No i do not i think the higher ups of the Enclave are though,but Col Autum still had his humanity as he was willing to leave the Purifier also just look at all the Remnants in Vegas they are all nice people
except,orisno and even he still helped the ncr showing he wasn't as much as a Facist as we thought he was.
If the Ncr,Brotherhood of steel.and the Enclave all worked together they could rebuild the world.

Alas, war never changes.

By the time the Lone Wanderer is brought to Eden, Autumn is the de facto leader of all human Enclave armed forces; note how they are following his orders, not Eden, and are engaging Eden's own troops. Regardless of whether or not he eventually intends to return things to normal, the fact is that Autumn exercises more authority over the human elements of the Enclave armed forces than Eden does, thus making him the leader.

I'm not trying to suggest that the Enclave is in a civil war here, as it's not; as has been rightly pointed out there is only one faction, Autumn's. I'm just trying to point out that Eden's plan to commit genocide is not representative of the Enclave as a whole at this point.

@The Enclave-Eden did have troops, all of the automated defenses and robots of the Enclave were under his command and engaging human Enclave units as you make your way through Raven Rock.

Fallout universe is so full of black and brimstone that even a centuries old, isolated group of paranoids is a better option than the current state as long as they have the firepower, which the Enclave has and which is their greatest asset.

Although to me the Enclave of Fallout 2 was never a good solution for a better future. They were identical to pre-war America: a band of rich and ruthless who didn't care about anything but making the world around them a image of their fantasies, even at the cost of most of world population. To me, the decimated Enclave of Fallout 3 is a better candidate since it has turned into a military organization who has been fixated to the goal of taking over the local population by force and eradicating mutated elemets (notably Ghouls, which the Enclave mass murders in their camps) while according to orders found in Enclave camps they distribute fresh water to locals that pass genetic scanning (that is, anyone "human"). Also the Enclave seems to have abandoned the FEV "months ago", as Colonel Autumn said and Eden brought the plan back to life only after meeting the Lone Wanderer (perhaps he knew he couldn't trust anyone else* within the Enclave - no one else with the ability wouldn't do it 'cept that one scientist who met his death in the Purifier). And as I have said a million times before, the true leader of the Enclave - Colonel Autumn - has entirely other goals than his de jure boss. Colonel Autumn is committed to serve the Enclave's public goals, which are to bring water and protection to the local population while eradicating hostile factions and mutants.

And since the OP is asking about the situation in the Capital Wasteland, I would note that the Enclave there is the only one with both the motivation and strength to control the Capital Wasteland. The Brotherhood is a faction of some ~100-~200 soldiers and as Lyons hints they are barely able to even protect themselves (that's why they needed a plot device such as Liberty Prime to win). And besides, there are no other candidates. No one else is interested in bringing security.

* "I'm not entirely sure Eden can be trusted. And I think he knows I don't trust him." - Colonel Autumn

Asking, is the Enclave evil is like asking "Is the Brotherhood of Steel evil?"

There is no such thing as evil and no such thing as good in a Post-Apocalyptic world. For example, is it evil to kill a scavenger for food to feed your family? Is it truly good to kill evil people? There are only shades of gray.

In the Enclave's point of view, they believe that's the only way to resurrect Pre-War government. Which is pretty much is the only way. But the question is not whether what they do is bad, but is it worth it to resurrect the Pre-War government? Remember that the politicians during the 2070's were corrupt and terrible leaders, allowing food riots to happen and then responding with military action.

I have a counter question to the one the OP poses:
Should the organization created by a mob of deserters from the US Army be permitted to be considered as being 'Good'?

Jenifur Charne

Talking about the BoS right?

Brotherhood deserted because they did not want to "follow orders." Worst crimes in the world are caused by those "only following orders." The Brotherhood deserted because they found out what the scientists and researchers were doing at Meriposa. Lets just say it involved FEV and human testing.

That's right Styles. I am indeed referring to the BoS.


Incorrect.
When they deserted, they were soldiers in the US Army. They were NOT at that time the BoS. What they were is law breakers. Military criminals. Hence my counter question to the one the OP posed.

Jenifur Charne

No, I was right. True they were not yet the BoS but under Roger Maxson who was second in command of the security team stationed Mariposa. He found out what they were doing with FEV so yes they rebelled/deserted, they tried telling the outside world what they had done but it was to late and the Great War had started.

Both and none.

They have good intention's, rebuilding the old world as close as possible. (Wiping mutations out, apparently.)

They do it through cruel and harsh ways, but it's what needs to be done.

FO2's Enclave wasn't "cruel" I think, The curling virus worked pretty quickly IIRC.

Jeni is technically right on that one Styles, Desertion in a time of war is punishable by firing squad. If the bombs didn't drop they would have all been shot for treason. They did murder all the bases scientists. Don't people call Autumn evil because he shot that one in the purifier?


To me, I'd say the enclave aren't afraid to make the "hard" decisions. They know it's a horrible thing, but it's the only way to bring back the level of stability they need to rebuilt. They looked at the wastes for a long time before this. trying to come up with a plan. To then wiping the slate clean and starting fresh was the answer. In reality if there plan was very effective, and would have worked beautifully and they would have been peacefully rebuilding with no pitfalls of raiders or mutants. With there huge stockpile of prewar knowledge and tech they would be well on there way to restoring pre war America in the time between FO2 and 3.

Anyway, the majority of Enclave you meet up with are Soldiers, soldiers are supposed to be uncompromising and efficient when dealing with the enemy. They are a very Ends justify the means faction. They think long term, and have a set goal.

That is I feel the ultimate question for all of those willing to think and not just brand the Enclave "NAZIS" or whatever with all prejudice aside, the easy way or the hard way to civilisation. The Enclave is essentially a pre-fabricated society and government with the means to instantly establish itself as such and remove any kind of opposition; of course the tag is the massively un-ethical ramifications of such a choice, hence the easy way. Essentially the government will re-establish itself and everyone will be born into a clean, safe world constantly on the rise, things may be hard at the begining and the Enclave may have to spread itself pretty thin in order to collect all the resources it needs and it will take so much longer to get things like multiple cities with there small populace but it will get there eventually.

The hard way is of course just to let the wasteland rebuild itself, the NCR is on the way but there is a lot of suffering out in the wastes and it will take longer to become civilised again. But of course this way is more "natural" and doesn't come with a pressumabley billions of lives price tag, not all at once any way.

The enclave are as evil to me as I am to them.

But they didn't desert in a time of war. The war didn't start until a week after they deserted. But that last week, the government apparently went mute or deserted as well. Maxsons squad radioed to someone (Dont recall who) and declared their desertion, but got no response.

I would say Jeni is not right in that one. America was at war with China (Sino-American War) but Roger Maxson was not on the front line, he was back in America in side Meriposa. Second its not worse then the Enclave if Jeni's point is "At least Enclave are loyal were as BoS are deserters."

Enclave wanted/were going to commit global genocide and they are not the government. They are a group of radical extremists within the government and military, that took control of the American Government during the Great War and were working toward that goal before the great war.

Were as Roger Maxson was not going to be a "good little soldier" and sit back and watch American scientists turn men into monsters, literally. Like I said in another post, "the worst crimes in human history are caused by people only following orders."

Yes they were, the Enclave was a group of people before the war who held positions of authority and power in both private and public sectors who then usurped that power to their own ends, dishonest and bad, yeah; but as long as one member of the Presidential Line of Succession survived he could become an Acting President until the time when elections would be held again.

Yeah I get it. They were the puppet master so therefore technically they are "the government." My point is they were a shadow government (puppet masters) of people willing to commit genocide, put people into vault experiments. Were as Roger Maxson was not willing to go along with the Government turing men into super mutants.

I don't care abut the actual arguement old sport, Maxson deserting 200 years ago for ethical reasons doesn't make the BoS bad, it wasn't even made till after the war and I don't get what the other persons point is.

But not even technically I mean, if the President is replaced or if the pre-war President was indeed privvy to the Enclave then can he not appoint all the people in it citizenship... etc. you know where I stand on this one.

I agree Maxson deserting does not make the brotherhood evil.

We don't need to go into Enclave pre-war government debate again I agree.

The original point were I stepped in was, JeniSkunk, I think was trying to say that at least Enclave were Loyal were as Maxson (therefore BoS) are bad. If there was a deathcamp and the guards deserted and freed the prisoners and killed those giving the orders/running the camp.. Would you call them evil? (Not a question for you The Enclave, its just an open-ended question.)

JeniSkunk if I missed your point, sorry.

All is says in the Wiki, is that the Army was "busy with the war in china". I have a feeling the higher up got some kinda of early warning that made them all scramble to shelters. That would be a obvious sign of them getting no answer. Also just because you can't get a hold of your superiors doesn't mean your out of the army anymore. After the nukes I can understand, but as you said they where traitors and deserters for thats few weeks until the bombs hit. Plus they were murderers too.

Styles It doesn't matter if your on the front line or not Desertion is desertion and in a time of war your shot. Also depends on the situation Styles. Those prisoners could be murdering psycho's that deserve there fate. What if the experiments the scientist did made once perfected made the war end in a few months once put into play saving billions of lives that the nukes took? You can't make arbitrary judgments. this reminds me of Truman's decision about the bombs. Would you use them? would you trade a few lives, for saving millions? Is it "evil" to do so?

When you talked to Richardson didn't he basically say it's "unfortunate but it's necessary to insure a better future" or something like that?

however this is just me, I can look at a side and see it from there point of view, and argue for it as they would, even if you don't agree with them. It was fun in debate class, also gets you thinking out side your normal frame of reference.

What if those people are/were innocent? would it still be ok? Even Criminals on death row should not be used for medical experiments but I guess thats just me. I can't use real world examples (forum rules) but alot of evil people in History have used "unfortunate but it's necessary to insure a better future" as a means to do evil and those they got to do it "I was only following orders."

People desert all the time and they don't get shot.

Well yeah, but all thats judged in hind sight. you know all the facts before hand. In your above example if you saw that happening in front of you would you help the guard keep them in or the prisoners escape? would you think the guards are evil for keeping them in? Remember you know nothing of the prisoners circumstances.

I'm usually of the mind to find out whats going on before I take action so I know exactly what i'm getting into.


They do it they get caught ,and it's war time.

Well Roger Maxson interrogated the scientists and the first in command, suffered a nervous breakdown. So chances are the scientists were not using "people that deserved it." Enclave being the puppet masters and the ones behind the Vault experiments, I have a feeling they had a hand in Meriposa.

Again I can't use real world examples (forum rules) but I have seen many cases where American soldiers go AWOL/desert during war, and don't end up dead for it.

You were on the right track Styles.
The question I was asking, as a counter to the one posed by the OP in the topic of this thread was: why should an organization (the BoS) which was founded by deserters (military criminals) be permitted to be considered as being 'good'?

Edit: I was not talking about any of the individuals who founded the BoS, I was asking my counter question about the organization itself.

Jenifur Charne

Well lets hope the OP comes back and can respond.

I just see the BoS as Neutral but the bible says they end up forming a state within NCR.