Daniels is Section 31

markhawkman

feiqa wrote: »

Dougherty's plan was unbelievably STUPID! I am not defending the Baku as a species, nor am I calling their world paradise. And yes they had a wonderful effect there. One worthy of collecting. They were effectively using dynamite and a bulldozer to collect flower nectar. Maybe the sona'a were right and they had a process that worked. But Dougherty has zero proof of that. They don't know why the thermietic radiation cause rejuvenation. And they don't understand how the collector was going to pull the right mix of the stuff into a container. Therefore the mission as done was idiotic. Based on the other two missions where it worked or would have worked. This smells of run for glory not a victory.

Apologies if I sound rough. But the one part I hate is when people say Doughtery was right. Minored with how evil the baku were for denying anyone else the wonders of their planet. They are so selfish. No one asked them. If you want to make sandwiches. I am not selfish for not giving you the bread in my apartment to make them, if you never asked. And it does not give you the right to dynamite my apartment for it.

Answer a few questions. How long do the youth particles last in storage?
When if ever will the rings recover to make more of those particles?
If you answer they won't to the second question. Then you traded an infinite resource for a finite one. Now pick who lives a long time because of that.

Dougherty was right... about the radiation being a wonder drug. He was also right that the Son'a were untrustworthy. Beyond that... not so much. Had the collector been used it was equally likely to blow itself up as achieving the intended result. It wasn't proven to work, AND it was believed that using it would have created a massive radiation burst. It's hard to guess what the effect of that would have been.

In fact Dougherty said that the ONLY reason they had chosen to go through with it was that it was part of their deal with the Son'a. the Son'a give them the tech and the Feds use it to collect radiation to reverse the aging of the Son'a. THAT was the only reason the Collector was being used.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

artan42

feiqa wrote: »

Apologies if I sound rough. But the one part I hate is when people say Doughtery was right. Minored with how evil the baku were for denying anyone else the wonders of their planet. They are so selfish. No one asked them. If you want to make sandwiches. I am not selfish for not giving you the bread in my apartment to make them, if you never asked. And it does not give you the right to dynamite my apartment for it.

Answer a few questions. How long do the youth particles last in storage?
When if ever will the rings recover to make more of those particles?
If you answer they won't to the second question. Then you traded an infinite resource for a finite one. Now pick who lives a long time because of that.

I wasn't on Dougherty's side, merely explaining what I thought his plan was. I also think it was a stupid plan by a stupid character in a stupid film.

But were the So'na planning to collect all of the rings? If not then Dougherty could have been planning to watch and see if the amount the So'na collected would decay or things like that before coming up with a more Federation way of hitting the problem.​​

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

artan42

I think Beyond has just settled the military thing .

legendarylycan

it was settled in '09 when pike called it a 'peacekeeping and humanitarian armada', but that didn't stop anyone regardless

however, just for humor's sake...what did beyond add to the argument pot? keep in mind that some still haven't seen the film, so spoiler tag it​​

artan42

[spoiler]The MACOs were disbanded. What happened? We did sir. Starfleet isn't a military organisation.

Scotty and Kirk talking about an Ex MACO.

[/spoiler]

legendarylycan

slash has to go the other way:

like so /

​​

artan42

Got it thanks.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

artan42

oliviaclaire wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

I think Beyond has just settled the military thing .

shadowfang240 wrote: »

it was settled in '09 when pike called it a 'peacekeeping and humanitarian armada', but that didn't stop anyone regardless

The so-called "alternate reality"? If you two say so.

The alternate reality that didn't split until after MACO were already disbanded and the non military Starfleet set up? Yes, that alternate reality.
The alternate reality that's even more militarised than the prime one? Yes, that alternate reality.
The alternate reality with space marine outfits for Starfleet? Yes, that alternate reality.

Not a military.

artan42 wrote: »

The MACOs were disbanded. What happened? We did sir. Starfleet isn't a military organisation.

Scotty and Kirk talking about an Ex MACO.

Star Trek: Into Darkness

SCOTT: That's what scares me. This is clearly a military operation. ls that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers.
KIRK: Sign for the torpedoes, that's an order.
SCOTT: Right, well, you leave me no choice but to resign my duties.
KIRK: Oh, come on, Scotty.
SCOTT: You're giving me no choice, sir. I will not stand by
KIRK: You're not giving me much of a choice. Will you just make an exception and sign
SCOTT: Do you accept my resignation or not?
KIRK: I do!
KIRK: I do. You are relieved, Mister Scott.

And? Did you read the dialogue you're posting. Scotty is been given a mission outside of Starfleet's parameters. Not a military.

And why was Scotty so surprised, considering that the new Enterprise apparently has at least 9-12 individual torpedo tubes, visually, on each side, and perhaps 72 or more torpedo tubes in total?

Torpedos they know about, not new fangled ones that he dosn't understand. He elaborated more in the scene talking about unknown energies and the warp core. His objection to the torpedos is not that they have their own, but rather that he's not allowed to investigate them.



As the post on TrekBBS states:

There are 72 of these torpedo tubes. There are 36 on each side, and they are located on either side of what would be main engineering.

The area where they were being loaded is specifically referred to as the "weapons bay".

Seriously! Why the hell are you mentioning that to me? I'm the one that thinks it's reasonable Starfleet ships are heavily armed. It's you that thinks civilian ships shouldn't be armed no matter the terrain because only military ships carry so much fire power.

Back to the so-called "prime universe", see DS9: "Siege of AR-558"



Reese, a Starfleet soldier stationed on AR-558 in 2375.

NOG: That soldier over there. You see his necklace? Those are Ketracel white tubes.

Colloquialism from a rooky.

Colonel West, a Starfleet officer, reinstated in the VHS version of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

While identified in dialogue as a "colonel", West wore the uniform of a Starfleet vice admiral (equivalent to a lieutenant general).

Genuine mistake that allows for other things like lieutenant 'never an officer' O'Brien.

The display that West shows during the briefing, does mention a Starfleet Marine Corps, suggesting (along with his rank) that West is actually a Marine himself.

Unreadable and on the same level as the giant duck in the ent D's MSD.

DS9: "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges"

BASHIR: Sorry to disappoint you. Admiral Ross and his staff will be discussing the exciting military issues.

Issues that Starfleet is interacting in due to their status as the Federations paramilitary.

[later in the episode]

BASHIR: How long has Koval been working for Starfleet?
ROSS: He's been providing the Federation with critical military intelligence for over a year.

Issues on the military actions Starfleet is engaged in. They are in a war you know.

Rick Berman Talks 18 Years of Trek In Extensive Oral History

Berman notes that veterans feel Sisko is "the most believable" as a military commander of the Star Trek captains.

Off screen so non-canon. The sound of the bottom of a barrel being scraped.

Of course, it's already been settled that Starfleet does not consider itself to be either civilian or paramilitary. The reason why they're still dragging the lie about not being a military is because Star Trek doesn't respect its audience.

It considers itself both and loudly about it. You are completely unable to respect that loud onscreen dialogue from onscreen canon characters instead preferring to believe that the show should respect you and your beliefs and not the other way around.

It seems you've been reduced to finding scripts and Ctrl+F 'military' and assuming that all mentions must mean that Starfleet is a military instead of assuming that the very definition of a paramilitary is to undertake military work because you are content to dismiss Pike, Picard, Scotty, O'Brien, Bashir and all the other direct confirmations that Starfleet is not a military just so you can get you're 24th century USMC or whatever it is you're angling for.​​

angrytarg

artan42 wrote: »

(Spoiler)

That clears a lot up that was logical to assume prior (since MACOs didn't exist until ENT) but now has been canonically confirmed at least for the alternate reality that may or may not be a direct follow-up on Enterprise. For everything prior to Enterprise and the invention of MACO it's really no question since, again, there most definitely was no MACO at all back then.

It also does add yet another crystal clearly spoken line of dialogue that can once again be dismissed as some delusional lie from canon characters ​​

mustrumridcully0

The biggest science fiction part of Star Trek might be the part where it describes a new "brand" of humans, basically. "more evolved".

For our understanding, Starfleet might count as military. But it's more than that, and it might not be entirely it.

A military doesn't generally have children aboard its military vessels. The military is generally not friendly to fraternization or sexual and romantic relationships between its soldiers (especially not across ranks). Starfleet does have all this, and it is not against any regulations apparently. (And it does exactly lead to the kind of problems one might expect, as we see for example when Worf and Dax are send on a mission to save an informant and it fails because Worf can't abandon Dax in favor of accomplishing his mission.)

If us non-evolved bog-standard humans from the 21st century must interpret Starfleet as miltiary, well, I gues the fictional evolved humans of the 24th century will probably be able to deal with it. But don't be surprised if in certain situations Starfleet does deliberatey not act like a military and cite this as bad military action. That's how they do things in Starfleet. We can't really argue against it, because their system seems to work for them quite well.

feiqa

Time to rant about PC BS.
So we can slide ranks since even civilian ships have ranks. Though I would love someone to find a cruise line where someone has the rank of admiral.
Disbanded the Macos because Starfleet is not supposed to be military. . . When I was in the service, the gate guards were not permitted magazines for their weapons. This was done to make people feel better about a military base. . It was a stupid order from peace time leaders and it showed. But I can see how they would want to spin things later.

But you do not get to carry a 36 torpedo salute per side, with 2 fore and aft as well as city crushing phasers and claim to be a civilian vessel. You want to say you are not military. Lose the blow up a planet ordinance and call for someone else that is allowed to carry it. Or stop being shocked that the maquis have weapons and are civilians. Because, SO ARE YOU!
Pick a horse.

mustrumridcully0

feiqa wrote: »

Time to rant about PC BS.
So we can slide ranks since even civilian ships have ranks. Though I would love someone to find a cruise line where someone has the rank of admiral.
Disbanded the Macos because Starfleet is not supposed to be military. . . When I was in the service, the gate guards were not permitted magazines for their weapons. This was done to make people feel better about a military base. . It was a stupid order from peace time leaders and it showed. But I can see how they would want to spin things later.

But you do not get to carry a 36 torpedo salute per side, with 2 fore and aft as well as city crushing phasers and claim to be a civilian vessel. You want to say you are not military. Lose the blow up a planet ordinance and call for someone else that is allowed to carry it. Or stop being shocked that the maquis have weapons and are civilians. Because, SO ARE YOU!
Pick a horse.

You get in Star Trek.

And city-crushing Phasers on a starship on a galactic scale are basically like automatic rifles to police officers on the scale of a single planet. (except apparently these phasers can be set to stun, where has the automatic rife can only kill and maim).

And they weren't shocked about civilians like the Maquis having weapons - they didn't like to see those weapons being used against others against a peace treaty made with a major power that ended a brutal war and could now cause it to flare up again.

Starfleet is its own thing in Star Trek. You can try to press it into your pre-existing schemes, but you will always find aspects that don't fit.

angrytarg

feiqa wrote: »

Time to rant about PC BS.
So we can slide ranks since even civilian ships have ranks. Though I would love someone to find a cruise line where someone has the rank of admiral.
Disbanded the Macos because Starfleet is not supposed to be military. . . When I was in the service, the gate guards were not permitted magazines for their weapons. This was done to make people feel better about a military base. . It was a stupid order from peace time leaders and it showed. But I can see how they would want to spin things later.

But you do not get to carry a 36 torpedo salute per side, with 2 fore and aft as well as city crushing phasers and claim to be a civilian vessel. You want to say you are not military. Lose the blow up a planet ordinance and call for someone else that is allowed to carry it. Or stop being shocked that the maquis have weapons and are civilians. Because, SO ARE YOU!
Pick a horse.

In addition to what @mustrumridcully0 said, you need to understand what Starfleet's purpose is. Exploration of unknown space. Doing that unarmed, when every odd episode they encounter something nigh omnipotrent that wants to murder your face, when you have families and all that on board you want to defend is stupid. Terms like "Civilian", "peaceful" or even "pacifist" do in no way shape or form necessarily imply not having access to weapons or paramilitary structures. It does not mean passiveness, it does not mean immedeate surrender. I feel a large part of the objection some people have with the whole paramilitary/explorations ervice thing is that the use of terms that are canonically done so implies some form of "weakness" in their morale code.​​

feiqa

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

You get in Star Trek.

And city-crushing Phasers on a starship on a galactic scale are basically like automatic rifles to police officers on the scale of a single planet. (except apparently these phasers can be set to stun, where has the automatic rife can only kill and maim).

And they weren't shocked about civilians like the Maquis having weapons - they didn't like to see those weapons being used against others against a peace treaty made with a major power that ended a brutal war and could now cause it to flare up again.

Starfleet is its own thing in Star Trek. You can try to press it into your pre-existing schemes, but you will always find aspects that don't fit.

So you are trying to say that scale determines legality? Because they have phaser rifles to be the equivalent of rifles. This is giving the NYPD the battleship New Jersey and arming it with nukes. And saying that other people have weapons does not excuse your civilians from running around with such firepower.

And yes they were shocked at the Maquis buying weapons. Quark was arrested for selling them because, oh shockers. Weapons are restricted merchandise. So once again, you want the Starfleet to be totally civilian. Put them under the same laws. That means rip the weapons out of those ships. Patrol boats on our rivers (as run by the police) do not have mounted guns. Coast guard which loves to sit in the grey area of not military and not civilian has weapons but not on par with an actual military. So you want to call them a coast guard, scale them back.

I would accept that Starfleet is its own mutant amalgam that fits no mold. If the honorable opposition to the stance that it is military. Also accepts that it has so many aspects of a military to fit that category as well.

And for that common ground a math parallel. Rules of a rectangle are four 90degree angles and two sets of parallel sides. The rule of a square has those rules and that the sides are of equal length. So is a square a rectangle? Yes. Is a rectangle a square? Not necessarily. It could be but does not have to be.

feiqa

angrytarg wrote: »

In addition to what @mustrumridcully0 said, you need to understand what Starfleet's purpose is. Exploration of unknown space. Doing that unarmed, when every odd episode they encounter something nigh omnipotent that wants to murder your face, when you have families and all that on board you want to defend is stupid. Terms like "Civilian", "peaceful" or even "pacifist" do in no way shape or form necessarily imply not having access to weapons or paramilitary structures. It does not mean passiveness, it does not mean immediate surrender. I feel a large part of the objection some people have with the whole paramilitary/explorations service thing is that the use of terms that are canonically done so implies some form of "weakness" in their morale code.​​

As I noted. The ship command structure is a ship command structure so I will let it pass and let others argue court martials and JAG, etc. But the fallacy of the armed argument hits counter issues. Arm your not military vessel with weapons equal or greater than those of declared militaries. But say how minor it is to want to use them. (Despite as you mentioned an issue arising practically every week needing such weapons) Say the galaxy is too dangerous to go unarmed. Then put families on your ships and be aghast when they are in danger. I can accept shields. They have one job. Protection. They keep everything from weapons fire to radiation from harming you. No issue at all with them. One or two token weapons would also be acceptable as you might have use of them scientifically. Break up an asteroid or comet for science as an example. But if you forget who you are and then list all the weapons at your disposal and your first thought is 'Battleship' then you might be a bit over gunned for a civilian.

The weakness in morality as I see it is either they are too weak to see that they are indeed a military. Or too weak in their passive goals to say they should remove most of those weapons.

angrytarg

feiqa wrote: »

As I noted. The ship command structure is a ship command structure so I will let it pass and let others argue court martials and JAG, etc. But the fallacy of the armed argument hits counter issues. Arm your not military vessel with weapons equal or greater than those of declared militaries. But say how minor it is to want to use them. (Despite as you mentioned an issue arising practically every week needing such weapons) Say the galaxy is too dangerous to go unarmed. Then put families on your ships and be aghast when they are in danger. I can accept shields. They have one job. Protection. They keep everything from weapons fire to radiation from harming you. No issue at all with them. One or two token weapons would also be acceptable as you might have use of them scientifically. Break up an asteroid or comet for science as an example. But if you forget who you are and then list all the weapons at your disposal and your first thought is 'Battleship' then you might be a bit over gunned for a civilian.

The weakness in morality as I see it is either they are too weak to see that they are indeed a military. Or too weak in their passive goals to say they should remove most of those weapons.

What you bring up is not new. First contacts sometimes went sideways in TNG because the Enterprise was so heavily armed. But the explanation back then was the same as it is now - it's necessary. And Starfleet aren't civilians, they are Starfleet and as such do act in Defense of the UFP. Nobody is denying that. They are still not a military in spirit or definition, it's a fictional service of the far future that has now multiple canonical dialogues as being identified as not a military, not civilian, but something else. Their battleships are called Explorers and not because they need a euphemism but they actually mean it, that's the mindset. It's not a ruse, nothing to deceive, that's how this society operates.​​

feiqa

angrytarg wrote: »

What you bring up is not new. First contacts sometimes went sideways in TNG because the Enterprise was so heavily armed. But the explanation back then was the same as it is now - it's necessary. And Starfleet aren't civilians, they are Starfleet and as such do act in Defense of the UFP. Nobody is denying that. They are still not a military in spirit or definition, it's a fictional service of the far future that has now multiple canonical dialogues as being identified as not a military, not civilian, but something else. Their battleships are called Explorers and not because they need a euphemism but they actually mean it, that's the mindset. It's not a ruse, nothing to deceive, that's how this society operates.​​

Then the society is more militant than the Klingons.
"Good day chancellor J'mpok. Welcome aboard our light survey ship."
"This ship has enough weapons to strip the surface of our world off."
"No no, we are lightly armed and have no hostile intentions. Our weapons fire is just for scientific exploration."


Not civilian, but not military. Armed to the teeth. But not ready to fight. So far the only definition we agree on is fictional. I can accept Starfleet and Star Trek are in a fiction I generally enjoy. But the definitions getting bandied about rub the wrong way.

So far we seem to have argued that they are in no definition at all now.

(On the KT Scotty argument. I agree with Mr. Scott but for his initial reasons. His job is to ensure the safety of the ship. You bring a large amount of ordinance aboard and won't tell him any specs so he can tell if these things can even be taken to warp safely? Yeah he was right not to sign off on them blindly. Too many bypass protocol lines. Whether the mission was out of line is a separate issue to me. Because even a military does not say shut up and ignore your own protocols. In fact you follow them more strictly when someone tells you to violate them because that is out of line.)

mustrumridcully0

feiqa wrote: »

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

You get in Star Trek.

And city-crushing Phasers on a starship on a galactic scale are basically like automatic rifles to police officers on the scale of a single planet. (except apparently these phasers can be set to stun, where has the automatic rife can only kill and maim).

And they weren't shocked about civilians like the Maquis having weapons - they didn't like to see those weapons being used against others against a peace treaty made with a major power that ended a brutal war and could now cause it to flare up again.

Starfleet is its own thing in Star Trek. You can try to press it into your pre-existing schemes, but you will always find aspects that don't fit.

So you are trying to say that scale determines legality? Because they have phaser rifles to be the equivalent of rifles. This is giving the NYPD the battleship New Jersey and arming it with nukes. And saying that other people have weapons does not excuse your civilians from running around with such firepower.

No, it's not. You're losing sight of the scale here. The NYPD is responsible for New York. As huge as the city or the state of New York may be, they are not the size of a whole planet or star system.
Where a NYPD police officer might have to deal with a bank heist or a gang war at worst, a Federation Starfleet Captain might have to deal with an entire planetary population being mind-controlled by some weird alien of the week.

And yes they were shocked at the Maquis buying weapons. Quark was arrested for selling them because, oh shockers. Weapons are restricted merchandise. So once again, you want the Starfleet to be totally civilian. Put them under the same laws. That means rip the weapons out of those ships. Patrol boats on our rivers (as run by the police) do not have mounted guns. Coast guard which loves to sit in the grey area of not military and not civilian has weapons but not on par with an actual military. So you want to call them a coast guard, scale them back.

I would accept that Starfleet is its own mutant amalgam that fits no mold. If the honorable opposition to the stance that it is military. Also accepts that it has so many aspects of a military to fit that category as well.

And for that common ground a math parallel. Rules of a rectangle are four 90degree angles and two sets of parallel sides. The rule of a square has those rules and that the sides are of equal length. So is a square a rectangle? Yes. Is a rectangle a square? Not necessarily. It could be but does not have to be.

Is a hunter armed with a rifle not a civilian when he encounters some native tribe that just has discovered bow and spears? What if these natives encounter a miner with explosives?

(Fun fact - in some of these scenarios, the Federation has been the tribesmen, in others the hunter or miner.)

Is Q a soldier because he is armed with the ability to snuff out your entire planet with the snip of a finger?


The biggest problem withs classifying Starfleet as a military is that the military's primary purpose and Starfleet's primary purpose are not the same, and that Starfleet does things in matters no real world military does. If you can wrap your head around the idea that Starfleet is a military while they carrying kids aboard their ships, that they rely on diplomacy and negotiation first, that they spend lots of their time exploring the universe and are the major scientific arm of the Federation, that they do policy duties and do intelligence work, that they are willing to risk their ships and all life aboard to avert wars and bloodshed, that they allow soldiers working in the same unit and possibly even with command authority over each other to engage in relationships and marriages. But don't call it a military and than be surprised if it acts in a ways that don't fit your definition of military. Then you only have yourself to blame.

artan42

Dear gods. Have you ever seen the show? The Enterprise cannot go a week without bumping into a mad god or planet ending catastrophe. Starfleet arms its ships in proportion to the threats they contend with.

feiqa

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

feiqa wrote: »

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

You get in Star Trek.

And city-crushing Phasers on a starship on a galactic scale are basically like automatic rifles to police officers on the scale of a single planet. (except apparently these phasers can be set to stun, where has the automatic rife can only kill and maim).

And they weren't shocked about civilians like the Maquis having weapons - they didn't like to see those weapons being used against others against a peace treaty made with a major power that ended a brutal war and could now cause it to flare up again.

Starfleet is its own thing in Star Trek. You can try to press it into your pre-existing schemes, but you will always find aspects that don't fit.

So you are trying to say that scale determines legality? Because they have phaser rifles to be the equivalent of rifles. This is giving the NYPD the battleship New Jersey and arming it with nukes. And saying that other people have weapons does not excuse your civilians from running around with such firepower.

No, it's not. You're losing sight of the scale here. The NYPD is responsible for New York. As huge as the city or the state of New York may be, they are not the size of a whole planet or star system.
Where a NYPD police officer might have to deal with a bank heist or a gang war at worst, a Federation Starfleet Captain might have to deal with an entire planetary population being mind-controlled by some weird alien of the week.

And yes they were shocked at the Maquis buying weapons. Quark was arrested for selling them because, oh shockers. Weapons are restricted merchandise. So once again, you want the Starfleet to be totally civilian. Put them under the same laws. That means rip the weapons out of those ships. Patrol boats on our rivers (as run by the police) do not have mounted guns. Coast guard which loves to sit in the grey area of not military and not civilian has weapons but not on par with an actual military. So you want to call them a coast guard, scale them back.

I would accept that Starfleet is its own mutant amalgam that fits no mold. If the honorable opposition to the stance that it is military. Also accepts that it has so many aspects of a military to fit that category as well.

And for that common ground a math parallel. Rules of a rectangle are four 90degree angles and two sets of parallel sides. The rule of a square has those rules and that the sides are of equal length. So is a square a rectangle? Yes. Is a rectangle a square? Not necessarily. It could be but does not have to be.

Is a hunter armed with a rifle not a civilian when he encounters some native tribe that just has discovered bow and spears? What if these natives encounter a miner with explosives?

(Fun fact - in some of these scenarios, the Federation has been the tribesmen, in others the hunter or miner.)

Is Q a soldier because he is armed with the ability to snuff out your entire planet with the snip of a finger?


The biggest problem withs classifying Starfleet as a military is that the military's primary purpose and Starfleet's primary purpose are not the same, and that Starfleet does things in matters no real world military does. If you can wrap your head around the idea that Starfleet is a military while they carrying kids aboard their ships, that they rely on diplomacy and negotiation first, that they spend lots of their time exploring the universe and are the major scientific arm of the Federation, that they do policy duties and do intelligence work, that they are willing to risk their ships and all life aboard to avert wars and bloodshed, that they allow soldiers working in the same unit and possibly even with command authority over each other to engage in relationships and marriages. But don't call it a military and than be surprised if it acts in a ways that don't fit your definition of military. Then you only have yourself to blame.

A militaries primary purpose is to defend the sovereign entity that it is sworn to. Either actively or by making one think twice on attacking. A military like the US military takes on many secondary roles such as reconnaissance and scientific survey. The problem with your analogies and why they rankle is that you are take an organization and comparing it to a single individual. First saying you have to look at scale and comparing a police officer with a rifle to a ship loaded with cannons and torpedoes capable of sterilizing a planet. A person to a ship or organization does not fit. Compare the Enterprise, ToS to E, to a modern sea going vessel and say what they compare to as a water craft. There you see ToS to C parallel navy vessels of cruiser weight. E compares as a battle cruiser. D fits the mold of an amalgam that you and angrytarg have mentioned. Often compared to the love boat by many despite considerable firepower at her disposal. But the idea for her was never realized. The galaxy class was supposed to be the ultra long range explorer. It was a flying star base. Meant to go years before seeing any form of relief or secondary star fleet vessel. And in that role of lone ship with families, research centers, and hopefully enough firepower that it can stay out of trouble. I accept her class. Leave her in federation borders and dispatch her to combat zones and I say the commanders of the federation have little regard for the civilian lives of the various dependents on the ship.

As for comparing Q in any argument. That is asking who would win in a fight. God or Batman.

Oh and captains being responsible for entire mind controlled planets. So the Federation allows you to exterminate a world due to telepathy?

mustrumridcully0

feiqa wrote: »

A militaries primary purpose is to defend the sovereign entity that it is sworn to. Either actively or by making one think twice on attacking. A military like the US military takes on many secondary roles such as reconnaissance and scientific survey.

If you take away all the scientific survey stuff away from the US miltiary, would it still be a military?

I think it would. But if you took it away from Starfleet, it' no longer Starfleet.

The problem with your analogies and why they rankle is that you are take an organization and comparing it to a single individual. First saying you have to look at scale and comparing a police officer with a rifle to a ship loaded with cannons and torpedoes capable of sterilizing a planet. A person to a ship or organization does not fit. Compare the Enterprise, ToS to E, to a modern sea going vessel and say what they compare to as a water craft. There you see ToS to C parallel navy vessels of cruiser weight. E compares as a battle cruiser. D fits the mold of an amalgam that you and angrytarg have mentioned. Often compared to the love boat by many despite considerable firepower at her disposal. But the idea for her was never realized. The galaxy class was supposed to be the ultra long range explorer. It was a flying star base. Meant to go years before seeing any form of relief or secondary star fleet vessel. And in that role of lone ship with families, research centers, and hopefully enough firepower that it can stay out of trouble. I accept her class. Leave her in federation borders and dispatch her to combat zones and I say the commanders of the federation have little regard for the civilian lives of the various dependents on the ship.

But they don't actually have a choice. They are not flying neatly inside safe borders, because that's not where exploration happens. They are out there, in deep space, where no man has gone before. And they still might feel the need to go with families there. The Enterprise-D's mission was supposed to take 20 years. Even if they hadn't had families aboard at the beginning, they likely would have had them at the end. (It's amazing there weren't more kids on VOY)

As for comparing Q in any argument. That is asking who would win in a fight. God or Batman.

Obviously I disagree. But I am not comparing Q with Batman or whatever. I am just asking you if he would constitute a soldier or a member of the military? There are many species that have vastly superior power to us, and a Federation starship is also vastly superior t o many other species. Superior power does not constitute a military.

For the level of technology in Star Trek, a ship with the size and travel capabilities of a starship like the USS Enterprise, firepower like that is just natural. The energy produced by the warp core alone would probably be enough to level a continent.

Oh and captains being responsible for entire mind controlled planets. So the Federation allows you to exterminate a world due to telepathy?

Depending on the circumstance, probably. But the point is if you're suddenly fighting the population of an entire mind-controlled world, you might need to use some big guns to deterr them long enough to stop the whole thing.

feiqa

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

If you take away all the scientific survey stuff away from the US miltiary, would it still be a military?

I think it would. But if you took it away from Starfleet, it' no longer Starfleet.

Point.

But they don't actually have a choice. They are not flying neatly inside safe borders, because that's not where exploration happens. They are out there, in deep space, where no man has gone before. And they still might feel the need to go with families there. The Enterprise-D's mission was supposed to take 20 years. Even if they hadn't had families aboard at the beginning, they likely would have had them at the end. (It's amazing there weren't more kids on VOY)

I was agreeing that the design of the D was misused. Sent on that 20 year mission the design is very justified. Inside federation borders and sent to potential combat zones however, it was reckless endangerment of the families.

I agree about the children on Voyager

Obviously I disagree. But I am not comparing Q with Batman or whatever. I am just asking you if he would constitute a soldier or a member of the military? There are many species that have vastly superior power to us, and a Federation starship is also vastly superior t o many other species. Superior power does not constitute a military.

My point on Q is he is so far out of left field he really is a separate entity. But since he was sent to judge us by his superiors and if necessary end humanity? Yeah he would fit the role of a soldier.

Depending on the circumstance, probably. But the point is if you're suddenly fighting the population of an entire mind-controlled world, you might need to use some big guns to deterr them long enough to stop the whole thing.

Not sure someone willing to mind control enslave an entire world would be very concerned about those guns. But that is not the real debate, and will concede this as deterrence is part of the job of the military.


(Edit adding) Reading this I think I need a highschool refresher on punctuation.

artan42

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

If you take away all the scientific survey stuff away from the US miltiary, would it still be a military?

I think it would. But if you took it away from Starfleet, it' no longer Starfleet.

Nice way of putting it.​​

ussintercept

Ive always headcanoned that there were two arms to Starfleet. Scientific and Military. The vast bulk of Starfleet is in its Military Arm. Though the Military Arm is most definitely not its pride and joy. Its simply a means to an end. In the past most of the ships were outdated starships that should of been decommissioned but because of the vastness of Federation space were used to fill gaps in Starfleets armada.

The Scientific Arm of Starfleet is where the brightest of the Federation go. These are officers and crewman that are going to be studying anything and everything that they come upon out there. Boldly going where no one has gone before on their 5 year missions. Making first contact and managing the most sensitive of diplomatic issues that might arise. This is also where Starfleets "Flagship" is. The Enterprise is like a giant mascot for both the fleet and for the Federation.

The Military Arm is a much more duller side of things for anyone that joined to explore new worlds. Its meant to patrol the sectors of the Federation and its borders. Its basically a governments Navy and Coast Guard in space. Theyre the first to engage enemy fleets in a war, theyre the ones executing warrants and search and seizures on illegal goods. This is also the arm that Starfleet Intelligence belongs in. The Military Arm doesnt get much notice unless theres some sort of conflict like the Dominion War because its not what everyone likes to romanticize and fantasize about. Day to day what the Military Arm does on in the background.

feiqa

ussintercept wrote: »

Ive always headcanoned that there were two arms to Starfleet. Scientific and Military. The vast bulk of Starfleet is in its Military Arm. Though the Military Arm is most definitely not its pride and joy. Its simply a means to an end. In the past most of the ships were outdated starships that should of been decommissioned but because of the vastness of Federation space were used to fill gaps in Starfleets armada.

The Scientific Arm of Starfleet is where the brightest of the Federation go. These are officers and crewman that are going to be studying anything and everything that they come upon out there. Boldly going where no one has gone before on their 5 year missions. Making first contact and managing the most sensitive of diplomatic issues that might arise. This is also where Starfleets "Flagship" is. The Enterprise is like a giant mascot for both the fleet and for the Federation.

The Military Arm is a much more duller side of things for anyone that joined to explore new worlds. Its meant to patrol the sectors of the Federation and its borders. Its basically a governments Navy and Coast Guard in space. Theyre the first to engage enemy fleets in a war, theyre the ones executing warrants and search and seizures on illegal goods. This is also the arm that Starfleet Intelligence belongs in. The Military Arm doesnt get much notice unless theres some sort of conflict like the Dominion War because its not what everyone likes to romanticize and fantasize about. Day to day what the Military Arm does on in the background.

That is not a bad way to look at things and it puts perspective on Picard being both an archeologist and a diplomat. While Kirk saw himself as a soldier.

Unknown

This content has been removed.