Who/What was the Cause of the War between the Tower and Mallers

[Osiris]

This is a conversation pulled from the 28-1 discussion thread. It should really be on its own. We've gone on these tangents before, but somehow we never dedicated a thread to it and if we did, I'm too busy at work to actually search for it and I'll merge them later. But for the here and now....we pick up our conversation where it essentially began with Osiris' comment based off Ray's rant

-nikvoodoo

I don't care what Kalani's motivations were, he got what he deserved. He should have suffered for what he did, saving everyone by flying the helicopter into the rig coming at the tower was nobile, but he deserved to die. He's completely responsible for everyone that died in the tower since the Mallers showed up. Everyone's blood is on his and Bill's hands. Bill deserved to die as well, had their treachery been known before now I would have shot them both. Shoved them out the door and shot them in the back. In my mind, they neither can ever be forgiven for what they did. Kalani had the audacity to insult and belittle everyone, especially the main three, over how things were playing out in the tower. He even compared them to the place he came from and if I remember correctly, they were all dead and the Tower guys had the exact same thing happen to them and they all survived the encounter with only one death. They were MUCH less fortified than the place Kalani came from and still came out smelling like a rose. The only, ONLY, reason they fell and most were killed was because of Kalani and Bill. Screw them both, it's just a shame they weren't turned and the Tower residents didn't get to fill them full of holes. They killed almost 30 people because of paranoia and selfishness. I can't wait to hear the rest of this chapter!

You're still glossing over the fact that the first shot was fired by Burt. Keeping your head in the sand to the facts does NOT make your argument correct or valid. Bash Kalani all you like, he's the reason the remainder of the residents escaped to Ft. Whatsamacallit.

[nikvoodoo]

You're still glossing over the fact that the first shot was fired by Burt. Keeping your head in the sand to the facts does NOT make your argument correct or valid. Bash Kalani all you like, he's the reason the remainder of the residents escaped to Ft. Whatsamacallit.

And you still gloss over the fact that the first aggressive act in that exchange was Scratch pointing a gun in Lizzie's face. You can argue all you want about the theft or Burt shooting first. scratch is the one who set the tone for all future interactions between the tower and Mallers.

[Osiris]

And you still gloss over the fact that the first aggressive act in that exchange was Scratch pointing a gun in Lizzie's face. You can argue all you want about the theft or Burt shooting first. scratch is the one who set the tone for all future interactions between the tower and Mallers.

Negative. First aggressive act resides on the side of the Tower residents. You hide behind Scratch being aggressive in the exchange over the tanker truck, but the simple fact is the tanker truck was stolen from territory the Mallers had claimed as their own. Protect what is yours in crisis or lose it. It's a simple matter of someone defending their resources against looters, which is exactly what was transpiring in that episode. You're looking at the events with blinders. Take em off and see the bigger picture.

If the tanker truck hadn't been stolen from Maller territory things could have gone a LOT different. That's a fact you cannot argue. Doing so takes away the need for the 'heroes' to face the consequences of their actions--which has been a major theme from episode one. Without that piece of the puzzle the entire story falls apart and all the subterfuge and collusion is entirely meaningless. I've argued this point with you before and we go in circles. You refuse to see the story from any vantage point other than it being Tower-centric. I see it in a broader scope, enjoying it as a a conversation about people in struggle. Not people getting the short end of the stick.

Still. It doesn't make you right.

[Grognaurd]

Wow, you believe that?. A couple of hundred people left alive where there used to be 15 million a couple of days ago and your willing to kill over a truck? You also believe that the mallers can call dibs on the greater LA county?

Are you calling Burt for the first shot because he shot a mirror? That should have been their hint gtfo, because they are out classed.

Scratch is a psycopath and a sociopath before the Outbreak. She is a menace. Damn, man, she is worse than TOWTM. They both play with their victims before killing them. But, Paul has the decency to eat what he kills instead of inflicting pain just for fun.

[Osiris]

Wow, you believe that?. A couple of hundred people left alive where there used to be 15 million a couple of days ago and your willing to kill over a truck? You also believe that the mallers can call dibs on the greater LA county?

Are you calling Burt for the first shot because he shot a mirror? That should have been their hint gtfo, because they are out classed.

Scratch is a psycopath and a sociopath before the Outbreak. She is a menace. Damn, man, she is worse than TOWTM. They both play with their victims before killing them. But, Paul has the decency to eat what he kills instead of inflicting pain just for fun.

The sad truth here is you'd all be singing a VERY different tune if the Mallers had tried to steal something that the Tower had lay claim upon. In a time of crisis, when the majority of the city is dead, resources are up for grabs. It's just the way it is. First come, first serve. The Mallers had a need for those tankers--which we later learn was to blow the holy fuck out of the horde at the Arena--so taking one of them would be no different than Scratch sneaking into the tower and taking Shirley. If you can't see that simple, logical fact then there is no hope to continue the conversation on that point. Protect what is yours. What's yours is what keeps you alive. Simple survival. Did the Mallers lay claim to all of L.A.? No. It's obvious that they didn't. They claimed what they needed to survive. It's no different than Angel and the Badman looting Burt's store. Taking what they needed to survive. Burt just wasn't in a strong enough position to deny the assistance they could offer him or I can almost guarantee that he would have shot both of them for their crime.

I'm going to call out that entire mission as being the cause for the war. It's not Scratch's 'aggression' that caused it. No steal. No interaction until much later and who knows how that would have gone. This is super, super simple. If the Tower doesn't steal resources of another group, there is no confrontation between the two that leads to Burt pissing as high as he can on the nearest tree. If there is no pissing contest, Scratch doesn't come calling. Scratch doesn't come calling, Latch doesn't get shot. Latch doesn't get shot, Scratch doesn't lay fucking waste to the bastards that killed her only family.

Ignorance of those facts does not validate an argument based on the events.

As far as Scratch being worse than TOWTM, that's based on the bias that we experience through the way the story is told to us. It's perspective is slanted in favour of The Tower being the good guys and The Mallers being the bad guys. It's too subjective to say with certainty.

[nikvoodoo]

If they wanted to actually destroy the Arena, then Scratch obviously had other things in mind when she defied her orders and saved one tanker for the Tower. Not to mention they already lost some tankers in the attack by TOWTM but even still...she decided to save one to destroy the Tower. So despite the theft of one tanker by the Tower, Tardust still had enough to effectively destroy the Arena before they were attacked. He said so. So the theft was such a big deal that they couldn't eradicate the zombies.....except....they still could up until they were funneled into an ambush.

You can't expect an open fueling depot full of abandoned Tanker trucks to be claimed by one group or another. If they truly wanted to stake a claim to it, then guard it. 24/7. If this mission was so important, put your base there. Protect your most precious resource. Protect your weapons. At the end of society, yes the rules are gone because there's no one to enforce it but you. You're sticking to the fact that they staked an invisible claim to a material possession. It's the same concept of finding a new land and placing a flag on it. If you land 100 miles North of me, and I place a flag in the same land you claim for yourself how am I supposed to know? If you guard it, I know. If it's there for the taking, I'm taking it. You said so yourself: First come, first serve. Unless you are there to protect it, it's still first come first serve because you haven't made it clear it's yours.

And your comparison to the Tankers and Shirley is completely asinine. One is a vehicle in an abandoned depot. One is in the possession of someone at all times. Can you see how those things are different? There is no logical comparison between the two. One is ownerless. The other is most decidedly owned by someone. And you can try to claim the Mallers have ownership of the Tanker. But prove it to me before they took the tanker where the Tower members would know that. Was there a sign? A Sentry posted at the gate? The Tower members were obviously there for a while because they took so long filling the tank.....why weren't they caught by a security sweep?

If they laid claim to the Tankers, then they should be protecting them better than they did. If you want to talk about Blinders, you have on one of the biggest pair of them when it comes to anything Maller and especially Scratch related. And I am not one that labels her as a sociopath or psycho. I understand that every person in this story has motivations and does what they do for a reason and I'm glad you defend her and try to make others see the story from her point of view. But you defend her to a fault because you don't or refuse to see the obvious flaws in her personality that lead to aggressive behavior, vindictiveness, putting others around her at great personal risk for her own gain (See both Tower Attacks). I don't need to have her backstory to understand why she does what she does. The simple fact is: She Does. Its her personality that has caused the greatest conflict in this story.

Since you refuse to accept that Scratch's aggression is what lit the powder keg, I'll say the lack of security of their possessions allowed the theft that caused the war. And if you can't see that, then there's obviously no reason to continue to talk to you about this subject either.

[Eviebae]

Scratch is a psycopath and a sociopath before the Outbreak. She is a menace. Damn, man, she is worse than TOWTM. They both play with their victims before killing them. But, Paul has the decency to eat what he kills instead of inflicting pain just for fun.

I don't think it's that cut and dried. Sociopaths/psychopaths don't have empathy for others and just don't feel things very deeply at all. In the absence of emotions or empathy to guide their ethical behavior; they trick and attempt to manipulate in order to control their world. They also tend to be self aggrandizing--think Idi Amin, or The Gate Keeper (they love to enforce rules). It's like they are the only human in the equation, any one else is a prop in the the movie of their life.

Scratch had a very developed sense of loyalty to her brother. She risked her life to release him from jail. She's in a precarious position between inmate-people who are scary and zombies who are scarier. Her reaction to the "liberating" of the tanker seems way more reasonable if you consider she expected the punishment for losing it was death. If not her's, then someone's.

[Osiris]

If they wanted to actually destroy the Arena, then Scratch obviously had other things in mind when she defied her orders and saved one tanker for the Tower. Not to mention they already lost some tankers in the attack by TOWTM but even still...she decided to save one to destroy the Tower. So despite the theft of one tanker by the Tower, Tardust still had enough to effectively destroy the Arena before they were attacked. He said so. So the theft was such a big deal that they couldn't eradicate the zombies.....except....they still could up until they were funneled into an ambush.

The tanker was saved to destroy the tower AFTER the conflict had risen between the two parties. So that argument flies out the window. You're basing it on Scratch going out of her way to save a tanker to attack a group she didn't know existed. Clearly that plan was made after the incident and would not have occurred otherwise. The fact that she decided to go out of her way to attack the tower with it... well... hey man, I didn't shoot her brother. Argument: Invalid.

You can't expect an open fueling depot full of abandoned Tanker trucks to be claimed by one group or another. If they truly wanted to stake a claim to it, then guard it. 24/7. If this mission was so important, put your base there. Protect your most precious resource. Protect your weapons. At the end of society, yes the rules are gone because there's no one to enforce it but you. You're sticking to the fact that they staked an invisible claim to a material possession. It's the same concept of finding a new land and placing a flag on it. If you land 100 miles North of me, and I place a flag in the same land you claim for yourself how am I supposed to know? If you guard it, I know. If it's there for the taking, I'm taking it. You said so yourself: First come, first serve. Unless you are there to protect it, it's still first come first serve because you haven't made it clear it's yours.

Yes, the first thing I do after society falls is to put up a big old flag that says "I need these, please don't touch." This argument is based on ignorance of territory. Run that tactic with Russian border patrol and let me know how the Gulag was. Argument: Invalid.

And your comparison to the Tankers and Shirley is completely asinine. One is a vehicle in an abandoned depot. One is in the possession of someone at all times. Can you see how those things are different? There is no logical comparison between the two. One is ownerless. The other is most decidedly owned by someone. And you can try to claim the Mallers have ownership of the Tanker. But prove it to me before they took the tanker where the Tower members would know that. Was there a sign? A Sentry posted at the gate? The Tower members were obviously there for a while because they took so long filling the tank.....why weren't they caught by a security sweep?

Arguing that the tanker is akin to Shirley is not at all asinine. One is NOT 'ownerless' when you consider that it is in territory staked out by one party. Both are weapons--as the tankers were intended as bombs to attack the Arena. Again, ask Russia and let me know. Ignorance of borders is ignorance. Plain and simple. If you want to ignore that, fine. You can argue that there was no signage reading MALLERS TURF but the fact is Scratch and Latch knew about the tankers, followed the thieves and confronted them. You can say that isn't a 'security sweep', but show me definitive proof that Latch and Scratch were merely out for a joyride and simply happened upon the group stealing property their chief had already earmarked for use. Argument: Invalid.

If they laid claim to the Tankers, then they should be protecting them better than they did. If you want to talk about Blinders, you have on one of the biggest pair of them when it comes to anything Maller and especially Scratch related. And I am not one that labels her as a sociopath or psycho. I understand that every person in this story has motivations and does what they do for a reason and I'm glad you defend her and try to make others see the story from her point of view. But you defend her to a fault because you don't or refuse to see the obvious flaws in her personality that lead to aggressive behavior, vindictiveness, putting others around her at great personal risk for her own gain (See both Tower Attacks). I don't need to have her backstory to understand why she does what she does. The simple fact is: She Does. Its her personality that has caused the greatest conflict in this story.

Again this argument is based on clear definition of borders and how one group chooses to protect what they have claimed as theirs. I just told you why that argument doesn't hold water. As for 'my' blinders with regard to Scratch? Fair enough. I am a fan of the character and I make no claim otherwise. You can bring up the other tower attack, but considering it was overrun and NOT attacked by The Mallers, that argument doesn't hold water either. You can argue that there was intent to attack it, but we'll never know for sure what would have happened there. So that argument flies out the window as well. As far as Scratch causing the greatest conflict in the story, that's about as true as saying Lizzy is completely innocent of causing mayhem. Now, I'm not saying that Lizzy is just as crazy as Scratch, I'm just saying you're only throwing rocks at a mountain. I'm not saying she's an angel, so don't think I'm defending her to a fault. She absolutely has issues, and I'm not at all disregarding that. I'm just saying that the situation would not have escalated or in fact happened at all had the tanker not been stolen and Burt not tried to play Alpha male. Those decisions, those two actions are the direct cause of the animosity between the two factions.

Since you refuse to accept that Scratch's aggression is what lit the powder keg, I'll say the lack of security of their possessions allowed the theft that caused the war. And if you can't see that, then there's obviously no reason to continue to talk to you about this subject either.

And you're staunch refusal to that the Tower residents are as much to blame for what befell them is reason enough for you to stop being engaged in the argument. I admit that Scratch has problems, likes to be a little vicious and is very, very dangerous. Product of environment, man. Did she react a little harsh during the first encounter? No. They were out numbered and trying to reclaim what was theirs. In a land without order, security and little to no chance of help on the horizon? I would have pulled my piece as well. Was it necessary for Burt to engage in a pissing contest with someone--by your accounts--they obviously should have known was unbalanced? No. No that was about the stupidest thing he could have done, and the price they paid was utter destruction.

[Osiris]

As immensely enjoyable as this discussion is... I think we have strayed from the topic a little far. Though it is fun as fuck.

[Osiris]

Man, so bummed I couldn't post prior to the episode on Monday. I got a little bored over the weekend and listened to some older episodes after reading something in one of the theory threads. That it had to of been more than one person, more than just Kalani. He had told Angel to grab the journal from BILL'S desk and it all hit me. He must have been working with Bill! Although as the episode proves it was more by accident and wasn't a trusting partnership at all.

Anywho! Great episode! Great because I was right! Pssh... grey area to being a rat. There's no accidents there, you either make the decision or your don't. But that's enough of that, kind of glad it's finally tied off and we can move on!

Osiris man! You're crazy! Lol! I think regardless of the Tower snagging one of their tankers the Mallers would have pursued them in some violent way once they noticed other people. They were going bonkers trying to access CJs tower for no other reason that I can figure, I'm sure they weren't being aggressive towards the Mallers. They pick up three plane crash survivors only to sabotage them for this insane need to get in to CJs Tower. They're a violent group of criminals, they'll stop at nothing to make sure they're on top, even it means squashing oter human lives... well then, they're going to cross some lines with no reason or rhyme.

And the whole Datu thing... Let me give you an example of how much the rest of the world doesn't exist in a car with loud music. I used to drive to and from California at least once a month, one time while heading back to Arizona I had my music blasted as usual. Due to living in a small world, a co-worker of mine was heading back from California the exact SAME time and spotted me on the highway (darn those bright orange decals). I guess at some point she pulled up next to me and honked... and honked... and laid on her horn. She even had her kids waving their hands. I didn't even notice.

At work the next day she told me and I was AMAZED that I didn't realize. So! I think it's pretty cut and dry there, Datu didn't notice. He jammed out, waiting on Kalani to let Micheal know they were leaving, of course Micheal can back that up... because Kalani told him they were leaving. Seeing as how Datu didn't realize the alarm and Micheal assuming the Kalani hoofed it to the vehicle pronto and leaving before anything happened... it just made sense to believe the entire scam. I highly doubt our sweet, doofy Datu is some sort of double agent. Lol!

That's basing everything on the assumption that the Mallers just wanted to watch the world burn (damn you, Alfred). We really have zero idea what CJ or any of the other members of that group did to the Mallers. It's not out of the realm of possibility that the Mallers simply needed to assess a potentially dangerous threat near enough to them to become a concern. Or maybe, JUST maybe, Durai really does want to pull a Joker and cause nothing but chaos. That only fits if you remove their plan to destroy TOWTM and the rest of the zombies at the Arena. But we can't do that, because it happened. To say they were going bonkers to get in? Do we have definitive proof that they were stopping at nothing to do so? No, we don't. However, that doesn't make it untrue. It just leaves it as an unanswered question that will have to remain a subjective point. If you're Pro-Tower? Yeah, those psychos wanted in bad. If you're Pro-Maller? No man, they just wanted to know who was near their hood. If you're trying to remain objective? We really can't say for certain as the opportunity for either side to act never came to pass. We're then left to speculate the reasons and intentions of a group we only experience through second hand information and sketchy recollections. You know... hearsay.

As for Datu in the car... well I mean, during this event on the freeway, were you in the midst of a zombie apocalypse? No? I totally get what you're saying though. Yeah, I can understand someone gapping out behind the wheel and cruising on auto-pilot. But I can't believe that someone could relax to the point of being totally oblivious in a situation as fraught with immediate physical danger at any moment as that. Not to say that hurtling down the road at 120 k/hr isn't packed with its own inherent set of dangers. I'm just saying in this world of second chances due to the miracle of modern medicine... well, Datu and company are not afforded that luxury. You get bit, you get dead. There's no real second chances there. You would assume--one would hope--that a modicum of mental alertness would be present and at the forefront of everyone's mind.

All the same, I like the direction you went.