>>23445117
You put words in my mouth opposite to what I said, and you are making a fallacious appeal to simplicity to dismiss the genocide of half of mankind into a forgettable event.

>It's far away and the colonies are "new" anyway.
The colonies are part of the Federation, literally half the human population, by the lore half-forced deportation.
It means recent family ties and the investment in building those colonies is still in everyone's mind.
The colonies are right above their heads, in direct sight every day and big enough to shine in daylight.
Realistically Lagrange point 4 and 5 are not stable so half of what's destroyed there would spread into Earth orbits, that's scary on its own.
By your own "plain" logic: nuking half of your family after they moved into mankind's costliest housing program.

>Blow up a major Earth city.
No different from blowing-up hundred of major Federation cities in space.
Logically, it only counts as a marker for the END of the genocidal one-week war. Not as a Pearl Harbor analogy.

>Sydney is hundreds of years old at this point.
Mr."recognize atrocity" should know that many would love to have the old shed in their backyard full of spiders burns by accident.

Analogy are flawed by nature but I think you are conflating two completely different things
- the FIRST STRIKE that would remain in memories as plunging your country into war, the one-week war.
- generational hate brewed from lasting persecutions and act of genocide.

>you're arguing like the Aryan/Japanese nationalists who contend...
The complete opposite of what I said.
At this point, that's more like your argumentations: "billions dying in space is too high a number" so you deflect on something minor but "relatable" with political motivation.

Frankly, I think you are just being contrarian because you like the show's FORCED ANALOGY, despite its tonal contradiction with numbers that are supposed to be canonical. Plus reminding the colony drop effect are grossly exaggerated.