience has been limited to fighting under-equipped and undersized foes (Caesar himself states his primary strategy had been to divide and conquer, taking the weakest of tribes and methodically moving upwards).

Lastly, given NCRs standard of living, and the legions brutal reputation, Caesars forces are guaranteed to fight tooth and nail for every inch of ground. On the other hand, an NCR victory promises a huge boost in standard of of living for all in legion territory eliminating a crucial element to formenting an effective resistance and insurgency campaign.
 
they weren't mutie scum
Click to expand...
Toeing the Enclave line I see. Seriously even Autumn realized that this sort of stance was downright insane. Also considering that the Legion are recruited from tribals in remote parts of the country that didn't get hit by bombs I bet their less mutated than the NCR.
 
Wish I had a cool name9 said:
they weren't mutie scum
Click to expand...
Toeing the Enclave line I see. Seriously even Autumn realized that this sort of stance was downright insane. Also considering that the Legion are recruited from tribals in remote parts of the country that didn't get hit by bombs I bet their less mutated than the NCR.
Click to expand...

Might qualify as near-human, but then again, still not pure.
 
Might qualify as near-human, but then again, still not pure.
Click to expand...
How exactly are they not human?

Yes I know your an Enclave fan and they have my partial support post oil rig/eden though they need to stop fucking with the Brotherhood but even the members of the Enclave have dropped that pure human crap. You don't see Moreno, Autumn or even Eden talking about that, when Eden gives you the FEV he tells you that its the only way to stop the creatures of the wasteland that will eventually destroy humanity, its not that he/it is out to destroy the wastelandanders, their just collateral damage. The way I always saw classifying the wastelanders as non human was as a way to ease the conscience of the Enclave.
The problem is that mutated creatures are simply better adapted to the environment of the waste. Considering that if they live long enough the Fallout 3 SM’s will all become behemoths that will take 2-3 mini nukes to destroy, the tunnelers, ect. That’s the problem with both the NCR and House, they think that its over, that humanities survival is certain and support things like gambling and consumerism when humanity should be mobilizing.
Really there are three options to dealing with the problems of the waste.

1: The Richardson/Eden/Elijah approach of wiping everyone out and starting from scratch.
2. Waiting out the threats while preserving the embers of human civilization like the Brotherhood does.
3. Establishing a military autocracy like the Legion and some offshoot members of the Brotherhood and Eastern Enclave have. This is the best option and why I feel some temptation to support Caesar and hope that his superstitious self destructively patriarchal Legion changes when they start getting recruits from civilized regions and takes on a more rationalistic approach to things. Its my belief that Caesar more plays to his tribal recruits with his prohibitions against medicine and the Legions treatment of women. The fact that he would recruit a female character to serve as his eyes ears and personal assassin shows that he might see many of his policies as temporary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top