Human Rights are protected by law enforced by the Geneva Convention and the UN. Laws of many nations have laws against murder and enslavement and so on. In a nuclear wasteland there are no such laws. Only in areas where people formed new governments and laws. If you are raised by the Enclave or Caesar you're not likely to see their actions as evil. The master had a whole wasteland religion.

The Master in Fallout wanted to make everyone into super mutants
Western BoS will kill to get what they want
NCR also does underhanded things to get what they want.
Caesar enslaves but is also uniting the wasteland
Enclave want to rebuild America in their own image.

The game is about survival and rebuilding people have different ideas about how to do things.

human rights are still there, the UN and Geneva convention are jokes anyway, people who want to violate human rights will do it anyway. the human rights still exist without a law, thats how you tell who is evil regardless of whether there are or are not laws. Also the nearly every country has some kind of law protecting human rights.

You got me before the edit. Many nations do have laws against murder. Still point is in a wasteland where you ae raised by "Evil" you're not likely to see your actions as Evil. Can't make an omelet without breaking eggs a few eggs.

But you are judging the Enclave by today's standards. They do what is necessary to be done is a post-nuclear world in rebuilding America. Are their actions unethical? Prehaps. Do the ends justify the means in this case? yes.

So while the enclave may be unethical in some of their actions. They are not evil.

there are no "today's standards" human rights are human rights regardless. standards are people's way of excusing themselves for when they have messed up. all human's have the same rights and value regardless of what people think and what situation they are in. and the means dont meet the ends, they get bit in the butt for being evil because the majority of the wasteland see them as evil and hate them.

Yes there is. You can judge them based on what the world is today (i.e. nice and comfortable) or you can judge them by the game universe (which is both hellish and what amounts to a never ending war for survival and resources). Which standard will they come out more as "evil" then?

peoples points of view mean nothing when it comes to human rights. if someone in the ghetto kills someone, its just as much murder and evil as if it were in a pent house sweet. environment and conditions dont effect human rights, any living human has the same rights regardless of time or place and regardless of whether or not others choose to recognize them.

You're missing the point, thats not what I mean. Here's an example of what im talking about based on the situation you provided me.

1. someone kills someone over stealing their stuff in a ghetto (a coat for example). By today's standard, that person would be considered "evil" for shooting him, because after all, a coat is a coat..

2. Now consider this, same person kills the same other guy in the ghetto and for the same coat that was being stolen from him. This time however, the shooting takes place in a hellish post-apocalyptic world where resources and food is vital and the simple act of stealing someones coat could mean life or death for the person who is getting his coat (or whatever) taken (i.e. that person could freeze to death).

Is the shooter who was getting his coat taken evil now?


See, different perspectives make the difference.

no, i understand that, he is still evil for violating that other persons rights, it doesnt matter if he had to, the only time killing is not evil is if you have to in self defense, killing another human for any other reason is evil

So NCR killing to protect their base is Evil? Lyon and his people Evil for killing the people in The Pitt? Boomers are Evil for shelling people that get to close? Killing for any reason is Evil?

exactly. Where do you draw the line then? What faction wouldn't be evil in fallout by the "no kill" policy that you set forward?

i said any reason other than self defense, they all give very easy to follow guide lines of what not to do, the enclave just comes and kills you for not giving them what they want

Good and Evil are abstract. Its how you see things. If you believe that killing no matter what is Evil then pretty much everyone in Fallout is Evil.

History is writen by the winners. Winners decide whats good or evil.

Enclave don't ask anyone for anything. BoS kill to get what they want. So does NCR.

Its not as simple as that. The Enclave attacking you for "not getting what they want" is not a giant hissy-fit by the Enclave saying
BUT WE WAAANT IT!"

They believe, and with good cause, that what you "have" (I guess you would be referring to the GECK) is how they can achieve their goals of rebuilding America and making it a safe and secure place again. They see that by killing you, they will have guanteed the safety of countless future Americans.

Now Im no lawyer, but that seems like that could be a viable "self-defense" plea.



Once again Styles I agree whole heartedly. By this defintion of "no killing to achieve goals" virtually EVERYONE in Fallout is guilty as charged.

NCR and BOS kill each other and others because they threaten them, they dont have a rule that tells them to kill random people. the enclave wants technology to even more extreme point than BOS and either kill you straight up for it or ask for it and then decide whether or not to kill you. and the geck wouldnt kill them so it isnt self defense......

I am no lawyer but it makes sense. In their minds America belongs to them. They are just taking it back.

L-T... you're fighting a battle you can't win.


What you have here, in ShotgunSteve, is a man who believes that human life is somehow sacred or valuable. He doesn't understand that his rights are nothing more than fairy tales and dust in the wind. He doesn't realize that the only freedoms he has to -enjoy- this life are given to him because other men kill and die and pillage. He uses this naive sense of righteousness to keep himself ignorant of the fact that he's meat, just another animal out there walking amongst billions, and that the only -right- he has is to try and keep himself from dying as long as possible.

You can't win the 'virtuous' argument of the idealists, because it isn't an argument. It's a statement of flawed logic and semi-religious fervor. Human rights just -are-... and it doesn't matter who enforces them? Not likely. Try telling that to any human to live in the few thousand years or so BEFORE written history... or during the massive waves of slavery and torture and abuse which came all throughout the Middle Ages of our society.

Those 'human rights' are nothing more than another bit of propaganda, written about by a number of very articulate and well-liked political activists. Before that, what you call 'human rights' didn't exist... and there wasn't a damn person who cared about them. The 'right to life' was dictated by those in power... be they the King, or the Church... and these people abused that power REGULARLY and with reckless abandon until they were largely overthrown.

The best thing you can do for yourself, Lieutenant, is to let it go.

You can't win these arguments... and really, you don't need to. History is not on the side of those who frivolously hide behind arbitrary rules and laws, anyway. It's behind those who are bold enough to -dare-... to make the hard choice, and carry through no matter the consequences.

This is why the Enclave resembles other groups... like Communist Russia... and Nazi Germany....

... it's because they have the same mentality: The Ends Justifies the Means.

Stalin drove his nation into the ground out of cold determination to prove he knew better than everyone else. Hitler brought about the demise of a great and powerful Germany because he allowed madness to contaminate his vision. The Enclave has failed, in the past, because it commits both these fatal acts.

It has nothing to do with human rights.

It has to do with human ingenuity. Humans, no matter how genetically diverse, are not to be underestimated. All the Enclave needs is someone willing to put as much time into bettering the world... as their former Xenophobic Psychopath leaders have invested in trying to -destroy- it all over again. Mutation -does- need to be fought. But you can CURE, just as well as KILL, if you're willing to try. So far, the Enclave has been poorly portrayed as a generic evil entity.

It is my sincerest hope that, much like the Brotherhood of Steel and the Remnants, any future contact we have with the Enclave will be more closely resemble an -actual- society... with many different points of view.

Just because the American 50's were a time of nationalist pride and social arrogance... doesn't mean that the average citizen is going to just go ahead and blindly condone murder. We're not a nation of stereotypes. We're a nation of people who, while usually content to go with the flow, have been known to launch some -very- persuasive attacks against the status quo.

-Col. John Tannanbaum

BoS and NCR do kill people. Someone has tech and BoS want it, they go in and kill. Lyons killed everyone at The Pitt because they were "mutated" sounds alot like what the Enclave does. NCR and BoS got along for along time. It was only in the Mojave they started fighting. NCR and BoS hunt and kill Enclave that have given up. NCR has taken places by force just because they wanted them.

*salutes the good Colonel*

Aye sir!

Disengaging from debate!

lol you didnt read what i said. human life and rights IS sacred and valuable. however i understand some people ignore that and mindlessly kill, which is evil. learn to read next time bub. and those men and women who kill are killing those who would like to take human life and abuse others rights, although you shouldnt talk about it because i highly doubt you have been one of those doing the killing

umm...you do realize that all the mutated stuff in the pitt was highly hostile and impossible to reason with, right? its self defense

Not everyone turns into trogs it takes years. BoS went in and killed everyone but for a few children. You also ignored the part about NCR killing to get what they want, BoS killing to get what they want.

because they dont...i never found an instance in either game where NCR killed someone without being provoked by violence or the BOS either.

Alright im going to have to disobey my strict orders to stand down to counter this. (Im a loose cannon Lt. who doesn't play by the rules :gun: )

What about Jacobstown? Forget that? Those mutants weren't hurting anybody, but the NCR ordered mercenaries to go in and kill them.

and now my good sir if you say "BUT THEY'RE MUTAANTS!!" Then you sir have just joined the Enclave, congrats.