Talk:Admiral Ozzel

"Captain Ozzel became the commander of the Super Star Destroyer Executor when it was launched" - This does not match up with what Timothy Zahn wrote in 'Allegiance'. In that book he has Ozzel as the captain of the Reprisal, and in the same book the Executor also plays a role, and it has a different captain. Therefore, unless there are two such ships (both SSDs and both Vader's personal flagships) I don't see how both statements can be true...

Please get Ozzel's picture, but not from the scene where he was killed by Vader.- B-101 12:39, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I would like it if you got Ozzel's picture. Please do it very soon.- B-101 22:02, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Rebel Sympathies
"...despite whispered rumors that he had Rebel sympathies." Fascinating. What is the source?
 * MSTCrow 05:18, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Height
I see that Ozzel's height is 5'3". Should his height be in English or in Metric? The same goes for all SW characters (there's a little inconsistency with what system their height is in). I think it should be in Metric.- B-101 17:27, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reason for death
Wasn't Ozzel's death actually a mistake on Vader's part? Vader assumed the Rebels knew the Imperial Fleet was on its way because Ozzel came out of hyperspace too close to the system. However, they knew because they found the probe droid. The probe droid wasn't able to get a message out because the confrontation with Solo was over so quickly (we saw before that it had to extend its antenna, and its signaling was audible), so the Empire never knew that they found it. (DrZarkov 23:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC))


 * Dunno. The Rebels certainly knew the Imperials were coming eventually because of the probe droid, but I think Ozzel's maneuver gave them the exact time and immediate warning, if you catch my drift. --maru  (talk)  contribs 03:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I think this could be considers a bit of a plot hole or tech error depending on one's point of view. If the Imperials knew that that the Rebels knew that they where coming then logically they would want to come out of hyperspace as close as possible to prevent the rebels from escape.  I think it is safe to assume the the Imperials knew the probe was detected since there was no reason that the probe would have not transmitted the fact that it was discovered.  If the Rebels know the Imperials are coming, it would be nearly impossible to sneak up on them.  They will certainly be paying more attention in a way that is difficult to maintain for the long-term.  Furthermore if the Imperials already know where they are that, the Rebels can use active scanners that would have given away their location if the Imperials had not already know their location.  (The Rebels could put an active scanner off-base to prevent the equivalent to the real-world missiles that follow radar transmissions to active radar sites.)  Also the Imperials would not have known that the Rebels did not have any patrols.  The Imperials don't know how long it will take the Rebels to get important people, troops, and/or equipment off Hoth.  So sneaking up on the Rebels risks allowing the Rebels to escape before the noose is closed.  Then there is a question of how such large ships that lack stealth can sneak up on anything. I might also point out that Ozzel's put down of Piett was just. The odds that the discovery was the Rebel base was low. A Galaxy-wide search should have produced many possible "rebels."  Piett's job would have been to do a better analysis than what he gave to Ozzel and Vader.  A group of humans on a planet not previously known to have them is a bit underwhelming.  It just so happened that Vader's use of the force told him the right answer.  He might have even had a feeling that he should be on the bridge... Of course one can say this is over-analysis of a series of movies that is loaded with many far more elementary plot holes.  And that would probably be right.  MichaelSH 02:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Ozzel's rank
I know I read somewhere that Ozzel was able to reach the highest echelons of the Imperial Navy due to him being the son of a wealthy and influential family with firm loyalties to the Empire. I can't remember if this was from one of the games or from one of the novels, but I believe it's a part of the same story that describes General Veers as being "A good man fighting for the wrong side" due to the fact that he believes the Empire has the potential to be a just and noble governing body, were it run by less corrupt leaders. If I recall correctly, he describes them as benign cancers that merely need to be removed. Does anybody else remember this at all? Gamer Junkie 06:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Certainly not... it's certainly Expanded Universe which doesn't qualify as Star Wars Canon. Admiral Ozzel wasn't in the highest echelons, he was inferior to Grand Moffs, and if he was that important, Vader wouldn't have been as keen in killing him.

DarthSidious 16:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)DarthSidious

Vader established on several occasions during the movie that he'd hardly have qualms about killing Imperial officers of any rank or social standing. In the first movie he almost killed one of the highest-ranking officers abord the Death Star for doing little more than criticizing his methods. At a guess, I'd say Vader would believe that he could kill just about anybody he wanted. Gamer Junkie 23:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The point I tried to make was that Ozzel's was easily replaceable, and made no substantial contributions to the Empire... Vader could not kill Grand Moff Tarkin as he was high in the emperor's favour, or even the Emperor himself. Although He could theoretically "kill" imperial officers, he'd be in trouble if he did any noticeable damage to the imperial navy.

(This conversation is pointless)...

DarthSidious 08:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)DarthSidious

Fair use rationale for Image:Ozzel Ep5 DVD.jpg
Image:Ozzel Ep5 DVD.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)