Death unto Dawn page up

[GoldStarz]

The Dragonsong War lasted for a thousand years. Untold amounts of Dravanians and Ishgardians perished on both sides of the conflict. Despite that, the Ishgardians and the Dravanians managed to make peace and those thousand years of conflict were put behind them, albeit with a few growing pains. If a conflict of that length can come to a clean end, then a much shorter conflict where Garlemald is concerned can easily be put behind everyone.

You're talking about two completely different type of conflicts. The Dragonsong War was a war that was waged on both sides, while Garlemald is empire that has and continues to attempt to colonize other nations. Any body that engages in hostility with Garlemald inherently has a moral high ground in that conflict of either defense, reclamation, or liberation; the only exception I can think of is if you are attempting to do something similar to what Noah Gabranth is doing and building your own empire off of re-captured pieces of land.

I don't think arguing the particulars of how the Eorzean Alliance would treat with Garlemald upon winning the war matters since it looks like the empire (or at least the capitol and presumably most major members of their governing body) are going to be obliterated, but it wouldn't surprise me if this still plays out where the Garleans are more or less put back in the little corner of the world after everything shakes out and Ilsabard starts to re-stabilize.

[Theodric]

It's all a matter of perspective, not black and white morality as per what the writers themselves have repeatedly stated across various interviews in relation to both Garlemald and the Ascians.

Ishgard, Ala Mhigo, Doma, Bozja, Werlyt are all being given free rein in how they govern themselves post-war in spite of knowing they all have some significant societal or governmental flaws... Ul'dah is still governed by the corrupt Syndicate, and Gridania at the caprice of the elementals

The idea that Garlemald must be uniquely punished/raked through the coals/forced to repent and grovel amounts to little more than a revenge fantasy on the part of a sub-set of players.

Emet-Selch even compliments the Scions and Warrior of Darkness for taking the high road in regards to Eulmore. The easy route would have been to waltz into Vauthry's domain, slaughter a significant portion of the people defending him and then leave the survivors to clean up the mess. That didn't happen, since the trend thus far has been to mediate between both sides of even the most brutal conflicts and attempt to find common ground.

That's very likely to happen when it comes to Garlemald and the survivors. The destruction of the Royal Palace and surrounding area also opens up two possibilities - either the territory is rebuilt, or a relocation effort is established to finally give the Garleans somewhere of their own to live where, for once, they're not forced to ike out a living in a bitterly cold and inhospitable location.

At the end of the day, it isn't as if the Garleans decided to wake up one day and conquer the world for no reason at all. They were nearly driven to outright extinction, clawed their way to a position of power and then decided to try and put themselves at the top of the food chain.

One can easily argue that they went too far, though the fact remains that they deserve to have at least some fertile territory to call their own. Especially given the lack of an ability to manipulate aether through conventional means.

We've also seen no shortage of collaborators willing to defect from the conquered territories and side with Garlemald because their own people treated them so terribly, so...I'm inclined to think it's not a case of 'moral superiority' no matter how many times that particular phrase is thrown around these parts. Especially when we're talking about fictional characters and entities that do not actually exist.

We can agree to disagree on specifics. Even broader strokes - though Shadowbringers established firmly that the game isn't interested in exploring black and white morality. I debate from the perspective that the writers themselves have established, not 'feels' or revenge fantasies.

[Lauront]

You're talking about two completely different type of conflicts. The Dragonsong War was a war that was waged on both sides, while Garlemald is empire that has and continues to attempt to colonize other nations. Any body that engages in hostility with Garlemald inherently has a moral high ground in that conflict of either defense, reclamation, or liberation; the only exception I can think of is if you are attempting to do something similar to what Noah Gabranth is doing and building your own empire off of re-captured pieces of land.

I don't think arguing the particulars of how the Eorzean Alliance would treat with Garlemald upon winning the war matters since it looks like the empire (or at least the capitol and presumably most major members of their governing body) are going to be obliterated, but it wouldn't surprise me if this still plays out where the Garleans are more or less put back in the little corner of the world after everything shakes out and Ilsabard starts to re-stabilize.

You must consider what gave rose to the Garlean stance towards their neighbours. They attempted to conquer the Garleans routinely, until Garlemald outsmarted and subjugated them. As a nation that experienced the worst side of their neighbours, due to their inability by and large to manipulate aether, they don't have a particularly positive view of them; they probably extend this view to the Eorzeans as well. And I'm sorry, but I consider it baseless to say that anyone who engages in hostility towards Garlemald inherently has a "moral high ground". Several of their colonial territories appear to have none, based on what I mentioned (bearing in mind we know from SB side quests that the nature of Garlean rule differs in severity across its colonies, with some seeing little change from before), and we saw this play out in Doma and Bozja as well, where there are those native to them who want nothing to do with the restoration of their original regimes, because they regard them as unjust.

As for the Dragonsong War, yes, it was waged on both sides, but entirely due to Ishgard's own actions, and continued thanks to Ishgard perpetuating deception about its origins. They just happened to cross a foe with a very different sense of time to theirs. His point stands - if the dragons, some of whom were alive when the Ishgardian nobles perpetrated their betrayal - can ultimately forgive following Nidhogg's demise, then in order to avoid sowing the future seeds of conflict, the Alliance can allow those Garlean survivors to determine their own way forward. City-states with questionable pasts when they were independent - including Doma - were afforded this opportunity. I don't see why those surviving Garleans, who may very well have not agreed with the imperial stance, or seen it as a necessity due to the Empire's beliefs about Primals, need to be punished for it. Emet-Selch, as Theodric mentioned, even praises the MC in Kholusia for not taking such a path. Imposing on the remaining Garleans a regime which they do not want will simply sow the seeds of future conflict.

I think that it's likely that Garlemald will return to being a republic, though I don't believe such an approach to be a necessity. Although Ala Mhigo chose to abandon its monarchy, Doma did not do so. I think it'd be interesting to have an Emperor established as a contact moving forward, to help make world affairs feel less inorganic each time the leaders of the Eorzean Alliance and Hien decide to take their seats at the table to discuss current events.

As far as successors are concerned, it's not impossible that Zenos has a living relative out there who is much more suited to the position. Alternatively, some other Garlean could simply take up the position out of necessity in order to guide their people towards a more peaceful era of prosperity. Magitek is extremely useful and Garleans excel at its use and creation - so that would make for a good resource to trade. Given how big and strong they are, I imagine plenty of Pureblood Garleans would have quite a solid career as adventurers, mercenaries and bodyguards too.

Possibly along the lines of Archades, with an elected Emperor/monarch.