War in Lordaeron

Publication par 4dehorde

The Scourge seek to destroy all life, the Forsaken seek to destroy the threats to their people (The Scarlets and the Alliance invaders).

Because Gilneas were invading...

The Forsaken were ordered into Gilneas and that conflict had been brewing for awhile. It doesn't justify the invasion, but what's done is done. It is the only example I can think of where the Forsaken attacked unprovoked.

Well other then Hillsbrad and Arathi of course.

How ignorant can you be? They were provoked in Hillsbrad after years of Alliance aggression and I seem to recall the Alliance and the Horde are at war. Stromgarde is part of the Alliance, and liable to an attack by the Horde.

Publication par Atik

The alliance in Hillsbrad did nothing.

The Forsaken ransacked their towns and murdered their people. And the Alliance did NOTHING in response.

Publication par 4dehorde

-->>Attacking a neutral nation, who left the Alliance of Lordaeron and went into isolation behind the Greymane Wall. The Alliance questline in Gilneas shows Sylvanas lying to Garrosh's representative and secretly uses the Forsaken Plague.

The invasion of Gilnaes was never Syl's idea, she was ordered by Garrosh. And seeing as how her army can't reproduce on its own and they are fighting the worgen who can make more of its self with a bite, having a weapon that can kill it and what it can infect dead is the smart way to fight. It's not honorable, but that doesn't make her evil.

-->>Invading Stormguarde.
You mean the kingdom that fell well before they got there?

The main reason Horde and Alliance didnt reach peace is because the Forsaken has been stirring all kinds of %^&* up behind the scenes. You can rly blame Varian going bat&*!@ on the Horde when he saw whats happening in the Undercity. (If youve done the Battle for UC on the alliance side) Sylvanas claimed she didnt know Putress was developing the Plague after the Betrayal at Wrathsgate. The Gilneas story line proves otherwise.

So it's the forsaken's fault that Wyrnn and Hellscream got into a fight at ulduar? Or at the peace conference? Or whenever they meet? There is far more to the horde vs ally then just the forsaken.

They are the New Scourge.
Who are the new old horde, who are the new burning legion... though to be fair the legion set up both the horde and the scourge so really its all the same thing. And the forsaken are at this point not showed to be part of the legion. So while they may be unpleasant and want the world to fit there image, many charicters in the other races feel the same way, which attributes to the size of the twilight hammer. Not the scourge.

--> Infecting the living and raising the dead using the Plague, basically undergoing human genocide in Northern E.K might be RIGHT for her, but it doesnt change that it is evil .

--> The Kingdom DID NOT fell. The people of Stormguarde still have a foothold in their capital and some took refugee in Refuge Pointe. Not actively invading? Horde has a quest to kill Galen specifically. Sylvannas specifically ordered him to be raised. And check the quests from Galen's Fall. Look at the picture when Arathi BG is loading.

--> Still no mention on the unprovoked destruction of Hillsbrad and Southshore.

--> I mention that they are the New Scourage cuz they are acting like the old one. Massacres, Infections, Ressurections, wiping everybody off the map. This have nothing to do with the Burning Legion. I think you failed to grasp the point here.

I have yet to see one massacre conducted by the Forsaken. Attacking and conquering is not the same as conducting a massace. Since when is defending your homeland and protecting your people evil? You must be mistaking this for the Alliance massacre at Taurajo.

Stromgarde is alinged with the Alliance and as such it is reasonable the Forsaken attack an ally of their enemy. This is war after all.

Really? You think after years of raids and lynchings, and now an official declaration of war, the Forsaken are not provoked to destroy the sources of Alliance aggression in Lordaeron? Please look again.

The Forsaken are defending their territory, they have comitted no massacres, and they are not wiping everyone off the map. That would include destroying Horde encampments. They are simply defending their empire from invaders and removing threats to their people. Doesn't sound like Scourge to me.

Publication par 4dehorde

The alliance in Hillsbrad did nothing.

The Forsaken ransacked their towns and murdered their people. And the Alliance did NOTHING in response.

I've just pointed out how the Alliance provoked its downfall in Hillsbrad. Also just ignore the fact most people escaped. I also recall an Alliance respnse in the form of an ill-fated Stormpike invasion.

Publication par Patty

Publication par Gone

Ok I been absent this thread for a day so I got a few points to make

1) The Alliance and Horde were at war in hillsbrad, half of the quests involved killing the other side. That wasnt some unwarrented massacer, it was war.

2) 4dehorde, Sylvanas is a %^&*ing psychopath. I mean Garrosh I may hate, but I can make an argument for him at least, he thinks hes doing right by the Horde. I had ana rgument with somebody about this very same thing the other day, they refered to her as a "tragic hero" and I couldnt agree more. I like that phrase because it reminds me of some other "tragic heroes", Arthas, Deathwing, Sargeras, Illidan, any of those names ring a bell? In all honesty I think Sylvanas is going down the path that they did.

3) Gilneaus was worse than Southshore, the Darkspear massacer, or camp whatever in the southern barrens. That was a neutral country that the Horde invaded just because they needed the land, they didnt try and bargin or anything like that. If the worgen hadnt allied with the Alliance then things there may have gotten much worse.

Publication par 4dehorde

I have yet to see one massacre conducted by the Forsaken. Attacking and conquering is not the same as conducting a massace. Since when is defending your homeland and protecting your people evil? You must be mistaking this for the Alliance massacre at Taurajo. Southshore, for one. That alone is comparable to Taurajo, not to mention the Hillsbrad fields, and that's from the top of my head in Hillsbrad alone.

The Forsaken are defending their territory, they have comitted no massacres, and they are not wiping everyone off the map. That would include destroying Horde encampments. They are simply defending their empire from invaders and removing threats to their people. Doesn't sound like Scourge to me.

Sylvanas can't afford to lose her support from the Horde at this point in time, that doesn't mean she's entirely loyal to the Horde. Her sarcasm at Garrosh in Silverpine is evidence enough that there is little love or loyalty between the two leaders.

It has been proven that there was no massacre at Southshore or Hillsbrad Fields. Unlike Taurajo, which was butchered without warning, the people at Southshore and Hillsbrad Fields knew about the attacks beforehand and evacuated. This is in the journal of Whitestead. A signifigant number chose to remain behind, and they knew the risks.

Dialogue from Lay Cozwynn reveals Sylvanas is at least trying to mend ties with Garrosh. Even if she isn't too loyal, more than less of her people have stronger bands with the Horde now.

Publication par Patty

Publication par 4dehorde

Publication par Patty

How is an invasion worse than a massacre? Unlike Taurajo, many people were either taken prisoner or escaped, not killed, in Gilneas. A few civilians were caught in the crossfire, but nothing more. The main casualties in Gilneas were army vs. army.

Because Gilneas was f*cking neutral. Camp Taurajo wasn't. Your (flimsy) justification for the invasion of Gilneas is the exact same justification for the destruction of Taurajo, and also the same reason for Hillsbrad falling. It was strategic.

Publication par 4dehorde

Ok I been absent this thread for a day so I got a few points to make

1) The Alliance and Horde were at war in hillsbrad, half of the quests involved killing the other side. That wasnt some unwarrented massacer, it was war.

There's a difference between killing soldiers and using chemical weapons to bomb out a large town of a mostly civilian population, then going and hunting down the survivors of that attack.

Edit:

It has been proven that there was no massacre at Southshore or Hillsbrad Fields. Unlike Taurajo, which was butchered without warning, the people at Southshore and Hillsbrad Fields knew about the attacks beforehand and evacuated. This is in the journal of Whitestead. A signifigant number chose to remain behind, and they knew the risks.Many of the survivors of Hillsbrad, again mostly civilian, were hunted down again and again whenever they tried to flee; which again includes women and children. The Forsaken killed indiscriminately, and that's hardly a 'good' thing to do.

You are forgetting Southshore was a military staging ground and supply port for the Alliance. The Forsaken cannot be expected to just ignore that so close to home. It had a signifigant garrison, so it was not just a civilian town. If the Alliance had chemical weapons, do you really think they would hesitate to use them against the Horde? The humans at Hillsbrad Fields had taken it upon themselves to raid and lynch Forsaken wherever they could. Niether side is innocent here.

The Forsaken are doing their very best to quickly remove all threats to their empire. Their tactics are harsh, but so are the Alliance tactics. You are right though, there is no "good" here. There is never any "good" when it comes to war.

Publication par Adamsm

Publication par Patty

Publication par 4dehorde

You know 4dehorde, you call us ignorant...but you are the real one; you seem to think any time the Horde does anything, it's justified, yet when the Alliance does anything, it's pure evil.

So yeah, enjoy your nice little world view, as it makes for horrible debating since you are always right and the rest of us are wrong.

Actually, I'm just calling you ignorant. You don't speak for everyone else here.

Have I ever said everything the Horde does is good and everything the Alliance does is evil? I can't recall any of that. I do recall pointing out the Alliance's atrocity at Taurajo while also explaining it is reasonable for them to invade enemy land as long as they don't go around behaving like they did at Taurajo. I also pointed out the circumstances behind the tragedy at Thal'darah and showed how both sides are at fault in Lordaeron and the entire war. Sounds to me like your just putting words in my mouth.

When someone who disagrees with you opens their mouth, they are wrong because they don't agree with you. Nice way to look at everything.

Publication par Adamsm

You also said that Varian was like Hitler....twice.....

And I've never once seen you ever say anything nice about the Alliance, in any of the threads you have created.

Publication par 4dehorde

You are forgetting Southshore was a military staging ground and supply port for the Alliance. The Forsaken cannot be expected to just ignore that so close to home. It had a signifigant garrison, so it was not just a civilian town.Oh, where does that sound like? That's right, Taurajo. It was a major supply line between the Barrens, further north, and Mulgore. If the Alliance had chemical weapons, do you really think they would hesitate to use them against the Horde?That's irrelevant. It's not "would the other side have used them?" that I'm questioning, it's the moral standing of the use of them on civilians, regardless of which side they're fighting on. The humans at Hillsbrad Fields had taken it upon themselves to raid and lynch Forsaken wherever they could.Source? Niether side is innocent here.If this is what you're arguing, then make it clearer. You say that, then completely justify everything the Forsaken did, villify everything the Alliance did, and ignore the wrongdoing of the Forsaken. If you're trying to have a balanced argument, make sure you balance it.

Taurajo and Southshore are not the same. Taurajo had nothing to do with the army. That was the Crossroads. And regardless, the Alliance could have attacked it without conducting a massacre.

The vanilla version of "The Battle of Hillsbrad" shows us how the humans at Hillsbrad Fields earned the Forsaken's ire.

Kindly provide a reference that shows me when I made it look so black and white. I've already said I know killing the survivors on Fenris Isle was wrong, and invading Gilneas was wrong, but understandable, at least to the strategic degree. I pointed out the Alliance has a legitimate claim to Lordaeron, but their tactics have only made the Forsaken fight harder.

Most of what I've seen thus far from you is "The Forsaken are evil, the Alliance is holy". The Alliance provoked the Forsaken, and the Forsaken are using extreme tactics. Both are at fault.

Publication par 4dehorde

You also said that Varian was like Hitler....twice.....

And I've never once seen you ever say anything nice about the Alliance, in any of the threads you have created.

So I'm not allowed to be critical of Varian, but people can be critical of Sylvanas?

You might want to look again. I've explained the good and bad on both sides.

Publication par Adamsm

You can be critical of faction leaders, but don't compare them to Hitler.

No, you've 'explained' that the attacks of the Alliance has always been to destroy and eradicate the Horde, while they just defend themselves against genocide and the rest....never mind that both sides have done it all through the Warcraft universe.

Publication par Patty

Taurajo and Southshore are not the same. Taurajo had nothing to do with the army. That was the Crossroads. And regardless, the Alliance could have attacked it without conducting a massacre.Taurajo was a major supply line, however, and a bulwark blocking the siege at Mulgore. Again, it's a strategic move. I know that the Alliance were wrong at Taurajo, and they were stupid for expecting criminals to act civilised, but at least the leader responsible, according to himself anyway, tried to leave a line open for civilians to flee through.

The vanilla version of "The Battle of Hillsbrad" shows us how the humans at Hillsbrad Fields earned the Forsaken's ire.Oh, you mean the handful? Because 6 or 7 humans killing a couple of Forsaken outrunners justifies the plague bombing of an entire town.

Kindly provide a reference that shows me when I made it look so black and white. I've already said I know killing the survivors on Fenris Isle was wrong, and invading Gilneas was wrong, but understandable, at least to the strategic degree. I pointed out the Alliance has a legitimate claim to Lordaeron, but their tactics have only made the Forsaken fight harder.Your tone in posts like this: "Since when is defending your homeland and protecting your people evil? You must be mistaking this for the Alliance massacre at Taurajo."

Most of what I've seen thus far from you is "The Forsaken are evil, the Alliance is holy".Which couldn't be further from the truth, as I've always argued the faults of both sides. The difference is that the Forsaken are highly morally ambiguous, as of yet the Alliance doesn't have a race that is willing to use chemical warfare and corrupting the conquered people of the Horde's regions (by this, I am of course referring to the resurrection of the fallen, which is a Scourge tactic).Both are at fault.
We've both agreed on this before.

War in Lordaeron

Répondre