Well, now I'm just upset. I used google for the spelling, the attempt is mine. Google threw up something that didn't make sense to me when I reverse translated it. .
That's the downside on having a language with numerous cases, times and even genders - although reverse translating stuff ever really works, doesn't it?
I'd go with "Das tut mir leid @verärgertestarg. Gerne kannst du mein Deutsch verbessern, sollte ich es jemals sprechen" - 'Ich entschuldige mich' was actually grammatically correct, just not as common in that context. The "verärgertesschwein" made me chuckle, but I guess a Targ is a Targ is a Targ , also no article because strong declension nominative . "Feel free to do sth." translates to "Gerne etw. tun können" (lit: "Like to do sth.") "Fühle frei zu" makes no sense in German. And I generally suggest the use of "du" instead of "sie" since we know each other well enough to not use formal pronouns.
Well Sisko is a TNG era Human, he's just not very good at it. Archer is a 21st century Human in the body of a 22nd century one. When Sisko asked Bashir for Biomenetic gel, Bashir refused. If Archer had have asked, Phlox wouldn't have been able to give it to him quickly enough.
It's that bit with Bashir that I like, you wouldn't get that in TNG. Picard wouldn't even have asked Crusher because he wouldn't have entertained the idea. And it takes a toll on Sisko. His dictate in 'In the Pale Moonlight' to the computer is showing a man who's willing to sacrifice himself for the cause, which I believe pushes him further into his magic-space-jesus stuff that ultimately leads to him literally giving his life.
I'm willling to believe Sisko "broke" after Wolf 359 and got worse over time, which is completely understandable. TNG era people aren't resistant to trauma and stress, see Miles O'Brien. With "in the pale moonlight" however Sisko is desperate and already obsessed. If he didn't become magic space jesus he wouldn't have been able to reintegrate into society anyway.
It's a simple fix, you either give them little jobs (like phone operator) that won't tax their brains or you dress them in really tight clothing so they at least serve a function on the bridge.
But if they're the lead character it's much harder, you have to hire a team of writers with really conflicting views on what her character is (plus they have to overcompensate for the drawback that she's female) and eventually make it look as though she's borderline hysterical or otherwise mad.
Yeah, Janeway on her period. We saw this miles away when they announced it. But we can relate, PMS just screws with you...
Nah, seriously, it's staggering that we still haven't reached a point where women in a lead role can simply be people. That's some sort of mystery secret writers can't figure out.
On the upside it did give us the two TNG Marquis plots which were really quite good and did serve Ro well. It's still a huge shame that Ro never made it onto VOY or DS9.
A lot of very promising plots were more or less dropped (even before VOY which reinvented "dropping a plot") or cut. There are a few episodes in every show which I feel would have been great in a two parter or even mini arc but were slashed because they only had a single episode.
Not that far along, but directly after the bombing. We've had courtroom episodes of ST before, there was the Worf one that was slightly after the bombing (I think). Like I said, I don't mind either way if he was right to fire the missiles or not, I do dislike the disservive that was done to Sisko, Eddington, and the crew of DS9's characters for no accountability or even lip service to the fact that it's not part of most captains day to day activities.
Of course do they face extreme circumstances. But all to often extreme circumstances are a welcome excuse to immedeatly - and I mean immedeatly - abandon everything "we" pretend to fight for. The TNG crew facing such a situation would have been interesting.
^ 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
Yeah, Janeway on her period. We saw this miles away when they announced it. But we can relate, PMS just screws with you...
Nah, seriously, it's staggering that we still haven't reached a point where women in a lead role can simply be people. That's some sort of mystery secret writers can't figure out.
Well... maaaybe.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Of course do they face extreme circumstances. But all to often extreme circumstances are a welcome excuse to immedeatly - and I mean immedeatly - abandon everything "we" pretend to fight for. The TNG crew facing such a situation would have been interesting.
I think there is a point at which it's permissible to set aside your ideals, but the prerequisite has to be a bonafide existential threat. The Dominion and the Borg (and in STO, the Iconians) are big enough to qualify, but the Maquis definitely aren't.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Well, now I'm just upset. I used google for the spelling, the attempt is mine. Google threw up something that didn't make sense to me when I reverse translated it. .
That's the downside on having a language with numerous cases, times and even genders - although reverse translating stuff ever really works, doesn't it?
I'd go with "Das tut mir leid @verärgertestarg. Gerne kannst du mein Deutsch verbessern, sollte ich es jemals sprechen" - 'Ich entschuldige mich' was actually grammatically correct, just not as common in that context. The "verärgertesschwein" made me chuckle, but I guess a Targ is a Targ is a Targ , also no article because strong declension nominative . "Feel free to do sth." translates to "Gerne etw. tun können" (lit: "Like to do sth.") "Fühle frei zu" makes no sense in German. And I generally suggest the use of "du" instead of "sie" since we know each other well enough to not use formal pronouns.
So 'Das tut mir leid' instead of 'Ich entschuldige mich', 'I'm sorry' instead of 'I apologise'? What is the difference in context? The article for 'verärgertesschwein' was for two reasons, one because I assumed in the back of my head 'schwein' would be gendered but I didn't know which so I went for neuter, but also because I'm sure you used to be (and I can't read ) known as oneangrytarg, which I'd translate as 'the' rather than '1'. For the rest of it I'm afraid I just resorted to a cypher translation and made word for word replacements.
'Du' instead of 'sie' ugh , it's 'you' vs. 'thou' isn't it.
I think it's a very good thing that almost everybody knows English because it's murder to try work a language with different verb orders or formal/informal or gendered words .
Well Sisko is a TNG era Human, he's just not very good at it. Archer is a 21st century Human in the body of a 22nd century one. When Sisko asked Bashir for Biomenetic gel, Bashir refused. If Archer had have asked, Phlox wouldn't have been able to give it to him quickly enough.
It's that bit with Bashir that I like, you wouldn't get that in TNG. Picard wouldn't even have asked Crusher because he wouldn't have entertained the idea. And it takes a toll on Sisko. His dictate in 'In the Pale Moonlight' to the computer is showing a man who's willing to sacrifice himself for the cause, which I believe pushes him further into his magic-space-jesus stuff that ultimately leads to him literally giving his life.
I'm willling to believe Sisko "broke" after Wolf 359 and got worse over time, which is completely understandable. TNG era people aren't resistant to trauma and stress, see Miles O'Brien. With "in the pale moonlight" however Sisko is desperate and already obsessed. If he didn't become magic space jesus he wouldn't have been able to reintegrate into society anyway.
TNG series 1 would disagree with you there .
I do really admire O'Brien though, his TNG two parter with the introduction of his history with the Cardassians and into 'Empok Nor'. His character is really another example of a great carryover of TNG into DS9, because he adapts to the situations in both shows in a way few other characters never could (including Worf).
On the upside it did give us the two TNG Marquis plots which were really quite good and did serve Ro well. It's still a huge shame that Ro never made it onto VOY or DS9.
A lot of very promising plots were more or less dropped (even before VOY which reinvented "dropping a plot") or cut. There are a few episodes in every show which I feel would have been great in a two parter or even mini arc but were slashed because they only had a single episode.
Not that far along, but directly after the bombing. We've had courtroom episodes of ST before, there was the Worf one that was slightly after the bombing (I think). Like I said, I don't mind either way if he was right to fire the missiles or not, I do dislike the disservive that was done to Sisko, Eddington, and the crew of DS9's characters for no accountability or even lip service to the fact that it's not part of most captains day to day activities.
Of course do they face extreme circumstances. But all to often extreme circumstances are a welcome excuse to immedeatly - and I mean immedeatly - abandon everything "we" pretend to fight for. The TNG crew facing such a situation would have been interesting.
If it were TNG I'd imagine the bomb plot would have taken the full 40 mins and been about the relative morals of the act. In DS9 it was an insight into Sisko's character and in service of the overall narrative.
Neither approach is necessarily better it's just a bit of a departure from that series norms. DS9 doesn't spend a lot of time going over the issues which is what makes 'ItPM' so unusual and TNG doesn't often do fast paced, quick decision making episodes, which is why 'Redemption' (that's the one with the Klingon civil war right?) stands out for them.
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
Like I said before Trilithium Resin is a lot less deadly than most other things that are categorized as "biogenic weapons".
Even if it would have been non-lethal anaesthezine the act would have been wrong. But you can figure that something is fishy when you start rationalizing something as "it was less deadly than..."
The point I was making is that he was NOT trying to kill anyone. He merely forced them to leave a planet that they should have left years ago... How is that wrong? The Maquis were considered criminals by the Federation for multiple reasons, not just terrorism.
EDDINGTON claimed Sisko was compromising his ideals, but Sisko clearly disagreed. I could never take anything Eddington said seriously after he started comparing Sisko to Javert. Why? Because Javert relentlessly pursued someone for a trivial reason. Eddington tried to claim his actions(which were terroristic acts that threatened to start a war with the Cardassians) were as trivial as petty theft. It is for this reason that I consciously ignore him. His misrepresentation of the situation made him impossible to beleive.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
As a counterpoint... police often DO kill criminals. It's not normally their first course of action but depending on the circumstances it may happen. Seriously... do you think they carry guns for show?
no, they carry them for self-defense, and considering the sheer amount of paperwork and oversight EACH fired bullet ends up causing, an officer's sidearm is always discharged as an absolute LAST resort
and that's what sisko DIDN'T do - there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried before the mere thought of poisoning an entire world ever entered his mind
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
Okay, so here's something new to talk about. The TrekMovie.com Twitter just said the new series has signed Joe Menosky onto the writing team. He wrote a bunch of episodes of TNG, DS9, and VOY, including co-writing "Darmok" and "Year of Hell".
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
I know some cops. I've heard about how annoying that process is. But never once did any of them say that paperwork would stop them from doing what they thought was right. I joked with one of them about how he needed more practice because he missed. Some lady tried to run him over so he shot at her.
Most police aren't as nice as the Mounties. Shoot at them and they'll return fire, threaten to shoot someone else, and they'll shoot you if there's no easy alternative. There's a reason police snipers exist. It's because "last resort" comes around a lot faster IRL than it does in movies.
At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
@markhawkman wrote: "At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice."
Now you're just contradicting yourself. Eddington did exactly the same thing Sisko did using a different chemical that behaves the same way towards Cardassians as Sisko's weaponized trilithium resin behaves towards humans. For Chrissakes that was where Sisko got the idea. So how is okay for Sisko to do it and not okay for Eddington?
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
it's not my job to come up with someone else's non-law violating decisions
If you want to prove that they do in fact exist.. then yes, yes you do. Also, as I pointed out earlier... the Sisko's actions were NOT considered criminal by the Federation.
@markhawkman wrote: "At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice."
Now you're just contradicting yourself. Eddington did exactly the same thing Sisko did using a different chemical that behaves the same way towards Cardassians as Sisko's weaponized trilithium resin behaves towards humans. For Chrissakes that was where Sisko got the idea. So how is okay for Sisko to do it and not okay for Eddington?
Why is it unacceptable for a thief(Eddington) to shoot the man he's robbing(Cardassians) but acceptable for a policeman(the Sisko) to shoot the thief in question? It's not the methods used that determine whether an action is right or wrong, it is the REASON for those actions.
it's not my job to come up with someone else's non-law violating decisions
If you want to prove that they do in fact exist.. then yes, yes you do.
How about stationing capital ships in orbit of Cardassian colonies to make it impossible for Eddington to attack them? But that would require Sisko to give up on his personal vendetta and admit he needed help to bring Eddington down within the law.
Also, as I pointed out earlier... the Sisko's actions were NOT considered criminal by the Federation.
Neither did the Federation apparently consider Janeway allying with a species actively engaged in a state of genocidal war against her government to be treason, but that doesn't make it any less the case. Being protected by plot armor does not excuse the actions.
@markhawkman wrote: "At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice."
Now you're just contradicting yourself. Eddington did exactly the same thing Sisko did using a different chemical that behaves the same way towards Cardassians as Sisko's weaponized trilithium resin behaves towards humans. For Chrissakes that was where Sisko got the idea. So how is okay for Sisko to do it and not okay for Eddington?
Why is it unacceptable for a thief(Eddington) to shoot the man he's robbing(Cardassians) but acceptable for a policeman(the Sisko) to shoot the thief in question? It's not the methods used that determine whether an action is right or wrong, it is the REASON for those actions.
False equivalence. In civilized nations the police are not given carte blanche to shoot just anyone committing a crime: they are required to have a reasonable belief that the suspect presents a threat to either the officer or civilians, whereupon he is allowed to use force to defend only. Or have you been asleep for the entire last eighteen months of scrutiny on police use of force? I'm not speaking as an armchair analyst here: my uncle is a retired Orlando County sheriff's deputy who did have to kill people in the line of duty at least once.
Furthermore Sisko isn't shooting the thief. He's shooting an entire city that the thief possibly visited once.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Okay, so here's something new to talk about. The TrekMovie.com Twitter just said the new series has signed Joe Menosky onto the writing team. He wrote a bunch of episodes of TNG, DS9, and VOY, including co-writing "Darmok" and "Year of Hell".
nice attempt to right the ship, but sadly ignored by those wanting to maintain their BS debates.
Okay, so here's something new to talk about. The TrekMovie.com Twitter just said the new series has signed Joe Menosky onto the writing team. He wrote a bunch of episodes of TNG, DS9, and VOY, including co-writing "Darmok" and "Year of Hell".
nice attempt to right the ship, but sadly ignored by those wanting to maintain their BS debates.
Well, I'll keep trying. Menosky also wrote the Letheans' introductory episode, "Distant Voices", as well as co-writing "Scorpion" with Braga.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
it's not my job to come up with someone else's non-law violating decisions
If you want to prove that they do in fact exist.. then yes, yes you do.
How about stationing capital ships in orbit of Cardassian colonies to make it impossible for Eddington to attack them? But that would require Sisko to give up on his personal vendetta and admit he needed help to bring Eddington down within the law.
In what messed up reality do you think that would have worked?
1: It's the Neutral Zone, the presence of a Federation fleet is a treaty violation.
2: The Cardassian government would rather send a fleet of their own to firebomb the Maquis than let the Federation "protect" their colonies.
3: What do you think the Cardassian colonies would think of having alien ships stationed in orbit.... Ships from the same alien government they were at war with recently?
4: given the nature of the weapons used it'd probably take more than one ship per planet to mount an effective defense anyways.
5: What would those ships be called away from to do this task? The Federation isn't known for keeping ships sitting around inactive...
@markhawkman wrote: "At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice."
Now you're just contradicting yourself. Eddington did exactly the same thing Sisko did using a different chemical that behaves the same way towards Cardassians as Sisko's weaponized trilithium resin behaves towards humans. For Chrissakes that was where Sisko got the idea. So how is okay for Sisko to do it and not okay for Eddington?
Why is it unacceptable for a thief(Eddington) to shoot the man he's robbing(Cardassians) but acceptable for a policeman(the Sisko) to shoot the thief in question? It's not the methods used that determine whether an action is right or wrong, it is the REASON for those actions.
False equivalence. In civilized nations the police are not given carte blanche to shoot just anyone committing a crime: they are required to have a reasonable belief that the suspect presents a threat to either the officer or civilians, whereupon he is allowed to use force to defend only.
Strawman, no one said they were given carte blanche. And to "defend only" is a misnomer since defense means defending someone from attack.... "Defending" hostages may include using lethal force on their abductors. And that is pretty much what Eddington was trying to do, use the Cardassians as hostages until his demands were met.
Or have you been asleep for the entire last eighteen months of scrutiny on police use of force? I'm not speaking as an armchair analyst here: my uncle is a retired Orlando County sheriff's deputy who did have to kill people in the line of duty at least once.
You're no more or less an armchair analyst than I am.
Furthermore Sisko isn't shooting the thief. He's shooting an entire city that the thief possibly visited once.
You claim I used false equivalence then do the same? The Maquis that the Sisko attacked may or may not have been aware of Eddington's plots, but that doesn't make them innocent bystanders. Also, they were not shot.
Eddington proved he was not going to stop until forced to do so, either by his death, or other means. In case you forgot, he was planning to continue poisoning Cardassian colonies. Part of his surrender was turning over his Cobalt Diselinide stockpiles to the Sisko.
it's not my job to come up with someone else's non-law violating decisions
If you want to prove that they do in fact exist.. then yes, yes you do.
How about stationing capital ships in orbit of Cardassian colonies to make it impossible for Eddington to attack them? But that would require Sisko to give up on his personal vendetta and admit he needed help to bring Eddington down within the law.
In what messed up reality do you think that would have worked?
1: It's the Neutral Zone, the presence of a Federation fleet is a treaty violation.
Yes it is. So is USS Defiant having a cloaking device. Treaties can have exceptions made to them if the signatories agree. And clearly the Federation has permission from the Cardassians to operate warships inside the DMZ or else Defiant and Malinche wouldn't be out there at all.
2: The Cardassian government would rather send a fleet of their own to firebomb the Maquis than let the Federation "protect" their colonies.
You're forgetting that at this point in DS9's storyline the Cardassian dictatorship that actually fought the war against the Federation was overthrown about eighteen months ago and a Federation-friendly democracy is in charge. And by the way? During that eighteen months they also had to deal with a Klingon invasion, to which I give much of the credit for the Maquis being as successful as they were.
3: What do you think the Cardassian colonies would think of having alien ships stationed in orbit.... Ships from the same alien government they were at war with recently?
Probably similar to what the inhabitants of Bryma thought when three Starfleet runabouts arrived in orbit to stop a Maquis attack against a Cardassian weapons depot in "The Maquis, Part II". And considering they're there to prevent a terrorist attack against them personally, not against a military site that happens to be located on their planet? I'd be grumpy but accepting.
4: given the nature of the weapons used it'd probably take more than one ship per planet to mount an effective defense anyways.
5: What would those ships be called away from to do this task? The Federation isn't known for keeping ships sitting around inactive...
I dunno, where'd they get the thousands-strong fleets the Federation marshaled for the Dominion war half a season later? By this point in the series Ron Moore's intent was that Starfleet had gone through a massive buildup after Wolf 359: where the loss of 39 starships was a crippling blow in 2366, by 2373 Starfleet has around 30,000 effectives. Just pull a few ships from less-critical core areas that aren't under threat, such as around Earth, Vulcan, and Andoria.
Strawman, no one said they were given carte blanche. And to "defend only" is a misnomer since defense means defending someone from attack.... "Defending" hostages may include using lethal force on their abductors. And that is pretty much what Eddington was trying to do, use the Cardassians as hostages until his demands were met.
And that's exactly the point: "what Eddington was trying to do". Not "what the inhabitants of Solosos III and Tracken II were trying to do". Do you likewise blame the entire population of the Middle East for 9/11?
You claim I used false equivalence then do the same? The Maquis that the Sisko attacked may or may not have been aware of Eddington's plots, but that doesn't make them innocent bystanders. Also, they were not shot.
And we're right back to that pesky "civilian target" concept. Once again, paying lip service to a cause does not make you an active part of that cause. There is zero evidence given that the citizens of either Solosos III or Tracken II were actively involved in any activities that would legitimize them as a target for military force; Sisko merely targeted them because they were conveniently located. And even if some of them were active participants, that still doesn't give Sisko the right to attack all of them.
As for being shot? Don't blame me when I use your own analogy against you.
Eddington proved he was not going to stop until forced to do so, either by his death, or other means. In case you forgot, he was planning to continue poisoning Cardassian colonies.
Which does not give Sisko the right to reciprocate.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
And there you go making wild claims with no evidence to back them up.... You say the planets in question were merely sympathetic to the Maquis and had no actual involvement with any Maquis activities..... Except that the episode states that it was a "Maquis colony". So yes, the colonies the Sisko attacked were NOT as innocent as you keep trying to portray them to be.
At which point your entire argument falls apart as you keep trying to portray them as innocent bystanders.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
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.
unless you're deluded enough to believe the 'evul' maquis employ CHILD soldiers
They were evil yes, but this sort of thing falls under the same aspect of the laws of war that permits bombing normally protected sites if there are weapons being stored there.
The question is about the site as a whole and not the individuals on site.
I think the main in story reason behind why Sisko could get away with something like that was because it upheld the political status quo between the Federation and Cardassians. The Maquis (whom the Cardassian's officially viewed as a part of the Federation) had effectively killed a Cardassian world, there was no way other than an even world for a world swap that something like that would go unchallenged.
The situation is pretty much on the same level as the Death Star roaming around your space, the threat of the Maquis poisoning entire worlds required swift decisive action. Was the decision morally disgusting? Certainly, they never pretended it wasn't. However it was ultimately the kind of decisive move that was needed, even if Sisko managed to catch Eddington it wouldn't end the threat posed by the Maquis staging repeat strikes. They needed to understand that the risks of such attacks would outweigh any perceived rewards they might gain.
The fact that they never try to sugar coat the decision (or others like it) is one of the better aspects of DS9's storytelling. It isn't glamorized, it simply happens and the viewer is trusted enough to make their own judgments.
In contrast TNG would often make dubious moral decisions, but would either dress them up with grandiose philosophical bluster or would simply run away from the consequences at the end of the episode and never look back.
For example:
-Picard's infamous "let there be polygamy" decision which he imposed on the refugees from two colonies that had to be evacuated.
-Riker and Pulaski murdering clones without consequence or discussion, or Worf murdering an alien head of state in cold blood with little more than a frown from Picard.
-The time that Picard refused to accept refugees from a fascist totalitarian human colony world.
-Plus all the times Picard would choose to watch strangers die because it offended his enlightened world view to step in and save them from "the natural course of their evolution".
I'm not even going to go into Archer or Mad Kathy's actions, their decisions are infamous in a different way.
And there you go making wild claims with no evidence to back them up.... You say the planets in question were merely sympathetic to the Maquis and had no actual involvement with any Maquis activities..... Except that the episode states that it was a "Maquis colony". So yes, the colonies the Sisko attacked were NOT as innocent as you keep trying to portray them to be.
At which point your entire argument falls apart as you keep trying to portray them as innocent bystanders.
Wrong again. I don't claim that there weren't people actively involved in the Maquis on the planets, I observe that it is literally impossible that every single person on the planet was actively involved in the Maquis. That is what would be required to justify an attack that would displace every single person on the planet.
unless you're deluded enough to believe the 'evul' maquis employ CHILD soldiers
They were evil yes, but this sort of thing falls under the same aspect of the laws of war that permits bombing normally protected sites if there are weapons being stored there.
The question is about the site as a whole and not the individuals on site.
Wrong: Sisko specifically chose a weapon that would be lethal to people but leave the planet and everything on it intact. The attack was against the individuals on site, not against the site itself, which makes the nature of the residents the sole determining factor for the legitimacy of the target.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
There have already been Official Trek Barbie dolls (1996), I have them.
Barbie was a Yeoman Rand look-a-like and Ken was a Capt. Kirk look-a-like.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
You like quoting the real-world laws of war, but only when it suits you. Well, remember that incident a while back where Israel blew up a Jordanian neighborhood? Guess what the LoAC had to say about that? NOTHING! Jordanian citizens had hidden rocket launchers in their houses and were firing them across the border into Israel. That made them valid targets, the presence of women and children does not prevent a building from being a military target.
I think the main in story reason behind why Sisko could get away with something like that was because it upheld the political status quo between the Federation and Cardassians. The Maquis (whom the Cardassian's officially viewed as a part of the Federation) had effectively killed a Cardassian world, there was no way other than an even world for a world swap that something like that would go unchallenged.
The situation is pretty much on the same level as the Death Star roaming around your space, the threat of the Maquis poisoning entire worlds required swift decisive action. Was the decision morally disgusting? Certainly, they never pretended it wasn't. However it was ultimately the kind of decisive move that was needed, even if Sisko managed to catch Eddington it wouldn't end the threat posed by the Maquis staging repeat strikes. They needed to understand that the risks of such attacks would outweigh any perceived rewards they might gain.
This^ The situation called for VERY decisive action. The Maquis had to be shown that neither the Cardassians nor Federation would tolerate their actions.
I really hope CBS Studios doesn't plan on running ads/commercials for their streaming service when the new Star Trek series comes out. I know they were talking about having a version where you pay something like $10 a month for no commercials (I pay $15 for Netflix), but there's talking and then there's doing.
I'd love to watch the new Star Trek series, but paying a subscription fee for a service where I'm going to get hit with commercials regardless is one of those things where I'm feeling ethically obligated not to do business with them.
Here's hoping they figure that out before it gets released.
You like quoting the real-world laws of war, but only when it suits you. Well, remember that incident a while back where Israel blew up a Jordanian neighborhood? Guess what the LoAC had to say about that? NOTHING! Jordanian citizens had hidden rocket launchers in their houses and were firing them across the border into Israel. That made them valid targets, the presence of women and children does not prevent a building from being a military target..
We're not talking about a building. We're talking about an entire planet with a population minimum thousands of people. A Maquis raider has a crew of a couple dozen, a Peregrine fighter has a crew of two.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
4: given the nature of the weapons used it'd probably take more than one ship per planet to mount an effective defense anyways.
5: What would those ships be called away from to do this task? The Federation isn't known for keeping ships sitting around inactive...
I dunno, where'd they get the thousands-strong fleets the Federation marshaled for the Dominion war half a season later? By this point in the series Ron Moore's intent was that Starfleet had gone through a massive buildup after Wolf 359: where the loss of 39 starships was a crippling blow in 2366, by 2373 Starfleet has around 30,000 effectives. Just pull a few ships from less-critical core areas that aren't under threat, such as around Earth, Vulcan, and Andoria.
I still maintain it was an ideological and moral blow, not a resources one.
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
I really hope CBS Studios doesn't plan on running ads/commercials for their streaming service when the new Star Trek series comes out. I know they were talking about having a version where you pay something like $10 a month for no commercials (I pay $15 for Netflix), but there's talking and then there's doing.
I'd love to watch the new Star Trek series, but paying a subscription fee for a service where I'm going to get hit with commercials regardless is one of those things where I'm feeling ethically obligated not to do business with them.
Here's hoping they figure that out before it gets released.
considering the teaser we've seen was released at an advertiser event.....
and can you guys whining and moaning about sisko go get yer own thread already... preferrably a soundproof one with curtains
Comments
That's the downside on having a language with numerous cases, times and even genders - although reverse translating stuff ever really works, doesn't it?
I'd go with "Das tut mir leid @verärgertestarg. Gerne kannst du mein Deutsch verbessern, sollte ich es jemals sprechen" - 'Ich entschuldige mich' was actually grammatically correct, just not as common in that context. The "verärgertesschwein" made me chuckle, but I guess a Targ is a Targ is a Targ
I'm willling to believe Sisko "broke" after Wolf 359 and got worse over time, which is completely understandable. TNG era people aren't resistant to trauma and stress, see Miles O'Brien. With "in the pale moonlight" however Sisko is desperate and already obsessed. If he didn't become magic space jesus he wouldn't have been able to reintegrate into society anyway.
Yeah, Janeway on her period. We saw this miles away when they announced it. But we can relate, PMS just screws with you...
Nah, seriously, it's staggering that we still haven't reached a point where women in a lead role can simply be people. That's some sort of mystery secret writers can't figure out.
A lot of very promising plots were more or less dropped (even before VOY which reinvented "dropping a plot") or cut. There are a few episodes in every show which I feel would have been great in a two parter or even mini arc but were slashed because they only had a single episode.
Of course do they face extreme circumstances. But all to often extreme circumstances are a welcome excuse to immedeatly - and I mean immedeatly - abandon everything "we" pretend to fight for. The TNG crew facing such a situation would have been interesting.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Well... maaaybe.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
I think there is a point at which it's permissible to set aside your ideals, but the prerequisite has to be a bonafide existential threat. The Dominion and the Borg (and in STO, the Iconians) are big enough to qualify, but the Maquis definitely aren't.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
So 'Das tut mir leid' instead of 'Ich entschuldige mich', 'I'm sorry' instead of 'I apologise'? What is the difference in context? The article for 'verärgertesschwein' was for two reasons, one because I assumed in the back of my head 'schwein' would be gendered but I didn't know which so I went for neuter, but also because I'm sure you used to be (and I can't read
'Du' instead of 'sie' ugh
I think it's a very good thing that almost everybody knows English because it's murder to try work a language with different verb orders or formal/informal or gendered words
TNG series 1 would disagree with you there
I do really admire O'Brien though, his TNG two parter with the introduction of his history with the Cardassians and into 'Empok Nor'. His character is really another example of a great carryover of TNG into DS9, because he adapts to the situations in both shows in a way few other characters never could (including Worf).
If it were TNG I'd imagine the bomb plot would have taken the full 40 mins and been about the relative morals of the act. In DS9 it was an insight into Sisko's character and in service of the overall narrative.
Neither approach is necessarily better it's just a bit of a departure from that series norms. DS9 doesn't spend a lot of time going over the issues which is what makes 'ItPM' so unusual and TNG doesn't often do fast paced, quick decision making episodes, which is why 'Redemption' (that's the one with the Klingon civil war right?) stands out for them.
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!
EDDINGTON claimed Sisko was compromising his ideals, but Sisko clearly disagreed. I could never take anything Eddington said seriously after he started comparing Sisko to Javert. Why? Because Javert relentlessly pursued someone for a trivial reason. Eddington tried to claim his actions(which were terroristic acts that threatened to start a war with the Cardassians) were as trivial as petty theft. It is for this reason that I consciously ignore him. His misrepresentation of the situation made him impossible to beleive.
My character Tsin'xing
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
My character Tsin'xing
and that's what sisko DIDN'T do - there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried before the mere thought of poisoning an entire world ever entered his mind
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Most police aren't as nice as the Mounties. Shoot at them and they'll return fire, threaten to shoot someone else, and they'll shoot you if there's no easy alternative. There's a reason police snipers exist. It's because "last resort" comes around a lot faster IRL than it does in movies.
At any rate... Since you said "there were plenty of other things he could've (and should've) tried"... I'd like to see you list them and explain why you feel they would be a better course of action. You see.... The Sisko had already done many things to stop Eddington and chasing Eddington around the galaxy while Eddington's cohorts poisoned Cardassians.... He knew that was a fool's choice.
My character Tsin'xing
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Now you're just contradicting yourself. Eddington did exactly the same thing Sisko did using a different chemical that behaves the same way towards Cardassians as Sisko's weaponized trilithium resin behaves towards humans. For Chrissakes that was where Sisko got the idea. So how is okay for Sisko to do it and not okay for Eddington?
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
My character Tsin'xing
Neither did the Federation apparently consider Janeway allying with a species actively engaged in a state of genocidal war against her government to be treason, but that doesn't make it any less the case. Being protected by plot armor does not excuse the actions.
False equivalence. In civilized nations the police are not given carte blanche to shoot just anyone committing a crime: they are required to have a reasonable belief that the suspect presents a threat to either the officer or civilians, whereupon he is allowed to use force to defend only. Or have you been asleep for the entire last eighteen months of scrutiny on police use of force? I'm not speaking as an armchair analyst here: my uncle is a retired Orlando County sheriff's deputy who did have to kill people in the line of duty at least once.
Furthermore Sisko isn't shooting the thief. He's shooting an entire city that the thief possibly visited once.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
nice attempt to right the ship, but sadly ignored by those wanting to maintain their BS debates.
Well, I'll keep trying. Menosky also wrote the Letheans' introductory episode, "Distant Voices", as well as co-writing "Scorpion" with Braga.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
1: It's the Neutral Zone, the presence of a Federation fleet is a treaty violation.
2: The Cardassian government would rather send a fleet of their own to firebomb the Maquis than let the Federation "protect" their colonies.
3: What do you think the Cardassian colonies would think of having alien ships stationed in orbit.... Ships from the same alien government they were at war with recently?
4: given the nature of the weapons used it'd probably take more than one ship per planet to mount an effective defense anyways.
5: What would those ships be called away from to do this task? The Federation isn't known for keeping ships sitting around inactive... Strawman, no one said they were given carte blanche. And to "defend only" is a misnomer since defense means defending someone from attack.... "Defending" hostages may include using lethal force on their abductors. And that is pretty much what Eddington was trying to do, use the Cardassians as hostages until his demands were met. You're no more or less an armchair analyst than I am. You claim I used false equivalence then do the same? The Maquis that the Sisko attacked may or may not have been aware of Eddington's plots, but that doesn't make them innocent bystanders. Also, they were not shot.
Eddington proved he was not going to stop until forced to do so, either by his death, or other means. In case you forgot, he was planning to continue poisoning Cardassian colonies. Part of his surrender was turning over his Cobalt Diselinide stockpiles to the Sisko.
My character Tsin'xing
You're forgetting that at this point in DS9's storyline the Cardassian dictatorship that actually fought the war against the Federation was overthrown about eighteen months ago and a Federation-friendly democracy is in charge. And by the way? During that eighteen months they also had to deal with a Klingon invasion, to which I give much of the credit for the Maquis being as successful as they were.
Probably similar to what the inhabitants of Bryma thought when three Starfleet runabouts arrived in orbit to stop a Maquis attack against a Cardassian weapons depot in "The Maquis, Part II". And considering they're there to prevent a terrorist attack against them personally, not against a military site that happens to be located on their planet? I'd be grumpy but accepting.
I dunno, where'd they get the thousands-strong fleets the Federation marshaled for the Dominion war half a season later? By this point in the series Ron Moore's intent was that Starfleet had gone through a massive buildup after Wolf 359: where the loss of 39 starships was a crippling blow in 2366, by 2373 Starfleet has around 30,000 effectives. Just pull a few ships from less-critical core areas that aren't under threat, such as around Earth, Vulcan, and Andoria.
And that's exactly the point: "what Eddington was trying to do". Not "what the inhabitants of Solosos III and Tracken II were trying to do". Do you likewise blame the entire population of the Middle East for 9/11?
And we're right back to that pesky "civilian target" concept. Once again, paying lip service to a cause does not make you an active part of that cause. There is zero evidence given that the citizens of either Solosos III or Tracken II were actively involved in any activities that would legitimize them as a target for military force; Sisko merely targeted them because they were conveniently located. And even if some of them were active participants, that still doesn't give Sisko the right to attack all of them.
As for being shot? Don't blame me when I use your own analogy against you.
Which does not give Sisko the right to reciprocate.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
At which point your entire argument falls apart as you keep trying to portray them as innocent bystanders.
My character Tsin'xing
unless you're deluded enough to believe the 'evul' maquis employ CHILD soldiers
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
The question is about the site as a whole and not the individuals on site.
My character Tsin'xing
metv.com/stories/spock-kirk-and-uhura-get-the-barbie-treatment-for-the-50th-anniversary-of-star-trek
Looks more like them then the toys sold back in the '60s.
metv.com/stories/william-shatner-says-he-wants-to-reprise-his-role-of-captain-kirk-on-star-trek
The situation is pretty much on the same level as the Death Star roaming around your space, the threat of the Maquis poisoning entire worlds required swift decisive action. Was the decision morally disgusting? Certainly, they never pretended it wasn't. However it was ultimately the kind of decisive move that was needed, even if Sisko managed to catch Eddington it wouldn't end the threat posed by the Maquis staging repeat strikes. They needed to understand that the risks of such attacks would outweigh any perceived rewards they might gain.
The fact that they never try to sugar coat the decision (or others like it) is one of the better aspects of DS9's storytelling. It isn't glamorized, it simply happens and the viewer is trusted enough to make their own judgments.
In contrast TNG would often make dubious moral decisions, but would either dress them up with grandiose philosophical bluster or would simply run away from the consequences at the end of the episode and never look back.
For example:
-Picard's infamous "let there be polygamy" decision which he imposed on the refugees from two colonies that had to be evacuated.
-Riker and Pulaski murdering clones without consequence or discussion, or Worf murdering an alien head of state in cold blood with little more than a frown from Picard.
-The time that Picard refused to accept refugees from a fascist totalitarian human colony world.
-Plus all the times Picard would choose to watch strangers die because it offended his enlightened world view to step in and save them from "the natural course of their evolution".
I'm not even going to go into Archer or Mad Kathy's actions, their decisions are infamous in a different way.
Wrong: Sisko specifically chose a weapon that would be lethal to people but leave the planet and everything on it intact. The attack was against the individuals on site, not against the site itself, which makes the nature of the residents the sole determining factor for the legitimacy of the target.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
There have already been Official Trek Barbie dolls (1996), I have them.
Barbie was a Yeoman Rand look-a-like and Ken was a Capt. Kirk look-a-like.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
This^ The situation called for VERY decisive action. The Maquis had to be shown that neither the Cardassians nor Federation would tolerate their actions.
My character Tsin'xing
I'd love to watch the new Star Trek series, but paying a subscription fee for a service where I'm going to get hit with commercials regardless is one of those things where I'm feeling ethically obligated not to do business with them.
Here's hoping they figure that out before it gets released.
You know, I think your real problem is lacking a sense of scale.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I still maintain it was an ideological and moral blow, not a resources one.
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!
considering the teaser we've seen was released at an advertiser event.....
and can you guys whining and moaning about sisko go get yer own thread already... preferrably a soundproof one with curtains