[004]
johnnye
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Come to think of it, we could make a creator page for TimBuckley and move all the trash talk to that, leaving this page for stuff relating to CAD.
to:
Have made a creator page for TimBuckley and moved a big chunk of the trash talk to that, leaving this page for stuff relating to \\\'\\\'CAD\\\'\\\'.
Changed line(s) 4 from:
n
*** Proudmoore\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \
to:
*** Proudmoore\\\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\\\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \\\"big, fat jerk\\\" label because he jumped the gun. Perhaps Blizzard intended for it to be more ambiguous, but it didn\\\'t come across well.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the original war with Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
As for Varian Wrynn, well, I think he has his head up his ass too, but as I didn\\\'t actually \\\'\\\'play\\\'\\\' that part of the game, I\\\'m leaving the entry up \\\'cause I\\\'m not going to stick my neck out on something I might have incomplete information on.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the original war with Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
As for Varian Wrynn, well, I think he has his head up his ass too, but as I didn\\\'t actually \\\'\\\'play\\\'\\\' that part of the game, I\\\'m leaving the entry up \\\'cause I\\\'m not going to stick my neck out on something I might have incomplete information on.
Changed line(s) 4 from:
n
*** Proudmoore\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \
to:
*** Proudmoore\\\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\\\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \\\"big, fat jerk\\\" label because he jumped the gun. Perhaps Blizzard intended for it to be more ambiguous, but it didn\\\'t come across well.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the destruction of Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
As for Varian Wrynn, well, I think he has his head up his ass too, but as I didn\\\'t actually \\\'\\\'play\\\'\\\' that part of the game, I\\\'m leaving the entry up \\\'cause I\\\'m not going to stick my neck out on something I might have incomplete information on.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the destruction of Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
As for Varian Wrynn, well, I think he has his head up his ass too, but as I didn\\\'t actually \\\'\\\'play\\\'\\\' that part of the game, I\\\'m leaving the entry up \\\'cause I\\\'m not going to stick my neck out on something I might have incomplete information on.
Changed line(s) 4 from:
n
*** Proudmoore\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \
to:
*** Proudmoore\\\'s status as a strawman is a bit unclear. In a conversation with Thrall, he points out how much blood the Horde has on their hands, which Thrall has no response to. After killing him Rexxar (who\\\'s not exactly a people-person) tells Jaina that above all else, Proudmoore was a proud warrior. Finally, in one of section of the RPG books written in-universe, Brann Bronzebeard says that Proudmoore had a point, but he still has to slap him with a \\\"big, fat jerk\\\" label because he jumped the gun. Perhaps Blizzard intended for it to be more ambiguous, but it didn\\\'t come across well.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the destruction of Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
Reason: Admiral Proudmoore\\\'s logic has two gaping holes in it: First off, even if we accept that Proudmoore would be justified in re-starting a war that has been stopped -- \\\'\\\'formally\\\'\\\' stopped, with a peace treaty and an alliance -- on the grounds that the orcs are unrepentant of their prior crimes, this logic fails in that they are not, in fact, unrepentant. The orc race as a whole decided to turn on its former masters and fight alongside the humans and night elves to save the world from them. If this doesn\\\'t qualify as a suitable penance, then nothing will.
There is also that Proudmoore is incorrect in assigning the moral onus of the orcs\\\' prior crimes to the orcs he is attacking. Many of them, \\\'\\\'including Thrall, their current head of state\\\'\\\', were not even alive at the time of the Azeroth campaign. Of those that were, all of them can plead diminished capacity: being juiced on Mannoroth\\\'s demonic blood rendered them incapable of exercising their own moral agency, turning them into corrupted tools of the Burning Legion until the influence was purged by the death of Mannoroth. The \\\'\\\'only\\\'\\\' orcs that Admiral Proudmoore could correctly accuse of bearing the moral responsibility for the destruction of Lordaeron are those orc chieftains who originally \\\'\\\'willingly\\\'\\\' accepted Mannoroth\\\'s blood corruption, \\\'\\\'and by the time he reached Kalimdor every single one of them was dead\\\'\\\'. Assigning the moral onus of their crimes to their successors is \\\"bloodline guilt\\\", which is a barbaric concept.
As to the objection that Admiral Proudmoore could not possibly know any of the above: \\\'\\\'originally\\\'\\\', no, he couldn\\\'t. All of his \\\'\\\'initial\\\'\\\' attacks on Durotan are morally justifiable, in that based on the information he had available at the time, he was doing the reasonable thing. But this moral equation completely changes the instant Daelin Proudmoore re-unites with Jaina, because she knows \\\'\\\'everything\\\'\\\' just outlined above. She was even a direct witness (and participant) to most of the critical events! And she is his own daughter... and also the legitimate ruler of the human nation formed adjacent to Durotan. He has \\\'\\\'no\\\'\\\' excuse for not stopping long enough to listen to her when she tries to tell him what\\\'s actually happened in his absence, much less \\\'\\\'taking over Theramore in a military coup\\\'\\\'. And so in the last act, Daelin Proudmoore fails to have any justification at all: in the final analysis, its all about his inability to let go of his hatred, and not defending humanity. Because even when he arrives in a situation where humanity entirely does not need defending, and was able to fight alongside the Horde against a common threat that endangers all life on the planet, he just doesn\\\'t care.
