The Saga of Tanya the Evil (light novel)
DO NOT discuss the source material beyond this episode. If you want to discuss future events or theories, please use separate threads.
DO NOT ask where to watch/download this episode or give links to copyrighted, non-fair use material.
DO NOT troll/bait/harass/abuse other users for liking or disliking the series/characters.
DO read the Anime Discussion Rules and Site & Forum Guidelines.
DO NOT ask where to watch/download this episode or give links to copyrighted, non-fair use material.
DO NOT troll/bait/harass/abuse other users for liking or disliking the series/characters.
DO read the Anime Discussion Rules and Site & Forum Guidelines.
| After looking up "Los Los Los" again, I have to agree that the previous ED was better. Oh well. Commanders are not obliged to evacuate civilians from the battlefield, nor are they permitted to otherwise harm non-combatants as per the laws of war. So really, it's entirely fair to not give civilians enough time to evacuate the city, and it seems like many already took the chance by the time they arrived there. Civilians engaging in warfare is "unlawful", and even more so that they executed an unarmed prisoner. If I remember correctly, high command referred to the imperials in the city as "civilians", so that's just slaughter. Honestly, it would have been in their best interests to not allow civilians to leave the city. Civilians create problems for both the defenders and the besiegers during warfare, and if they actually managed to escape the city, the mage battalion would have been woefully unprepared to deal with the care of so many people. Even after the initial bombardment, there was no way those mages would have been able to fight effectively while simultaneously evacuating wounded, terrified civilians. As a manager, Tanya is really just reflecting draconian business attitudes towards virtue. The more they're forced to kill "unlawful combatants", the more used to it they'll become until they stop questioning her orders. From a utilitarian perspective, long-term, far fewer civilians will end up dying if they can operate as efficiently as this. If you disagree with this, then you wholly disagree with the justification for the atomic bombings. |
nep-nepMar 5, 2017 2:42 PM
| Didn't like this ep as much as the others. It's like they are inferring most of the interesting things that happened, like how the the lieutenant got shot in the arm and such, the other episodes gave me the filling that sometimes something is missing too, but maybe that is just my imagination. |
nep-nep said: As a manager, Tanya is really just reflecting draconian business attitudes towards virtue. The more they're forced to kill "unlawful combatants", the more used to it they'll become until they stop questioning her orders. From a utilitarian perspective, long-term, far fewer civilians will end up dying if they can operate as efficiently as this. If you disagree with this, then you wholly disagree with the justification for the atomic bombings. No matter how you spin it there is no justification for the atomic bombings, it's a shame people are starting to think like that just cause a "few" years as pasted... |
Snaita said: To be fair, one would then argue that there is no justification for killing either. Murder is murder, regardless of how it is done. Denying the benefits of the atomic bombings merely justifies less pronounced forms of murder, and fully accepts the consequences of a prolonged war, which would have been increased fire bombings, human trophy collection, and rape. The net loss and pain suffered in a non-atomic scenario would have been considerably greater than the end result of what is today, history. nep-nep said: As a manager, Tanya is really just reflecting draconian business attitudes towards virtue. The more they're forced to kill "unlawful combatants", the more used to it they'll become until they stop questioning her orders. From a utilitarian perspective, long-term, far fewer civilians will end up dying if they can operate as efficiently as this. If you disagree with this, then you wholly disagree with the justification for the atomic bombings. No matter how you spin it there is no justification for the atomic bombings, it's a shame people are starting to think like that just cause a "few" years as pasted... That is, at least, how I feel Tanya would justify a "faster war". He would compare the pointlessness of trench-based combat to his own slew of successful operations, and argue that nearly everyone benefits more from a quicker, cheaper war even if his methods are "less sound". Regardless of that, there's nothing wrong with disagreeing with these ideas, it just means that you disagree with Tanya's methodology. |
| Can't wait to see Mary fight with Devil of the Rhine - if that was according to original plot. |
nep-nep said: Snaita said: No matter how you spin it there is no justification for the atomic bombings, it's a shame people are starting to think like that just cause a "few" years as pasted... That is, at least, how I feel Tanya would justify a "faster war". He would compare the pointlessness of trench-based combat to his own slew of successful operations, and argue that nearly everyone benefits more from a quicker, cheaper war even if his methods are "less sound". Regardless of that, there's nothing wrong with disagreeing with these ideas, it just means that you disagree with Tanya's methodology. I don't disagree with Tanya methodology, just that it's preposterous to compare what she did with the bombings even if it was more efficient(the bombings were on a different dimension than what she did). There's no justification for mass murder of that scale, it's easy to think short-term but the aftermath on the long-term was and still is disastrous but as always the general population rarely thinks that way. The war ended quickly... true(funny thing Japan was already surrendering but still got nuked), but what of it matters if the next war that happens might be last one for us all(in the sense that we are all gonna die). |
| What an episode, if this keeps up there could be more mutiny in Tanya's group >.< Please don't tell me the guy at the end also has God's power now and can fight Tanya on equal terms =.=" |
 |
shimada_m said: Can't wait to see Mary fight with Devil of the Rhine - if that was according to original plot. It looks like they're deviating from the LN, since Mary's father is still alive and looks to be the one who's gotten power from Being X |
 |
| I like the subtle tonal shift as the show progresses. It's gone from being a goofy show about Tanya spitting in the face of Being X to serious war conflicts. She/he has gone from wanting to totally avoid the frontlines to one who wants to be in the action. |
 |
| New tone and new ending to that. I don't say I don't like it. Truly warlike. But I alway like original premise more. Now thanks to Tanya, terrors of World War 1 met terrors of World War 2 and things getting serious. |
Martin_TaylorMar 10, 2017 4:23 AM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| I really don't want this anime to end at ep. 12. Loved this episode, really interested to see the new route they take. |
GenesisAria said: Being X's agenda is to force Tanya to acknowledge it. This SMG that she got from the guy i can guess would be a key centrepiece for future outcomes. For example, if i were setting up a Being X wins plot, i would have an ending in which, perhaps Tanya meets the guy's wife and child later. Meaning this all being an elaborate setup by Being X, with the intimidation tactics merely being a diversion ploy, and in which Tanya would have to accept fated outcomes in an emotional sense, and acknowledging Being X as "God". Though i could be jumping the gun, and this could just be an inconsequential side plot. There is also the possibility the guy survives and gets supercharged by Being X to spank Tanya some more, ie being the rival... GenesisAria said: Alcatraz_Zombie said: He had the yellow eyes and made prayers. I thought it was pretty obvious that Being X was up to something.Where the hell is all this talk of a rival coming from? Now I'm starting to feel like I missed something because I didn't see jack shit in the episode that even remotely implied one was coming. I called it last ep. Pretty obvious setup, Being X using very round about ways of forcing Tanya to acknowledge as god. Obviously Being X is not much of a real god if it's so determined to make one bad person acknowledge it, unless there's some kind of future where Tanya becomes the one true devil. |
GenesisAriaMar 7, 2017 4:30 PM
❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
Takuan_Soho said: Lack of empathy isn't evil, it's psychopathy. If you're going to tell me psychopathy is evil, then sorry to say but monotheism and Being X are also psychopathic, because emotions don't exist in their context.GenesisAria said: Or an alternative God, which is possible in Japan.Pretty obvious setup, Being X using very round about ways of forcing Tanya to acknowledge as god. Obviously Being X is not much of a real god if it's so determined to make one bad person acknowledge it, unless there's some kind of future where Tanya becomes the one true devil. Remember episode 2, God is interested in Tanya because she is an example the growing trend towards atheism and un-empathic sentiment in modern Japan. She is, therefore, a test case for him. His goal is not to just get her to "acknowledge" him, she already does in a way - but to get her to have faith. Oh, and yes, as for Tanya being a devil, she already is. That is what evil is: a lack of empathy. What i mean is that he'r a pretentious douchebag with power, not any kind of benevolent or natural entity. Even as a shinto-like kami, he's too full of himself. |
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
Takuan_Soho said: Psychopathy is a lack of emotional empathy of humans, and is a whole scale from minor impedance to completely null. If what you say is "evil" then that makes me evil too. Suspending remorse or distancing yourself from empathy is something that people do all the time, especially in war situations, out of necessity, for self preservation, or because conditions require it. Nazi Germany wasn't made by Hitler, the conditions of that time are what made Hitler. Their country was in serious trouble, so they acted, then it got out of hand (like all wars do).GenesisAria said: No, that is the TOTAL lack of empathy. Evil is when one can consciously suspend empathy towards someone because it benefits them. Hitler had empathy, he loved dogs for instance, he loved Germany as another example, but he lacked empathy towards others. Lack of empathy isn't evil, it's psychopathy Takuan_Soho said: It can't though, because emotions invoke actions, and there are exactly zero observed effects to indicate actions. I'm still inclined to say that it is like the Goa'uld in Stargate, just being a god-poser because they have power over the primitives which is beyond their imaginations.GenesisAria said: An interesting philosophical discussion, particularly as it related to Being X, but traditionally in Monotheism, God has infinite empathy. And yes God does have emotions. then sorry to say but monotheism and Being X are also psychopathic, because emotions don't exist in their context. Takuan_Soho said: You missed my point. He's full of himself because he demands the attention of one measly individual who denies it. If the "god" were so all-powerful, it wouldn't give a damn about what a single ape thought. Especially when it doesn't seem to be going out of it's way to persuade anyone else (the other influenced people were likely already predisposed, hence why they seemed to convert so easily).GenesisAria said: That may be where the writer is going with this, but I don't think so. Yes, I do agree that in episode 2 God came off as an extremely peevish person, but at the same time he was dealing with Salaryman. Which, if you think about it, means he was merely REFLECTING what Salaryman thinks. We barely can get through an episode without Tanya complaining about her Job, in other words she sounds just like Being X. That I believe is being done of purpose by the writer.What i mean is that he'r a pretentious douchebag with power, not any kind of benevolent or natural entity. Even as a shinto-like kami, he's too full of himself. |
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
Takuan_Soho said: "Wrong" is subjective.Tanya obeys the rules, she is by any definition "ethical", but what makes her actions wrong isn't on an ethical level, but on an emphatic level. She honestly doesn't care what happens as a result of her desire to be efficient. Takuan_Soho said: If it wasn't Hitler, it would have been someone else, maybe delaying it all by a bit. Countless people have studied the state of germany and the rise of naziism, and it's pretty common to come to the conclusion that someone would rise to power. The people desperately needed a voice, so Hitler gave them one. Hitler would not have become a dominant figure if not for the conditions.GenesisAria said: Not really, there would not have been a Nazi Germany without Hitler, so yes he did make it. Now, yes there were possibilities, the Germany love for efficiency and applying evolution on a societal level predated Hitler, and yes hyperinflation creates instability, however the form that was Nazi Germany was entirely created by Hitler.Nazi Germany wasn't made by Hitler, the conditions of that time are what made Hitler. Their country was in serious trouble, so they acted, then it got out of hand (like all wars do). Takuan_Soho said: Dude, i'm going to be frank with you: if i, a mere human, can understand the nature of time, or rather the non-existence of time, and the ability to perceive all of continuum in an instant, as any "superior being" would have to be able to, then there being sin in the first place is either colossal incompetence or intentional design. Your hypothesis here relies on the interpretation of time as a linear function (even if it could be spliced).GenesisAria said: The problem you have is with scale. Now, first, I am agnostic, so please don't think I am justifying anything, I don't believe in the afterlife and I am doubtful of their being a "Godhead", but that caveat aside, if there IS an afterlife, then God does NOT have to act. Eventually ALL evil/pain will be redeemed, even those in hell can achieve grace. The only thing that matters is OUR actions in the here and now. It can't though, because emotions invoke actions, and there are exactly zero observed effects to indicate actions. Stargate was more fun than clever - though it did have some nicely handled plot arcs. Takuan_Soho said: If he's so mighty then converting people to his cause is infinitesimally inconsequential and of no complicated feat. He wouldn't need to catch this prick a second from death, he's set up the conditions for each person to be persuaded from birth. Hence why i say this Being X as "god" is a farce, and Tanya is more "good" than this self-proclaimed god.GenesisAria said: No, no, no you are missing the writer's point. Being X's beef is with MOST of humanity (which is why he complains about being overworked), Salaryman is just the perfect epitome of current human thought. That is why Being X is interested in him/her, if he can figure out Salaryman, then everything else will become easy.You missed my point. He's full of himself because he demands the attention of one measly individual who denies it. Takuan_Soho said: According to writing, though i have similar beef with the subjects in those statements, especially when it's likely "god" was a mistranslation of something more fundamental and empowering about the nature of the universe. Personifying it to something human-like is a very petty human thing to do.GenesisAria said: That is absolutely wrong. In Christianity (at least, Judaism and Islam not as much) God cares infinitely about each and every individual. That is what I meant above that EVERYONE is capable of grace. Even the worse sinner, if they honestly and truly repent, will be saved. That is the point of hell, not to punish the wicked, but to expose the wicked to results of their own, un-empathic, actions.If the "god" were so all-powerful, it wouldn't give a damn about what a single ape thought. Especially when it doesn't seem to be going out of it's way to persuade anyone else. Takuan_Soho said: No it's not. There is no divine being in Buddhism, buddha is a symbol of a self-actualized goal, as a reference to reaching nirvana (more or less the expulsion of precepts). Original Buddhism is a monistic ontology, a philosophy of being (oneness, coherency) - the most absolutist kind. There isn't meant to be any dogma or myth.This is also the underlying belief in Buddhism. Takuan_Soho said: If he was all powerful, worrying would be non-existent because there wouldn't be any problems in the first place.But to say it in a different way. Because God is "all powerful" he CAN worry about every individual. In summation: you can't refer to gods if you don't even vaguely think like a god would, unbound by any of the holography we call existential reality. |
GenesisAriaMar 7, 2017 10:16 PM
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
Ysad_Ziwezhan said: Quite rare and impressive : an anime where the MC is directly involved in the killing of children, women and all civilians and she doesn't try anything to avoid the mass killing. Tanya did even justify the killing of children :"they will become our enemy". At least one can say it is realistic, since that's what many soldiers have done during WWII. This. It's refreshing to see a genuinely vicious MC, and not just some "misunderstood warrior with good intentions" kind of guy. |
| uh oh! |
| Started watching this 2 days ago and now I'm hooked. A very interesting show. Although, as everyone here mentioned, this episode was pretty dark. That ending - 'Being X' is playing with Tanya |
LeoMar 8, 2017 5:25 AM
 |
| Seeing people justifing the Empire's actions in this thread is indeed funny. It's obviously not okay to deliberately target civilians retreating from a city, no matter the situation. The "oh, but there were armed militias!" was the justification used by the Ottomans to commit genocide against the Armenians, and if you think that is justifiable or correct you are, simply put, scum. |
Takuan_Soho said: Wrong is an ethical term, meaning it's subjective to a consensus of moral code, and relative to something perceived as "right".GenesisAria said: Nope, it is objective, once you drill down to what you are really talking about."Wrong" is subjective. Takuan_Soho said: What you say there is an opinion, and a somewhat ignorant one. There are many more people with similar potential than just the ones who happen to make it to the top. There have been countless wise and wiser than Gandhi, they just aren't famous. Even the popular Neil deGrasse Tyson agrees with my statement there, and he's the epitome of a person chocked full of consensus theories.GenesisAria said: Sorry, that is bunk. The idea that there are no "Great Men" in history is wrong. There are no "forces" of History, Hegel was wrong, Marx was wrong, countless "Historians" were wrong. History is not a "science", it is not "progressive", it is too entirely a "human" endeavor. The world changed because of Napoleon, no "society" would not have produced another one. Same with Hitler. Same with Gandhi (if we need a positive example).If it wasn't Hitler, it would have been someone else, maybe delaying it all by a bit. Takuan_Soho said: I never said he was elected. It's like when you have a pack of wolves without an alpha, whomever claims alpha first, wins. It's about tendencies and susceptibility... There are countless probabilistic variables involved in such a circumstance. If you could (i'm not saying you can) then there would with high probability be a number of other candidates for the potentiality to become the nation's "saviour" (granted outcomes would be different). Again, just as there are many as wise or wiser than Gandhi, his circumstances fortuned to him becoming a famous figure.GenesisAria said: First, appeals to authority do not work - who are these "countless people". Second, Hitler was no "democratically" elected. A bizarre circumstances of events coupled with Hitler's own inane cunning led to Hindenburg selecting him to Chancellor, and then allowed Hitler to use violence become the largest bloc (though not a majority - he only won 38% of the vote), and then his determination allowed him to seize control.Countless people have studied the state of germany and the rise of naziism, and it's pretty common to come to the conclusion that someone would rise to power. The people desperately needed a voice, so Hitler gave them one. Hitler would not have become a dominant figure if not for the conditions. Takuan_Soho said: Time doesn't exist. Einstein failed to grasp that, which has been known since ancient greece or prior, and known by many since. There are many people with far more expertise and understanding of various aspects than a guy who basically plagiarized most of his work (study some more history on that one). Time isn't a direction or a line or a force or a subject. It cannot effect things as it's merely a representation of change which we humans quantify using consistently changing devices like clocks; it is a shadow of cause and effect.GenesisAria said: You "assume" you understand time. You don't. Time is linear, not even Einstein proved otherwise.Dude, i'm going to be frank with you: if i, a mere human, can understand the nature of time, or rather the non-existence of time, and the ability to perceive all of continuum in an instant, as any "superior being" would have to be able to, then there being sin in the first place is either colossal incompetence or intentional design. Your hypothesis here relies on the interpretation of time as a linear function (even if it could be spliced). Takuan_Soho said: Doctor Who has way more cleverness in it (and Mahou Sensei Negima! even outdid Doctor Who for time travel consistency). Most of it was nonsensical, and pretty much everything Carter said was pseudoscience.GenesisAria said: Agree on the fun, but come on, they outdid "Groundhog Day" in the "trapped in a single point of time" episode. That was brilliance, it alone justified watching 10 seasons of the show. Watching the two "dumber" characters being forced to learn Latin to escape the time trap cannot be properly explained. All three of the actors were amazing in that scene. Stargate was more fun than clever - though it did have some nicely handled plot arcs. Takuan_Soho said: Again, it's highly impractical to wait until their life is over to do so, you can literally persuade them through suggestion and circumstance while their mind is fresh and full of curiosity before growing obstinacy with age.GenesisAria said: Not if God's purpose is to redeem every single human life. If you think of it from this level, then Being X's interest in Salaryman is completely understandable. Indeed one could argue that the world that Tanya is in IS her own personal hell. If he's so mighty then converting people to his cause is infinitesimally inconsequential and of no complicated feat. He wouldn't need to catch this prick a second from death, he's set up the conditions for each person to be persuaded from birth. Hence why i say this Being X as "god" is a farce, and Tanya is more "good" than this self-proclaimed god. Takuan_Soho said: I guess it means the story is consistent to it's subject of reference, but they both nave the same problem lol.GenesisAria said: And?According to writing, though i have similar beef with the subjects in those statements, especially when it's likely "god" was a mistranslation of something more fundamental and empowering about the nature of the universe. Personifying it to something human-like is a very petty human thing to do. Takuan_Soho said: It's not, it's from a guy who translates ancient Pali and knows metaphysics inside and out; old Buddhism was a lot more incommensurate and simplex than what we have now (which misinterprets monistic mind as nihilistic mind). As soon as you give god a humanistic mentality, human emotions, or ideas that come from the human perspective, you're immediately doing one of two things: 1) assuming humans are so great that they're like god; 2) humans are too feeble-minded to understand the monism, so they apply their ideas onto it to make better sense of it. In the end using the word "god" directly implies anthropomorphic behaviours in some kind of dictatorial manner.GenesisAria said: Your viewpoint is too narrow. The "Godhead" and "Nirvana" are the same goal, with the same goal, they are the same thing. You are too hung up on the anthropomorphism of "God", that went out of most religions, humm, 1900 years ago.]No it's not. There is no divine being in Buddhism, buddha is a symbol of a self-actualized goal, as a reference to reaching nirvana (more or less the expulsion of precepts). Original Buddhism is a monistic ontology, a philosophy of being (oneness, coherency) - the most absolutist kind. There isn't meant to be any dogma or myth. Takuan_Soho said: If he was a smart scientist, he would understand causality and therefore chaos, and would establish initial conditions to prevent problems and fix them at their source... not waste time band-aiding a billion iterations of symptoms. That is unless he's a third party who took up the job, but even so, god should be outside time. Being outside time means that the past present and future can be observes simultaneously: you're always dying, you're always being born, it's always the crusades, it's always the renaissance, Apollo 11 is always touching down on the moon, i am always writing this sentence, and you are always reading it. Regardless, "thinking of him as a scientist" is still a very human thought pattern. "Gods" supposedly exist in the meta, thus you need to think metaphysically: beyond physcality, beyond "time", beyond perception and beyond humanity.GenesisAria said: You have a really petty view of power. Think of God as an ethical scientist who feels responsible for the subjects in the experiment. If he was all powerful, worrying would be non-existent because there wouldn't be any problems in the first place. Takuan_Soho said: Yeah no, on the contrary, i'm at the frontline, and we have the basics of the unified field solved already, and some of us understand the methodology as well, so at this point progress is going to accelerate exponentially, unless the masses get more superstitious and smother out the discoveries in their denials. The only reason it seems we're not that far, is because all most of you know is a jumble of incomprehensive and incomplete theories that intrinsically contradict eachother, giving the impression of our best being not that impressive. You're looking at the wrong "best".As for the rest, I think you over estimate human ability far too much. We are nowhere near that level, and even if we were able to achieve it, it would be the death of humanity. Intelligence is not Wisdom. Understanding how nature works is not even difficult. What is difficult is quieting your mind and shedding your preconceptions and perspectives. People must stop projecting their ideas onto nature, and instead just watch, and listen, and study, and trace the basis of things. If you go out looking for particles, all you're gong to find is particles or lack thereof. If you stop thinking and thinking and thinking and reinforcing, and instead just sit back and let nature do the talking while you merely take notes, the things i've said about it, such as time not existing as anything other than a projection or result of something else, will become clear and unavoidable rather quickly. And this is exactly why it seems that we're not as far along as we are, because of information you do not possess, and preconceptions you hold to. What we're really not far along at, is getting the majority of people to shut up and listen like the minority has learned to do. Buddhism tries to do this, though hopefully soon we'll have some actual existential innovations that will be so profound that they can no longer be ignored (such as DIY limitless power harnessing; many people are making a LOT of progress - the more useful holographic and electrical principles are reaching more people, and more people are making new discoveries and solving old unsolved riddles of physics as we speak based on these enlightened principles they are able to gain through the internet). All i'm trying to say is that yes, i'm thinking humanistically, but you're thinking even more humanistically and materialistically than i am. I can't adequately intellectualize a god, and you definitely can't. This Being X is too easy to intellectualize (the actions are too materialistic and egotistical - a psychologist could give quite a thorough analysis of this "Being X's actions), as it was made by a writer who was not a philosophy genius, therefore Being X can only be a humanistic conception under the impression of a god - hence my thesis: "Being X is a false god" (it also has a 50/50 chance of being revealed as such in the plot). |
GenesisAriaMar 9, 2017 1:26 AM
| ❀桜舞う空〜 Cute is Power. 🔗CosmoGenesis Project “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “A truth seeker has no patience for BS.” I seek only to improve myself and others. |
| This show proving to be most interesting in recent times. Finally a somewhat evil MC, not like the fake ones(Overlord with jesus skeleton) |
Yoshikawa_China said: This show proving to be most interesting in recent times. Finally a somewhat evil MC, not like the fake ones(Overlord with jesus skeleton) HA!. You, I like you. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Ok. I know war is cruel and everything but the evacuation order was dirty. The whole scheme obviously was just a justification for the murder of civilians while taking control of the city. Well. Luckily it doesn't affect the progress of the story. It'd really suck if we wouldn't be able to see more battle-skills of the MC because that shit is unethical as fuck. I'm glad she is so self-interested. Soo did that guy shoot at her, himself or actually where he was ordered to shoot? Whaaaat? That guy with the rifle from his daughter survived? Tough motherfucker. And I was wondering why they showed the two scenes of his family in the previous ep. Ahegyao said: Killing civilians because of "collateral" damage =/= killing soldiers Being a soldier doesn't mean throwing away your morals. I know what you are getting at but let's be honest. That doesn't even work in reality sadly (seriously. there is at least one experiment that shows perfectly how the average person behaves if you take away responsibility. The Milgram experiment to be precise and if I'm not mistaken that one was done several times always with a similar result. If you think about it it is actually terrifying). And to be fair Tanya made a valid point. Some of them would have come back as soldiers and fueled by revenge. It obviously doesn't justify the slaughter of innocent civilians which most of them were but it's not like the order was unreasonable from a tactical stand-point. I'm honestly just curious what she is going to do with her men now. That battle probably wasn't very good for the health of her group. |
NanashiMar 11, 2017 4:11 PM
| A lot of people sympathizing with Tanya...why? She wrote the damn book on how to bomb civilians and she executed the plan with no remorse. Tanya is a devil indeed. |
 |
| Using Imperial hostages as an excuse to slaughter civilians...okay, there goes my happiness for the day. Just a fair reminder that as amusing as Tanya can be, (he) she truly is evil. |
 |
| Nasty business... war. Nice ED song. |
  |
| Damn, that was a hard ep. to watch. Tanya haven't changed at all, and now even killing innocent people with no hesitation. That actually is going too far. But I understand her/empire's point of view too. If they let them live some of them will rebel against the Empire. But almost all the time, at least at that time, it's always the boys that want the sweet revenge. At this time the woman and girls bear the grudge inside themselves. but usually stay quiet. So it's stupid of her to kill the whole gang, including the women and female children. And there may have been some babies too, so that way of thinking is just stupid. The end of the ep. were quite epic. Being X (or God) had enough of Tanya's bullshit. Even giving her power,, doing miracles and making her more superior than other people, she still think she is superior to Him. I guess, this were God's limit. Now he have send his messenger (which I knew weren't dead by the way) to bring down the evil. It's gonna be interesting to see how it's gonna be done. Cause I believe God have given him some power now. |
 |
| A bit of a different episode or so that's how I experienced it, especially with that different toned ED! Well, I'm looking forward to see what's next, but that ending sure made it a lot more interesting, and I just knew that wasn't the last we would see from him! He sure is going to get her back for his gun! |
 |
| So that guy before wasn't dead and was blessed by being x... Love the new ending, but I love the first one more. |
 “Even if the attention isn’t forever, I’ll keep singing.” |
| lol, i thought that old guy died... he now got the blessing by Being X interesting... |
 |
TheBigGuy said: Grantz really pissed me off this episode. I hope, that Tanya kills him. Well, she gave them fair warning and a chance to surrender. Everything that happened after that, lies in their responsibility. lol I actually thought he went mad enough to take his gun and attempt to shoot Tanya, then get killed by her but he forced himself to go with the orders X) Damn, Sioux still alive? Being X must be bored and want to make a rival for Tanya lulz. |
| Kill "innocent" people. No, they're not. They were warned that everyone that remained in the city will be treated as an enemy. The civilians had a chance to retreat but for unknown reasons chose not to. How is it the imperial army's fault? They followed the rules and warned them. But they decided to go "lolz lets stay XDXDXDD" untill it was too late. There are no good or bad guys, only normal and retarded ones. |
| Gib [img] plz |
| Tanya's command looks like it's going to crumble. |
 Novels I have read/am reading pending approval: since November 10 2022 |
| So we've done timeskip, this will be interesting. |
Novels I have read/am reading pending approval: since November 10 2022 |
| This went from pure awesome action to stuff that made me think about morals in war a lot... The Empire's actions were horrendous with the artillery to civilian fire, but damn, the Alliance's actions were just so reckless and irresponsible. The battalion responsible for so many successful missions issued a goddamn evacuation order and finding out that many of them didn't listen and just stay where they are... Not to mention those rebels who stirred up the trouble were civilians themselves who impulsively killed the very hostages they were told not to kill for their safety and probably tried to exploit the conditions of fighting in a city using non-combatants. There was no guarantee that they'll win so not prioritizing their evacuation was just a big regretful mistake. Why they were shocked that those shells came raining down just made me shake my head in disappointment while pitying the whole situation. None of the sides were in the right in the end anyway since war is a horrible act in itself. Orders were orders and Tanya executed them perfectly. I have to admit that I had fun seeing her dance while explaining her perspective. Sioux surviving through Being X's meddling makes me feel that it's not gonna end up well. That ED was a somber one indeed. |
 |
| Hmm I wonder if Tanya is as ruthless as she is because she feels somewhat detached coming to this world from her previous one? Kinda like it's just a game of survival between her and Being X. War is no joke, guys. |
| I'm Bruneian and I like anime. And Manchester United. And fat cats. |
| This episode is amazing! I love how much Tanya is so LAWFUL EVIL! She's abiding by the rules while being a goddamn psychopath that was the one who came up with bombing citizens. And I somehow feel like her battalion gonna rebel against her at some point, because they had enough of shits. Though she was right to kill those escapee, because they will come back and bite them in the ass later. |
 |
| This doesn't bode well for Tanya. I think the empire's gonna order her to do many more atrocities and then make her take the fall in the end. Also another person with ties to this god that will fight Tanya should be interesting. |
 |
| Well, war is shit after all. And lol, cool to see that dad survived with being X. Pretty interesting development. |
One Piece episode 914 & 915 & 1027 were a mistake and 957 brought the salvation - FMmatron |
| Shit the second part got dark... Fucking shit, war is hell. |
 |
| not surprised to see a soldier turn against her, war fucks with your head big time. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Youjo Senki Episode 3 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Stark700 - Jan 20, 2017 |
218 |
by RGreatDanton
»»
1 hour ago |
|
Poll: » Youjo Senki Episode 2 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jan 13, 2017 |
313 |
by RGreatDanton
»»
6 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Youjo Senki Episode 1 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jan 6, 2017 |
448 |
by RGreatDanton
»»
6 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Youjo Senki Episode 12 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Mar 31, 2017 |
291 |
by Phixiately
»»
Yesterday, 8:26 AM |
|
Poll: » Youjo Senki Episode 11 Discussion ( 1 2 3 )Stark700 - Mar 24, 2017 |
147 |
by Phixiately
»»
Apr 22, 9:38 AM |