That's... meeting him more than halfway.
The Jedi Order got wiped out when they were the dominant force in the galaxy. They're weaker, Palpatine is stronger, charging in again just hoping for things to turn out differently is... optimistic.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Couldn't Obi-Wan and Yoda just create a rebellion with Bail Organa to lead, to distract the emperor, and then strike? I mean heck, in G.I. Joe: Retaliation, even though Cobra manage to wipe out a lot of members, Roadblock, Flint, and Lady Jaye managed to organize a way to stop Cobra and drive them out of D.C., instead of just waiting MANY years! Why couldn't Obi-Wan and Yoda just do something like that?
Because in the movies, it takes 20 years to organize, raise, and outfit a rebellion that has even the slimmest of chances of doing anything to the empire.
They can't just flick a switch and suddenly have thousands of soldiers and hundreds of ships at their beck and call to fight an empire that controls the entire galaxy.
Especially considering, the way Palpatine spun it, the Empire had vast popular support throughout the Senate and the galaxy as a whole. There wasn't anything to make a rebellion out of yet.
Edited by MrDeath
You mean the ones that just decisively and completely lost the war, are going to be occupied by Imperial forces for years to come, had been fighting the Jedi directly for years, and which Palpatine had been controlling the whole time?
Don't some of them have militias/home guard type of armed forces on their home planets that stay behind, while the droids (Which were shut-down) were doing the front-line stuff? Besides, have you heard of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?
^ It's very improbable that these militia could be on par with the empire. At this point, your arguments are just flimsy and really stretching too far for justification.
But what if they were all together? Then they'd probably have a fighting chance against the Empire.
Even if they were altogether, we don't know how strong they are or how many of them they are.
When one side wins a war, they occupy the other side's territory specifically so that rebellions don't start up.
You're suggesting that Obi Wan and Yoda — already the two most wanted men in the Galaxy — go try to start a rebellion in a place the Empire is already keeping an eye on to prevent it from starting a rebellion.
And you're talking about places that just lost a war. Places that just lost a war are generally not all that giddy about immediately starting another war against the side that just beat them.
Edited by MrDeath
Yeah, my inclination is that such an example doesn't fit.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
But how can I put this as What An Idiot moment? How can I phrase it possibly? Because I still believe Yoda and Obi-Wan giving up immediately was not the smartest idea. Plus, "What An Idiot" is a YMMV.
It just plain is not an example. YMMV does not mean anything goes. This situation just does not fit the trope, and the action you're suggesting Yoda and Obi-Wan should have done is simply not smart or practical.
How can I phrase it to be legit? Besides, besides Bail Organa, Mon Mothma was also one of the few anti-Palpatine senators, right?
There's no way to phrase it to be legit, because any accurate description of the situation will not be an example of that trope. The alternatives you're suggesting would, in fact, be far less smart than what they actually did.
There had to be an alternative instead of just giving up immediately!
Okay, with all of the evidence we have presented, what would the alternative be?
No, sometimes you just need to give up on the spot.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
... are you referring to how Tropelicious should Know When to Fold 'Em, or how Yoda did?
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Do NOT add this Flame Bait back without a discussion.
- Harsher in Hindsight: Nearing the end of the movie, Palpatine declares his intent to reorganize the Galactic Republic into the Galactic Empire. The already horrifying prospect is made even more harsh recently after Barack Obama declared to reorganize the government to make the Executive Branch the most powerful and unquestioned position, under eerily similar reasons to Palpatine, during his 2012 State of the Union address.
I don't want to possibly censor it on basis on political opinions but it seems to me that comparisons between altering financial decisions and openly moving from democracy to authoritarianism is a bit of a leap. It seems to me that if it was a declaration of, say, Congress being abolished it would be a better fit. Also Harsher in Hindsight seems a bit better when applied to cases such as a scene of someone bombing the World Trade Center prior to the 1990s or making comments about the first Catholic president being shot before the 1960s. Simply having similar language doesn't seem to be enough to me.
Edited by Grant Fsteak
If not similar language, then certainly similar actions would be enough condemning evidence. Obama, during his term, had managed to bankrupt the US economy, he also circumvented, blatantly, the Constitution by instigating Attack Watch, spent more time out of the country than in the country, was responsible for basically snubbing Israel, had made a situation in Afghanistan even worse than before when apologizing for accidential burnings of the Quran (Qurans that, BTW, were also themselves desecrated by extremists who want to voice hate for America), and right now is also trying to force Catholic institutions into supplying contraceptives, and also denied us a way to avoid having us get oil from somewhere other than the Middle East. You can learn more about it from various sources, including New Advent.org, PJTV / PJ media, Glenn Beck, and Breitbart.com. Heck, just like Palpatine, he also got rid of a bad person (Count Dooku for Palpatine, and Osama Bin Laden for Palpatine) shortly before unveiling more of his true colors. Oh, and speaking of Osama Bin Laden, Obama also delayed action when they had the chance to stop Bin Laden once and for all until circumstances pretty much forced him to act.
And another thing. Why is it perfectly all right to report bad things regarding Bush in Harsher in Hindsight articles, but not all right to mention similar bad things regarding Obama. I mean, if its flamebating, there shouldn't be any references to Bush in there, either, and Pew poll numbers also dictate that Obama is actually below 50% approval, meaning he's becoming increasingly unpopular among Americans.
Well for starters you're using Glenn Beck as a souce, so basically everything you justsaid is blatantly untrue.
No, that doesn't mean that at all. If you're not going to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion, please shut up. Thank you.
"You're using Michael Moore as a source, so basically everything you just said is blatantly untrue." "You're using Huffington Post as a source, so..." "You're using Al Gore as a source, so..."
See how that works? I'm not a big Glenn Beck fan either, but /ad hominem/ arguments add nothing to the debate no matter which direction the arrows are being fired. If you can muster factual evidence and rational analysis to counter the argument being made, then do so; if your whole counter-argument is "your sources are stinky poopy-heads 'cause they say stuff I don't like", it doesn't exactly lend credence to your side of the issue.
Anyway, leaving aside the specifics of Obama vs. Palpatine, EJO 1 *does* make one valid point — why is it seemingly OK to slap former President Bush around in "Harsher in Hindsight", "Funny Aneuryism Moment", etc. (and as a fiscally-conservative-leaning social-libertarian, I will admit there is much the man deserves to be slapped around for), but not OK to express similar sentiments about President Obama? What's good for the goose, and all that...
^Comparisons like these are just Flame Bait. It's probably better to just delete them on sight.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Well, Septimus Heap, I think that the main reason why that shouldn't really be put on there is because Obama is still president currently, and I guess "in hindsight" doesn't really work. If after he's out of office, we look back and see that you were right, it should be put on there.
I wanted add this:
I feel that Yoda giving up immediately was not a smart move (though was Doomed by Canon).
Edited by TropeLicious Hide / Show Replies