test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Vulcan ships?

1356

Comments

  • wakerobertswakeroberts Member Posts: 99 Arc User
    edited March 2017
    Another gem from JJ. Pike was describing the Federation in that scene, not Starfleet. That's why I never liked that description, because Pike got it completely wrong.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 9,687 Arc User
    edited March 2017
    risian4 wrote: »
    Guys it really doesn't matter whether Starfleet is a military organisation or not. The game itself and various release blogs state that member species have kept producing and offering their ships to Starfleet. See the descriptions of the Caitian Atrox and the Xindi ships for just a few other examples.

    If they can keep their older designs up to date, they can design new hulls as well as that is relatively easy.

    The argument that member species would only have police, trade and medical ships is simply not true for this game as least - we see Kumari's fighting alongside the players in Undine Assault for example.
    And strictly speaking, it's an irrelevant discussion as, gameplay-wise, the ships we're talking about are perfectly capable of combat and there's no reason why Cryptic couldn't decide to create a new Vulcan design.

    So instead of derailing the thread with this old discussion on Starfleet's nature, perhaps we should go back to the original topic: more Vulcan ships. I assume you all know how to create your own thread if you do wish to discuss other matters.

    This is pretty much out of the question and T6 ships of the founders, maybe even putting them in a FotF discount pack would defenitely be something I think nobody would oppose. Ideas for ships are plenty and all over the forum as well pig-1.gif
    jonsills wrote: »
    (...)

    Because at this point, we're just yelling "Yes they are", "No they're not" at each other - and as the Argument Clinic sketch pointed out, an argument is more than just saying "No it isn't." ("Yes, it is!" "No, it isn't!")

    The fun thing is that the "pro military" posters at this point basically choose to ignore everything contrary to their opinion (which, mind you, are the shows and movies themselves ) and simply repeat their arguments over and over again. Some of them actually had some merit if we'd discuss anything but a sci-fi show with rules that are presented to us as worldbuilding fact, among them trivia like the latest movie being all about the non-military nature of Starfleet to a degree proud soldier men from MACO turned insane and wanted to toss the galaxy into eternal war so they can stop encountering aliens in peace again - and I am pretty sure they did not do that because Starfleet lied about not not being a military. It's also interesting that Kirk's "I am a soldier" line conveniently always weighs more than examples from other shows AND movies from different people combined. At this point there is objectively no ground to argue on. You are free to say "canonically Starfleet is not a military, I don't see it like that" but the source material is pretty ctystal clear that int he future, obviously things are defined differently than we do today, the whole purpose and mindset behind the UFP and Starfleet from a real world perspective put aside for a moment.​​
    2r2u1s2.jpg
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 33,587 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    The fun thing is that the "pro military" posters at this point basically choose to ignore everything contrary to their opinion (which, mind you, are the shows and movies themselves ) and simply repeat their arguments over and over again.​​
    The same is true of the anti-military side. Starfleet is shown doing everything a true military would do. This is indisputable fact.

    Truthfully the entire argument should get written off as "the people writing the show contradicted themselves repeatedly". The entire reason the debate hasn't ended is that BOTH sides have merit. IS it equal merit? Hard to say. You'd really need a month of binge watching to make a list of all the times it's referred to(or treated as) as either a military or non-military. I say "treated as" because I can't think of any time a character actually ACTS like Starfleet is non-military.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • kodachikunokodachikuno Member Posts: 5,999 Arc User1
    **sends for more popcorn, butter and nachos**Inventory is low but still plenty for sale!
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 8,335 Arc User
    Sisko even says outright that the Defiant, despite the official Starfleet classification of "escort," was designed to be a warship.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,296 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    The fun thing is that the "pro military" posters at this point basically choose to ignore everything contrary to their opinion (which, mind you, are the shows and movies themselves ) and simply repeat their arguments over and over again.​​
    The same is true of the anti-military side. Starfleet is shown doing everything a true military would do. This is indisputable fact.
    I think that is the part that the "pro military" side really doesn't get. Your argument is that they are military beacuse they do some things like a military. But then pro military types tend to get annoyed when things are done in Starfleet that aren't done in militaries. Kids aboard a space ship, people not following uniform codes, dating between officers withing a command hierarchy, seemingly no enlisted personnel, telling off Admirals without suffering any negative consequences, refusing promotions withour ruining your career, petty officers outranking officers, cadets outranking enisgns, making decisions that threaten the safety of everyone aboard for the sake of adhering to certain moral principles.

    Maybe, just maybe, it's not quite a military that we're dealing with? Having some of the trappings of a military is not the same as being one. It's science fiction organization, and is its own thing. Is it really that hard to consider? Is it really relevant to even have a specific name for it? It has its own name already - it's Starfleet.
    Sisko even says outright that the Defiant, despite the official Starfleet classification of "escort," was designed to be a warship.
    Why would a military conceal that its warship is a warship?
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • ash352ash352 Member Posts: 231 Arc User
    edited March 2017
    I think that is the part that the "pro military" side really doesn't get. Your argument is that they are military beacuse they do some things like a military. But then pro military types tend to get annoyed when things are done in Starfleet that aren't done in militaries. Kids aboard a space ship, people not following uniform codes, dating between officers withing a command hierarchy, seemingly no enlisted personnel, telling off Admirals without suffering any negative consequences, refusing promotions withour ruining your career, petty officers outranking officers, cadets outranking enisgns, making decisions that threaten the safety of everyone aboard for the sake of adhering to certain moral principles.

    Maybe, just maybe, it's not quite a military that we're dealing with? Having some of the trappings of a military is not the same as being one. It's science fiction organization, and is its own thing. Is it really that hard to consider? Is it really relevant to even have a specific name for it? It has its own name already - it's Starfleet.

    That is the main issue with that portion of the show in general. You had a group of people writing an organization based on the military, using military terms, rules, actions, etc, but trying to put it on screen as "totally not a military". They created the issues that are seen that you mentioned. Why did Gene and company design it using the basic framework of a military? Why pick those terms and rules to be played out on screen? It doesn't make sense for a non-military organization to have things like court-martial's if they're not a military organization as it's defined as a military court. They could easily have had a jury of their peers to handle issues but instead they went with something that is entirely, 100%, a military functionality. That's not even touching on all of the other things they used.

    It's not that they have some of the trappings of one, they wholesale lifted everything from the actual navy and then decided to change a few things to make it "totally not a military" when they realized that they made a space navy but didn't want an actual space navy. I could go on and pick apart most of the arguments you raised and point out why you're wrong to use them, the easiest being why Warrant Officers like Chief O'Brien "outrank" commissioned officers when he doesn't and commissioned officers 99% of the time default to the WO's opinion as that's the whole reason they're a WO in the first place, but it wouldn't be useful to do. Starfleet IS the military branch of the Federation. If you don't want to see it that's fine but it doesn't change the fact the writers pretty obviously used the navy as the basis and just never changed anything besides making the characters say "we're totally not a military" whenever they needed to write themselves out of a corner.
    Why would a military conceal that its warship is a warship?

    "Hello friendly alien species that we're making first contact with. This is the Federation Warship Defiant. We come in peace though. Would you like to join the Federation? No, we won't attack you if you say no. What do you mean you don't believe us?"
  • tousseautousseau Member Posts: 1,395 Arc User
    I would love to see a Federation Founders Pack...
    Vulcan = science
    Andorian = tactical
    Telerite = engineering
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 33,587 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    The fun thing is that the "pro military" posters at this point basically choose to ignore everything contrary to their opinion (which, mind you, are the shows and movies themselves ) and simply repeat their arguments over and over again.​​
    The same is true of the anti-military side. Starfleet is shown doing everything a true military would do. This is indisputable fact.
    I think that is the part that the "pro military" side really doesn't get. Your argument is that they are military beacuse they do some things like a military. But then pro military types tend to get annoyed when things are done in Starfleet that aren't done in militaries. Kids aboard a space ship, people not following uniform codes, dating between officers withing a command hierarchy, seemingly no enlisted personnel, telling off Admirals without suffering any negative consequences, refusing promotions withour ruining your career, petty officers outranking officers, cadets outranking enisgns, making decisions that threaten the safety of everyone aboard for the sake of adhering to certain moral principles.

    Maybe, just maybe, it's not quite a military that we're dealing with? Having some of the trappings of a military is not the same as being one. It's science fiction organization, and is its own thing. Is it really that hard to consider? Is it really relevant to even have a specific name for it? It has its own name already - it's Starfleet.
    You don't seem to know much about actual militaries if you think any of that actually makes Starfleet different than the US military. If you want to look at other countries... some of them have very loose requirements on uniforms. ETc.... I don't feel like typing up a book explaining why each of your statements is wrong.
    Sisko even says outright that the Defiant, despite the official Starfleet classification of "escort," was designed to be a warship.
    Why would a military conceal that its warship is a warship?
    Politics. Which is exactly what the Klingons had to say about it.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 8,313 Arc User
    Picard said Starfleet wasn't military.

    Kirk and Sisko said it was.

    Janeway didn't weigh in on the question, so far as I can remember (and I'm not going to go rewatch VOY to check).

    So, as we can see, relying on what the characters tell us is not really a feasible method. It's almost as if different people wrote the words they were saying...
    "Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"

    - David Brin, "Those Eyes"
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,032 Bug Hunter
    nikeix wrote: »
    Do they say "we're not a military" despite being obviously a military?

    It's not a military though. It's a exploration agency with paramilitary functions, we've already covered this.
    lianthelia wrote: »
    artan42 wrote: »
    jonsills wrote: »
    They operate under a strict rank structure, using a military law that is considered different from civilian law and includes courts-martial....


    Strict? Lackadaisical is far closer to the truth. They utilise the broadest possible structure to keep track of a large number of trained profesionals. It's not even slightly strict from nonlinear promotions to dress code.

    It's a exploration and humanitarian amarda with big guns and no alternative.

    Yes it is strict...they don't *play* officers...just because Picard is a friendly person and developed close relationships with his officers it doesn't mean that is how Starfleet functions as a whole...even with how close they were they didn't call him Jean Luc...

    From my above post...
    artan42 wrote: »
    Except it's not. All the bitching people make about how lax or deregulated things are in Starfleet and how that would never fly in their *insert particular favourite Earth military*?

    How you have Petty Officers out ranking lieutenants? How you can happily be first officer for decades turning down at least three offers of command and not hurt your career? How you can have field commissioned cadets out ranking properly commissioned ensigns? How you can have admirals in personal command of their own ships? How you can go straight from officer cadet to captain? Children as acting ensigns? How you can tell admirals to stuff it and not suffer any consequences? How you can have ships crewed exclusively by officers? How you can have up to 3 captains on-board? That's not even getting into Starfleets lack of saluting and marching codes etc., all that silly pomp and ceremony militaries use? Starfleet dosn't. They barely stand to attention.
    ​​

    It's not strict and it's barely military.
    lowy1 wrote: »
    You are correct on UFP, my mistake, but all of those above organizations you stated are paramilitary. Even the Coast Guard, in the U.S. falls under the Department of Defense during wartime. Anything with a rank structure or is organized in a military styled hierarchy type of structure is paramilitary. Id doesn't mean they are military or function as one, they are just organized as one.

    The US Coast Guard is a military branch. I'm not American, I never mean the US Coast Guard when I say paramilitary as it's not paramilitary, it's a full on service of the military.
    But yes, Starfleet is broadly organised along paramilitary lines, like all comparable organisations, however most people seem unable to look past the obvious and just assume military.
    warpangel wrote: »
    Starfleet likes to pretend it's not a military, even though it obviously is.

    It's called supporting evidence, you couple the statements of the captain of the flagship of Starfleet with several other high ranked members who know what their own job is and then add in the evidence that they don't act like a military, don't structure themselves as strictly as a military, and don't preform the roles of a military except as a last resort you come to a conclusion most fans of the shows that actually pay attention to the shows and not the space marine game they're playing with the other hand come to. Starfleet is not a military.
    warpangel wrote: »
    It likes to pretend it's ships are not built for war (that's why Fed tactical ships have the label "escort" in the game, it's Starfleet-ese for warship according to Sisko), even though they obviously are.

    HA! You know how out there the Defiant (and the Dreadnought) are right? Obviously you've never seen Star Trek but they don't make warships. That's why the Defient is such a big deal. It's not hard to find DS9 online, do yourself a favour and go watch it and some TNG and stop assuming STO is representative of Star Trek.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Sure, because something that uses military ranks, military functionality, military disciplinary actions, and use starships with more weapons than is strictly necessary for actual defense is totally not a military because they say they aren't.

    I'm starting to wonder if people can read. P.a.r.a.m.i.l.i.t.a.r.y. For goodness sake, it's really not hard NON-MILITARY ORGANISATIONS CAN USE MILITARY RANKS, STRUCTURES, ETC. Constantly showing off how unable you are to use Google to look up American police using military ranks and weapons, or the East India using military ranks, protocols, and battleships despite being a business is just silly.
    ash352 wrote: »
    The reason they say they're not a military is because you don't want to spread out as Starfleet is and outright say you're a military organization. That sends anyone you come into contact with into a panic.

    No it would't.
    ash352 wrote: »
    They're primary focus is exploration, yes,

    Unlike a military who's primary focus is defence and offence in service of a nation.
    ash352 wrote: »
    but that doesn't change the fact that they are at their core a military organization.

    Yes it does, it's the very definition of their core. Exploration. You would't call a Earth military a 'humanitarian organisation at their core' even though they undertake vast amounts of humanitarian work across the globe every year. That would be a fundamental mischaracterisation of their role.
    jonsills wrote: »
    Artan, at this point I think it's necessary to ask you to define what "military" means to you.

    Because at this point, we're just yelling "Yes they are", "No they're not" at each other - and as the Argument Clinic sketch pointed out, an argument is more than just saying "No it isn't." ("Yes, it is!" "No, it isn't!")

    Very simple. a military is an organisation of a state or nation who's role it is to provide defence of said state or offence to protect it's interests as it's primary function. If it has ships with large capacity then let it undertake humanitarian work, if it has ships with nifty sensors let it undertake survey work.

    I.e. the opposite of Starfleet. It has survey ships with big guns, it has convoy ships with big guns. It's undertaking all its other duties first and can also undertake defence work if necessary.

    Or more simply...
    real-world military: Primary mission - defense
    Secondary mission - humanitarian relief, disaster response, teach, diplomacy etc.

    Starfleet: Primary mission - humanitarian relief, disaster response, teach, diplomacy etc.
    Secondary mission - defense

    that distinction is why starfleet isn't a military​​
    Yet, Captain Kirk also states that "I'm a soldier, not a diplomat." Kirk also characterizes Starfleet as a "combined service."

    The former refers to Kirk's feelings as a non-diplomat on the frontier, the second refers to what would be Pike's later (or earlier) statement 'Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Armada'
    Another gem from JJ. Pike was describing the Federation in that scene, not Starfleet. That's why I never liked that description, because Pike got it completely wrong.

    No. He got one word wrong, he said Federation instead of Starfleet. That's a mistake on the writers part and you can switch to the correct word in your head as easily as you can imagine Picard isn't calling 'never-an-officer-O'Brian' lieutenant.
    The same is true of the anti-military side. Starfleet is shown doing everything a true military would do. This is indisputable fact.

    From my above post...
    artan42 wrote: »
    Except it's not. All the bitching people make about how lax or deregulated things are in Starfleet and how that would never fly in their *insert particular favourite Earth military*?

    How you have Petty Officers out ranking lieutenants? How you can happily be first officer for decades turning down at least three offers of command and not hurt your career? How you can have field commissioned cadets out ranking properly commissioned ensigns? How you can have admirals in personal command of their own ships? How you can go straight from officer cadet to captain? Children as acting ensigns? How you can tell admirals to stuff it and not suffer any consequences? How you can have ships crewed exclusively by officers? How you can have up to 3 captains on-board? That's not even getting into Starfleets lack of saluting and marching codes etc., all that silly pomp and ceremony militaries use? Starfleet dosn't. They barely stand to attention.
    ​​

    The issue is people unable to look past their own preconceived ideas of what Starfleet should be to what it is directly stated to be i.e. not a military.

    Their statements that it goes to war is baseless as non-military organisations do that. Their statements that militaries do non-military work fail to take into account what an organisation is at it's core or what it's primary purpose is. Their arguments about what they perceive as military trappings just show they are unable to Google paramilitary or take stock of just how nonmilitary Starfleet actually is in the shows not in their heads. There are no arguments left that haven't been resolved for the pro-military side to throw other than back down the rabbit hole of repeating long debunked ones until I run out of will to post the same old rebuttals to them.
    jonsills wrote: »
    Picard said Starfleet wasn't military.

    Kirk and Sisko said it was.

    No they didn't. They both compared themselves to soldiers, they made no statements on Starfleet.
    Well, except these...

    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home

    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance

    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness

    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond


    Bottom line, Starfleet is a exploration, colonisation and humanitarian fleet organised very loosely along paramilitary lines with large, well defended ships that are capable of protecting the Federation if necessary.

    There is no stretching needed to come to this conclusion, it is presented, in canon, in the simplest terms possible with no need to come up with silly statements about the Federation trying to lie or disguise itself, no need to twist statements by characters (it is possible to feel like a soldier in the emergency services for goodness sake), and no need to force your own opinions onto the Shows founding and driving principle because you lack either imagination or Google.
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • ash352ash352 Member Posts: 231 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    Bottom line, Starfleet is a exploration, colonisation and humanitarian fleet organised very loosely along paramilitary lines with large, well defended ships that are capable of protecting the Federation if necessary.

    There is no stretching needed to come to this conclusion, it is presented, in canon, in the simplest terms possible with no need to come up with silly statements about the Federation trying to lie or disguise itself, no need to twist statements by characters (it is possible to feel like a soldier in the emergency services for goodness sake), and no need to force your own opinions onto the Shows founding and driving principle because you lack either imagination or Google.

    Refute the following points.

    Why does Starfleet engage in Court Martial proceedings? That is a strictly military function and does not occur in any other situation in a non-military, or para-military, organization. (Hint, they shouldn't at all if they aren't a military. The fact that they do means they are, in fact, a military organization)

    Why does Starfleet maintain a rank structure of the complexity and exact nature of the actual navy when para-military organizations do not do so to the same extent. If they were para-military they would have a guideline to follow but they would not have the exact same, ENFORCED, grouping of Commissioned, Warrant, and Enlisted.

    Taking your advice I googled Paramilitary and look what I found.

    "A paramilitary is a semi-militarized force whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military, but which is not included as part of a state's formal armed forces." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramilitary

    Please explain to me how you want to rely on a definition that is easily refuted when presented with the actual acts shown during the show itself. No dialog needs to be used. Going by what is shown and how Starfleet is organized it is not a Paramilitary organization, it is, in fact, an actual military. I did what you asked, I googled it. Did you not do the same?

    Funny enough, Starfleet fits all the criteria that makes up a Military organization. It's not a Paramilitary. It's the Coast Guard of the space, a military organization using the Naval ranking structure following military customs and traditions as well as having a ranking and disciplinary structure that performs other duties and only performs combat missions when necessary. You're flat out wrong so please stop trying to state that they aren't one. I proved it using your own stated reasoning to actually google something. Maybe you should have taken your own advice and googled it for yourself first.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 8,313 Arc User
    I see why we're talking past one another. You think of a military as composed primarily of warriors - those whose function is to do violence in support of their nation.

    Whereas I, and many others who have in fact served, see it as composed primarily of soldiers - those who go where they are told, and do what they are told, in service of their nation. That may sometimes be to go do violence; it may be to explore strange new worlds (as the Air Force and Navy have done, both in conjunction with NASA for space exploration and on their own for exploring the seas and mapping the lands); it may be to learn new things, to do significant medical research; it may be (and often is) to carry out humanitarian missions on behalf of other humans, frequently not even humans from their own nation (what the Marine Corps was up to in Somalia back in the day, for instance - trying very hard to get food assistance to the starving people, while also trying to keep it out of the hands of the warlords who were the very reason the people were starving).

    Since you define "military" so very narrowly, it becomes easy to claim, based entirely on the words of one character in TNG (who was a bit of a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou prig) and one character in two movies from a completely different continuity, that Starfleet "is not military", even when its actions plainly belie those words.

    (As for Kirk in STIV, you might recall that at the time, he and his crew weren't regarding themselves as in the service any more - they'd committed mutiny, assaulted a few officers, committed sabotage of the Excelsior, stolen a starship, then stolen another from a hostile foreign power before violating some pretty serious regs regarding time travel. They were, basically, being pirates.)
    "Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"

    - David Brin, "Those Eyes"
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,032 Bug Hunter
    edited March 2017
    ash352 wrote: »
    Refute the following points.

    Why does Starfleet engage in Court Martial proceedings? That is a strictly military function and does not occur in any other situation in a non-military, or para-military, organization. (Hint, they shouldn't at all if they aren't a military. The fact that they do means they are, in fact, a military organization)

    This has already been brought up. It's simply a disciplinary court with a military name. It's no more inherently military than a phaser canon is a tube chemically propelling a metal ball.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Why does Starfleet maintain a rank structure of the complexity and exact nature of the actual navy when para-military organizations do not do so to the same extent. If they were para-military they would have a guideline to follow but they would not have the exact same, ENFORCED, grouping of Commissioned, Warrant, and Enlisted.

    It's not the exact same as any military. The often brought up fact that commodore still exists is one example. The lack of NCOs is another. Flag officers acting as line officers is another. They follow established enforced lines like any other organisation with ranks.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Taking your advice I googled Paramilitary and look what I found.

    "A paramilitary is a semi-militarized force whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military, but which is not included as part of a state's formal armed forces." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramilitary

    Please explain to me how you want to rely on a definition that is easily refuted when presented with the actual acts shown during the show itself. No dialog needs to be used. Going by what is shown and how Starfleet is organized it is not a Paramilitary organization, it is, in fact, an actual military. I did what you asked, I googled it. Did you not do the same?

    Go on then. Where is Starfleet not an example of an organisation 'whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military'?

    I've posted an exhaustive list of how they differ from established militaries so the ' function are similar' requirement is fulfilled.

    I know it was a long post above, but it's all there.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Funny enough, Starfleet fits all the criteria that makes up a Military organization.

    Except it dosn't and repeating the same point without any evidence allows me to reject it without evidence. I won't though, I'll still provide it, because that's how I draw conclusions.
    ash352 wrote: »
    It's not a Paramilitary.

    Yes it is as I've shown above and before.
    ash352 wrote: »
    It's the Coast Guard of the space, a military organization using the Naval ranking structure following military customs and traditions as well as having a ranking and disciplinary structure that performs other duties and only performs combat missions when necessary.

    From my above post...
    artan42 wrote: »
    Except it's not. All the bitching people make about how lax or deregulated things are in Starfleet and how that would never fly in their *insert particular favourite Earth military*?

    How you have Petty Officers out ranking lieutenants? How you can happily be first officer for decades turning down at least three offers of command and not hurt your career? How you can have field commissioned cadets out ranking properly commissioned ensigns? How you can have admirals in personal command of their own ships? How you can go straight from officer cadet to captain? Children as acting ensigns? How you can tell admirals to stuff it and not suffer any consequences? How you can have ships crewed exclusively by officers? How you can have up to 3 captains on-board? That's not even getting into Starfleets lack of saluting and marching codes etc., all that silly pomp and ceremony militaries use? Starfleet dosn't. They barely stand to attention.
    ash352 wrote: »
    You're flat out wrong so please stop trying to state that they aren't one. I proved it using your own stated reasoning to actually google something. Maybe you should have taken your own advice and googled it for yourself first.

    You've yet to do any of that other than insisting it's exactly like all your favourite militaries without showing how it's like any of them and also without refuting all the ways it's not that I keep posting.

    I'm off to bed so you've got at least 7 hours to come up with something, anything.
    jonsills wrote: »
    I see why we're talking past one another. You think of a military as composed primarily of warriors - those whose function is to do violence in support of their nation.

    Whereas I, and many others who have in fact served, see it as composed primarily of soldiers - those who go where they are told, and do what they are told, in service of their nation. That may sometimes be to go do violence; it may be to explore strange new worlds (as the Air Force and Navy have done, both in conjunction with NASA for space exploration and on their own for exploring the seas and mapping the lands); it may be to learn new things, to do significant medical research; it may be (and often is) to carry out humanitarian missions on behalf of other humans, frequently not even humans from their own nation (what the Marine Corps was up to in Somalia back in the day, for instance - trying very hard to get food assistance to the starving people, while also trying to keep it out of the hands of the warlords who were the very reason the people were starving).

    Yes I've already addressed that. It's a primary vs. secondary mission situation.

    It's also a perfectly functional definition of a military that you've not done anything more than elaborate on. I've already said military's do all those other stuff, I've even given examples, it's however, not their primary job, just something they can be called upon to do if they have the time as they have the resources.
    jonsills wrote: »
    Since you define "military" so very narrowly, it becomes easy to claim, based entirely on the words of one character in TNG (who was a bit of a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou prig) and one character in two movies from a completely different continuity, that Starfleet "is not military", even when its actions plainly belie those words.

    Yes, actions of not being a military. Words that state they are not. And come one man, I would have expected you would be above the childish attempts to dismiss statements from the KT films that are about changes made prior to the timeline split. Starfleet was formed after ENT when MACO was disbanded and Starfleet ceased to become a military, that is what Scotty is referring to, no changes to the nature of Starfleet happen after the attack on the Kelvin except to make it more militaristic thanks to Abrams lack of interest in the franchise's core and later undone by Pegg's understanding of it.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • ash352ash352 Member Posts: 231 Arc User
    edited March 2017
    artan42 wrote: »
    This has already been brought up. It's simply a disciplinary court with a military name. It's no more inherently military than a phaser canon is a tube chemically propelling a metal ball.
    Incorrect. A court martial is a military court. No other organization except for military use them.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/court-martial
    "1. A military or naval court of officers appointed by a commander to try persons for offenses under military law.
    1. a military court appointed by a commander to try armed forces personnel charged with infractions of military law. "

    I will say it again, Court Martial's are ONLY used by Military groups, no one else. You are 100% completely and flat out wrong on this point. The fact that they use them means they are acting in a military fashion. The word you're looking for is a Tribunal, something both military and all other can and have used in the past, including those in Star Trek. The fact that they have used a Court Martial means they are a military organization.
    artan42 wrote: »
    It's not the exact same as any military. The often brought up fact that commodore still exists is one example. The lack of NCOs is another. Flag officers acting as line officers is another. They follow established enforced lines like any other organisation with ranks.

    Commodore may be an "antiquated rank" but it is still used to this day. So again, you're wrong on this point.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_(rank)

    There are NCO's. As stated BY YOU there are Petty Officers which ARE NCO's. You verified my point by trying to talk it down. You're wrong on this point.

    Commissioned Officers routinely are needed to fulfill multiple roles. In many cases you can have a higher ranked officer doing the job of a lower or a lower ranked officer doing the ranked of a higher officer. I served as NCOIC of S2 while I was in as a PFC, two full ranks below SGT the first NCO rank. We had two O1's serving in O3 positions because our unit was understaffed for those ranks and one O2 serving in a O1 position for 3 months because he knew the job better than anyone else and volunteered to keep doing it until a trained replacement was found. The fact that a Flag officer was acting as a Line officer is neither uncommon nor out of the norm for any branch of the military. Again, you're wrong on this point. Anyone who's been in any branch of service will tell you you are.

    artan42 wrote: »
    Go on then. Where is Starfleet not an example of an organisation 'whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military'?

    I've posted an exhaustive list of how they differ from established militaries so the ' function are similar' requirement is fulfilled.

    I know it was a long post above, but it's all there.
    They aren't functionally similar to one, they are functioning AS one. You're intentionally trying not to see this point to cling to your notion that they're not a true military, "because they say they aren't in the shows!"
    artan42 wrote: »
    Except it's not. All the bitching people make about how lax or deregulated things are in Starfleet and how that would never fly in their *insert particular favourite Earth military*?

    How you have Petty Officers out ranking lieutenants? How you can happily be first officer for decades turning down at least three offers of command and not hurt your career? How you can have field commissioned cadets out ranking properly commissioned ensigns? How you can have admirals in personal command of their own ships? How you can go straight from officer cadet to captain? Children as acting ensigns? How you can tell admirals to stuff it and not suffer any consequences? How you can have ships crewed exclusively by officers? How you can have up to 3 captains on-board? That's not even getting into Starfleets lack of saluting and marching codes etc., all that silly pomp and ceremony militaries use? Starfleet dosn't. They barely stand to attention.
    Petty Officers, or more correctly Warrant officers as Chief O'Brien is, are more than capable of pulling seniority over a Commissioned officer if the information is within the realm of the MOS they became a Warrant Officer in. This happens quite often as Commissioned officers almost always defer to the knowledge of the Warrant Officer as Warrant Officers specialize where as Commissioned officers do not. When a CW5 tells a full bird Colonel "Sir, this is a stupid thing to do and I highly advise against it" almost every time, unless you're actively being shot at, the Commissioned officer WILL take the advisement and not admonish the Warrant officer. In every case in the show that Chief O'Brien says something it's within the same leeway that is seen in the actual military. Again, you're wrong on this point.

    Turning down an offer of command happens for the exact same reasons as Commander Riker did it. You can turn down a promotion if you do not feel you deserve it or do not feel as though you can perform the duties as required at that time. You superior officers will take that into consideration. It *could* lead to you not getting any further promotions but in many cases if you explain why that is taken into account for the next time a promotion is at hand. There's nothing stated anywhere that you MUST accept or want any promotion past a certain point. If you're happy being a Major you're perfectly capable of being a career Major. Hell there were "carer specialists" in that they sit right below the first NCO rank of SGT for as long as possible because it means less decisions and ridiculous orders. Again, you're wrong on this point.

    A field promotion happens during a time of war and that commission carries with it the same rights, privileges, and responsibilities as a normal commission would. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_promotion#Types_of_Battlefield_Promotion Again, you're wrong on this point.

    In many cases the upper officers are all on first name basis just like it's seen in the show. My Battalion Commander had first name basis conversations with the commanding General. They also got into verbal arguments that sometimes came to the point of, "Sir I'm not going to make all my Soldiers follow that dumb TRIBBLE order because there's no point to it." It's similar to a PFC and a PV2 getting into an argument. Technically the PFC can order the PV2 around but that never happens.

    Ships are not crewed entirely by officers. As stated on Memory Alpha there are enlisted personnel on the ships. Those are all the various other crew members you see running around that aren't Commissioned officers. Did you actually think that random person in uniform walking down the hall with no rank insignia was a Commissioned officer?

    On board a naval ship traveling at sea saluting and other military courtesies are often not followed. Rank or "Sir/Ma'am" are still required as it shows in Star Trek. It really seems like you're trying to pull out "knowledge" that you actually don't have and are presenting it as fact. Go ask an actual naval officer of non-com and see what they say.

    The rest I'm guessing you're referring to the game itself and as such is not to be taken as cannon because those are gameplay adjustments. I really hope you're not seriously bringing up the fact the player character went from Cadet to Admiral though. I REALLY hope you're joking on this point because if you're not I'm going to call you out as being beyond stupid.
    artan42 wrote: »
    I'm off to bed so you've got at least 7 hours to come up with something, anything.

    After posting everything I did, please feel free to stop acting like you're correct. What's posted not only flat out disproves your points but honestly makes it look like you're not even trying to defend YOUR points or are making things up because you saw it in a movie and didn't bother to actually check with someone who was actually in and doing the thing you're claiming we're all doing. Try again and this time actually go try and get your own facts straight.
  • byozuma#0956 byozuma Member Posts: 502 Arc User
    edited March 2017
    Ash352, you're starting to sound like all you want to do is be contrary now. Starfleet and the Federation aren't a true military as much something akin to Japan's JSDF. A military force in name, just strong enough to defend it's borders and little else (which is why alot of Japanese are worried about the current political climate in the US). Using the Defiant prior as an example, it's the first and (as far as canon sources state) only purpose-built Federation warship as pointed out in a number of episodes of DS9. It was built to combat the Dominion threat during the war against them. Every other ship is multi-purpose to fill as many roles as feasibly possible without terrible compromises. Cite as many wikis as you want, canon sources like the movies and TV series all state the Federation's stance at some point with character lines quoted prior and this mantra; to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before.

    Append - I stand corrected, the Borg were a more substantial threat. Still stands as the only dedicated warship in the Federation fleet, it's armament on par with the larger vessels built for more varied roles.
    Post edited by byozuma#0956 on
    oldracesbanner.jpg
  • shadowfang240shadowfang240 Member Posts: 31,075 Arc User
    the defiant was built to combat the BORG, not the dominion - it was press-ganged into battle against the jem'hadar​​
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!

    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."

    How Game Devs SHOULD be interacted with:
    http://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/157238832062/i-remember-your-52080-rule-and-it-was-an-awesome

    "Curiosity is bad! It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed...and more importantly, it makes you poor!"

    "Beware of dog. Or possibly, enhanced, psycho-addicted, cybernetically-enhanced nightstalker death-dealing dog from hell."
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.

    Stand with Star Trek: The Animated Series content for STO! #TASforSTO
  • angarus1angarus1 Member Posts: 599 Arc User
    I would like to see more Vulcan ships in-game, yes. My Vulcan would appreciate it a lot.
  • wylonuswylonus Member Posts: 466 Arc User
    i may have propose concept. some fresh ideas.

    add "exclusive" bridge officer or new duty officer(s) that come with specific non-human ships, make those one per character, cant have same multiple officer on one ship, you can collect officers or duty crew from other ships since those officers are "unique".

    i would buy vulcan ship if they include some specific vulcan officers, same for andorian ships with thier own duty officers.
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,313 Arc User
    I would not mind seeing some Vulcan ships, and other member race's ships added into the game, even some ships that have a distinct style of that race implemented into the ships like what was done with the Romulan Multi-mission explorer ships. I could see something like the below ship done as a design that was inspired by aspects of the older vulcan designs.

    enterprise___f__my_version__by_colourbrand-d57gw57.jpg

    THough it would never be used, I do personally love the design of the ship actually. An could see a vulcan designer or captain creating and flying such a ship.
  • avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 2,210 Arc User
    That ship looks like it's out of proportion.
  • wakerobertswakeroberts Member Posts: 99 Arc User
    Artan, did you even read what my final opinion on the matter was? If you had you would realize that my statement was in agreement with yours.

    Plain and simple, the 21st century definition of what a military is, does not completely encompass the full function of Starfleet. I will say again, Starfleet is an amalgamation of the major executive functions of a government.
  • mtemplar86mtemplar86 Member Posts: 15 Arc User
    I for one would love a T6 Vulcan ship. I have a Vulcan captain with all Vulcan crew. It would be awesome to get the full build complete.
  • psiameesepsiameese Member Posts: 1,370 Arc User
    I also would enjoy end game worthy versions of a Vulcan designed starship being made available. From our C-Store.
    (/\) Exploring Star Trek Online Since July 2008 (/\)
    #TASforSTO
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 8,335 Arc User
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military
    The military, consisting of the Army, Navy and Air Force, and also called the armed forces, are forces authorised to use lethal and / or deadly force, and weapons, to support the interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually defined as defence of the state, and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions within a society...

    There is no question this applies to Starfleet.

    It doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because it has other functions in peacetime. It doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because it's organized differently than the military of <insert favorite real-life 21st century Earth nation-state here>. And it certainly doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because some people don't like to call it by that word.
  • mtemplar86mtemplar86 Member Posts: 15 Arc User
    psiameese wrote: »
    I also would enjoy end game worthy versions of a Vulcan designed starship being made available. From our C-Store.

    Yeah, we really need to be careful for what we ask Cryptic. If we aren't careful, it will end up in some lockbox and be over 150m on the market or 900 lobi.
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,032 Bug Hunter
    edited March 2017
    ash352 wrote: »
    Incorrect. A court martial is a military court. No other organization except for military use them.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/court-martial
    "1. A military or naval court of officers appointed by a commander to try persons for offenses under military law.
    1. a military court appointed by a commander to try armed forces personnel charged with infractions of military law. "

    I will say it again, Court Martial's are ONLY used by Military groups, no one else. You are 100% completely and flat out wrong on this point. The fact that they use them means they are acting in a military fashion. The word you're looking for is a Tribunal, something both military and all other can and have used in the past, including those in Star Trek. The fact that they have used a Court Martial means they are a military organization.

    For the sake of argument (as I can't find the last thread where this came up to copy my reply) I'll give you thins one. So you've found one single trait a military has over a paramilitary organisation. That gives you one solid piece of evidence Starfleet is a military and not a paramilitary.
    So that one for, innumerable against so far.
    ash352 wrote: »
    There are NCO's. As stated BY YOU there are Petty Officers which ARE NCO's. You verified my point by trying to talk it down. You're wrong on this point.

    Sorry, that should be very few, i.e. single examples on entire ships or stations. You know, just like a real military. Where the entire crew is made up of officers right?
    ash352 wrote: »
    The fact that a Flag officer was acting as a Line officer is neither uncommon nor out of the norm for any branch of the military. Again, you're wrong on this point. Anyone who's been in any branch of service will tell you you are.

    Funny because they tell me the exact opposite, constantly moaning about how Admirals can't have their own ships and so on. That's not me making that argument, that's them.
    ash352 wrote: »
    They aren't functionally similar to one, they are functioning AS one. You're intentionally trying not to see this point to cling to your notion that they're not a true military, "because they say they aren't in the shows!"

    Close, I'm actually posting evidence as to how they don't act or behave like one which is different to how the pro-military side sees it where they make a flat statement based on little canon evidence simply because they can't comprehend any other way it could be.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Petty Officers, or more correctly Warrant officers as Chief O'Brien is, are more than capable of pulling seniority over a Commissioned officer if the information is within the realm of the MOS they became a Warrant Officer in. This happens quite often as Commissioned officers almost always defer to the knowledge of the Warrant Officer as Warrant Officers specialize where as Commissioned officers do not. When a CW5 tells a full bird Colonel "Sir, this is a stupid thing to do and I highly advise against it" almost every time, unless you're actively being shot at, the Commissioned officer WILL take the advisement and not admonish the Warrant officer. In every case in the show that Chief O'Brien says something it's within the same leeway that is seen in the actual military. Again, you're wrong on this point.

    O'Brian is a Petty Officer not a warrant officer. That's outright stated in the show. And he holds the position of Chief of Operations, this means he physically out ranks officers, not just they take what he says under advisement, physically out ranks them as a head of department.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Turning down an offer of command happens for the exact same reasons as Commander Riker did it. You can turn down a promotion if you do not feel you deserve it or do not feel as though you can perform the duties as required at that time. You superior officers will take that into consideration. It *could* lead to you not getting any further promotions but in many cases if you explain why that is taken into account for the next time a promotion is at hand. There's nothing stated anywhere that you MUST accept or want any promotion past a certain point. If you're happy being a Major you're perfectly capable of being a career Major. Hell there were "carer specialists" in that they sit right below the first NCO rank of SGT for as long as possible because it means less decisions and ridiculous orders. Again, you're wrong on this point.

    Again, this is the same military folks online telling us it's career suicide for Riker to turn down several offers of promotion and that after the third he would never have ended up with the Titan, so it's your word against theirs.

    ash352 wrote: »
    A field promotion happens during a time of war and that commission carries with it the same rights, privileges, and responsibilities as a normal commission would. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_promotion#Types_of_Battlefield_Promotion Again, you're wrong on this point.

    I know what a field promotion is, however as the cadets are cadets they are still outranked by Nog and as the Valiant isn't their ship they can't even pull the 'captain outranks an admiral on their own ship' stuff.
    ash352 wrote: »
    In many cases the upper officers are all on first name basis just like it's seen in the show. My Battalion Commander had first name basis conversations with the commanding General. They also got into verbal arguments that sometimes came to the point of, "Sir I'm not going to make all my Soldiers follow that dumb **** order because there's no point to it." It's similar to a PFC and a PV2 getting into an argument. Technically the PFC can order the PV2 around but that never happens.

    And? Unless you're saying a military lacks ridged discipline all the time then it's not comparable to the lax protocols of Starfleet.
    ash352 wrote: »
    Ships are not crewed entirely by officers. As stated on Memory Alpha there are enlisted personnel on the ships. Those are all the various other crew members you see running around that aren't Commissioned officers. Did you actually think that random person in uniform walking down the hall with no rank insignia was a Commissioned officer?

    Those people without rank names ensign in dialogue? The scant few referred to as crewman? Yes, the ships are vastly overwhelmingly crewed with officers. The only exception is the TWoK films.
    ash352 wrote: »
    On board a naval ship traveling at sea saluting and other military courtesies are often not followed. Rank or "Sir/Ma'am" are still required as it shows in Star Trek. It really seems like you're trying to pull out "knowledge" that you actually don't have and are presenting it as fact. Go ask an actual naval officer of non-com and see what they say.

    Who said navy? The claim is that Starfleet is a military, not that it's specifically a navy, I'm not solely using naval protocols because nobody has made the claim it's a navy.
    ash352 wrote: »
    The rest I'm guessing you're referring to the game itself and as such is not to be taken as cannon because those are gameplay adjustments. I really hope you're not seriously bringing up the fact the player character went from Cadet to Admiral though. I REALLY hope you're joking on this point because if you're not I'm going to call you out as being beyond stupid.

    No. I'm referring to the plot of 09. It's how Kirk goes from Cadet to Captain in a few days.

    ash352 wrote: »
    After posting everything I did, please feel free to stop acting like you're correct. What's posted not only flat out disproves your points but honestly makes it look like you're not even trying to defend YOUR points or are making things up because you saw it in a movie and didn't bother to actually check with someone who was actually in and doing the thing you're claiming we're all doing. Try again and this time actually go try and get your own facts straight.

    Nice try at deflection. However, you've actually made an effort this time to post some evidence rather than just make claims, but they're still not as strong as evidence from the opposite side.
    Artan, did you even read what my final opinion on the matter was? If you had you would realize that my statement was in agreement with yours.

    I misread you as somebody else conflating your post with another. That's the downside of trying to reply to everyone and trying to avoid points falling through the gaps.
    warpangel wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military
    The military, consisting of the Army, Navy and Air Force, and also called the armed forces, are forces authorised to use lethal and / or deadly force, and weapons, to support the interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually defined as defence of the state, and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions within a society...

    There is no question this applies to Starfleet.

    Yes there is, look at the very first line. Starfleet is neither an Army, Navy and Air Force. And again at the last line, Starfleet does not 'may also have'. Those 'may also have' are its primary functions, not an optional extra. Starfleets optional extra is acting as a military.
    warpangel wrote: »
    It doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because it has other functions in peacetime.

    Other way around. It dosn't become a military just because it is the Federations only defence in wartime.
    warpangel wrote: »
    It doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because it's organized differently than the military of <insert favorite real-life 21st century Earth nation-state here>.

    Not by itself no, it's called supporting evidence.
    warpangel wrote: »
    And it certainly doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because some people don't like to call it by that word.

    I'm still going to take Scotty and Picard's words over yours until you show me your combadge.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 8,335 Arc User
    artan42 wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military
    The military, consisting of the Army, Navy and Air Force, and also called the armed forces, are forces authorised to use lethal and / or deadly force, and weapons, to support the interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually defined as defence of the state, and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions within a society...

    There is no question this applies to Starfleet.

    Yes there is, look at the very first line. Starfleet is neither an Army, Navy and Air Force. And again at the last line, Starfleet does not 'may also have'. Those 'may also have' are its primary functions, not an optional extra. Starfleets optional extra is acting as a military.
    Semantic nitpicking. Appears to be the whole extent of your argument.
    warpangel wrote: »
    It doesn't stop being the Federation's military just because it has other functions in peacetime.

    Other way around. It dosn't become a military just because it is the Federations only defence in wartime.
    Yes, in fact it does. It is the Federation's official defense force.
Sign In or Register to comment.