There were actually two kisses. Once on the cheek for luck when escaping the Death Star I and the second was in the recovery room in the Hoth Base to make Han jealous. At the time, it hadn't even been decided that Luke and Leia were siblings and both Han and Luke were competing for the affections of Leia.

Not all Sith are extremists. Saying all Sith are extremists is like saying all Jedi are pacifists. If it were true, there would be no Jedi that turn to the Dark Side. If all Sith were extremists, the Sith would have died out long before the Rule of Two came to an end. While it may have been a result of the Great Hyperspace War, that act is what spurred on the war going on during TOR. Also, the first two Great Schisms are not attributed to the Dark Jedi, which became the Sith, so the SIth have not started all of the wars, making your statement false. The Sith Philosophy does not tell one to start wars. It tells one to learn from adversity and become stronger for it. The SIth Culture is one of the strong surviving and ruling over the weak which is how nature selects the ruling class. It seems only natural, not evil. There are evil Sith individuals. To say the entire Order is inherently evil is a fallacy of biased sampling.

Actually, nobody knows who started the First Great Schism. The Second Great Schism was started by escalating arguments regarding their opposing views. It was the Republic that chased the Sith out of the Galaxy nearly causing their extinction which instigated the current war being waged in TOR. So, your statement that the Sith started all the wars is not true. The Sith Code does not end peace, it says peace is detrimental to one's progress. Only extremists would take it to mean war is the path to strength. Conflict can be overcoming any adversity.

Who said they cause it? They just don't avoid it. If the Jedi had their way, conflict and strife would be avoided altogether.

Sorry I've been gone for a couple days moving. But, I do. Back to your question about the Sith Code being evil or not. Peace is a lie, there is only passion. What this means to the Sith is Peace brings stagnation and from stagnation weakness. Passion brings conflict and strife which must be endured to become more than you currently are. Through passion I gain strength. As stated before, passion brings conflict and strife. It is only by facing conflict and strife that we test our limits and boundaries. By testing these limits, we learn to adapt or we die. Through strength I gain power. By adapting and overcoming our limitations, we gain mastery over ourselves. Mastery over one's self is the path to true power. Through power I gain victory. For this, it is best described by one of the axioms of Darth Plagueis. Through victory my chains are broken. You transcend the slavery of mediocrity and become something more. The Force shall free me. This is the path of the Dark SIde of the Force. While it may be very self-serving, there is nothing inherently evil with how the Sith interpret the Code. It is a big F U to the Jedi Code because it is the exact opposite sentiment. The Jedi Code advocates pacifism while the Sith Code advocates activism. The Jedi Code leads to improvement of the whole while the Sith Code leads to improvement of the self. Seems to me they both have their merits. Maybe a hybridization of the two is actually best.

That is avoiding the question entirely. You're going the route of listening to what the author wants. Why not take a look at what you see in the Sith society and formulate your own opinion. Look at the Sith Ambassadors in the novel Deceived. Or even Malgus, they are examples of Sith born in the Empire that know nothing else. They do not see how things should be any different than what they were raised to believe. They view the Jedi as heretics that pervert the Force just as the Jedi see the Sith. I hate using this as a reference because I really don't like the franchise but, it is like the Alliance and Horde of Warcraft. Neither side is more good or evil than the other. There are just the beliefs that each hold to.

In Sith Society, the Imperials are the peasants to working class. Some may even hold high enough rank to equate to Middle-Class. The Sith are the top 1%. They are the Ruling Class. The Imperials are the infrastructure. While it may be true the Imperials monitor themselves, the Sith do not just "Come and Go" they are an ever present, work-at-home parent. While the lower ranking Sith are off fighting wars and such, the upper echelons of the Sith ensure the laws of the Emperor are conveyed to the Imperials.

How about this? Is it evil for the Beta Wolf to challenge and kill the Alpha male to become the new Alpha? Is it evil when a male lion challenges and kills the head of the pride to become the new head? If you answered no to either of those, why is it evil for a Lesser Sith to challenge and kill a higher ranking Sith to take his position? Because Sith have the ability to speak? In all three scenarios there is a build up of tensions and there is a planning phase. All three challengers intend to kill the defender. If you would like to say they murder people when they conquer planets, people die in war. Nobody is going to give up their home without a fight, some will not give up until you kill them. Conquering planets is essential to establishing an empire. If you would like to say they murder their subordinates, Sith are the authority, therefore they are judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to meting out disciplinary actions for failures. The Sith act within the bounds of the laws of the Empire. If the Imperials did not want to suffer such fates, they could have chosen a different profession.

I think instead of saying right and wrong, as those are closely linked to good and evil, you should say Just and Unjust. Is it just to allow a murderer to go on living and have more opportunities to kill? Is it unjust to let one's strength and desire to live be his only saving grace?

I'm not saying that Obi-Wan picked Soresu to be the future answer to Maul's Juyo. I'm saying that Obi-Wan saw that Ataru's flourishes and emphasis on wide open attacks left gaping holes in your defense, therefore he opted for the much more defense oriented Soresu. Quoted from the Wookieepedia page for Form III: Soresu.

Let me see if I can break it down for you even further. Padme was an elected official. She did not inherit the throne from her mother or father. She ran for office and was elected by way of gaining the most votes. There was no usurper to her throne as her term was finished and she decided not to run for office again, instead becoming a senator. The person we see in Episode II was the new elected queen, she did not take the throne away from Padme. Therefore, neither Luke nor Leia have any claim at all to the Throne of Naboo. Would they be welcome as citizens in full, I'm sure, given the throne just because their mother used to be queen, no.

The fight against Maul is actually the reason Obi-Wan adopted and mastered the Soresu Form. He was able to see in retrospect all of the failings of Ataru and decided to utilize Soresu instead. Don't get me wrong, Ataru is great if you have ample room to maneuver. It is why Yoda was one of the fiercest lightsaber duelists of the Order, his small size allowed him to capitalize on even the smallest of open spaces, turning a confined space into his biggest advantage against his larger opponents.

The only reason he won is because he knew how hot tempered his former Padawan was. He used his superior experience and his knowledge to his advantage. Anakin was also well versed in Soresu, he just favored Djem-So more. If you know the history of Djem-So, you would know that it was developed by Soresu practitioners who wanted to add offense. They married Soresu's defense with Makashi's aggressive style. So the solid defense was not what won him the fight. Anakin had a solid defense as well. The fight could have gone either way until Obi-Wan goaded Anakin into making that near fatal mistake. Neither one had a clear advantage over the other. They seemed to be evenly matched in nearly every way up to that point when Obi-Wan capitalized on Anakin's belief that he should be the more powerful and therefore able to overtake any perceived advantage Obi-Wan had.

Sith do scheme and plot against one another constantly. There are constant power plays as the Sith Culture is driven by the Dark Side which naturally fosters an innate sense of competition. You have to be strong to stay in power, once someone thinks himself stronger he will go after your position, if you are not able to defend this position, you were not worthy of this position.

Actually, being the "Master of Soresu" had very little to do with the win. Obi-Wan goaded him and Anakin fell for it, literally. He did exactly what Obi-Wan expected him to do and Obi-Wan capitalized. It came down to which one was able to keep their head in the game.

If you are looking for the Answer given by George Lucas, the answer is yes they are evil. I've seen this thread enough times to at least remember that. Thanks to people such as the good ol' Professor Walsh. However, if you are looking for our opinions and our arguments one way or the other, I will give you my opinion on the subject. Actual Sith, those born into the culture, are no more evil than predatory animals. The Philosophies of the Sith mirror those of Natural Selection. The strong shall survive and rule over the weak while the weak are to be culled lest they weaken the whole. For them, it is THE way of life. It is all they have ever known. Those that are not born into the culture yet seek it out are another story. Their intentions are what make them evil. There are those that would argue the former of my two statements is false. They would argue that good and evil, right and wrong are not relative, that they are absolute and as such, even the Sith born into the culture are evil. But then I would argue that there is no absolute authority on what is good or evil, right or wrong. There is only what we perceive as such. If we were to be born in a society where all citizens of this society subscribed to the Sith Philosophies, we would no longer view it as evil but the sad fact of life.

Anger and Hate are not the only emotions that fuel the Dark Side. Also, it is possible to have a source of Anger or Rage that has nothing to do with your opponent. Using as an example, Malgus. He used the loss, even though self inflicted, of Eleena to fuel his rage. Vader. He had the loss of Padme to fuel his rage. Vader vs Luke: Vader was starting to lose the conflict raging within himself. Anakin was beginning to resurface. That is why Vader lost to Luke. Dooku vs Anakin: Dooku had every reason to hate Anakin. Dooku was fully aware that he was replaceable as Palpatine's Apprentice and he was also fully aware that Palpatine had his eyes set on Anakin for that specific reason. Palpatine is another matter entirely. He no longer needed to rely upon emotions spurred on in the heat of battle. Plagueis spent all of Palpatine's apprentice years turning him into a creature of pure hatred. Palpatine just figured out how to temper that hatred and keep it under control.

Look, I can do this too. Quoted from the Wookieepedia page for Form V. As you can see, I did my homework before even coming to the table, young Padawan. By the time Episode III had come around, Anakin had grown in power significantly and had become one of the foremost masters in Form V. He was better than Dooku in every way, more powerful and using the perfect answer to Dooku's preferred fighting style. Also quoted from the same Wookieepedia page. As for my claims concerning the Dark Side, I would be a fool to say you were wrong in claiming that the Dark Side draws upon its practitioners' emotions and grants them power. That IS how it works. But at the same time, the Dark Side also corrupts the body, even degenerating it. Quoted from the Wookieepedia page for The Dark Side of the Force. You have a talent of quoting parts of what someone says and using it to your advantage. However, it is best to actually read for comprehension of the full statement. Just because part of what you said was correct, does not mean you didn't still fail to convey the correct message. As stated previously, the Fail is strong in you, young Padawan.

The Sith are the ruling class and as such are very much in the spotlight. You better believe that any power struggles between any middle to high ranking Sith are well known. If only for the fact the citizens will want to know which one wins the struggle. You definitely don't want to make the mistake of saying you are a supporter of Lord/Darth X after Lord/Darth Y killed him, it would be very detrimental to your survival. Especially if a Kaggath is called, those who were loyal to the losing Sith were summarily executed. Just because the Sith are fewer in numbers than the mundanes and the Emperor is the HSIC, that does not mean each Sith doesn't have authority and some measure of power over the citizens. If even a Sith Apprentice were to say jump to an Imperial, the only suitable response is to jump until that Sith is satisfied. So, to say the affairs of the Sith go unnoticed by the Imperials is far from accurate. The Imperials just don't go looking to get in the middle of said affairs.

Well, he was a hybrid for starters. His mother was human if I remember correctly. Secondly, after a time, he decided to hide his real body and start inhabiting the bodies of others to protect himself from being killed. If you couldn't reach his real body, you couldn't actually kill him, in theory.

@RDeanOU I said the character was written in a way we weren't supposed to like him. I never said whether or not I liked him until a later post. You don't have to be the main focal point of the action sequences to be the protagonist. He was the reason for the story. Did I care whether or not Anakin fell to the Dark Side and that he was dismembered? Yes I did actually. I remember the first time I saw the movie back in '05, "Finally, we get to see how this whiny brat gets turned into my favorite character." I actually cheered when you hear the sound of the respirator for the first time at the end of Episode III shortly followed by a bittersweet cheer when I heard James Earl Jones' voice and that awful "No" that was bellowed. Ugh, I'm tired of this round robin with you. I'm done, neither of us is going to budge on our points of view. Have fun with your anal retentive over analyzing point of view.

Even more fail. I will get to this epic fail in a moment. To answer the OP first. It is not the Dark Side itself that grows weak over time, it is the body of the user. Not as quickly as you seem to think it does though. It takes years of use to degrade the body in the manner which you described. Maul lost to Obi-Wan because he was cocky, pure and simple. He figured he beat the Master, he had nothing to worry about from the Padawan. He got careless and was bifurcated in response. Anakin defeated Dooku because he was just better, there was nothing else to it. His powers grew in the three years since their last duel and his Saber Form was the perfect answer to Dooku's. Dejem-So took the defense of Soresu and married it to the offense of Makashi while adding a lot of physical strength which allowed Anakin to overpower Dooku. Luke defeated Vader from natural ability. He instinctively knew how to use Dejem-So. His power had grown to the point where he was on the same level as Vader. Vader was not expecting his untrained son to be able to fight him on his own level. Now, back to the quoted fail above. Yes, the Dark Side feeds off of those emotions, and yes they empower the wielder but, not without cost. The Jedi are aware of this. That is why they preach on about not giving in to your emotions. If you are not careful, you become like a beast of rage, acting on pure instinct. There is a lack of self control when one uses the Dark Side. Neither side is capable of attaining more power than the other, the Dark Side just gives you access to this power at a quicker rate because you are feeding it your emotions.

You are putting words in my mouth. I said I like the character, when I read the novelization. I even liked the character when I looked past the horrible acting. I did say that he was intentionally written to be a jerk. It makes more sense that there are parts of his personality as Vader present before he became Vader. It wouldn't be a plausible transformation for him to one day be a sweet and innocent boy to the next being the most ruthless and cold-hearted tyrant the Galaxy has seen in a long time. However, you are correct. I don't expect everything to make sense, in a fantasy world. It doesn't have to. This isn't a fictitious story about a war that happened in our world. This is a fantasy world developed from the imagination of the author. The story only has to remain plausible within the story's universe, it does not have to make sense in ours.

During the times when there were actually Sith Empires, there were laws forbidding murder that if broken were met with swift and harsh punishment. Don't forget, people in general prefer order to chaos. EDIT: That did not stop people from using subversion and lack of witnesses to kill their opponents. However, this way of life allowed for the power of the Sith to become diluted over time. The weak would band together to kill the strong, hence the Rule of Two. You absolutely had to be stronger in some way shape or form than your Master to kill him. This system begat some of the most powerful Sith in the entire history of the Order.

Your point of view would be correct if Episode I could be viewed in a vacuum. It cannot, therefore it should not. Anakin from Episode I was likable, in my opinion. In Episodes II and III, from the Novelizations, there were points at which he was likable. But, while he is the protagonist, he is NOT the hero. He does not become the hero until Episode VI. That is what I mean by you have to look at the story as a whole, not just individual Episodes. I'm well aware that at the time the Original Trilogy came out the Prequels did not exist. I saw them in their original theatrical releases. Your statements about everything are based upon opinion. Proven by the fact that I, along with others, do not agree with you. Sure, I like the Original Trilogy a lot better than the Prequels, which one of us alive early enough to have seen them before their rerelease in '97 doesn't? A fictional world does not have to make sense. This world is not one of Science Fiction where technology has to be plausible. This is high fantasy based in a technologically advanced era. The tactics used in battle don't have to make sense. We don't even know what strategy was being used. You called me an apologist in an earlier post. You couldn't be more wrong. I make no apologies for anything Lucas did. I had nothing to do with it, nor do I believe there is any apology owed for what he did. He told the story he wanted to tell. If you don't like it, you don't have to. The difference between you and me is you are arguing your opinion as fact, I am arguing my opinion to show you there are other opinions that exist. You see the story one way, I see it a completely different way. Now I bid you adieu. May the Force be with you.