Lu Bu or Liu Bei: who is the bigger traitor?

Best threads of the SGYYS, for your viewing pleasure.

Re: Lu Bu or Liu Bei who is the bigger traitor??

Unread postby Han Xin » Sun Sep 21, 2003 6:50 am

jiuwan wrote:If you're gonna debate it that way, then why didn't you bring Sun Quan into it as well? Sun Quan's betrayals were greater than Liu Bei's and Lu Bu's combined! :shock:

WOW... Such an original comments. 1 person suggesting an unprovent statement might be regard as an innuendo, 2 persons suggested it might be regard as rumours, 3 persons suggesting it then its fact. Such lamed logic. If you want to make a comments, then please provide the counts of exams to prove of Sun Quan's treachery. Using other people arguments without any thought of logic is lamed.
Han Xin's past-time - 沉湎於酒, 淫於聲色, 左手擁華姬,右手抱越女:lol:
User avatar
Han Xin
Shu Emperor
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:20 am
Location: In the middle between Love and Lust. ^_^

Unread postby LorD Ma Titans » Sun Sep 21, 2003 7:05 am

Dian_Wei wrote:
Also there were numerous people that that had more legitimate claims to throne, like Emperor Xian for starters, but he made himself emperor anyways.


When Cao Pi rebelled... there were many rumors that Xian was killed.... This information was all Liu Bei could base himself on... so how can he give a supposed "dead" man, his land as emperor.

Dian_Wei wrote: He was a distant relative of the emperor, the emperor had never even heard of him, so how is it legitimate.


The Emperor referred to him as Uncle... makes it legitimate for me...

Dian_Wei wrote: Cao Cao was already prime minister to the crumbling empire, if he didn't take power than Liu Bei would have anyways, because Cao Cao was more open with his ambition while Liu bei silently plotted to kill Cao Cao for nothing but the reason that Cao Cao had a powerful position, which was willingly given to Cao Cao after he saved the emperors life from Guo Si and Li Jue.


It was Xian that wanted Cao Cao killed.... and Liu Bei was only following the Girdle Decreement given to Dong Cheng...

BtW when one is open with his ambition... does that not make him a traitor?
When a person is near death, his words are wise.
User avatar
LorD Ma Titans
Apprentice
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 6:13 am
Location: Look behind you

Unread postby Jon » Sun Sep 21, 2003 2:27 pm

Are you completely sure the emperor called him 'Uncle'? It could have been one of crazy old Luo Guangzhong's attempts to make Liu Bei look good. That guy can make even long ears sound honorable.
Jon
Ladies' Man
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:06 am

Unread postby Separation Anxiety » Mon Sep 22, 2003 12:23 am

LorD Ma Titans wrote:
Dian_Wei wrote: He was a distant relative of the emperor, the emperor had never even heard of him, so how is it legitimate.


The Emperor referred to him as Uncle... makes it legitimate for me...


I believe that Lu Bu called Liu Bei his brother, that didn't stop him from having Lu Bu killed did it.
Separation Anxiety
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 3467
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:40 pm
Location: The search party never came...

Unread postby Zhilong » Mon Sep 22, 2003 1:25 am

Cao Cao killed Lu Bu, not Liu Bei. Liu Bei reminded Cao Cao of Lu Bu's actions. Lu Bu is responsible for the actions which Liu Bei mentions. Cao Cao is the one that decides. I'd have liked to have seen him live in the novel and see what crap he gets up to. :D

Pragmatically i wonder how feasible it is to rescue and / or enthrone the the former Han Emperor...

The one i think Liu Bei truly betrayed was Liu Zhang. But given the circumstances it could not be helped if their cause was to have a hope in hell.

Lu Bu kills those he serves but does Liu Bei formally serve the other warlords? Is his status that of a vassal or is he seeking refuge? Did he pledge allegiance and ask to serve as vassal to a lord or was his status as a guest since he was a warlord himself? Rulers in the Spring & Autumn & Warring States period sometimes sought refuge under another ruler, only to leave later and revive their state.
Zhilong
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:22 am
Location: Shang Fong Valley with petrol bombs waiting for yours truly.

Unread postby Separation Anxiety » Mon Sep 22, 2003 9:39 pm

Zhilong wrote:Cao Cao killed Lu Bu, not Liu Bei. Liu Bei reminded Cao Cao of Lu Bu's actions. Lu Bu is responsible for the actions which Liu Bei mentions. Cao Cao is the one that decides. I'd have liked to have seen him live in the novel and see what crap he gets up to. :D


Cao Cao might have done the act but Liu Bei was the one who actually decides to kill him. Liu Bei told Cao Cao to kill Lu Bu. And also do you think that the author would willingly make Liu Bei out to be the killer of Lu Bu after Lu Bu saved Liu Bei with his arrow shot. I read somewhere that in reality it was Liu Bei that had Lu Bu killed and Lu Bus killer was none other than Zhang Fei. Liu Bei was not always the peaceful and virtuous man that Luo Guan Zhong makes him out to be. There was the beating of that imperial officer by Zhang Fei which was really done by Liu Bei, but Luo put it to Zhang because it was more fitting to his violent nature.
Separation Anxiety
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 3467
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:40 pm
Location: The search party never came...

Unread postby Wen Choung » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:49 pm

I agree that naming the kingdom "Shu-Han" doesn't necessarily mean Liu Bei was loyal, but IMO, that is better than Wei or Wu, both of which does not contain the word "Han" in it.

If I had no former education on the TK, and you were to ask me who is the continuing successor of the Han dynasty, Wei, Wu, or Shu-Han, I would say Shu-Han.

It may just be a name, but it is still one more thing working for Liu Bei. That was the point I was trying to come across.

Sure, Emperor Xian was basically the legitimate emperor, but the whole empire and the emperor himself was at the mercy of Cao Cao.

In terms of legitimacy, Cao Cao may have had it if you want to measure ability, because afterall, the empire belongs to the most worthy. But if you want to talk lineage, with Xian deposed, Liu Bei would be next one up.
User avatar
Wen Choung
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2002 1:27 am

Re: Lu Bu or Liu Bei who is the bigger traitor??

Unread postby jiuwan » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:50 pm

Han Xin wrote: Such lamed logic. If you want to make a comments, then please provide the counts of exams to prove of Sun Quan's treachery. Using other people arguments without any thought of logic is lamed.


This topic has been covered over and over again with neither side accepting the other's. Do you really want to go over it again? Passages have been quoted to death from SGZ, yet there is no agreement.

If you want to play pulling quotes from SGZ, then I would do so too. But only after school is out of session.
jiuwan
Marquis of Shun Ping
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:46 am

Unread postby jiuwan » Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:56 pm

[quote="Wen Choung"]I agree that naming the kingdom "Shu-Han" doesn't necessarily mean Liu Bei was loyal, but IMO, that is better than Wei or Wu, both of which does not contain the word "Han" in it.
quote]

The kingdom of "Shu-Han" wasn't originally named that. It was just "Han".

In Zhuge Liang's memorials, they referred to themselves as "Han" and their goal was the restoration of the Han dynasty.

In Fu Rong's bio, when he was surrounded just after the defeat of Yi Ling he referred to himself as a "Han" general. (Look at my signature)

You may want to message Mengdez New Book on more info.
jiuwan
Marquis of Shun Ping
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:46 am

Re: Lu Bu or Liu Bei who is the bigger traitor??

Unread postby Han Xin » Tue Sep 23, 2003 12:33 pm

jiuwan wrote:This topic has been covered over and over again with neither side accepting the other's. Do you really want to go over it again? Passages have been quoted to death from SGZ, yet there is no agreement.

If you want to play pulling quotes from SGZ, then I would do so too. But only after school is out of session.

Then why don't you try it yourself... don't tell me you end up using Steve's post over at other forums to justified Sun Quan's treachery. :roll: The logics in his post were flaws, using Sun Quan refusal to send a son he doesn't have in 202AD to Cao Cao who were not even his boss as treachery is a bit laughable don't you think? :roll:
Han Xin's past-time - 沉湎於酒, 淫於聲色, 左手擁華姬,右手抱越女:lol:
User avatar
Han Xin
Shu Emperor
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:20 am
Location: In the middle between Love and Lust. ^_^

PreviousNext

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved