The Bayverse has THE platform now to do a lot of really cool things within the TF mythos outside of some incredible fight scenes and special effects.

 

It's the Bayverse! ANYTHING can happen! And by anything I mean incredible fight scenes and special effects.

I was in the military for 9 years and am a disabled vet and still work with the military and I also have several friends...... Well you get the point, any ways even in war if a known terrorist came up to you you could draw your weapon but could not fire on them unles they:

 

1: keep coming after you tell them to stop.

 

2: Draw a weapon

 

 

Did the decepticons pull a weapon or try to keep coming at the autobots after being told to stop?

Different type of engagement situation with a different type of enemy. What you described is in a guard post situation, not a combat situation. The Decepticons didn't need to pull a weapon because they are weapons. Their bodies have built in weapons. On top of that, this was a seek and destroy mission. Find the enemy and destroy them to prevent them from fulfilling their overt and covert missions. Those were the rules of engagement. The US military has run several such missions in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Quaida (sp?), seeking out their strongholds and blasting them to smithereens before they can even knew what hit them, much less draw their weapons. We use snipers armed with 50 cal. sniper rifles to take out enemy commanders and the like, sometimes from from two miles away, without the enemy even knowing they're about to die, much less seeing their killer, or hearing the shot.

 

Also, in your list, you missed one. If you order an enemy to stop in order to detain them, and they attempt to flee, you can shoot them then as well.

So then.

 

What's the moral justification for shooting an injured combatant rather than capturing him? I'm being serious here, the only reason I can think of for killing Demolisher rather than taking him captive is either "I feel like killing him" or "We're too lazy to move him while he's alive."

 

Neither of which put Prime in the best light. I do wish this was addressed in the movie, it could've been interesting. Especially since they tried to show the Autobots in an "ambiguous" light... except ambiguous more meant "LOOK AT THE STUPID HUMANS BEING PARANOID THE AUTOBOTS ARE AWESOME FUCK YEAR. WE SHOULD ALWAYS LISTEN TO PRIME."

I was in the military for 9 years and am a disabled vet and still work with the military and I also have several friends...... Well you get the point, any ways even in war if a known terrorist came up to you you could draw your weapon but could not fire on them unles they:

 

1: keep coming after you tell them to stop.

 

2: Draw a weapon

 

 

Did the decepticons pull a weapon or try to keep coming at the autobots after being told to stop?

Different type of engagement situation with a different type of enemy. What you described is in a guard post situation, not a combat situation. The Decepticons didn't need to pull a weapon because they are weapons. Their bodies have built in weapons. On top of that, this was a seek and destroy mission. Find the enemy and destroy them to prevent them from fulfilling their overt and covert missions. Those were the rules of engagement. The US military has run several such missions in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Quaida (sp?), seeking out their strongholds and blasting them to smithereens before they can even knew what hit them, much less draw their weapons. We use snipers armed with 50 cal. sniper rifles to take out enemy commanders and the like, sometimes from from two miles away, without the enemy even knowing they're about to die, much less seeing their killer, or hearing the shot.

 

Also, in your list, you missed one. If you order an enemy to stop in order to detain them, and they attempt to flee, you can shoot them then as well.

So then.

 

What's the moral justification for shooting an injured combatant rather than capturing him? I'm being serious here, the only reason I can think of for killing Demolisher rather than taking him captive is either "I feel like killing him" or "We're too lazy to move him while he's alive."

 

Neither of which put Prime in the best light. I do wish this was addressed in the movie, it could've been interesting. Especially since they tried to show the Autobots in an "ambiguous" light... except ambiguous more meant "LOOK AT THE STUPID HUMANS BEING PARANOID THE AUTOBOTS ARE AWESOME FUCK YEAR. WE SHOULD ALWAYS LISTEN TO PRIME."

Simple, the first one is to put him out of his misery. He was already mortally wounded, and dying. He wouldn't survive anyway. They also didn't have the facilities to imprison POWs, nor the capability to move such a large prisoner, even if his wounds weren't mortal. Even if he could have recovered from his injuries, he would have been too dangerous to keep alive. Thus, the risk was too great.

Something occurred to me while reading this thread. Since Sideways is a messenger and Sideswipe is a warrior with swords.... wouldn't that make the situation a bit...

I was in the military for 9 years and am a disabled vet and still work with the military and I also have several friends...... Well you get the point, any ways even in war if a known terrorist came up to you you could draw your weapon but could not fire on them unles they:

 

1: keep coming after you tell them to stop.

 

2: Draw a weapon

 

 

Did the decepticons pull a weapon or try to keep coming at the autobots after being told to stop?

Different type of engagement situation with a different type of enemy. What you described is in a guard post situation, not a combat situation. The Decepticons didn't need to pull a weapon because they are weapons. Their bodies have built in weapons. On top of that, this was a seek and destroy mission. Find the enemy and destroy them to prevent them from fulfilling their overt and covert missions. Those were the rules of engagement. The US military has run several such missions in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Quaida (sp?), seeking out their strongholds and blasting them to smithereens before they can even knew what hit them, much less draw their weapons. We use snipers armed with 50 cal. sniper rifles to take out enemy commanders and the like, sometimes from from two miles away, without the enemy even knowing they're about to die, much less seeing their killer, or hearing the shot.

 

Also, in your list, you missed one. If you order an enemy to stop in order to detain them, and they attempt to flee, you can shoot them then as well.

So then.

 

What's the moral justification for shooting an injured combatant rather than capturing him? I'm being serious here, the only reason I can think of for killing Demolisher rather than taking him captive is either "I feel like killing him" or "We're too lazy to move him while he's alive."

 

Neither of which put Prime in the best light. I do wish this was addressed in the movie, it could've been interesting. Especially since they tried to show the Autobots in an "ambiguous" light... except ambiguous more meant "LOOK AT THE STUPID HUMANS BEING PARANOID THE AUTOBOTS ARE AWESOME FUCK YEAR. WE SHOULD ALWAYS LISTEN TO PRIME."

Simple, the first one is to put him out of his misery. He was already mortally wounded, and dying. He wouldn't survive anyway. They also didn't have the facilities to imprison POWs, nor the capability to move such a large prisoner, even if his wounds weren't mortal. Even if he could have recovered from his injuries, he would have been too dangerous to keep alive. Thus, the risk was too great.

So... in other words, they were too lazy/unprepared to move him.

I was in the military for 9 years and am a disabled vet and still work with the military and I also have several friends...... Well you get the point, any ways even in war if a known terrorist came up to you you could draw your weapon but could not fire on them unles they:

 

1: keep coming after you tell them to stop.

 

2: Draw a weapon

 

 

Did the decepticons pull a weapon or try to keep coming at the autobots after being told to stop?

Different type of engagement situation with a different type of enemy. What you described is in a guard post situation, not a combat situation. The Decepticons didn't need to pull a weapon because they are weapons. Their bodies have built in weapons. On top of that, this was a seek and destroy mission. Find the enemy and destroy them to prevent them from fulfilling their overt and covert missions. Those were the rules of engagement. The US military has run several such missions in Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Quaida (sp?), seeking out their strongholds and blasting them to smithereens before they can even knew what hit them, much less draw their weapons. We use snipers armed with 50 cal. sniper rifles to take out enemy commanders and the like, sometimes from from two miles away, without the enemy even knowing they're about to die, much less seeing their killer, or hearing the shot.

 

Also, in your list, you missed one. If you order an enemy to stop in order to detain them, and they attempt to flee, you can shoot them then as well.

So then.

 

What's the moral justification for shooting an injured combatant rather than capturing him? I'm being serious here, the only reason I can think of for killing Demolisher rather than taking him captive is either "I feel like killing him" or "We're too lazy to move him while he's alive."

 

Neither of which put Prime in the best light. I do wish this was addressed in the movie, it could've been interesting. Especially since they tried to show the Autobots in an "ambiguous" light... except ambiguous more meant "LOOK AT THE STUPID HUMANS BEING PARANOID THE AUTOBOTS ARE AWESOME FUCK YEAR. WE SHOULD ALWAYS LISTEN TO PRIME."

Simple, the first one is to put him out of his misery. He was already mortally wounded, and dying. He wouldn't survive anyway. They also didn't have the facilities to imprison POWs, nor the capability to move such a large prisoner, even if his wounds weren't mortal. Even if he could have recovered from his injuries, he would have been too dangerous to keep alive. Thus, the risk was too great.

So... in other words, they were too lazy/unprepared to move him.

Not at all. The mission wasn't to capture any prisoners, it was a seek and destroy mission, no prisoners. And, he was dying anyway.

The Bayverse has THE platform now to do a lot of really cool things within the TF mythos outside of some incredible fight scenes and special effects.

 

It's the Bayverse! ANYTHING can happen! And by anything I mean incredible fight scenes and special effects.

 

 

Anything, that is but characterization, plot, or any semblance of coherence.

 

The Trix Petro-Rabbit says: Silly Autobots, Murder is for Decepticons!

Hmmm, I think I got it. After many millions of years of taking the high ground on everything the Autobots had these small insugnificant flesh creatures convince them that they should just wipe the decepticons out of existance. They are bad after all and should be destroyed, humans do it all the time and it's ok..... See, how could the autobots argue with this logic, they thought it was a good idea.

Hmmm, I think I got it. After many millions of years of taking the high ground on everything the Autobots had these small insugnificant flesh creatures convince them that they should just wipe the decepticons out of existance. They are bad after all and should be destroyed, humans do it all the time and it's ok..... See, how could the autobots argue with this logic, they thought it was a good idea.

Who says in the Bayverse the Autobots "took the high ground" for millions of years? They could have very well been more "bloodthirtsy" than humans before coming to Earth.

 

 

Good point... I guess the Autobays and Baycons act a lot different than I exspected.

Something occurred to me while reading this thread. Since Sideways is a messenger and Sideswipe is a warrior with swords.... wouldn't that make the situation a bit...

 

"THIS... IS... SHANGHAI!"

 

...Nope, doesn't have quite the same ring to it... :tfgrin

 

 

Hmmm, I think I got it. After many millions of years of taking the high ground on everything the Autobots had these small insugnificant flesh creatures convince them that they should just wipe the decepticons out of existance. They are bad after all and should be destroyed, humans do it all the time and it's ok..... See, how could the autobots argue with this logic, they thought it was a good idea.

Who says in the Bayverse the Autobots "took the high ground" for millions of years? They could have very well been more "bloodthirtsy" than humans before coming to Earth.

 

 

Good point... I guess the Autobays and Baycons act a lot different than I exspected.

 

Well, no matter how you slice it, reasonable or not, I suspect it may send "the wrong message" to all the Children who aren't mature enough to come to this forum and participate in our enlightened philosophical discussion here. :shrug