Kyle will win this. See: Advent (she's uber-hott).
That said, Kyle is another example of a video-game character. Honestly, if the fight took place inside a novel or a comic, I doubt Jerec's power would have been described as that phenomenal and if it were, Kyle would have had to have been more powerful than what he was shown as. Especially if Jerec can cut people off from the Force, and then destroy a galaxy.
That's my single problem with video games.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
No, but the sith is the epitome of darkness and all that is evil. Darth Sidious didn't see him as a foe, more of a tool that he would forge into the perfect sith. I wouldn't consider jedi Anakin a foe of the darkness, he was potentially their greatest ally - he would destroy the jedi and bring about a golden age for the sith. No contradiction Motoko.
Im glad someone else sees things the way I do.
Well, in the end he ended up destroying the Sith, too. Great ally, yes? If you go by the "prophecy", he is an enemy. And Dooku feels Anakin is an enemy as well, given his dialogue of "Which is precisely", Dooku said meditatively, "why it might be best if I were to kill him, instead". And again, he was a foe of the darkness for a time being. Fighting Asajj is proof enough, because as it says "the darkness", it's more than likely referring to any dark ideals, and any associated with it. Not Sidious singulary.
The dictionary defines "foe" as:
1. a person who feels enmity, hatred, or malice toward another; enemy: a bitter foe.
2. a military enemy; hostile army.
3. a person belonging to a hostile army or nation.
4. an opponent in a game or contest; adversary: a political foe.
5. a person who is opposed in feeling, principle, etc., to something: a foe to progress in civil rights.
6. a thing that is harmful to or destructive of something: Sloth is the foe of health.
Anakin does fit those descriptions as a "foe of darkness". He was opposed to the principles of the Sith, he is destructive to the Sith (by killing Sidious), and he was a military enemy by being associated with the Jedi. As Dooku does want to kill him, and feels it'd be best.
Originally posted by Advent
Well, in the end he ended up destroying the Sith, too. Great ally, yes? If you go by the "prophecy", he is an enemy. And Dooku feels Anakin is an enemy as well, given his dialogue of "Which is precisely", Dooku said meditatively, "why it might be best if I were to kill him, instead". And again, he was a foe of the darkness for a time being. Fighting Asajj is proof enough, because as it says "the darkness", it's more than likely referring to any dark ideals, and any associated with it. Not Sidious singulary.The dictionary defines "foe" as:
1. a person who feels enmity, hatred, or malice toward another; enemy: a bitter foe.
2. [b]a military enemy; hostile army.
3. a person belonging to a hostile army or nation.
4. an opponent in a game or contest; adversary: a political foe.
5. a person who is opposed in feeling, principle, etc., to something: a foe to progress in civil rights.
6. a thing that is harmful to or destructive of something: Sloth is the foe of health.
Anakin does fit those descriptions as a "foe of darkness". He was opposed to the principles of the Sith, he is destructive to the Sith (by killing Sidious), and he was a military enemy by being associated with the Jedi. As Dooku does want to kill him, and feels it'd be best. [/B]
Maybe so but the prophecy meant jack in the end. Palpatine came back, and the sith continued. Anakin didn't destroy the sith one bit. I mean he killed hundreds of jedi, yet because he finally killed one sith that would come back anyway... He caused far more destruction than he did good. If he had completely destroyed the sith and darkside, maybe so but he didn't.
Also, about Assaj and the other dark jedi, they were essentially extensions of Palpatine's 'will'. Killing and battling them doesn't make him a foe of the darkside because the sith that essentially controlled them, Darth Sidious didn't view him as one.
Really, the point is Advent that he caused far more destruction to the jedi and lightside than he did to the sith, and the main sith lord, the one behind the clone wars and the one who essentially controlled Dooku and all the dark jedi - the epitome of darkness viewed him as a potential ally that he would forge into his ultimate weapon.
Anakin doesn't come under that category. Not that it matters anyway as the statement is incredible. I just wanted to point out that there was no contradiction.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
Maybe so but the prophecy meant jack in the end. Palpatine came back, and the sith continued. Anakin didn't destroy the sith one bit. I mean he killed hundreds of jedi, yet because he finally killed one sith that would come back anyway... He caused far more destruction than he did good. If he had completely destroyed the sith and darkside, maybe so but he didn't.
I always thought saving his son from being killed, the only future hope that the galaxy had, was redeeming enough. Had he not saved Luke, the galaxy would've been - quite frankly - f*cked. So, Star Wars beings of 4 BBY and on have Darth Vader to thank for essentially saving the galaxy by saving Luke.
Originally posted by Advent
I always thought saving his son from being killed, the [b]only future hope that the galaxy had, was redeeming enough. Had he not saved Luke, the galaxy would've been - quite frankly - f*cked. So, Star Wars beings of 4 BBY and on have Darth Vader to thank for essentially saving the galaxy by saving Luke. [/B]
Maybe so, but the actual credit goes to Luke and Luke alone.
My completely solid and backed up proof as to why Vader tools this fool into oblivion.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
Maybe so but the prophecy meant jack in the end. Palpatine came back, and the sith continued. Anakin didn't destroy the sith one bit.
Um, yeah he did destroy the Sith "one bit". Unless killing the last Sith to come for a decade isn't anything. He took out the Sith reign as the Emporer. Had he not done that the Rebellion would've been crushed, thus the Galactic Empire - run by Sith - would be back in total domination.
While in EU, he didn't completely destroy them - he still took Sidious out for a time. Long enough so that Luke and Leia could actually train at least.
Also, about Assaj and the other dark jedi, they were essentially extensions of Palpatine's 'will'. Killing and battling them doesn't make him a foe of the darkside because the sith that essentially controlled them, Darth Sidious didn't view him as one.
My Buddha. Sidious isn't the darkness (in this context). Asajj was out to kill Anakin. She is part of the darkness, hence a "foe". Just because Sidious wanted it to be so, doesn't mean he wasn't an enemy of any other Darksider.
Really, the point is Advent that he caused far more destruction to the jedi and lightside than he did to the sith, and the main sith lord, the one behind the clone wars and the one who essentially controlled Dooku and all the dark jedi - the epitome of darkness viewed him as a potential ally that he would forge into his ultimate weapon.
Okay? What does any of this have to do with the fact he was still an enemy of other Darkside beings? Is Sidious the only "darkness"? Obviously not in that context. He was, at a time, an enemy. There's really nothing more to it.
And even if he caused more destruction to the Jedi than the Sith, how does that change the fact - at one time - he was, indeed, an enemy? It doesn't. If I join the U.S. Army for two months and kill Buddha knows who, and then become a traitor and join the opposition later - I was still an enemy at one point in time. Especially if a member of the opposition tried to murder me.
Maybe so, but the actual credit goes to Luke and Luke alone
Yes, because Luke alone stopped Sidious' Force storm, right?
'Um, yeah he did destroy the Sith "one bit". Unless killing the last Sith to come for a decade isn't anything. He took out the Sith reign as the Emperor. Had he not done that the Rebellion would've been crushed, thus the Galactic Empire - run by Sith - would be back in total domination.'
1. Palpatine came back, stronger than ever.
2.The sith with Lumiya also continued.
3. He didn't bring balance.
4. Oh, and preventing the rebellion from being crushed some how redeems his purging of the jedi?
'My Buddha. Sidious isn't the darkness (in this context). Asajj was out to kill Anakin. She is part of the darkness, hence a "foe". Just because Sidious wanted it to be so, doesn't mean he wasn't an enemy of any other Darksider.'
The point is, Assaj was a pawn and 'extension of [Dooku's] will'. Palpatine controlled Dooku, and thus basically controlled all of the dark jedi. Palpatine didn't view him as a foe, the fact that one of his lackeys did means jack.
'Okay? What does any of this have to do with the fact he was still an enemy of other Darkside beings? Is Sidious the only "darkness"? Obviously not in that context. He was, at a time, an enemy. There's really nothing more to it.'
The point is, he was more of an ally (potentially) to the darkness than a foe on a relative scale. Just because he may have briefly been a foe to a few minor darksiders, he was a potential ally to the epitome of darkness and he was going to purge the jedi and bring the sith into a golden age. Palpatine basically = darkness. He had plans for Anakin, Anakin was his last hope you could say. I say he's more of an ally to the darkness than a foe when you balance everything out.
'And even if he caused more destruction to the Jedi than the Sith, how does that change the fact - at one time - he was, indeed, an enemy? It doesn't. If I join the U.S. Army for two months and kill Buddha knows who, and then become a traitor and join the opposition later - I was still an enemy at one point in time. Especially if a member of the opposition tried to murder me.'
Please, that would be like including Exar Kun in that list.
The point is, Palpatine - the epitome of darkness and the sith that controlled pretty much every dark jedi that appeared in the clone wars viewed his as a potential ally and had plans for him. Even fighting dark jedi such as Assaj Ventress was bringing him closer to what Palpatine had planned for him. He was hardly an enemy to the darkness even as a jedi and was potentially the darkness' greatest weapon. You see, the difference between your analogy and this is that Palpatine already had plans for Anakin and viewed him as an ally before Anakin joined him.
'Yes, because Luke alone stopped Sidious' Force storm, right?'
I was speaking in terms of Luke and Vader, of course Luke had help from others.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
1. Palpatine came back, stronger than ever.
2.The sith with Lumiya also continued.
3. He didn't bring balance.
4. Oh, and preventing the rebellion from being crushed some how redeems his purging of the jedi?
1.) So what? Had he not destroyed Sidious at that moment, the Darkside of the Force would've completely taken over the galaxy. Had he not benchpressed Sidious into a reactor core, Luke would've been killed. So, he did destroy the Sith "one bit" - like I said - destroying Sidious for a near decade, and allowing Luke to survive so he could combat future Sith.
2.) And? He still did destroy the guy you consider to be "the darkness" for a time being.
3.) According to the movie, he did. In any case, what does that have to do with the fact through his act of redemption - Sidious was able to be destroyed because Luke lived.
4.) Um, saving the galaxy for years to come does. He may have destroyed the Jedi, but the New Jedi Order has Vader to thank for the fact their Supreme Master is alive.
The point is, Assaj was a pawn and 'extension of [Dooku's] will'. Palpatine controlled Dooku, and thus basically controlled all of the dark jedi. Palpatine didn't view him as a foe, the fact that one of his lackeys did means jack.
Is that why Asajj attempts to kill Anakin? You're acting as if Palpatine is "the darkness". In this context, he is clearly not. So, why does you keep acting as if he is? If he was, at a point, an enemy of Asajj - he was an enemy of the darkness. Palpatine didn't view him as an enemy, but he certainly wasn't an ally at that point in time, therefore we can conclude - at a time - he was an enemy. "Foe" is described as "being on the opposing side of military". Anakin was a Jedi, not a Sith. And he, himself, considered the Darkside his enemy. It also says "opposing feeling, principles, etc.". The darkness itself was a foe of Anakin by this definition given the clear cut fact Anakin didn't believe in the Darkside's beliefs at a point. Practically up until half of ROTS, and even when Palpatine give his secret up, Anakin doesn't do it for the principles, he does it to save his wife - as he believed that to be the only way.
The point is, he was more of an ally (potentially) to the darkness than a foe on a relative scale. Just because he may have briefly been a foe to a few minor darksiders, he was a potential ally to the epitome of darkness and he was going to purge the jedi and bring the sith into a golden age. Palpatine basically = darkness. He had plans for Anakin, Anakin was his last hope you could say. I say he's more of an ally to the darkness than a foe when you balance everything out.
This is really all I'm going to address. But, in the context given about Yoda's quote "the darkness" is not just Palpatine, clearly referring to anything related to darkside ideals, and those associated with it, ergo if he was an enemy - even briefly - of a Darksider, he was then an enemy of "the darkness". Regardless if he actually ended up joining the opposition, or caused more destruction. The darkness is not limited to just Palpatine, nor just the Sith. Obviously it includes a broader scale. And if you do go by the definition of "opposed in feelings, principles, etc. to something" Anakin clearly is a "foe" of the darkness itself.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
I'd say I get kudos for that.
Uh, no. You get "kudos" if you defeated me in an actual versus debate. Talking about a friggin' contradiction is not very impressive, seeing as my expertise is matches, not views of darkness and light. If it was, there'd be many people who get "kudos". Obviously, you only get glory if you prove your worth in a versus debate. Which, of course, you cannot do. Unless you're up to the challenge, Ulic vs. Kyle perhaps.
And I'm ending this debate with:
Originally posted by Jen'ari
lol, not that I'm trying to back out of this or anything MOKOTO, but I really don't have the energy to start a debate with someone who replies in such big segments like you. If the source of the debate was something that I really firmly believed in, maybe, but it wasn't.
So, before you go on some parade, hiring an entire circus to celebrate some odd, weird thing you think you accomplished because I said I don't want to continue - realize you have done the same before. And like I said, your points do hold some merit, but they hardly provide a "defeat". I'm just too tired to continue, and like said - bored, as this debate is insignificant (likewise with the title of "Ancient"😉.
Originally posted by Jen'ari
1. Palpatine came back, stronger than ever.
2.The sith with Lumiya also continued.
3. He didn't bring balance.
4. Oh, and preventing the rebellion from being crushed some how redeems his purging of the jedi?
no1) palpatine reached his full potential by ROTS, he only learned more techniques like the force storm and ancient sith techniques, that only made him more powerful in a way he mastered so many techniques.
3, vader did bring balance, he crippled the sith which allowed luke to train and become very very strong, so stronge to destroy the sith. he destroyed the sith allowing the jedi to rise to defeat the sith, thats balance
4. small answer, yes because luke forgave him and so did leia after a time. if he had not killed sidious, the rebels would be crushed
last but not least, TPM sidious saber skills r greater than DE sidious because he still practises while DE palpatine had not practised for 6 years