Thread: Licensed Girls und Panzer
View Single Post
Old 2013-03-14, 10:57   Link #4652
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 35
Overall the reason why this is focusing on the "danger" of the situation or the "potential danger" as depicted is whether Miho acted appropriately. I don't think anyone here truly believes that in a true life or death situation we would condone not providing assistance. [Unless we are shown that historically in Senshado competitions people die and it is deemed culturally to be an acceptable risk in this world -- then it would mean our fundamental value system doesn't apply to the world at large, which does not appear to be the case] If we ever do truly come to the conclusion that it was truly truly dangerous, then we also must question the Senshado organization for why 1) the battle wasn't stopped (could be timing?) and 2) why the resulting win by Pravda was not annulled based on the circumstances.

That said, applying all our rules of reality to this anime is kind of flawed thinking, they are shooting "fake shells" at each other but no one ever has concussions? No smoke inhalation? Gunpowder burns? Explosions? A commander standing exposed outside of the hatch while fire is going on is OK? If we consider the potential of Miho getting struck directly by a "fake shell" being acceptable I'm not sure you can attribute the same amount of danger of real life situations to this show at all. That may be why we have such divergent views on the danger of the situation. There is no clear real life analogy here folks.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
Let's not limit the variations:

Or E (which is probably closest to the truth): The situation was indeterminate and thus it is not possible for her to evaluate how much she can help. However, it is clear that if she can help and she delays helping, the overall chances of her help being useful goes down.
Let's kill that last sentence and I will vehemently agree. I don't think that part was clear at all.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
Of course, it can be agreed that she did not take the best action. Certainly I agree that the chances she'll be able to do something will be massively increased if for example she ordered her whole platoon off their tanks and into the river (at the cost they'll also be put at some risk, admittedly). But then, no one pretends that Miho is the perfect commander, and even less so at that stage.
Okay, and we also agree here, so she didn't take the best action. I'm not sure about you but any athlete, martial artist or soldier would be reprimanded then, no? Kicked off the team?

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
They could ignore the running "exercise" and start rescuing. Sure, they'll lose, but that's it.
See my first sentence. Yes, I agree if it was determined to be truly dangerous then they should start rescuing -- they all should have started rescuing. In an organized manner. Simultaneously, Pravda should have stopped shooting! Imagine if they had dropped another tank onto the sinking tank!?

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
But then, I don't think it is critically important whether she did or not. Even if she did, we can still look at the odds and say it was still a bad decision and she got lucky. And failure similarly may be no more than bad luck.
It is critically important to determine whether it was actually dangerous and she actually managed to help and whether her help was necessary -- because the point in question here is what the situation was and whether she acted appropriately. Based on the answer one arrives at to that question is how individuals are then projecting that to the greater question(s) at hand.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
Is there anyone that sees Miho as a "perfect depiction of a hero"? The show would have been much less amusing if she was!
I'm being a tad facetious since everyone appeared to be laying into Shiho and the Nishizumi School without acknowledging any of Miho's obvious failures and weaknesses.

Anyways, I'm not cherry-picking my responses to you and suspect neither are you cherry-picking my points you are responding to of mine, ultimately though the question is not based on a fundamental difference in ideology but what we as 3rd persons are viewing a (fictional) situation and doing an evaluation of likely, desired and optimal outcomes and the actions of those participants therein. We disagree based on differing facts -- this will be resolved either with more information or will be left as a question for the ages.

Last edited by willx; 2013-03-14 at 11:08.
willx is offline   Reply With Quote