I perceive the left wing comments come with much more of an implicit assumption by the poster, and the respondents to it, of the moral superiority of left wing positions, and that all attending will see it the same way.
Isn’t that reasonable though? If you’re a X-winger, isn’t the whole point that X-wing positions are in fact morally superior?
Isn’t that reasonable though? If you’re a X-winger, isn’t the whole point that X-wing positions are in fact morally superior?
Morally superior perhaps, but they lack the hull plating and durability to survive ongoing combat and the offensive payload pales in comparison to what the Y-wing can deliver.
The Y-wing was an outdated piece of junk even by the Battle of Yvain; that’s why the Rebels had it at all. The X-wing’s proton torpedoes deliver the hurt when necessary (just ask Tarkin or Ysanne Isard), and if you want more than that, well, that’s what the B-wings are for… Between them and the A-wing, there is simply no role for Y-wings at any point—except cannon bait!
Isn’t that reasonable though? If you’re a X-winger, isn’t the whole point that X-wing positions are in fact morally superior?
Morally superior perhaps, but they lack the hull plating and durability to survive ongoing combat and the offensive payload pales in comparison to what the Y-wing can deliver.
The Y-wing was an outdated piece of junk even by the Battle of Yvain; that’s why the Rebels had it at all. The X-wing’s proton torpedoes deliver the hurt when necessary (just ask Tarkin or Ysanne Isard), and if you want more than that, well, that’s what the B-wings are for… Between them and the A-wing, there is simply no role for Y-wings at any point—except cannon bait!
Shouldn’t that be spelled “canon bait”? Heh.
Well, by bringing in Isard, I make it both.
Ha!
Assuming that everyone would see it the same way when manifestly they do not is just an empirical mistake.
Yes, everyone think’s their position is right, but not everyone speaks to audiences who disagree with them expecting them all to agree.