Let me see if I understand this correctly:

Khans are pissed at NCR because of Bitter Springs.. heres what I heard, tell me if I'm missing something:

Papa Khan: "So, we see the NCR moving into the area, and we think awesome! Lets rob, murder, pillage and [censored] (wow.. you cant say a word that starts with R, ends with e and means to sixually violate with force... yet its said several times in the game.. ok) their settlers as they struggle to get a foothold, good times, right? On top of that, lets sell drugs that addict and kill, make the wastelands even worse. But no, thoes NRC bastards couldnt sit there and take it. They fight back and attack our settlement! They kill some of our women children and elderly, like we have been doing to others for decades! How dare they, the pigs!"

And on top of that, NCR feels bad about this? What kind of liberal crap is this? This isn't a gentlemans war or something, its raiders killing settlers and a nation responding by killing raiders... its clear as day whos in the right and the Khans got what they deserved. Seriously, am I missing a key part of the story line here or does this not make sense to anyone else?

You seem to have a major inability to distinguish individuals from groups. That would be what you're missing.

If someone doesn't like what you're doing, then goes and murders your family who weren't involved in your activities at all as far as you were concerned, you might be a little upset at them.

And if the people who killed your family were actually expecting to only find you and not your infant son when they opened fire, they might be a little traumatized as well.

IIRC, it's because the NCR murdered innocent women and children.

I have played Fallout since Fallout 1 came out. The Khans arent innocent... they make thier living by killing and stealing from others. It isn't like 2 countries fighting where you might be able to see both sides. that old khan that died killed and robbed from how many people in his youth? That kid is being taught how to ambush a caravan when the guards are at their guards are at their weakest. The women raid with the men. They are criminals, and a bane to any group trying to set up a stable community.

To Tale, its not like they have different people in thier group, craftmen, artists etc... they are raiders, and drug makers, thats it.

So? If a child is brainwashed into doing violent things, they are still at an age when they are not considered responsible for their actions, just pawns of ruthless advlts. TBH, it also riles me when people group women and children together, as if women are incapable of either evil or taking responsibility (there are loads of female Khans who are just as proud to be one as the men) - I was just quoting the game. Point is, your OP questioned why the NCR felt guilty, and the reason is because they believe that they killed innocent people. Whether you believe it is "liberal crap" to feel bad for killing kids (and "innocent" women, as the game says) is your opinion, I was just saying why they felt bad.

[Edit] NCR, not NPC.

FO hits a human truth chord again, that's war one view vs. another. I for one will have no :celebration: guilt killing Khan's, I view them as a social disease, just like the Fiends, Powder Gangers, Leigion, you know the types.


bigcrazewolf

So if I understand correctly, you're advocating wholesale slaughter of every member of a group (women, children, sick) because some members of the group are involved in illegal activities?

Their criminality doesn't make a massacre right. Any normal person would find the murdering of children to be reprehensible and disgusting no matter the circumstances. Morality isn't given a pass when your enemy is amoral. To remain moral and guilt free you can't do what they would. And how you would see any of that as liberal or conservative is beyond me.

It is generally considered "evil", by civilized people, to kill noncombatants (better term than "women and children" considering the armed female enemies in the game).


Therefore, it was bad for the NCR to open fire on the noncombatants fleeing from Bitter Springs, and most of the people involved (ie, not the crazy ones) would feel bad about it.

To quote Chineapplepunk

So? If a child is brainwashed into doing violent things, they are still at an age when they are not considered responsible for their actions, just pawns of ruthless advlts. TBH, it also riles me when people group women and children together, as if women are incapable of either evil or taking responsibility there are loads of female Khans who are just as proud to be one as the men


In a culture like that the apple falls right next to the tree. TBH in a setting of trying to re-build the world I for one would reward robbing, [censored], slavery with what it deserves, some good old fashion hemp rope around the neck.


but hey it's just a game :rolleyes:

This will contain spoilers, but it's pertinent to the topic.

As the story from the game goes, the NCR thought Bitter Springs was a raiding camp. It isn't until you do the mission "I Forgot to Remember to Forget" that you really find out the mindset of what went down in Bitter Springs.

/Spoiler
The NCR tracked down the Khan's all the way to Bitter Springs and thinking that it was just a base of operations for raiding parties, they sent the main force through the front door. Meanwhile First Recon set up at the back door with orders to shoot first and ask questions later. What NCR didn't know is that Bitter Springs was the Khan's home and not just some outpost. So as the main force approached the Khans saw them and sent the women and children out the back door into the line of sight of the First Recon snipers. Despite trying to get their superiors from Camp Golf to let them allow the women and children through they were ordered to open fire. After the main force fully engaged the Khans, wounded started coming out the back and the First Recon had to kill them.
/endspoiler

When you expect to find a bunch of burly raiders armed to the teeth surrounded by piles of chems and the spoils of their raids, and find their homes and women and children. Despite the fact that the women could have been responsible for the deaths of civilians or NCR personnel or drug addicts and pushers and their children, but it wasn't meant to be a strike on the Khan homeland. It was meant to be a sign that NCR wasn't going to be pushed around by some raider group. What would have been a standard military act turned into a massacre as non-combatants suffered heavy casualties.

That's why the NCR felt bad. They didn't mind killing some Khans, but they weren't expecting to destroy homes and livelihoods, they just wanted to send a message that they weren't backing down.

I can't fault the NCR for feeling bad, but it was something they needed to do.

bigcrazewolf

I think OP is saying why does Khan hold a grudge on NCR in Bitter Spring.

Pillage and Massacre is too whole different concept: the former is robbing, violence and possible manslaughter while later is homicide.

I think its different mindsets as to how you view this, my view is criminals should be killed.

What some of you don't seem to get is the khans aren't a diverse group.. its not like they are a peaceful tribe, and some of them are raiders and some are choir boys.. they are ALL raiders. men are raiders, women are raiders, old are former raiders, children are being trained to raid...they don't farm, they don't build. They raid others who are trying to rebuild. What part isn't clear on this? Khans are a violent group who bit off more then they could chew, and now reap what they sew. In Fallout 1 they have attacked Shady Sands without provocation.

If any of you have played Fallout Tactics (I recommend it, I really liked it despite what some say) I loved the way the BoS worked in that.. thats how I would run things if I was in the Fallout situation. Kind of a mash between NCR and Ceasar legion. Basically, they work for the greater good.. but aren't like FOTA, they use violence to achieve it. They help towns/tribes as they expand but require some food/supplies/troops from the people they help. They don't conquer like Legion but if you want help, you have to give back. Raiders, criminals, and groups who fight the mid western BoS are killed and their bodies put on display, captives are sent to work camps. Basically if you don't cause trouble and want to help them rebuild and find tech, they are good to you, if your a trouble maker your dealt with, brutally. Moral is, don't be a jerk and you and your family live. If your gonna go around being a tough guy and attacking everyone around you, you better be able to defeat all comers or not cry when retribution comes.

"Go Nazi. They had the right idea."

Is that what the OP is saying?

On a more serious note,

The NCR actually HAVE strict regulations on the treatment of non-combatants. It was mentioned when you interrogate the Legion Prisoner at Camp McCarren.

While their Moral standard (which, I assume, is just a continuation of the U.S. Military Code NCR military descended from) is not your moral standard, it doesn't make it any less theirs. It just means someone that would do what you purpose is lacking in empathy, or full of hate - and is the ideal members for Nazi death squads.

Our own troops in this very day and age have slaughtered non-combantants in the pursuit of combatants, and it is against our own Military Policy. Unless it is proven to be a deliberate act (such as those marines that were put on trial for murder and cover up of their killing of civilians) they usually get a slap on the wrist - because accidents happen.

The Bitter Water incident was categorized as a "miscommunication" which ended up with no one really being punished for it. It does not mean those who did the killing, who thought they were fighting to defend their country against armed soldiers, felt ok slaughtering unarmed civilians. There is such a thing called Honor and Faith, and some soldiers would still have it even in Fallout times.

And even in Fallout Tactics, you are NOT suppose to kill Civilians. One of the General in Tactics is actually a human supremist who want to cleanse the wasteland of mutants (very much like Nazi's final solution), but it is not the actual policy of BoS.

What part isn't clear that children cannot be held responsible for the actions of the advlts responsible for them? What part isn't clear that a massacre of defenseless people is not a moral thing to do in any situation? An eye for an eye is an ethically and morally indefensible stance.

I think it makes a world of difference whether the people fleeing Bitter Spring came running down unarmed or with gun blazing. The fact that the NCR could have dealt with them without the need to open fire makes what they did wrong.

You may say that it's a bunch of liberal crap but that's what makes the NCR different to say The Legion. Someone has to take the moral highground otherwise the NCR wouldn't be any better than any other savage tribes out there except they are better armed and organised.

Let's hope you don't get caught speeding then lol

I see what you're saying, but you're confusing your opinions with that of the NCRs. It seems that they want all society under their rule, and will sometimes use underhanded, somewhat morally dubious ways to do so. However, all out murdering isn't what many aspire to - they have martial law, sure, but I think that judging from the reaction to Bittersprings, their most desired outcome is to get as many people as possible over to their side. Maybe instead of slaughtering the unarmed, rounding them up and giving them the option of renouncing the Khans or exile (or maybe punishment then?) would have been the desired outcome for them, which is why they feel guilty. It seems that the "once a criminal, always a criminal" (even if you were born into it and don't have the autonomy to choose otherwise) stance isn't held by the NCR, even if it is by you.

This about sums it up - truly, it's an unfortunate situation. There is no "right" here, both parties are guilty of great atrocities and both have had great atroctities done onto them.

I kill the khans every NV run i do.

they're degenerates, and those "innocent" elderly were once those degenerates, so they deserve to die too. women are innocent... lets not even go there. those children would've become degenerates as well. on top of that the khans had been doing the same thing. wounded degenerate raiders who would just recover and continue deserve to die as well.

there's no real issue.

So when does a child become responsible for their actions? Great Khans are murderers and deserve death above all else. They can be compared to the Nazi Youth in a way. You can say that they aren't responsible for their actions because they are children but the fact is that most all of them will climb the ladder and go the next step up.

there is no real "line" where people become responsible for their actions. it's something people make up for themselves. we're designed to be protective of children, it is an evolutionary advantage.

I don't know why calling something "liberal" automatically makes something bad. Only the most extreme of sociopaths would use such a tactic as evidenced here. So yes, the Khans are no saints but where does the justification of murdering the Khan children come in? Guilt by association doesn't apply here.

Yes, the NCR didn't set out to murder children but it was still a horrible thing they did. But it also doesn't mean the entire NCR is corrupt and evil. I can't believe how simplistic and psychopathic the OP's thinking is. He thinks because these children are born with the label "Khan" then somehow that makes it okay to kill them. Yeesh.

it doesn't matter, they're going to become [censored] raiders anyway.

your thinking is what is simplistic.

So you think when the Allies won WWII that they should have shot everyone of the children that had attended Nazi youth camp? :rolleyes: