Re: Conviction Discussion thread

[Guest]

Yes it was a regular event that occured, but I'm not sure how that changes anything. It wasn't something that the parents or the children wanted if Goldy's parents and Goldy's reaction once she realized what was going on is the norm. Seeing as the other kids that were a little brighter then Goldy reacted the same way only sooner I would assume that's true.

And I don't think having a good relationship with the person who kidnapped you makes up for it. Or even begins to make up for it.

I'd feel it was more justified if they allowed them to surrender, but they didn't surrender. You think his surrender was genuine and representitive of more than just himself. I don't.

[DoomManta]

As far as I'm concerned, the Celestians gave up any kind of moral high ground the instant they decided to not bother even trying to get the nightkin to surrender.

I finished my editing run of the chapter, but I'm not the only person looking it over. But judging from progress, I'd guess it'll go up in the next few days.

[Frost]

I agree, Mant (man, my nicknames are awkward sometimes)

In any event, I look forward to it.

[Guest]

Eh, the nightkin lost it for me when they kidnapped children and slipped further down the ground when NMM suggested bringing Goldy into a threeway between her and Chase.

[Frost]

Eh, the nightkin lost it for me when they kidnapped children and slipped further down the ground when NMM suggested bringing Goldy into a threeway between her and Chase.

Especially considering that Chase declined that offer, Nightmare Moon's own relative debauchery has little bearing on her soldiers' deaths. The relative sympathy of the Nightkin, in fact, is completely irrelevant to the fact that the Celestians committed a war crime.

 If I get sent to Syria and shoot a surrendering ISIS member in the dick because he beheaded fifteen Kurdish children, that is still murder and still a war crime. If I take his watch once he's dead, that's still looting and still a war crime. The likelihood of my facing courts-martial for said war crime is dependent on who, exactly, witnesses it; but the law is the law.

[Guest]

It's not a war crime to kidnap children and force them to fight for you?

[Frost]

It's not a war crime to kidnap children and force them to fight for you?

It's also a war crime to massacre war criminals.

[DoomManta]

Of course it's a war crime to force child soldiers, but that doesn't make killing those child combatants right. 

If US Marines could give Imperial Japanese soldiers the chance to surrender at Okinawa or Iwo Jima, even after the Batan Death March, the Celestians could have done the same at Blackrock. They just chose not to.

[Guest]

Okay so what is the morally right way and legally right way to kill someone of the opposing force? If you're attempting to be stealthy because the enemy holds a defendable position should you announce your presence? Should you only attack forts that are racially diverse?

Again only one nighkin surrendered.

@Doommanta They didn't kill the children and the Japanese aren't super soldiers. As a soldier I don't think you have a moral obligation to cease your attack and ask them if they want to surrender. I would not ask a marine to ask his enemy if they want to surrender between every shot. Nor would I ask the Celestians to stop swinging their weapons at an enemy for the same purpose. It's the enemy's obligation to ask for surrender if they want it.

[DoomManta]

Given that the TRADITIONAL ROYAL CANTERLOT VOICE is a thing, they could have given a surrender demand that way before the attack even began. But that's neither here nor there since Pyra rather explicitly said that they were under orders to make sure there were no survivors. The intent was total slaughter, and that's the issue for me.

[Frost]

Okay so what is the morally right way and legally right way to kill someone of the opposing force? If you're attempting to be stealthy because the enemy holds a defendable position should you announce your presence? Should you only attack forts that are racially diverse?

Again only one nighkin surrendered.

@Doommanta They didn't kill the children and the Japanese aren't super soldiers.

It's entirely legal to stealthily kill the enemy or even kill a retreating enemy. A visibly surrendering enemy is no longer a combatant and is now a prisoner of war. Refusing surrender and treating surrendering personnel as belligerents is a violation of the Law of Land Warfare and punishable, depending on the prosecuting state, by death or imprisonment. That the surrendering party was one soldier is irrelevant--one man or one battalion, a surrender is a surrender. That he was a war criminal is irrelevant--war criminals' status as prisoners-of-war and entitlements to the protections of the Geneva conventions are indeed revoked, but only after a "Competent Tribunal" has determined their status as such.

[Frost]

The Geneva conventions do not exist in Equestria, naturally, but this is a medieval-based society, and the Laws and Customs of War that medieval societies followed were outright genteel compared to the Law of War (The gestalt code of the Geneva and Hague Conventions' rulings) and similar--if not more restrictive--laws are to be expected. The Peace of God, for instance, was practically dueling on an army-scale, if only applicable between Christian nations

[Guest]

Am I remembering this wrong? Is there a passage where the nightkin as a whole or anyone besides that one nightkin surrenders? It's the crux of your argument and I don't remember the evidence supporting it.

Why does what Pira said matter? At all? If no nightkin ever surrendered then no Celestial killed a surrendering enemy. Killing the opposing force is not morally wrong.

[Frost]

Also, it's naturally been a while since I've read the fic--they went back and "mopped up" wounded enemies, didn't they? Also a war crime. A wounded, incapacitated combatant is, again, no longer a combatant and is now a prisoner of war. Perhaps different in this medieval setting--considering the Middle Ages' tradition of Coup de Gras, literally "blow of grace" and meant as a mercy kill in the days of primitive, painful and ineffective medicine to prevent the wounded from hours of suffering before death-- but considering medical magic is available, I doubt the practice exists in this setting.

They also picked up a few "souvenirs", or at least intended to, if I recall. Looting of any sort is also a war crime.

[Guest]

Am I remembering this wrong? Is there a passage where the nightkin as a whole or anyone besides that one nightkin surrenders? It's the crux of your argument and I don't remember the evidence supporting it.

...no, the crux of my argument is at least one nightkin surrendered.
It might have been only the one, but one is enough.

He stopped surrendering the moment he bit Pira and that was the moment he was killed. I don't remember the scene too well but the celestials to my memory had no plan on killing him immediately.

[Frost]

Chapter 6: Pyra:

Stygus definitely surrendered (because, as seen earlier in the chapter, he'd grown utterly disillusioned with Luna and her cult of Nightkin) and, by all appearances, his surrender was sincere. And Pyra very deliberately executed him. That's about as clear-cut a war crime as you can get, with the justification of "Celestia's orders"

[Guest]

"you're the first nightkin I've ever met that even considered surrendering." Let's ignore this I guess.

And there's no chance he lied about surrendering to catch Pyra off guard.

[Frost]

"you're the first nightkin I've ever met that even considered surrendering." Let's ignore this I guess.

Art. 23. In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden.....(c) To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion(d) To declare that no quarter will be given........

Let's ignore this, I guess

And there's no chance he lied about surrendering to catch Pyra off guard.  

Sorry, I can't seem to find the "Unless you think they're lying" clause to the Law of War

[Guest]

Friends up the hall would raise that number above eight swicked. Unless she's insulting stygus and means to imply he has no friends, and seeing as they were in Blackrock it's pretty safe to assume they were nightkin.

[Guest]

"you're the first nightkin I've ever met that even considered surrendering." Let's ignore this I guess.

Art. 23. In addition to the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially forbidden.....(c) To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion(d) To declare that no quarter will be given........

Let's ignore this, I guess

And there's no chance he lied about surrendering to catch Pyra off guard.  

Sorry, I can't seem to find the "Unless you think they're lying" clause to the Law of War

I'm not defending them in court. And they live in a fantasy world I think it's safe to assume the judicial system did not evolve paralel to the real world. I was just saying Pyra's account of the event is no other Nightkin surrendered, it's not a complete account of events but it is better evidence then just believing that others did.

[Frost]

Across from me, I heard Chase’s breath catch in her throat.

It was the same orange pegasus who killed Astral. I grit my jaw as I watched the fire bounce off her three tone mane, white, yellow, and red, tied back into a short ponytail. Internally, I vowed to kill her somehow. She had a necklace on, and embedded in the front of it was a red gem carved in the shape of a candle flame. She was short, even for a pegasus, and through the leather armour she had on, an athletic frame was visible. The strangest thing was that she was out of uniform. Her armour bore no heraldry, and its make and craft was clearly different from all the other pegasi.

Modern laws of war regarding conduct during war (jus in bello), such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, provide that it is unlawful for belligerents to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements, such as wearing distinctive uniform or other distinctive signs visible at a distance, carrying weapons openly, and conducting operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Impersonating enemy combatants by wearing the enemy’s uniform is allowed, though fighting in that uniform is unlawful perfidy, as is the taking of hostages.

Huh

[Guest]

Yes, he only pretended to surrender so that, when she had her blade in his heart because her orders were to kill all nightkin, he could non-fatally injure her. The perfect plan!

Because he didn't succeed in killing her doesn't mean he didn't attempt it. And I'm fairly certain he got much closer to killing her than any other nightkin in the fort besides the one that actually did her in.

[Frost]

And they live in a fantasy world I think it's safe to assume the judicial system did not evolve paralel to the real world.

The Geneva conventions do not exist in Equestria, naturally, but this is a medieval-based society, and the Laws and Customs of War that medieval societies followed were outright genteel compared to the Law of War (The gestalt code of the Geneva and Hague Conventions' rulings) and similar--if not more restrictive--laws are to be expected. The Peace of God, for instance, was practically dueling on an army-scale, if only applicable between Christian nations

We generally operate under the understanding that pony laws, customs, and mindsets concerning such matters are like humans' unless noted. Though violence seems rare in the modern setting, self-defence killings are generally noted to be legal. Drug use, when it appears in fic, is also generally noted to be similarly illegal unless prescribed. This allows both the author and reader to understand the nature of events without the author having to make a legal code wholesale because "it's different; they're ponies". Likewise, unless noted, I am operating under the assumption that their Laws and Customs of War are similar to the Hague and Geneva Conventions' rulings.

[Frost]

Yes, he only pretended to surrender so that, when she had her blade in his heart because her orders were to kill all nightkin, he could non-fatally injure her. The perfect plan!

Because he didn't succeed in killing her doesn't mean he didn't attempt it. And I'm fairly certain he got much closer to killing her than any other nightkin in the fort besides the one that actually did her in.

The moment his surrender was denied, he was no longer a prisoner-of-war and was once more a lawful combatant. His attack was a lawfully belligerent act of war, not a war crime (nor is it a war crime for prisoners-of-war to resist or attempt escape in the first place).

If the Nightkins' violence was a detestable, brutal series of acts, then the Celestians' equal or more-brutal actions are likewise detestable. They do not get a free pass because they're the main continuity's designated "good guys". Allied soldiers who committed war crimes against the Axis were also punished after the war, though they were both the victor and the historically-recorded "good guys".

[Guest]

Well you did convince me of one point. Pyra didn't know that Stygus was going to attack her, she clearly did not think that was the case or she would not have turned her back and gave him an opening, I will concede that was a murder. It does not matter if he planned on killing her after or not.

But Pyra's account is the most complete one available, according to her no other nightkin surrendered. so while they did murder someone. That was wrong. I don't see anything morally wrong with opposing forces killing one another, I don't see why Celestials lose moral high ground because their soldiers killed opposing soldiers.

I will admit the orders were wrong, they shouldn't kill the nightkin because they look different (Though it is probably well known that they kidnap children and abuse them. I wouldn't blame a father for killing someone who kidnapped his daughter and abused her. It would be illegal for him to doso but I don't think it would be wrong) but with the exception of Stygus all evidence leads to the conclusion that they were killed for being the opposing army not for being Nightkin. That reason could not come into play until they had surrendered. Which only one is known to have and I admit that was wrong, you're right.

[Frost]

The fact that it only came into play once is irrelevant; the declaration of "no quarter" is a war crime. The declaration of "no quarter" based on the race of the targets isn't "wrong", it's genocide. The fact that all known Nightkin were Lunar soldiers is irrelevant--the order to unconditionally kill all Nightkin on account of their race constitutes a crime against humanity--or equinity, as it were. No one is faulting the Celestians for killing the active defenders of an enemy force, we're faulting both the ground fighters and Celestian high command (apparently, Celestia herself) for attempting/executing and ordering, respectively,  a genocide.

[Guest]

If that's the argument then I can agree with that. I was arguing against the idea that the Celestial soldiers with the exception of Pyra (you guys have convinced me of her) had done anything wrong at Blackrock.

Though I of course will freely admit I have a bias againt the Nightkin in general not because the setting has deemed they are bad but because their actions have done that. More specifically the actions of those that live in Blackrock.

[Frost]

Stygus was magically-brainwashed and the rest were mundanely brainwashed. Nightmare Moon (also kind of a pervert, as you've pointed out) was the one to order them to systematically take more children to become Nightkin. Combine the non-optional physical changes, the indoctrination from a young age, and the use of sex and affection as a tool to keep them in line, and they're, at the end of it, pretty much all overgrown child-soldiers--except, again, for Stygus, who was mentally and magically coerced.

[Guest]

It's muddy but I think the majority of the Nightkin are responsible for their actions. Chase has at least on one occasion (The scene where NMM wanted to sex her on Goldy's first night.) has shown to have a free will that doesn't always line up withh NMM's desires. I still think she is at the very least partially responsible for kidnapping Goldy.

Not to imply that the Nightkin are not victims of NMM.

[Vinylshadow]

NMM selects the foals; older Nightkin are tasked with raising them and teaching them that every pony under Celestia is the scum of the earth; NMM selects one after screwing them all to be her Foaltoy...

Whatever works, I guess

Oh hey, new Harmony Theory Chapter...
*28,897 words* Oh for crying out loud...

[Sponsored content]