#Shorts

Heed our warnings, Heretics.

[@Synthonym]

I love the tragedy of the Gaalsien being right, even though they didn't know exactly why

[@michasowik2438]

Gaalsien: Sajuuk in his anger is gonna destroy everyone on this sacred world!
Coalition: NO YOU R WRONG!
Hardboiled HW fan: Yes... but actually no.

[@dsdy1205]

@@michasowik2438 Taiidan empire: well, not Sajuuk, no...

[@voidimperial1179]

The real tragedy is that the Gaalsien are correct about Kharak being torched, but the Coalition are also right in that they need to leave the planet to survive. Both are right, both want what's best for not only their people but also for their species - but both paths lead to mass death.

[@avolcano2387]

You’ve gotta realize, with that hashtag, there’s going to be some ADHD tik-tok kids suddenly being bombarded with Gaalsien propaganda.
Somehow, that humors me.

[@Coercer]

May there be peace on Kharak once again!

[@Thepissheadman]

Yes

[@FilipRanogajec]

"For the coward there is no life. For the hero there is no death."
This is so true, believe it or not.

[@cenktuneygok8986]

Sajuuk akbar!

[@PraetorPaktu]

Nice

[@Thepissheadman]

Nice

[@grugmangaming5152]

space allah

[@christianriddler5063]

Nah. There are no sand people in homeworld.

[@alexandriac6641]

@@christianriddler5063 ???? The game is literally called Deserts of Kharak

[@rostokk2706]

@@alexandriac6641 I think he's talking about race lol. Yeah but following the exile Hiigaran's are gonna be sand people in their hearts for a long time.

[@BloodyArchangelus]

But... iNDUISM.

[@conjurorofcheaptricks8944]

Gritidiim=sand people, A derogatory slang utilized by the Siidim.

[@prostovasya6678]

Galdrastafir)

[@GurniHallek]

Coward: runs away from battle and lives his full lifespan.
Hero: Dies in battle and only "lives" in fugacious memory of his compatriots, if that.
Debunked with facts and logic.

[@alexandriac6641]

Spoken like a coward

[@GurniHallek]

@@alexandriac6641 shouldn't you be lying on the battlefield, disemboweled and screaming for your mommy right now, mister Hero?

[@alexandriac6641]

@@GurniHallek In the history of warfare you were most at risk of being killed when your side routed, was unable to coherently defend itself and was run down by the enemy.
Now in modern mechanised warfare you have even less chance off escaping, because if you individually run away you’re abandoning your unit’s transport vehicles and will be easily caught up with by the enemy riding in APCs or lorries, or picked off by a drone because you ran away from your side’s anti-air equipment.
Your best bet of survival is for your whole unit to stay together and fight cohesively.
Debunked with facts and logic :^)

[@GurniHallek]

@@alexandriac6641 Did you learn your "history of warfare" from video games, or something? People like me were the LEAST likely to be killed, simply because when the battle would start, we would already been gone long time before that. And if not, then still it holds true, especially in modern times. Who the fuck would expend fuel and expensive ordinance pursuing an enemy who is already given up fighting, and to achieve what? Further radicalization of the opposition, due to needless killings? Pfff, no. Keep fighting you strawmen, mr.Hero.

[@alexandriac6641]

@@GurniHallek You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. You pursue a fleeing enemy so you can destroy them as a fighting force before they’re able to reorganise, and if you tried to flee as soon as a battle starts, you would be noticed and immediately recaptured and forced back into the fight or imprisoned/executed. Do you really think armies didn’t develop ways to deal with deserters?
Don’t tell me I get my knowledge from video games when you obviously don’t have the first clue.