Headscratchers / The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1

• The capital sure seems to like destroying their own resource extraction equipment to stop the rebellion. D12 extracted coal for the capital, so instead of making an example a few people, they(unwisely) destroy all the infrastructure necessary to extract the coal in the first place. Replacing all that destroyed equipment and infrastructure would be far more expensive and time-consuming than simply fighting them on the ground. They have whole platoons force-marching an ~ equal number of loggers to work. If it requires nearly 1 PKer to force 1 worker to actually work, the rebellion has already won a de facto victory w/o firing another shot. The movie shows other examples of the capital destroying its own equipment necessary to extract all the raw materials necessary to feed the capital. The strategy seems to be to wage a scorched earth policy against, in effect, themselves.
  • That's actually an extra argument for the rebels which is also expressed in the books: the districts don't need the Capitol. The Capitol needs the districts instead in order to maintain their lifestyle of luxury. The Capitol knows that. For 75 years, they kept the districts in check with the Hunger Games and violent oppression. It was just a matter of time before the situation would explode again. Katniss provided that spark. The Capitol only had one measure left: strike fear with violence. Bombing District 12 was probably the only measure left to ensure that the districts were to scared to maintain the rebellion. It didn't help.
  • Aye, Make an Example of Them was never the most effective tactic. Especially combined with Disproportionate Retribution. In that far future verse, the Capitol basically stumbles upon the same stone as Nazis in occupied European territories and (at the same time) Japanese in the lands of China and so on. People really don't tend to learn lessons of history, sadly... And like Chancellor Sutler, President Snow has only one solution to such problems, and even then it's too late to use it.
• How can Peeta be called a traitor? To be a traitor, shouldn't there have to be an allegiance to betray in the first place? Peeta, in the movie, was never a member or ally of District 13. He was never a part of the rebellion. He even says he and Katniss had no idea of the plot that was going on to rescue them. (And they failed to rescue him anyway.) I can understand the 13'ers calling him a whole bunch of other names (Capitol-lover, coward, deluded) but traitor just doesn't apply.
  • It's also strange how given what they know about the Capitol's tactics no one except Katniss (and briefly Gale) seems to entertain the idea that maybe he's being forced to say those things. Even in the later interviews where they've obviously tried to cover up the marks of torture but not succeeded. If he was on Team Capitol acting as their prime spokesperson, you'd think he would be pampered, not malnourished and pained. Yet everyone seems to think he's their willing enemy despite his physical and emotional state.
    • Nobody says he is willing. They simply don't talk about how he has been tortured and coerced, all of them (except Katniss) being much more concerned about the effect his words will have on the revolution than with him as a person. Also, about the interview where he appears on camera with clear signs of torture, pretty much nobody talks about that one at all because they're hoping Katniss didn't see it and are hiding it from her.
  • This was William Wallace's defense at his trial. "I could not be a traitor to Edward, for I was never his subject." Spoiler: Edward still had him killed gruesomely. Just saying, there's historical precedent.