The reason for the deathstar

[KirkSkyWalker]

Sure, the DS has a self-destruct button, but ISD's are foolproof if a single loyal commander is in charge ROTFLMAO

[Praeothmin]

And since you've never proven how unloyal the Imperial Commanders are, I'll keep thinking that a greater fleet would have been better, and a lesser waste of ressources... :)

And again, if a few Bothan spies effectively disabled the defense systems of an entire planet, imagine what the same small number of people could do to a Battle Station using 1 single power generator... :)

[Mr. Oragahn]

And since you've never proven how unloyal the Imperial Commanders are, I'll keep thinking that a greater fleet would have been better, and a lesser waste of ressources... :)

And again, if a few Bothan spies effectively disabled the defense systems of an entire planet, imagine what the same small number of people could do to a Battle Station using 1 single power generator... :)

It would take... a Jedi!?

[Mike DiCenso]

Or a person (or persons) who were well-equipped, and very determined to carry out the mission.
-Mike

[Praeothmin]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

[KirkSkyWalker]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

Yeah, about that-- when the Emperor is killed in RotJ, everyone celebrates; the Empire's over-- do the math. An empire ruled by one man tha tno one wants ruling them, NEEDS a lot of power under own thumb-- not under the thumbs of 10,000 other people whom the vast majority of people don't want him there; ships would be taken and turn by the hundreds, and be used against the Empire.

[User1442]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

Yeah, about that-- when the Emperor is killed in RotJ, everyone celebrates; the Empire's over-- do the math. An empire ruled by one man tha tno one wants ruling them, NEEDS a lot of power under own thumb-- not under the thumbs of 10,000 other people whom the vast majority of people don't want him there; ships would be taken and turn by the hundreds, and be used against the Empire.

The empire didn't fall completly though. Yes the EU can't be used for debate tactics, but it wouldn't take a genius to figure out it still was a huge threat even after he died.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

Yeah, about that-- when the Emperor is killed in RotJ, everyone celebrates; the Empire's over-- do the math. An empire ruled by one man tha tno one wants ruling them, NEEDS a lot of power under own thumb-- not under the thumbs of 10,000 other people whom the vast majority of people don't want him there; ships would be taken and turn by the hundreds, and be used against the Empire.

Actually it was his death and the destruction of his uber powerful symbol the DS that were both contributing factors, had it been just him who died on a SSD or ISD it would not have had the same political and social impact accross the empire.

[Praeothmin]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

Yeah, about that-- when the Emperor is killed in RotJ, everyone celebrates; the Empire's over-- do the math. An empire ruled by one man tha tno one wants ruling them, NEEDS a lot of power under own thumb-- not under the thumbs of 10,000 other people whom the vast majority of people don't want him there; ships would be taken and turn by the hundreds, and be used against the Empire.

Yeah, about that, notice people only rejoiced after he was killed, and that had he still been alive, it would not have happened?

Oh, I know, you only accept G-canon answers.
Ok, the Emperor ruled the SW galaxy for 20 years before he had the first DS at his disposal.
How come he didn't have to face hundreds of allied ships taken over by the Rebellion during that time?
How come no one was able to overthrow him, if he was despised so much, and people hated him so?

Did Saddam Husseins' reign of terror end because of treason?
No, it eneded because the US attacked and took him out, and while a lot of people rejoiced when he was out because they all hated him, no one had the guts to fight him while he was in power...

[KirkSkyWalker]

In other words, it is feasable, and a lot easier to accomplish then overthrowing the Empire with one lone commandeered ISD if the fleet has 10 000 more of them...

Yeah, about that-- when the Emperor is killed in RotJ, everyone celebrates; the Empire's over-- do the math. An empire ruled by one man tha tno one wants ruling them, NEEDS a lot of power under own thumb-- not under the thumbs of 10,000 other people whom the vast majority of people don't want him there; ships would be taken and turn by the hundreds, and be used against the Empire.

Yeah, about that, notice people only rejoiced after he was killed, and that had he still been alive, it would not have happened?

Oh, I know, you only accept G-canon answers.
Ok, the Emperor ruled the SW galaxy for 20 years before he had the first DS at his disposal.
How come he didn't have to face hundreds of allied ships taken over by the Rebellion during that time?

There weren't enough of them, and so they could be commanded by his loyal stooges.

How come no one was able to overthrow him, if he was despised so much, and people hated him so?

He didn't have enough ISD's for them to make a difference; power was centralized, and likewise his stormtroopers were mostly clones.

Did Saddam Husseins' reign of terror end because of treason?
No, it eneded because the US attacked and took him out, and while a lot of people rejoiced when he was out because they all hated him, no one had the guts to fight him while he was in power...

Saddam Hussein didn't take over a democratic republic, however-- he was a barbaric dictator who took over a barbaric dictatorship, so there was no real diference.
Likewise, tn contrast, when Hitler took over Germany there were a significant resistance.
The reason that the USA had the 2nd Amendment was so that the states could resist a federal coup; and that's one reason that it didn't happen in over 200 years.

[User1442]

Did Saddam Husseins' reign of terror end because of treason?
No, it eneded because the US attacked and took him out, and while a lot of people rejoiced when he was out because they all hated him, no one had the guts to fight him while he was in power...

Saddam Hussein didn't take over a democratic republic, however-- he was a barbaric dictator who took over a barbaric dictatorship, so there was no real diference.
Likewise, tn contrast, when Hitler took over Germany there were a significant resistance.
The reason that the USA had the 2nd Amendment was so that the states could resist a federal coup; and that's one reason that it didn't happen in over 200 years.

Unrelated to ST vs SW i'd like to say, that there HAS been numerous coups in the american history. People just haven't realised it.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Did Saddam Husseins' reign of terror end because of treason?
No, it eneded because the US attacked and took him out, and while a lot of people rejoiced when he was out because they all hated him, no one had the guts to fight him while he was in power...

Hussein's reign of terror... you mean the reign which formerly was a layman one, where at least Christians could survive in, where the death toll certainly was nowhere near +1.5 million, the same reign which the US didn't give a shit about, leaving the "dictator" in place after the first "war", until Sad' guy would accept exchanging euros for some oil?
Ahem *cough* sigh...
Yes, let's talk about people rejoicing, now that their country is a ruin, divided and literally sold to foreign groups.
Off topicness kills kittens.

[Who is like God arbour]

Saddam Hussein didn't take over a democratic republic, however-- he was a barbaric dictator who took over a barbaric dictatorship, so there was no real diference.
Likewise, tn contrast, when Hitler took over Germany there were a significant resistance.
The reason that the USA had the 2nd Amendment was so that the states could resist a federal coup; and that's one reason that it didn't happen in over 200 years.

You must come from an Earth from a parallel-universe because your history differs significantly from the history of this Earth.

[KirkSkyWalker]

Saddam Hussein didn't take over a democratic republic, however-- he was a barbaric dictator who took over a barbaric dictatorship, so there was no real diference.
Likewise, tn contrast, when Hitler took over Germany there were a significant resistance.
The reason that the USA had the 2nd Amendment was so that the states could resist a federal coup; and that's one reason that it didn't happen in over 200 years.

You must come from an Earth from a parallel-universe because your history differs significantly from the history of this Earth.

Such as? Iraq has never been a democracy; meanwhile the Weimar Republic held free elections prior to Hitler's appointment, while mounting a strong resistance after it-- if you can't read so well, at least see the movie "Valkyrie."

As for the 2nd Amendment, try reading Federalist No. 46 by James Madison-- that is, if you can read anything which hasn't been thoroughly distorted by revisionists.

Likwise if you want to make an argument, try something more specific and accurate than simply being a contrarian smartass; humor comes from truth and wit, and you have all but two of those.

[Who is like God arbour]

The NSDAP was elected. Hitler was made chancellor by president Paul von Hindenburg. After Hindenburg died, there was a plebiscite in Germany about the merging of the presidency with the chancellorship winning 84.6% of the electorate. Through that, Hitler became - perfectly legal - Führer und Reichskanzler (leader and chancellor) of Germany 1934. There was no significant or even organized resistance to Hitler’s regime in the period between his appointment as Chancellor in January 1933 and the crisis over Czechoslovakia in 1938. And even the few Wehrmacht officers who participated in their attempted coup d'état from 20. July 1944 didn't really start to resist Hitler until they knew that Germany will loose the war. And all the time, the majority of the German people were behind Hitler. They loved Hitler and many of them were ready to die for Hitler.

I recommend that you do not get your history knowledge only from movies. To say that » when Hitler took over Germany there were a significant resistance « is simply wrong. Maybe you could read that page: German resistance. It's not really good, but good enough for you.

And I didn't want to write more, because

1. I didn't really want to debate with you. That's like debating with a wall.
2. I didn't want to derail that thread any further.

That's why I will not continue this. It's only to show you how wrong you are - again.