The name of attempting to rebuild a city is indeed just that - - a name, a claim by him, a bunch of words. The reality is what's on the ground, and in his methods, and in what he's produced.
What exists for real is a slave encampment where one class of people is held captive and continually abused and murdered by another class. The murderers are people whom Ashur empowers and therefore, is responsible for. And this system has been going on for a long time.
I think it is a basic principle of history and human rights that a little war on the part of the victims to get out of a continually-murderous situation (and a couple deaths along the way) is understandable. Also, kidnapping and caring for a baby does not compare with the evil of systematically murdering a trapped and otherwise helpless class of people.
So I still see no grey area at all. Even history doesn't judge against the people who fought to free themselves from tyrants, as long as they succeed. The ones that fail seem to be forgotten about, or, called names which lead people to believe that the conflict was about something else.
Perhaps the grey question mark around this story is - - that it shows how it is possible to get people who are not endeavoring to be evil to support something which is.
What exists for real is a slave encampment where one class of people is held captive and continually abused and murdered by another class. The murderers are people whom Ashur empowers and therefore, is responsible for. And this system has been going on for a long time.
I think it is a basic principle of history and human rights that a little war on the part of the victims to get out of a continually-murderous situation (and a couple deaths along the way) is understandable. Also, kidnapping and caring for a baby does not compare with the evil of systematically murdering a trapped and otherwise helpless class of people.
So I still see no grey area at all. Even history doesn't judge against the people who fought to free themselves from tyrants, as long as they succeed. The ones that fail seem to be forgotten about, or, called names which lead people to believe that the conflict was about something else.
Perhaps the grey question mark around this story is - - that it shows how it is possible to get people who are not endeavoring to be evil to support something which is.
Yep, I finished the Pitt just a few days ago, and was wondering where the supposed moral greyness is. Kill Joe Stalin and the murderous thugs whom he uses to work slaves to death with, and not kill his kid, but give it to someone who will raise it as their own, without ever knowing their murderous father? She is not being kidnapped. Her parents are being killed because they are monsters, and the slaves are simply not killing her in the bargain. Now if you had to decide whether or not to kill the kid, that would add some real moral uncertainty, as she is not responsible for her parent's evil. In most RL slave uprisings, the children of the overlords would have their brains bashed out. Midea shows a great deal of compassion insisting that she not be harmed, caring for her, and paying you to bring her toys.
On the flipside of all this I can join Stalin or replace him as the evil bastich kidnapping people throughout the wasteland and forcing them to work until they literally die. Not seeing the grey area between the two.