Intergalactic Summit

None of those, I made the mistake of giving attention to your deflection of the issue, since you have no actual way of twisting the issue to your personal benefit, that is your only recourse.

You're really overgeneralizing here, you know.

1. Humanity generally agrees that killing other humans is wrong, in the abstract sense. It's an outgrowth of hardwired empathy (except in the case of sociopaths) and self-interest.

2. Humanity also generally agrees that someone might still try to kill you. If someone tries to kill you, or you see someone trying to kill someone else, you should stop them, and it's regrettable, but ok, if you have to kill them to do it.

3. Humans, in aggregate, have agendas that benefit the group.

4. Groups can have agendas that conflict with the agendas of other groups.

5. Most of humanity (again, there are sociopaths and barbarian savages out there) agrees that when conflict arises, these groups should attempt to resolve these conflicts in mutually-beneficial ways. One of the most basic benefits available is 'nobody in my group ends up dead'.

6. Everyone (except again, some specific sects of barbarian savages who may or may not be sociopaths) agrees that nobody is perfect. Everyone screws up sometimes, and unfortunately, those screw-ups don't always happen in isolation.

7. As a result of the combination of (1), (2), (4), (5), and (6), big enough groups tend to maintain sub-sections of the group whose job is to protect the lives of members of the group. These sub-sections also serve as a deterrent against (6) in another group.
7a. It is generally understood that membership in these sub-sections includes a willingness to place (2) and (3) above one's personal self-interest in not dying.

8. (4) + (6) happens. (7) isn't always enough of a deterrent. We call this 'war'.
8a. Sometimes, the (4) that causes (8) isn't even about (6), it's about (2). Because even though (2), there's always those savage barbarian sociopaths.

9. Given (1) and (5), it's generally acknowledged that (8) is a (6), and that in the big picture, nobody really wants it, but that it happens anyway.

10. As a result of the general agreement on (9), (1), and (2), when (8) happens, there are rules that generally intend to limit the loss of life to (7), who accept this risk as indicated in (7a).

So, yes, even when war breaks out, human society overall (barbarian savage sociopaths potentially excepted) generally agrees that there are restrictions on who dies. Military service, like law enforcement, is in many ways a "sin-eater" position: when society screws up, you pay for it.

But you do once again seem to be horribly misusing 'civilized' to mean something like 'polite' or 'peaceful', when that's not really what the word means, it's just connotations people with overly facile misunderstandings of society and human nature have ladled onto it in an attempt to convince themselves 'oh, no, we're much better than that'.

We're not.

I have no agenda nor benefit from this issue. I was just interested in understanding what is a valid reason to kill from your perspective.

That´s kinda the thing. "Believe" but don´t practice. So it´s just words in the wind and then a lot of rationalizaiton to justify it, like every point you made after number 1.

People do what they do, i´m not judging. Just find it interesting to see the mental contortionism that people perform to avoid admiting such a clear thing.

Things are things, i do not see right or wrong, just things and people creating their personal stories and makebelieves to give this dream meaning and context.

Remember: Whatever is, is right. It couldnt be otherwise.

Gallente are far from perfect, but at least they have the tendency to own up to their mistakes, and even try to do better in the future [...]

They have. And at least try, which is more than most do, who just prefer banging their head on the wall and crying how evil the wall is for not budging.

Pandemic Legion is probably the only true meritocracy in an alliance or organization of its size. There is some democracy in the construction of doctrines or decisions regarding deployment and some autocracy in settling disputes or enforcing policy.

Overwhelmingly though, those who put in the work and are known to have the skill are given all of the power. It can seem extremely chaotic but our culture and flexibility are without a doubt extremely important to our success. My short explanation does not do the system or culture justice though.