What if there was a REAL civil war in the Empire?

[Konig15]

It seems to me in the films and ESPECIALLY the EU, the Empire is firmly in control of the galaxy until Endor, when the warlords splinter and the Empire falls apart under it's own rotting weight. However, in a story I considering writing, a different version of my Admiral Griff story, where Griff does not obey the Emperor. Now this doesn't have to just apply to my story, suppose:


1. A traitor rebels against the Empire after a particularly brutal and stupid atrocity, whether of not it was out of principle. Blowing up Alderaan would be a good example.

2. This traitor denounces the atrocity and declares Palpatine unfit to rule.

3. The traitor may or may not seek to become Emperor himself, but he/she does seek to restore the Senate and some semblance of Constitutional rule.

4. The traitor has the support of 1/4 to 1/3 of the Star fleet, who defect accordingly.

5. Darth Vader remains loyal to Palpatine.

Where would the fault lines be? I could see Motti staying loyal and Tagge defecting, Needa staying loyal and Grant defecting, but maybe not?

Would this pro-Imperial group be willing or able to make an understanding with the Rebel Alliance, maybe even join the Rebel Alliance?

Could they win? And what would be the time frame?

Sorry, but I love counterfactuals, even in fictional universes!

[Lord Tesla]

Sorry, but I love counterfactuals, even in fictional universes!

But, in that case, wouldn't they be counterfictionals? :xmas:

I'm fond of pondering the what ifs myself, and yours in an interesting proposition.

I'm not sure how much difference it would make in the long run, even if such an Imperial faction were to make common cause with the rebellion. If it happened before Alderaan, it probably wouldn't make much difference. The Death Star pretty much trumped every other military asset, until it was blown up by a farmboy, his discorporated mentor, and Han Solo (Luke alone wasn't going to get the job done). The battle of Yavin might have been more spectacular, or might have happened somewhere else.

If it happened after, well, the rebels would have been better armed, but, note that the "ultimate power in the universe" was insignificant compared to the power of...The Force, a proposition proven by the fact that the victory at Yavin IV came about largely due to the use of the Force by Luke and Obi-Wan. And laid waste TUPITU.

The crucial factor in the struggle was in fact Luke the Fluke, and I don't see Luke joining the Empire for any reason arising from a defection of a portion of Imperial forces not including his father, or an alliance between the rebellion and this Imperial faction. On the other hand, if his father had had another shot at convincing him after Bespin...well, things might have been considerably different, I believe.

[Konig15]

I'm not sure how much difference it would make in the long run, even if such an Imperial faction were to make common cause with the rebellion. If it happened before Alderaan, it probably wouldn't make much difference. The Death Star pretty much trumped every other military asset, until it was blown up by a farmboy, his discorporated mentor, and Han Solo (Luke alone wasn't going to get the job done). The battle of Yavin might have been more spectacular, or might have happened somewhere else.

If it happened after, well, the rebels would have been better armed, but, note that the "ultimate power in the universe" was insignificant compared to the power of...The Force, a proposition proven by the fact that the victory at Yavin IV came about largely due to the use of the Force by Luke and Obi-Wan. And laid waste TUPITU.

The crucial factor in the struggle was in fact Luke the Fluke, and I don't see Luke joining the Empire for any reason arising from a defection of a portion of Imperial forces not including his father, or an alliance between the rebellion and this Imperial faction. On the other hand, if his father had had another shot at convincing him after Bespin...well, things might have been considerably different, I believe.

Well, I understand your opinion, but it comes from the belief that the GFFA is nothing but the chessboard where the Jedi and Sith continously vei for dominance and the rest of the people are merely pawns in that game. I most infactically disagree with that. In fact, as I've stated before, the Jedi and Sith are the LEAST interesting parts of the Star Wars story, at least to me.

But to rebutt what you said, remember General Dondonna said the Death Star had nearly half[i/] the power of [i]a starfleet. Now starfleets can mean many things to many people, so I have looked up this article from the Wookieepedia, probably our best source for in universe Star Wars related info:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy#Fleet

Dondonna is almost assuredly talking about a Sector Fleet, or Sector Group, which would, on adverage, have 2,400 ships on them, 24 of which were Star Destroyers. Death Squadron had at least 11 SDs and relative number of support craft. Death Squadron could take on the Death Star and theoretically win. Of course how long it would take the squardron to batter down the defenses of the Death Star and the casualties involved is a matter of conjecture.

[Lord Tesla]

Well, I understand your opinion, but it comes from the belief that the GFFA is nothing but the chessboard where the Jedi and Sith continously vei for dominance and the rest of the people are merely pawns in that game. I most infactically disagree with that. In fact, as I've stated before, the Jedi and Sith are the LEAST interesting parts of the Star Wars story, at least to me.

To each his own, of course, but it is worth keeping in mind that Star Wars without the Jedi (and the Sith), is not Star Wars, and that, in the GFFA, everything we see is driven by...the actions of the Jedi and the Sith. Doesn't make everyone else pawns, exactly, but it does put them in a somewhat subordinate role to the folks with the Force.


But to rebutt what you said, remember General Dondonna said the Death Star had nearly half[i/] the power of [I]a starfleet. Now starfleets can mean many things to many people, so I have looked up this article from the Wookieepedia, probably our best source for in universe Star Wars related info:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy#Fleet

Dondonna is almost assuredly talking about a Sector Fleet, or Sector Group, which would, on adverage, have 2,400 ships on them, 24 of which were Star Destroyers. Death Squadron had at least 11 SDs and relative number of support craft. Death Squadron could take on the Death Star and theoretically win. Of course how long it would take the squardron to batter down the defenses of the Death Star and the casualties involved is a matter of conjecture.

First, the exact quote is: "The battle station is heavily shielded and carries a firepower greater than half the starfleet. Its defenses are designed around a direct large-scale assault." [emphasis added.]

Now what does that mean, exactly? It seems to be a reference to the turbo-lasers and other defensive emplacements--that's what he was talking to the pilots about, after all: the defenses they'd have to face in making the attack--and making them out to be equivalent to something more than half that of what he believes to be the Empire's "fleet," i.e., it's total inventory of operational capital ships. What else could "the starfleet" mean in this context?

And Han Solo, who knew a little something about the Imperial Navy, proclaimed that the entire fleet couldn't have done the job at Alderaan: "The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take a thousand ships with more firepower than I've..." Alas, he didn't get to finish the point because of that pesky TIE fighter.

With all due respect to figures from Wookieepedia, it seems the Empire, as understood in the GFFA, and probably the mind of GL, didn't dispose of that many ships, and that they weren't powerful enough to generate the kind of damage the Death Star could with its primary weapon. And the station was designed to defend against those very ships, and if it had the defensive firepower of something more than half the fleet, that must have been based on an assumption that, operationally, the entire fleet, or anything equivalent to it, couldn't have been brought to bear against the station at one time. A reasonable assumption, given that the primary weapon was not only hell on planets, but also on capital ships, as we saw at Endor: with the super laser to thin the ranks, you wouldn't ever have to worry about facing an entire fleet.

Second, even Dodonna invoked the Force, before sending the rebel pilots out to take on the most powerful technological weapon in the galaxy.

So, fleet elements, surely not equal to half the fleet, let alone the entire thing, defecting would not have had a major impact. They would not have been decisive, certainly, while the Emperor or Vader lived.

[RollaFett]

Not to oversimplify things, but if a high-ranking military officer within the Empire was planning treason, I really don't think he'd get very far. Palps would sense this and end that threat rather quickly, methinks.
Obviously, your 'what if' isn't including that scenario, but shouldn't it?

[Konig15]

Not to oversimplify things, but if a high-ranking military officer within the Empire was planning treason, I really don't think he'd get very far. Palps would sense this and end that threat rather quickly, methinks.
Obviously, your 'what if' isn't including that scenario, but shouldn't it?

Palpatine can't sense the entire galaxy. Grand Admiral Harkov got very far in his schemes before being stopped in TIE Fighter. To the point he was actually attacking Imperial assests. It all depends on the size of the following this traitor is able to gather.

[RollaFett]

Well, I have no idea who the hell Grand Admiral Harkov is, but based on what I've seen in the films, I can't possibly imagine Palps or Vader not sensing an impending attempt at treason. That's just me, though, I suppose.

[Kam Solusar]

Well, I have no idea who the hell Grand Admiral Harkov is, but based on what I've seen in the films, I can't possibly imagine Palps or Vader not sensing an impending attempt at treason. That's just me, though, I suppose.

Mass scale defection, yeah, or some sort of internal plot, perhaps. But I think it'd be pretty naive to assume that all of the miliatary minds of the Rebellion came "from nowhere." There had to be a few defections. EU tells us of a few, but removing EU from the picture, you have to think that at least a few of the high ranking officers either changed, or chose, sides.

[RollaFett]

Okay, now I think we're talking about something a little different. An officer leaving the Empire to join the already formed Rebellion is one thing, and I can see that happening.
However, an Imperial officer turning traitor and forming his own rebellion against Palps would seem like writing his own death sentence which would be carried out swiftly.

[Tovor]

Now wait a moment. Neither Vader nor Sidious were able to sense the location of the stolen DS plans, or the location of the hidden rebel bases (there were more than one, I'm sure, and Tarkin did demand from Leia the location of the "main rebel base" which proves that there were more than one), so why are we to assume that he they would have been able to sense meetings between conspirators?

An approaching "rebel" Imperial fleet bent on attacking Coruscant, or other Imperial ships; that I can believe they would sense and sense strongly, but not just Imperial officers meeting in secret and making plans.

IMO. :P

[RollaFett]

Hmmmmmmm....maybe.

[RollaFett]

Hmmmmm...the more I think about it actually, the more I actually may be changing my tune. That is a really good point, Tov, about ANH when Vader is pratically mocked for not being able to accomplish crucial things through the Force.
One can only conclude that Palps had tried as well to do those things and failed too.

[Tovor]

:victory:

[Lord Tesla]

Now wait a moment. Neither Vader nor Sidious were able to sense the location of the stolen DS plans, or the location of the hidden rebel bases (there were more than one, I'm sure, and Tarkin did demand from Leia the location of the "main rebel base" which proves that there were more than one), so why are we to assume that he they would have been able to sense meetings between conspirators?

An approaching "rebel" Imperial fleet bent on attacking Coruscant, or other Imperial ships; that I can believe they would sense and sense strongly, but not just Imperial officers meeting in secret and making plans.

IMO. :P

Sensing need not have entered it, especially within the Imperial command structure...

One word: spies.

Sure as finger-lightning stings, I'm sure Palpatine had a boatload of them.

[Lord Tesla]

Now wait a moment. Neither Vader nor Sidious were able to sense the location of the stolen DS plans, or the location of the hidden rebel bases (there were more than one, I'm sure, and Tarkin did demand from Leia the location of the "main rebel base" which proves that there were more than one), so why are we to assume that he they would have been able to sense meetings between conspirators?

A further thought: How are we certain Palpatine was unable to locate the plans and the site of the bases? Vader wasn't. But the films are silent on the state of Palpatine's knowledge. He could have withheld the information from Vader, and tasked him with the search as an exercise, or a test.

[RollaFett]

As for spies, sure, but my theory was based on either Palps or Vader sensing an impending treason. Spies could work too, but if he had any prior to and during ANH, they did a poor job of locating the secret Rebel base as well.

[RollaFett]

^^Now you're taking a gigantic leap with that. There is simply nothing to point in that direction even a little bit.

[Tovor]

A further thought: How are we certain Palpatine was unable to locate the plans and the site of the bases? Vader wasn't. But the films are silent on the state of Palpatine's knowledge. He could have withheld the information from Vader, and tasked him with the search as an exercise, or a test.
Well then the whole story involving Leia's capture and imprisonment, and Tarkin's efforts to break her through threats, were for naught then. In fact, if Sidious knew where the base was, and where the DS plans were, then that pretty much negates the whole movie, doesn't it? Her mission to Tatooine, for naught; enlisting Obi-Wan and Luke in a race against time, for naught; the Death Star wasting time blowing up a planet if the Emperor knew that the rebel base was elsewhere.

[Lord Tesla]

As for spies, sure, but my theory was based on either Palps or Vader sensing an impending treason. Spies could work too, but if he had any prior to and during ANH, they did a poor job of locating the secret Rebel base as well.


That Palpatine had spies, as well as the Force, seems a very safe assumption. But we can't be sure that they were doing a poor job. The films simply do not tell us how Palpatine's spies were doing. We know that Tarkin, and the Keystone Imperials in the briefing room didn't know, and that Vader didn't know, where the plans were or where to point the Death Star. But that doesn't tell us what Palpatine knew.

Palpatine may have had any number of reasons to keep the information to himself. Not least to keep the rebellion from knowing that he knows about them, the more effectively to work against them. Keeping it to himself would also serve to give his subordinates something to do (finding rebels, fighting rebels, snipping among themselves over which of them is lamest at finding and fighting rebels) other than look to the center and conspire against him.

[Lord Tesla]

^^Now you're taking a gigantic leap with that. There is simply nothing to point in that direction even a little bit.

A leap? A suggestion. The films are silent on the matter. Nothing points to it, perhaps, but nothing points away from it, either. I think it not unreasonable to assume Palpatine knew more than his subordinates, and played games with them. The galaxy was his Xbox...

[Lord Tesla]

Well then the whole story involving Leia's capture and imprisonment, and Tarkin's efforts to break her through threats, were for naught then. In fact, if Sidious knew where the base was, and where the DS plans were, then that pretty much negates the whole movie, doesn't it? Her mission to Tatooine, for naught; enlisting Obi-Wan and Luke in a race against time, for naught; the Death Star wasting time blowing up a planet if the Emperor knew that the rebel base was elsewhere.

"Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."

"Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen."

"It was I who allowed the Alliance to know the location of the shield generator. It is quite safe from your pitiful little band. An entire legion of my best troops awaits them."

[Orandhite]

Palps isn't all powerful. He is great at manipulating people as shown in the PT - he manages to manipulate the entire Senate, the Trade Federation, and the Jedi. But being able to sense what everyone is feeling and thinking I don't think so. :no:

So defecting officers is more than likely. :yes:

As for LT's suggestions - they sound like a good topic to discuss, but might be more appropriate in one of the OT threads? :)

[Raganork8]

Palps isn't all powerful. He is great at manipulating people as shown in the PT - he manages to manipulate the entire Senate, the Trade Federation, and the Jedi. But being able to sense what everyone is feeling and thinking I don't think so. :no:

So defecting officers is more than likely. :yes:

As for LT's suggestions - they sound like a good topic to discuss, but might be more appropriate in one of the OT threads? :)


Wasn't Crix an ex Imperial Commander?

[RollaFett]

That Palpatine had spies, as well as the Force, seems a very safe assumption. But we can't be sure that they were doing a poor job. The films simply do not tell us how Palpatine's spies were doing. We know that Tarkin, and the Keystone Imperials in the briefing room didn't know, and that Vader didn't know, where the plans were or where to point the Death Star. But that doesn't tell us what Palpatine knew.

Palpatine may have had any number of reasons to keep the information to himself. Not least to keep the rebellion from knowing that he knows about them, the more effectively to work against them. Keeping it to himself would also serve to give his subordinates something to do (finding rebels, fighting rebels, snipping among themselves over which of them is lamest at finding and fighting rebels) other than look to the center and conspire against him.

No, no, and no. Gimme a break with this. There would not be a single benefit of keeping that sort of information to himself. "Palpatine may have had any number of reasons to keep that information to himself"? Really? Name one. You cannot. He wanted to destroy the rebels probably more than anyone. "Giving his subordinates something to do" would've been sending them to destroy said base once he told them where it was. You're reaching, you're making a leap, making a suggestion...call it whatever you want, but in the end, it's simple nonsense. IMHO, of course. :)


A leap? A suggestion. The films are silent on the matter. Nothing points to it, perhaps, but nothing points away from it, either. I think it not unreasonable to assume Palpatine knew more than his subordinates, and played games with them. The galaxy was his Xbox...

Do you know why the films are "silent on the matter"? Because, as you pointed out, there isn't a single thing in the film to point to it. And just because nothing "points away from it", that doesn't mean it's a logical conclusion to come to. Sure, I'm confident that Palpatine kept some things to himself, his character is pretty well established enough to think that, but to keep this particular piece of information to himself is completely makes zero sense. In the end, he, along with his subordinates, had a common goal: to wipe out the rebellion. Do you think that once they finally finished constructing the Ultimate Power in the universe that he would play games with those running it and allow the rebellion to study plans to destroy it at a hidden base that, for mysterious reasons, he would keep as his own personal secret? Please. With all due respect, Tesla, you're smarter than this. Sometimes things aren't any more complicated than they are presented.

[RollaFett]

Upon re-reading my above post, it occurs to me that I may have been unecessarily harsh. No offense meant, LT, ok?

[Lord Tesla]

Upon re-reading my above post, it occurs to me that I may have been unecessarily harsh. No offense meant, LT, ok?

Absolutely none taken, RF. You needn't give it another thought. :)

[Lord Tesla]

As for LT's suggestions - they sound like a good topic to discuss, but might be more appropriate in one of the OT threads? :)

This isn't an OT thread? Is there another OT-ier thread?

[Lord Tesla]

No, no, and no. Gimme a break with this. There would not be a single benefit of keeping that sort of information to himself.
"Palpatine may have had any number of reasons to keep that information to himself"? Really?

Yes, really.

Name one. You cannot.

Yes, I can; I already did. One: keeping the rebels in the dark about his knowledge. Why? Knowledge is power; and knowledge of others that they do not know you possess is power over them. So long as he knows where they are, and what they're doing, they are an element he can manipulate. Would he do that? Why would he do that? Why did he manipulate the Trade Federation and then the Separatists? I don't think he was in control of the Rebellion the way he was in control with either of those groups, but he didn't have to be.

Two: To maintain the rebellion as a credible threat, that is, as a serious focus, for his various commanders and governors. It is not unheard of for rulers to play up divisions among their supports, to send them off on military adventures to distract them, or to ruin them, but in whichever way to keep them from causing trouble at home--and accumulating too much power, or influence.

He wanted to destroy the rebels probably more than anyone. "Giving his subordinates something to do" would've been sending them to destroy said base once he told them where it was. You're reaching, you're making a leap, making a suggestion...call it whatever you want, but in the end, it's simple nonsense. IMHO, of course. :)

There's a difference between giving them something to do, and giving them a victory, after which they will have troops, ships, power, influence. Keeping them running around the galaxy trying to track down a shadowy, slippery Rebellion, which they never seem to quite get a handle on, is definitely going to keep them busy, and it's going to do so without building them up or making them more popular or more powerful.

And where is the proof that Palpatine wanted the rebellion destroyed so intensely? He left the matter entirely to subordinates. He didn't even bother to check in with them until well into ESB. And then, he sends a holo to Vader about...the Rebellion? Nope: Luke Skywalker. "We have a new enemy-Luke Skywalker."

Remember, the Death Star is insignificant next to the power of the Force, and if it is, surely so must be the far less powerful Rebellion. This is a third reason to continue to allow the Rebellion to exist, to keep secret exactly what he knew of it, to preserve it as a means of tracking Luke Skywalker, and engineering a confrontation with him. That is why Luke's "insignificant Rebellion" was allowed to continue, why Palpatine fed them the location of the second Death Star and the shield generator--which proves he knew about them, and had spies working to subvert them, at least at the time of ROTJ--so that their greatest hero, and the only threat to Palpatine, could be lured in range, and offered a similar choice to the one that faced Anakin in the Chancellor's office twenty-odd years earlier.


Do you know why the films are "silent on the matter"? Because, as you pointed out, there isn't a single thing in the film to point to it. And just because nothing "points away from it", that doesn't mean it's a logical conclusion to come to. Sure, I'm confident that Palpatine kept some things to himself, his character is pretty well established enough to think that, but to keep this particular piece of information to himself is completely makes zero sense.

I think I found some deafening noise in the films to support this, actually, in Palpatine's action, or lack thereof, in each of the films, and the focus and nature of his actions especially in ROTJ.

And I still think it makes sense, apart from that, as I outlined above.

In the end, he, along with his subordinates, had a common goal: to wipe out the rebellion.

Now that's what brought me in to this thread, bold assumptions. Now there's nothing wrong with that one, and it is most likely correct, but...it's still an assumption. I have a different assumption, as outlined above and elsewhere.

Do you think that once they finally finished constructing the Ultimate Power in the universe that he would play games with those running it and allow the rebellion to study plans to destroy it at a hidden base that, for mysterious reasons, he would keep as his own personal secret? Please. With all due respect, Tesla, you're smarter than this. Sometimes things aren't any more complicated than they are presented.

Yes, I think it possible. In the beginning, I proposed it more as a means of illustrating that some of the assumptions in this thread were just that, and needed to be examined more closely. However, as opinion to the contrary has mounted, I have thought harder about it, and I think it a lot more substantial than I did.

It may be excessively complicated; it may be wrong. I don't think, however that it quite has zero sense content. :wink:

On the subject of my smartness, well, I may be smarter than this; maybe not. I'm not the one to judge. :)

[RollaFett]

I still think you're making a great leap with this theory. None of your arguements in support of Palpatine keeping it a secret hold any water.
You must remember that we're talking about ANH, and ANH only with this discussion. In that film, and that film alone, there isn't any solitary reason to think the Emperor, who is mentioned just once during the entire movie, knew where the rebel base was and kept to himself. At this point in time, he was a very undeveloped character that didn't have an important role to play. It wasn't until the film was a hit that Lucas could then do more with him in other films.
Yes, we learn of what a dastardly fellow he is in later films, but even in those films he seems most interested in ruling the galaxy. Doing so would require eliminating enemies like the rebels.
Yes, in ESB he speaks to Vader about Skywalker, but if he wasn't a part of the rebellion in the first place they wouldn't have even known about him nor considered him a threat. And in ROTJ, they didn't construct a brand new Death Star just to get to Luke. It was to destroy the rebellion.
Don't forget about the overriding ambition of the Emperor. He wants to rule, plain and simple. He was just as willing to kill Luke, and continue to rule with Vader at his side, when Luke wouldn't turn.
We're getting way off track, though.
In the end, there simply is no good reason, or any solid eveidence to come to the conclusion that Palps would keep the location of the rebel base secret. You're overthinking things with this, and driving me nuts, dammit.

[Tovor]

You're...driving me nuts, dammit.
You remind of what the pirate said who had a steering wheel attached to his testicles.

[Lord Tesla]

Wasn't Crix an ex Imperial Commander?


I believe that is indeed his backstory, in the EU. In the films, I don't believe any mention is made of it.

[Lord Tesla]

I still think you're making a great leap with this theory. None of your arguements in support of Palpatine keeping it a secret hold any water.

Perhaps it is something of a leap. But...sometimes the only way to get from Point A to Point B is to leap. And if you're going to leap...

You must remember that we're talking about ANH, and ANH only with this discussion.

Are we? I don't recall any specific limitation in the original proposition, which, if I recall correctly, was in the nature of a speculation about a possible genuine civil war in the Empire. During the OT seemed implied, but the only specific reference to ANH that I remember was to the destruction of Alderaan as a possible catalyst for dissent and defection in the Imperial ranks. No one objected when I offered opinions of the effects of Imperial factions in both pre-Yavin and post-Yavin scenarios. At least not that I recall.

In that film, and that film alone, there isn't any solitary reason to think the Emperor, who is mentioned just once during the entire movie, knew where the rebel base was and kept to himself. At this point in time, he was a very undeveloped character that didn't have an important role to play. It wasn't until the film was a hit that Lucas could then do more with him in other films.

Well, what you say about the Emperor's primitive state of development is certainly true--from a certain point of view. A POV outside the films themselves. Within the story, so to speak, ANH Emperor is the same as ESB Emperor, and ROTS Emperor. Though unseen, he is there, in the background, with the power, knowledge, and motives (more or less) he has in the other films.

It is from that point of view I approach this analysis. From that perspective, Palpatine's absence, his silence, is of a piece with the curious incident of the dog in the night-time of Sherlockian lore, and like that quiescent dog's, Palpatine's inaction requires explanation.


Yes, we learn of what a dastardly fellow he is in later films, but even in those films he seems most interested in ruling the galaxy. Doing so would require eliminating enemies like the rebels.

Why would it require eliminating the rebels? Some enemies, yes, but why, when so much else in the films tells us that the technology and the armies and the rest of it is insignificant next to the power of the Force, should destruction of this one particular band with rather modest means, be such an all-consuming objective of the Emperor? It need be only if the Rebellion is considered to be a significant threat against the Empire. But they only succeed against the Empire twice, and both times, it because of the Force, not the force of their puny armaments.

Yes, in ESB he speaks to Vader about Skywalker, but if he wasn't a part of the rebellion in the first place they wouldn't have even known about him nor considered him a threat. And in ROTJ, they didn't construct a brand new Death Star just to get to Luke. It was to destroy the rebellion.

The actual purpose of the second Death Star was never revealed. One assumes it was to deter any antics among rebellion-minded subjects--but was it made specifically to crush the rebellion? How would it do that? If your aim is to pacify your empire, doing it by blowing it to bits one planet at at time is a poor strategy. But, once it's operational, why not use it as bait to lure in the Rebels, in whose ranks Luke can usually be found?

And I think I noted that the Rebellion was what brought Luke to the Emperor's attention, and that one reason for allowing it to continue to exist
was to allow it to serve as a means of keeping a handle on Luke Skywalker, who was in its ranks. Keeping tabs on him would be a powerful motivation to allow a pitiful insurrection to continue to exist.

Don't forget about the overriding ambition of the Emperor. He wants to rule, plain and simple. He was just as willing to kill Luke, and continue to rule with Vader at his side, when Luke wouldn't turn.

I don't forget about it, not for a moment. But that doesn't mean the rebellion had to be destroyed. He ruled the galaxy in on capacity or another for thirty-odd years. During war, secession, Jedi treason, numerous crises. He couldn't have continued to rule unless he wiped out a small band of rebels? I find that very hard to believe.



We're getting way off track, though.

There was a track? Dang, I must have missed it. :)

In the end, there simply is no good reason, or any solid eveidence to come to the conclusion that Palps would keep the location of the rebel base secret.

Not even his long standing pattern of keeping secret information on, and using, threats to the central authority in the galaxy to further his ambitions? It's what the man does, like breathing and eating, naturally.

You're overthinking things with this, and driving me nuts, dammit.

Overthinking? Well, I thought about it, certainly, but I really didn't have to work all that hard to come up with these observations. It seems rather obvious, once you start down that particular path.

Sorry about the whole driving-you-nuts aspect, though; that was never my intention.

[RollaFett]

Perhaps it is something of a leap. But...sometimes the only way to get from Point A to Point B is to leap. And if you're going to leap...


Sure, if one finds a leap to make. I have not.


Are we? I don't recall any specific limitation in the original proposition, which, if I recall correctly, was in the nature of a speculation about a possible genuine civil war in the Empire. During the OT seemed implied, but the only specific reference to ANH that I remember was to the destruction of Alderaan as a possible catalyst for dissent and defection in the Imperial ranks. No one objected when I offered opinions of the effects of Imperial factions in both pre-Yavin and post-Yavin scenarios. At least not that I recall.

Yeah. I'm only talking about the discussion within the discussion you and I are having regarding the Emperor keeping the location of the rebel base a secret.



Well, what you say about the Emperor's primitive state of development is certainly true--from a certain point of view. A POV outside the films themselves. Within the story, so to speak, ANH Emperor is the same as ESB Emperor, and ROTS Emperor. Though unseen, he is there, in the background, with the power, knowledge, and motives (more or less) he has in the other films.

It is from that point of view I approach this analysis. From that perspective, Palpatine's absence, his silence, is of a piece with the curious incident of the dog in the night-time of Sherlockian lore, and like that quiescent dog's, Palpatine's inaction requires explanation.

Well, I don't know squat about Sherlock's dog, but I do know that even with the Emperor we get to know in ESB and ROTJ, there still isn't any reason for him to keep knowledge of the rebels hidden base a secret.
Also, I whole-heartedly disagree about your last statement. This is something that you really cannot look upon unless you consider the 'outside the films' themselves. His role was non-important for the story of ANH, and unless that movie was a hit, we wouldn't have known anything further about him.
As a result, his inaction requires no explanation. He wasn't needed to tell the tale, so he had no important acts to explain.


Why would it require eliminating the rebels?

Ummm...just a leap, but they're pretty much the only real threat to the Empire that we know about. Sooo...eliminating them kind of takes care of your one major enemy. I know, it's a crazy leap on my part, but that's how I roll.



The actual purpose of the second Death Star was never revealed. One assumes it was to deter any antics among rebellion-minded subjects--but was it made specifically to crush the rebellion?

Ugh. Really? That's your counterpoint? I think it's pretty damn safe to assume the purpose of the second Death Star is right in line with the first one. In the end, did Luke wind up on it? Yes, but it wasn't constructed just to get that done.

And I think I noted that the Rebellion was what brought Luke to the Emperor's attention, and that one reason for allowing it to continue to exist
was to allow it to serve as a means of keeping a handle on Luke Skywalker, who was in its ranks. Keeping tabs on him would be a powerful motivation to allow a pitiful insurrection to continue to exist.

No. The Empire wants to get rid of the rebellion, period. You don't keep around an enemy that just detroyed a vital weapon so you can 'keep tabs' on one of their members. Is Palps a scheming scumbag? Yes, but even he would want to have as few enemies as possible hanging around the galaxy.



I don't forget about it, not for a moment. But that doesn't mean the rebellion had to be destroyed. He ruled the galaxy in on capacity or another for thirty-odd years. During war, secession, Jedi treason, numerous crises. He couldn't have continued to rule unless he wiped out a small band of rebels? I find that very hard to believe.

Uh-huh, and the point was also made in AOTC that the Republic had been in existence for far longer than a mere 30+ years. Palps had a long way to go before he could truly rule the galaxy comfortably. Otherwise, he would have had no reason for that first Death Star.





There was a track? Dang, I must have missed it. :)

Yeah, somewhere, but I'll be damned if I know where it anymore either. :wink:



Not even his long standing pattern of keeping secret information on, and using, threats to the central authority in the galaxy to further his ambitions? It's what the man does, like breathing and eating, naturally.

Ok, his goal was revealed in the PT. He, as a Sith, wanted to rule the galaxy. He accomplished that by performing all sorts of devious acts, as you correctly point out. However, once he's in that position, his ambition is pretty much fulfilled. He's ruling the friggin' galaxy! Not much left after that. So again, why would he keep the location of the rebel base a secret from his Empire staff? You have yet to supply an answer that makes an ounce of sense.



Overthinking? Well, I thought about it, certainly, but I really didn't have to work all that hard to come up with these observations. It seems rather obvious, once you start down that particular path.

Y'know, you're right. If you had overthought it, I'd have a satisfactory answer by now. :wink:

Sorry about the whole driving-you-nuts aspect, though; that was never my intention.

That's ok. Whenever I get into a discussion with stubborn individuals, like yourself, that refuse to allow the possibility that perhaps they may, in fact, be wrong about something, or just off-base about it, I usually get driven a little nuts. Happens enough around here, so I'm kind of used to it.

Merry Christmas, by the way! :maulxmas:

[Lord Tesla]

Sure, if one finds a leap to make. I have not.

Which is not the same thing as it not being there at all.


Yeah. I'm only talking about the discussion within the discussion you and I are having regarding the Emperor keeping the location of the rebel base a secret.

Okay, then I didn't miss anything.



Well, I don't know squat about Sherlock's dog, but I do know that even with the Emperor we get to know in ESB and ROTJ, there still isn't any reason for him to keep knowledge of the rebels hidden base a secret.

I thought everyone knew about the dog in the night-time...

Well, suffice it to say, Holmes drew Watson's attention to a dog's reaction in the night as a "curious incident." Watson replied, "The dog did nothing in the night-time." Holmes said: "That was the curious incident." (It's in the story "Silver Blaze," published in The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes.)

So it is with Palpatine: his inaction, his remoteness, at a moment when the Death Star is poised to begin operations, when the Rebellion has won its first victory, and the station's plans are unaccounted for, call out for an explanation. His inaction is...quite curious.

And, yes there is a reason. To preserve the Rebellion as a useful tool, a game piece, if you like, in the game he must necessarily have played to keep his subordinates, running loose in the galaxy with large fleets and legions of troops, from doing what commanders often do in empires, when they haven't anything better to do: declare themselves emperor and march on the capital.

Also, I whole-heartedly disagree about your last statement. This is something that you really cannot look upon unless you consider the 'outside the films' themselves.

I can't? Funny, it's what I've been doing all along.:wink:

It's like the Baker Street Irregulars, taking Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories as if they were genuine accounts of a real person, Sherlock Holmes, written by his friend, Dr. John Watson, equally real, and, from that basis, analyzing the stories, the odd points, the contradictions, and assorted inconsistencies in an effort to explain them.

It's a different approach than yours, but telling me it can't be done is like telling me my orange is lousy excuse for an apple, and impossible anyway.

His role was non-important for the story of ANH, and unless that movie was a hit, we wouldn't have known anything further about him.
As a result, his inaction requires no explanation. He wasn't needed to tell the tale, so he had no important acts to explain.

That is true, of course, all except the part about requiring explanation: you've just offered one yourself, after all. However, it has nothing to do with my points, or my analysis. It doesn't tell us a thing about Palpatine as viewed from my in-film perspective.


Ummm...just a leap, but they're pretty much the only real threat to the Empire that we know about. Sooo...eliminating them kind of takes care of your one major enemy. I know, it's a crazy leap on my part, but that's how I roll.

Your assumption is that the major enemy of the Empire is the Rebellion. But the Rebellion is insignificant. They don't have the ships, they don't have the men. About the only time they win is when they've got the Force on their side, in the person of one Skywalker or another. The Skywalker family is a much bigger threat to the Empire than the Rebellion.

Palpatine needs to control, kill or neutralize all the Skywalkers. The Rebellion he largely ignore, apart from the busywork it gives his commanders, who pose a much greater threat to him than the rebellion ever could.

Ugh. Really? That's your counterpoint? I think it's pretty damn safe to assume the purpose of the second Death Star is right in line with the first one. In the end, did Luke wind up on it? Yes, but it wasn't constructed just to get that done.

I don't believe I ever claimed that it was constructed for that purpose. It was meant to be a deterrent. You can't really use a Death Star all that much, after all, or you've destroyed what you're trying to rule. And you wouldn't build it to just whack the pathetic rebellion, either. But, once it's built, you can use it for any purpose you like, and that's what Palpatine did with it.

No. The Empire wants to get rid of the rebellion, period. You don't keep around an enemy that just detroyed a vital weapon so you can 'keep tabs' on one of their members. Is Palps a scheming scumbag? Yes, but even he would want to have as few enemies as possible hanging around the galaxy.

What other enemies does he have, for cryin' out loud? Damn few. He's been whacking them for nearly forty years. But he also uses some of them, creates and cultivates them, before he ultimately whacks them.

The only potential threats to his power at that point, other than the odd Skywalker here or there, were the folks in charge of the ships and battlestations. And he can't destroy them. The best he can do is hope to destract them.

Uh-huh, and the point was also made in AOTC that the Republic had been in existence for far longer than a mere 30+ years. Palps had a long way to go before he could truly rule the galaxy comfortably. Otherwise, he would have had no reason for that first Death Star.

I don't see what the age of the republic has to do with the total, or lack thereof, control Palpatine had over the empire.



Ok, his goal was revealed in the PT. He, as a Sith, wanted to rule the galaxy. He accomplished that by performing all sorts of devious acts, as you correctly point out. However, once he's in that position, his ambition is pretty much fulfilled. He's ruling the friggin' galaxy! Not much left after that. So again, why would he keep the location of the rebel base a secret from his Empire staff? You have yet to supply an answer that makes an ounce of sense.

To preserve the rebellion as a distraction from Imperial ambitions among his generals and governors, who, unlike the rebels, could threaten his position. To give them someone to fight other than him. I think this is about the third or eleventh time I've written it.

That's ok. Whenever I get into a discussion with stubborn individuals, like yourself, that refuse to allow the possibility that perhaps they may, in fact, be wrong about something, or just off-base about it, I usually get driven a little nuts. Happens enough around here, so I'm kind of used to it.

Merry Christmas, by the way! :maulxmas:

Well, I hate to add to anyone's stresses, all the same.

And Merry Christmas to you (a bit belated), and a Happy New Year!

[RollaFett]

I thought everyone knew about the dog in the night-time...

Well, suffice it to say, Holmes drew Watson's attention to a dog's reaction in the night as a "curious incident." Watson replied, "The dog did nothing in the night-time." Holmes said: "That was the curious incident." (It's in the story "Silver Blaze," published in The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes.)

So it is with Palpatine: his inaction, his remoteness, at a moment when the Death Star is poised to begin operations, when the Rebellion has won its first victory, and the station's plans are unaccounted for, call out for an explanation. His inaction is...quite curious.

While I do see what you mean, I do not agree that there is a need to have his actions, or lack thereof, in ANH explained. Remember that his sudden appearance in ROTJ, also onboard a brand new Death Star about to begin operations, came as a surprise to most. Obviously, he tends to sit out most battles in the comfort of his office on Coruscant.

And, yes there is a reason. To preserve the Rebellion as a useful tool, a game piece, if you like, in the game he must necessarily have played to keep his subordinates, running loose in the galaxy with large fleets and legions of troops, from doing what commanders often do in empires, when they haven't anything better to do: declare themselves emperor and march on the capital.

I simply don't buy this theory.


Your assumption is that the major enemy of the Empire is the Rebellion. But the Rebellion is insignificant. They don't have the ships, they don't have the men. About the only time they win is when they've got the Force on their side, in the person of one Skywalker or another. The Skywalker family is a much bigger threat to the Empire than the Rebellion.

Palpatine needs to control, kill or neutralize all the Skywalkers. The Rebellion he largely ignore, apart from the busywork it gives his commanders, who pose a much greater threat to him than the rebellion ever could.

Yes, I am assuming that the Rebellion is the Empire's main enemy. Why? Because we are presented with no others in the course of the entire OT. It's a completely logical leap to make.
And what about the opening crawl to ANH:
"It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire. During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the Death Star, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet. Pursued by the Empire's sinister agents, Princess Leia races home aboard her starship, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her people and restore freedom to the galaxy..."

Uhhh...that first vicory was won without any help from a Skywalker. Plus, the victory directly threatened the Emperor's rule. I don't make this stuff up, as it's right there in the crawl.
The Rebellion was, indeed, a major enemy of the Empire. Did they regard in utter contempt? Sure they did. But that just makes them look like evil and cocky bad guys, which makes for a better story. But to say they are insignificant is incorrect.



I don't see what the age of the republic has to do with the total, or lack thereof, control Palpatine had over the empire.

That was in response to this: I don't forget about it, not for a moment. But that doesn't mean the rebellion had to be destroyed. He ruled the galaxy in on capacity or another for thirty-odd years. During war, secession, Jedi treason, numerous crises. He couldn't have continued to rule unless he wiped out a small band of rebels? I find that very hard to believe.

You seemed to think that Palps was comfortably in control after a nere 30+ years. I disagree. It takes a long time to know that you are comfortably in control, and once he got rid of the rebels, he'd have a helluva lot less to worry about. Hell, like I pointed out, the Republic was in control for over a 1,000 years, but even it fell apart. Palps had to worry about losing his power. That actually is a Sith trait, remember?




To preserve the rebellion as a distraction from Imperial ambitions among his generals and governors, who, unlike the rebels, could threaten his position. To give them someone to fight other than him. I think this is about the third or eleventh time I've written it.

Ok, and I still don't buy it. Like I said, I've yet to see a satisfactory explanation. So I suppose, in the end, we simply do not agree on your theory. Furthermore, I find it quite weak.



Well, I hate to add to anyone's stresses, all the same.

Nah, in the end, I like to debate.
Happy New Year to you too.

[Lord Tesla]

While I do see what you mean, I do not agree that there is a need to have his actions, or lack thereof, in ANH explained. Remember that his sudden appearance in ROTJ, also onboard a brand new Death Star about to begin operations, came as a surprise to most. Obviously, he tends to sit out most battles in the comfort of his office on Coruscant.

Well, when you get down to it, there's not a need for any of our contemplations, speculations or analyses. Good for us there's no requirement for a need.:)

True enough, Palpatine didn't lead from the front; but he did lead. And his lack of leadership presence, even to the extent visible in ESB, is odd. He didn't have to be there, just showing some sign of involvement. He could have been on extended leave in the Lake Country on Naboo for all we can tell in ANH.



I simply don't buy this theory.

And that's your privilege. However, it does have the virtue of a basis in real-world historical precedents, and in the character of Palpatine--and even in the character of Anakin-as-Vader: Even on Mustafar, when he was talking about his empire, he was showing what happens when the subordinates get a taste of power and success and perceive an opportunity. It's not all wild imagination.




Yes, I am assuming that the Rebellion is the Empire's main enemy. Why? Because we are presented with no others in the course of the entire OT. It's a completely logical leap to make.

Okay, granted, they are the major declared enemy; but, that being the case, then it follows the Empire, in its twenty-somethingth year, had no significant enemies. Because the Rebellion wasn't significant.

And what about the opening crawl to ANH:
"It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire. During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the Death Star, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet. Pursued by the Empire's sinister agents, Princess Leia races home aboard her starship, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her people and restore freedom to the galaxy..." Yes, I'm familiar with that one. It's been twenty-some years, and they're just now having their first victory--not much of a threat to the peace, let alone the stability of the Empire.
Uhhh...that first vicory was won without any help from a Skywalker. Plus, the victory directly threatened the Emperor's rule. I don't make this stuff up, as it's right there in the crawl.

Of course there was Skywalker helping. You'll note the reference to a certain princess in the crawl, prominent in the Rebellion, and, it just so happens, the daughter of Anakin Skywalker.

The Rebellion was, indeed, a major enemy of the Empire. Did they regard in utter contempt? Sure they did. But that just makes them look like evil and cocky bad guys, which makes for a better story. But to say they are insignificant is incorrect.


Then I'm afraid I must continue to be incorrect, from a certain point of view. I haven't for a very long time thought the rebellion significant, well before it ever crossed my mind that the Emperor might have known the location of the secret rebel base.

That was in response to this:

You seemed to think that Palps was comfortably in control after a nere 30+ years. I disagree. It takes a long time to know that you are comfortably in control, and once he got rid of the rebels, he'd have a helluva lot less to worry about. Hell, like I pointed out, the Republic was in control for over a 1,000 years, but even it fell apart. Palps had to worry about losing his power. That actually is a Sith trait, remember?

1. Palpatine's words of wisdom to Anakin were, and I'm working from memory here, that everyone who has power fears to lose it. Not just the Sith. But that's a minor quibble.

2. I never maintained that Palptine wasn't worried about losing his power. Quite the contrary: I argued that in order to retain his power, he needed a means to distract and occupy his commanders to keep them from turning on him and trying to usurp his position. A worry or fear that it is possible
is implicit in that proposition.

3. If there was no certainty of stability and security of control after a thousand years, what hope did Palpatine have of achieving more than he already had, in his 30+ years? How much longer was he going to rule? Reigns of more than 30 years are rare in history. And I don't see the rebellion as the threat that you do, so I don't see how it reduces his worries that greatly to do away with it, especially when he has a galaxy full of other threats, the threat of treachery, and the ordinary tendency of anything as large and complex as a galactic government, imperial or republican, to break down, to consider. Especially when the rebellion had potential to distract/control the commanders, and even to help keep the populace in line, for that matter, keeping alive the image of Palpatine as the defender of order coming out of the Clone Wars.



Ok, and I still don't buy it. Like I said, I've yet to see a satisfactory explanation. So I suppose, in the end, we simply do not agree on your theory. Furthermore, I find it quite weak.

Well...weak is as weak does, I suppose. It's internally consistent. Rests on sound character analysis, to say nothing of historical precedents--and explains what we see.

But, if you find that unpersuasive, that's that, and there's nothing more I can do. Short of Darth Plaid himself stepping in to tell us which one, if not both, of us is full of Sith, there can be no definitive resolution to this.

:)

Nah, in the end, I like to debate.
Happy New Year to you too.

I'm sure we'll find more occasions for debate, given time. The new year should give us a very good start! :)

[RollaFett]

True enough, Palpatine didn't lead from the front; but he did lead. And his lack of leadership presence, even to the extent visible in ESB, is odd. He didn't have to be there, just showing some sign of involvement. He could have been on extended leave in the Lake Country on Naboo for all we can tell in ANH.

No, he was busy on Coruscant. Remember him dissolving the Senate? Hell, with that one move he actually gave his regional governors more power.


And that's your privilege. However, it does have the virtue of a basis in real-world historical precedents, and in the character of Palpatine--and even in the character of Anakin-as-Vader: Even on Mustafar, when he was talking about his empire, he was showing what happens when the subordinates get a taste of power and success and perceive an opportunity. It's not all wild imagination.


In the end, Palps was firmly in charge on the Empire. Yes, we see in ESB that he certainly had reason to worry about Vader, but I don't see the Imperial Officers as any threat at all to his reign. Unless, of course, you factor in their apparant imcompentancy in battling the Rebels. ;)



Okay, granted, they are the major declared enemy; but, that being the case, then it follows the Empire, in its twenty-somethingth year, had no significant enemies. Because the Rebellion wasn't significant.

Yes, I'm familiar with that one. It's been twenty-some years, and they're just now having their first victory--not much of a threat to the peace, let alone the stability of the Empire.

Ok, perhaps you'd like to re-read the last sentance of the crawl again. It's made abundantly clear that with that first victory the rebels are close to restoring freedom to the galaxy. Doesn't sound insignificant to me.


Of course there was Skywalker helping. You'll note the reference to a certain princess in the crawl, prominent in the Rebellion, and, it just so happens, the daughter of Anakin Skywalker.

Balls. Ok, I gotta give you that on a technicality. But c'mon, even she doesn't know she's a Skywalker, and she clearly isn't exhibiting any Force powers.
And, outside the scope of the films, she wasn't even Luke's at the time. You don't have all that kissing and build some romantic tension just to have them be siblings in the end. It was a deciscion made late in the game by Lucas.


Then I'm afraid I must continue to be incorrect, from a certain point of view. I haven't for a very long time thought the rebellion significant, well before it ever crossed my mind that the Emperor might have known the location of the secret rebel base.

Again, I must bring up the opening crawl. It's clearly stated that the rebels are indeed close to ending the Empire. That is a significant threat.
Now I will concede that they obviously didn't end the Empire by the close of ANH, but they struck a mighty blow which enabled them to stick around long enough to ultimately strike the final blow in ROTJ.



1. Palpatine's words of wisdom to Anakin were, and I'm working from memory here, that everyone who has power fears to lose it. Not just the Sith. But that's a minor quibble.

That sounds about right. But remember that Sith crave power, so once they get it, it's safe to say that they probably fear losing it more. Also, fear is a Sith trait.

2. I never maintained that Palptine wasn't worried about losing his power. Quite the contrary: I argued that in order to retain his power, he needed a means to distract and occupy his commanders to keep them from turning on him and trying to usurp his position. A worry or fear that it is possible is implicit in that proposition.

But remember that Sith crave power, so once they get it, it's safe to say that they probably fear losing it more. Also, fear is a Sith trait.

3. If there was no certainty of stability and security of control after a thousand years, what hope did Palpatine have of achieving more than he already had, in his 30+ years? How much longer was he going to rule? Reigns of more than 30 years are rare in history. And I don't see the rebellion as the threat that you do, so I don't see how it reduces his worries that greatly to do away with it, especially when he has a galaxy full of other threats, the threat of treachery, and the ordinary tendency of anything as large and complex as a galactic government, imperial or republican, to break down, to consider. Especially when the rebellion had potential to distract/control the commanders, and even to help keep the populace in line, for that matter, keeping alive the image of Palpatine as the defender of order coming out of the Clone Wars.

"Once more the Sith will rule the Galaxy...and we shall have peace."
A direct quote from Palps. Who knows how long he personally hoped to rule? He put the Sith, as an order, in position to rule the galaxy, even after his death. Of course it all blew up in his face, and that is in no small part due to the continuing existance of the insignificant rebellion.


But, if you find that unpersuasive, that's that, and there's nothing more I can do. Short of Darth Plaid himself stepping in to tell us which one, if not both, of us is full of Sith, there can be no definitive resolution to this.

Well, I agree with you about that.

I'm sure we'll find more occasions for debate, given time. The new year should give us a very good start! :)

Heh, heh...probably. Remember, we've agreed on some things as well around here.

[Lord Tesla]

No, he was busy on Coruscant. Remember him dissolving the Senate? Hell, with that one move he actually gave his regional governors more power.

1. Yes, he swept away the last remnants of the Old Republic, as Tarkin put it, the Senate. Which had been his handpuppet for...thirty years or more. A change more cosmetic than anything else.

2. If it did indeed result, as Governor Tarkin believed, in more power to him and his ilk--all the more reason to maintain a threat to keep them occupied with Imperial business rather than their own ambitions.

In the end, Palps was firmly in charge on the Empire. Yes, we see in ESB that he certainly had reason to worry about Vader, but I don't see the Imperial Officers as any threat at all to his reign. Unless, of course, you factor in their apparant imcompentancy in battling the Rebels. ;)

Tarkin had no respect for Vader; Tarkin had the biggest gun in the galaxy; Tarkin had every appearance of being an autocrat in the making. Men have tried to claim the imperium with far less.





Ok, perhaps you'd like to re-read the last sentance of the crawl again. It's made abundantly clear that with that first victory the rebels are close to restoring freedom to the galaxy. Doesn't sound insignificant to me.

Well, it says that, but...it doesn't happen to be the case. The Alderaanians, at least all who were home when Tarkin came calling, were annihilated. And the restoration of freedom had only just begun at the end of ROTJ. The Crawl got carried away. :)


Balls. Ok, I gotta give you that on a technicality. But c'mon, even she doesn't know she's a Skywalker, and she clearly isn't exhibiting any Force powers.

Doesn't matter whether or not she knows it; the Force knows it. And the Force was obviously with her.

And, outside the scope of the films, she wasn't even Luke's at the time. You don't have all that kissing and build some romantic tension just to have them be siblings in the end. It was a deciscion made late in the game by Lucas.

This is true.


Again, I must bring up the opening crawl. It's clearly stated that the rebels are indeed close to ending the Empire. That is a significant threat.
Now I will concede that they obviously didn't end the Empire by the close of ANH, but they struck a mighty blow which enabled them to stick around long enough to ultimately strike the final blow in ROTJ.

Well, I'll grant the took out a high-value target, and then hightailed it to escape of that wrathful Empire they were still fleeing in ESB, and with which they were still contending in ROTJ. After ROTJ, the Empire was headless, the Imperial fleet and one assumes, much of the command structure was destroyed or disarrayed. Mainly because the nature of the Battle of Endor was a winner-take-all scenario, and the Empire lost it.





That sounds about right. But remember that Sith crave power, so once they get it, it's safe to say that they probably fear losing it more. Also, fear is a Sith trait.

Perhaps they do. But is fear really a Sith trait? It's a path to the dark side, but is it really a trait of theirs? Remember Vader's words to Luke: "You have controlled your fear...now release your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me." Seems like fear is something they acknowledge, and in others exploit, but it is a trait of the Sith that they control their own fear.

"Once more the Sith will rule the Galaxy...and we shall have peace."
A direct quote from Palps. Who knows how long he personally hoped to rule? He put the Sith, as an order, in position to rule the galaxy, even after his death. Of course it all blew up in his face, and that is in no small part due to the continuing existance of the insignificant rebellion.

Yes, peace, but by what means? How long he personally hoped to reign is difficult say; we don't know much about life expectancy in that milieu, or how old Palpatine was. My sense is that he had already been around quite a long time: The Chancellor looked to be on the high side of sixty in TPM; add the 32 years to ANH, and the five or so years covered by the OT, and you're pushing 100. Dooku must have been close to that, and yet sill active. We assume Yoda's age was a characteristic of his species, but it might have simply been the power of the Force. Maybe he wasn't kidding Luke about Luke not looking so good when 900 years old he reached.

But it wasn't the rebellion that undid Palpatine and the Empire; it was Vader who blew up in his face. And the rebellion was only incidental to that.


Well, I agree with you about that.

Common ground! :yeah:





Heh, heh...probably. Remember, we've agreed on some things as well around here.

True. I don't expect, or hope for, unrelenting disagreement in the new year, certainly. But friendly debate is another matter, and I'm sure I'll come up with some challenging notions, sooner or later. I usually do.

[RollaFett]

2. If it did indeed result, as Governor Tarkin believed, in more power to him and his ilk--all the more reason to maintain a threat to keep them occupied with Imperial business rather than their own ambitions.

Sure, according to your theory, which I still don't buy.

Tarkin had no respect for Vader; Tarkin had the biggest gun in the galaxy; Tarkin had every appearance of being an autocrat in the making. Men have tried to claim the imperium with far less.

Another leap, you seem to be making, in assuming that Tarkin didn't respect Vader. I certainly didn't see that in ANH. I also don't see Tarkin having ambitions beyond the quite comfy and powerful position he already held.

The Crawl got carried away. :)

Eh? Carried away? Sure, it still took the rebels a few more years to actually rid the galaxy of the Empire, but that clearly was the beginning of the end.

Doesn't matter whether or not she knows it; the Force knows it. And the Force was obviously with her.

If the Force was active around her, why didn't Vader sense it? He's in the same room with her on multiple ocassions. He senses Luke's Force power while chasing him down a chasm during a dogfight and all sorts of madness going on, but he can't sense even the tiniest hint of it with Leia during one on one interrogations? That indicates, to me at least, that she wasn't in touch with the Force at all at that point.
Like the crawl, I've got to go with the evidence presented in the film.

Well, I'll grant the took out a high-value target, and then hightailed it to escape of that wrathful Empire they were still fleeing in ESB, and with which they were still contending in ROTJ. After ROTJ, the Empire was headless, the Imperial fleet and one assumes, much of the command structure was destroyed or disarrayed. Mainly because the nature of the Battle of Endor was a winner-take-all scenario, and the Empire lost it.

Yup. The Empire lost it, and to the insignificant rebellion to boot, huh?

Perhaps they do. But is fear really a Sith trait? It's a path to the dark side, but is it really a trait of theirs? Remember Vader's words to Luke: "You have controlled your fear...now release your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me." Seems like fear is something they acknowledge, and in others exploit, but it is a trait of the Sith that they control their own fear.


True. I definately worded that wrong. Everyone feels and has experience with fear. To say it is a trait of the Sith was incorrect. What I meant was what you pointed out, that it is a "path to the darkside". So, in the context of our discussion, Palpatine natuarally fears losing his hold on the galaxy, and since his dealings with fear were most likely essential to him going down the dark path, I would say that it's safe to assume he may fear losing his rule stronger than many others might. Thus, he would want to rid a threat to his rule quite badly. That threat being, of course, the rebellion.

But it wasn't the rebellion that undid Palpatine and the Empire; it was Vader who blew up in his face. And the rebellion was only incidental to that.

Yes, Vader did blow up in his face, but the rebellion was right there too, ready to blow up the Death Star in any case.
If Vader had behaved and allowed Palps to kill Luke, would they have escaped prior to it's destruction? Who really knows?

True. I don't expect, or hope for, unrelenting disagreement in the new year, certainly. But friendly debate is another matter, and I'm sure I'll come up with some challenging notions, sooner or later. I usually do.

You and me both, buddy, you and me both.

[Jedi Master Harrison]

This is a most interesting discussion guys. :yes: I really don't know which side of the fence I sit on in this. You both make pretty convincing arguments. Perhaps the 'truth' is somewhere inbetween? :scratchchin: Meditate on this I will. Or at least, think about it when I am not just about to head to bed!

[Lord Tesla]

Sure, according to your theory, which I still don't buy.

You don't buy it, but you do agree that the observed actions in question support it? I'm a little confused here. I think. :wink:


Another leap, you seem to be making, in assuming that Tarkin didn't respect Vader. I certainly didn't see that in ANH. I also don't see Tarkin having ambitions beyond the quite comfy and powerful position he already held.

No, the disrespect is there in ANH. Vader is Palpatine's right hand. Tarkin orders him around. Treats him like a flunky. Release him! This had better work! etc., etc. He scoffs at his powers in the matter of sensing Obi-Wan and at his conclusions.

A man who does that is a man who cannot consider himself much less important than the Emperor--either that, or he wears the Mandalorean armor, and I just don't see Tarkin in it.

From there, it isn't far to thinking the Emperor isn't much more important than one's self, and that it wouldn't take much effort to erase even that negligible difference. Especially if you happen to have possession of the biggest gun in the galaxy.

Eh? Carried away? Sure, it still took the rebels a few more years to actually rid the galaxy of the Empire, but that clearly was the beginning of the end.

No more than the very early part of the middle, at best, I should think.



If the Force was active around her, why didn't Vader sense it? He's in the same room with her on multiple ocassions. He senses Luke's Force power while chasing him down a chasm during a dogfight and all sorts of madness going on, but he can't sense even the tiniest hint of it with Leia during one on one interrogations? That indicates, to me at least, that she wasn't in touch with the Force at all at that point.
Like the crawl, I've got to go with the evidence presented in the film.

First, I never said she was in touch with the Force. But, then, neither did I say she wasn't. Vader didn't sense Luke, that we know of, until the X-wing attack. He did however remark on the Princess's remarkable resistance to the mind probe, indirect evidence of an unconscious connection to the Force on some level. And there are more ways than one (or two) that the Force can be with a person, group, or activity--note Dodonna's invocation of the Force before pilots set out to assault the Death Star; note also that Count Dooku said the Force was with "us" when he reported the beginning of hostilities to Darth Sidious after Geonosis, both of which instances suggest it was possible to operate with/under the general favor of the Force, which gets around any problems with specific personal connections to it.

Yup. The Empire lost it, and to the insignificant rebellion to boot, huh?

Yes, the Empire lost it, because Palpatine chose to gamble it in such a way that even the pathetic rebellion could walk away the victor. Who won was indeed insignificant next to how the contest was arranged...by the Empire, by Darth Sdious.



True. I definately worded that wrong. Everyone feels and has experience with fear. To say it is a trait of the Sith was incorrect. What I meant was what you pointed out, that it is a "path to the darkside". So, in the context of our discussion, Palpatine natuarally fears losing his hold on the galaxy, and since his dealings with fear were most likely essential to him going down the dark path, I would say that it's safe to assume he may fear losing his rule stronger than many others might. Thus, he would want to rid a threat to his rule quite badly. That threat being, of course, the rebellion.

Exactly, he would want to protect himself against all threats. That roster must have included the fear of treachery in the ranks, mustn't it? If he was indeed exceptionally sensitive to threats to his power? Especially fearful of it? How could he overlook such a possibility, particularly given the nature of the Sith, and of advancement within their ranks? And what better way for Palpatine to achieve that protection, than by setting one threat to his power against another, neutralizing both?

Yes, Vader did blow up in his face, but the rebellion was right there too, ready to blow up the Death Star in any case.
If Vader had behaved and allowed Palps to kill Luke, would they have escaped prior to it's destruction? Who really knows?

Give me one good reason why the "throne room" was built on a great big honking tower, if it wasn't in order to give it a good launch platform in case things went south. It was the mother of all escape pods, on a a mighty launch gantry. They would have buttoned up, pulled the "GO!" lever, and been safe and sound.

Even failing that, given that Luke had time to drag Vader to a shuttle, have a heart-to-heart with Daddy Darkest, and make a safe escape, wouldn't Vader and the Emperor have had time to manage a similar escape route?

You and me both, buddy, you and me both.


See. I told you there'd be opportunities in the year ahead! :yoda:

[RollaFett]

Heh, heh...thanks for the kind words. Funny thing is, is that I almost forgot what we were originally debating in the first place!