At least I don't feel the need to resort to ad hominems and know the difference between "your" and "you're".
It's a bit sad that you don't address any of the actual arguments I have brought up and instead just tell me that you know what I'm thinking and don't care what I wrote.
I guess that's just how weak your point is.
Being an asshole =/= calling for (and trying to enforce) the death of a child that accidentally bumped into you. That is being a psychopath and a literal menace to society.
P.s. I do feel the need to dwell on this particular nugget of wisdom:
You are aware that I could respond to that by, word for word, repeating the part you quoted and it would be just as valid? You repeating what you wrote before just switching around a few words and adding an adhom doesn't change anything.
No matter how obvious things may appear to you, unless the author states the characters' thoughts and intentions explicitly they are subject to interpretation, or in other words:
And EVEN if I granted this point for the sake of argument, so what? The idiotic actions of one character are supposed to be justified by the lack of a reaction from another character within the same story?
P.p.s. Waitwaitwaitwaitwait... I only just managed to wrap my head around this.
You think some random nobles (since you don't provide any particulars) would have enough authority to demand reparations from another country? Really? How was I supposed to understand a point so... unrealistic? Let's go with this word.
