Spock committed mutiny too. Why does he get a pass? The entire TOS crew commit mutiny, sabotage, any number of various bad things. Why is it ok for them?
I made a list once of the crimes committed by Kirk and company in STIII. The one who got off lightest was Chekov, who merely conspired to commit mutiny, theft of Federation property, and violation of restricted space. (At least, I'm assuming Uhura's charge of assaulting a fellow officer would be considered worse than conspiracy.) Every last one of them should have spent the rest of their lives in the New Zealand penal colony, at best. But we forgive them because they saved Spock - in a manner of speaking - and that their blatant violation of even more Starfleet regulations let them save Earth.
Burnham? She committed mutiny in an effort to save her crew the best way she knew how (and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried). But we haven't been following her adventures for years already, so space her for her crimes!
you notably fail on a couple counts here, Jon...
1. yes, they did all that. And they went into HIDING...because there were consequences for DOING all that.
2. But, they came back and saved their entire civilization. it's remarkably easy to get a pardon when you stop something all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't, and it'd be hard to find an admiral to sit on the court who didn't owe them his life, career, etc. for their subsequent actions. (aka Star Trek IV).
minus the events of STIV (the voyage home) Kirk&Co. would be relegated to a life and existence as fugitives until turning themselves in and facing...
life terms and/or execution depending on who's writing that day.
And you think there aren't consequences for Burnham? She gets a life sentence for mutiny, I'd say that's pretty damn consequential.
What happens next is part of a long-standing trope in Star Trek: since, whatever her many faults, she nonetheless did read the Klingons' intentions correctly, Captain Lorca gives her an opportunity to earn her way back in as a subject matter expert. Just like Tom Paris (drummed out of Starfleet for falsifying official documents, then convicted of terrorism later). Just like Ro Laren (BCD and prison for insubordination leading to the death of eight crew members). And you can bet Lorca's going to be watching her like a hawk.
So, yeah, accusation of a double standard is IMHO completely justified.
"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 for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I'm going to continue my point with a hypothetical.
Since Kirk et al.'s exoneration for their various acts of sabotage and barratry in Star Trek III didn't take place until Star Trek IV, let's pretend Star Trek IV never aired. You'd all be going, Kirk's done, career over, probably sent to prison.
That's Burnham. The stories where she earns her way back HAVEN'T AIRED YET.
Furthermore: Kirk's saving the day in TVH had jack to do with his crimes in TSfS; he got let go basically because he'd made prosecuting him politically dicey (maybe it was an election year). Whereas Burnham's presumed redemption arc is directly related to her offenses. I'm prepared to give that a lot more slack than what Kirk did.
"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 for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
Correct, but as I said her stated reasoning was very different. She told the captain "I'm trying to save you", she didn't say anything about preventing war until they hatched their plan to capture T'kuvma, and then when she finally had the opportunity to do so she instead switched her phaser from stun to kill and, without any hesitation, gunned him down. So if that really was what the writers were going for, they should find a new line of work because they did a terrible job.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
Correct, but as I said her stated reasoning was very different. She told the captain "I'm trying to save you", she didn't say anything about preventing war until they hatched their plan to capture T'kuvma, and then when she finally had the opportunity to do so she instead switched her phaser from stun to kill and, without any hesitation, gunned him down. So if that really was what the writers were going for, they should find a new line of work because they did a terrible job.
The thing is what does Burnham mean when she wanted to save the Captain? Was it to save her and the ship, or her reputation?
As mentioned days ago, it's possible the killing of T'Kuvma could of been an accident or on purpose, considering the fight with Qov, Burnham looked uneasy on her feet, she may not of known the phaser was accidentally dropped and set to kill. But then again after Georgiou went down it could of been simply out of revenge or honor that drove her to kill T'Kuvma, but i am basing that on her reaction after beaming out to the Shenzhou before abandoning ship.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
or it could've been that pesky untreated PTSD flaring up when confronted with a member of the species that killed her parents - and the trigger point for it was georgiou's death
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.
or it could've been that pesky untreated PTSD flaring up when confronted with a member of the species that killed her parents - and the trigger point for it was georgiou's death
any and all options are on the table regarding this point in her life. But as starswordc mentioned, i think her character needs to be given the benefit of the doubt until we know a bit more.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I doubt they'd go down this road - but it'd be really interesting to see how these Klingons feel about the late Captain Georgiou - especially since her body was left aboard their ship.
Would they consider her a worthy foe who died in honorable combat, or would they consider her the responsible for a 'cowardly attack' on their ship and
dump her body out the nearest airlock.....?
Again, I can't see this being addressed but I couldn't help but wonder.
An interesting thought on the subject, but i would imagine that with her lockstepping ways proven correct in a communication with T'Kuvma and then later on she comes on T'Kuvma's ship. Regardless of the actions of Burnham and T'Kuvma being shot. It's very possible they could see her as a cowardly assassin sent to kill one of the most important Klingons in recent history. While Klingons are slow to changing circumstances like a complete investigation, they are not slow when it comes to framing their enemies as a propaganda piece back home.
Unfortunately it is likely the Klingons claimed Qov along with Georgiou and T'Kuvma's bodies and used that as political firepower to unite the houses further, it could even swing Kol's vote to join in to fight against Starfleets matra, "we come in peace".
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
Actually, it is pretty common behavior in the TNG era for Klingons to back down when attacked first. You usually see this in personal interaction mostly, though, and I don't know if it would work here.
Picard beats a challenger on Q'Onos. Riker beats someone up in the Bird of Prey mess hall to get respect.
When Worf trains the DS9 crew for an undercover mission, he also recommends getting physical (though Sisko does it the wrong way in their little training exercise, so you can get it wrong.)
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
I'm going to continue my point with a hypothetical.
Since Kirk et al.'s exoneration for their various acts of sabotage and barratry in Star Trek III didn't take place until Star Trek IV, let's pretend Star Trek IV never aired. You'd all be going, Kirk's done, career over, probably sent to prison.
That's Burnham. The stories where she earns her way back HAVEN'T AIRED YET.
Furthermore: Kirk's saving the day in TVH had jack to do with his crimes in TSfS; he got let go basically because he'd made prosecuting him politically dicey (maybe it was an election year). Whereas Burnham's presumed redemption arc is directly related to her offenses. I'm prepared to give that a lot more slack than what Kirk did.
the fundamental problem is, she's going to be right back in uniform, with rank, and without any self-examination, and we know this, because that's how these arcs work with the sort of writing we've already seen and the scenario they've already given us.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
except at no point did she actually ACT in a logical manner.
You could theoretically be right, but... I don't think it will be that easy.
This isn't your TNG era Star Trek where everything is neatly resolved at the end of the episode (or the end of a two-parter). This also seems not be focused much on an ensemble cast either, and really focus mostly on her. So I expect the first season to be a redemption arc for her. There will certainly be dramaturgical convenience (like how she gets out of prison), but that doesn't mean it's all forgiven or forgotten by episode 3.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
except at no point did she actually ACT in a logical manner.
She did but from certain points of view, however in certain other points of view she might not of, Logic is funny like that.
She acted within the bounds of her Vulcan upbringing and training but at the same time one could accuse her of acting without a good reason because of her human nature.
For example her need to relieve Captain Georgiou of her command while she went to the bridge, to Burnham she acted on the logic that firing first was the best option because of what Sarek said. Sarek pointed out that a Vulcan ship was destroyed by Klingons before and ever since the Vulcans have always fired first to force the Klingons to respect their Vulcan opponents so they are not shown to be weak. To Burnham this was the best way of dealing with the Klingons by forcing them to realise Starfleet isn't weak and that she didn't want history to repeat itself.
From another point of view she comes across as a stark-raving mad woman who attacked her captain and siezed the ship.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
except at no point did she actually ACT in a logical manner.
She did but from certain points of view, however in certain other points of view she might not of, Logic is funny like that.
She acted within the bounds of her Vulcan upbringing and training but at the same time one could accuse her of acting without a good reason because of her human nature.
For example her need to relieve Captain Georgiou of her command while she went to the bridge, to Burnham she acted on the logic that firing first was the best option because of what Sarek said. Sarek pointed out that a Vulcan ship was destroyed by Klingons before and ever since the Vulcans have always fired first to force the Klingons to respect their Vulcan opponents so they are not shown to be weak. To Burnham this was the best way of dealing with the Klingons by forcing them to realise Starfleet isn't weak and that she didn't want history to repeat itself.
From another point of view she comes across as a stark-raving mad woman who attacked her captain and siezed the ship.
your argument falls apart on a single salient point.
It took the vulcans several encounters of firing first to get to the point the Klingons back down. she didn't have the ground work to employ the strategy on behalf of the Shenzou-and any vulcan applying vulcan logic with the same information she was using, would tell you the same thing.
It might work for the next Starfleet ship, or after ten, or after three, or two more, but not in the immediate situation-which Sarek made pretty clear when he answered her query.
the Klingons didn't gain respect in a single encounter for the Vulcans, it took several-and that was Klingons acting in typical klingon fashion. it was already established these weren't.
her actions, were not Logical. Not for the conditions she was in, not for the conditions Sarek was explaining.
you actually make a good point there. +1.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I'm going to continue my point with a hypothetical.
Since Kirk et al.'s exoneration for their various acts of sabotage and barratry in Star Trek III didn't take place until Star Trek IV, let's pretend Star Trek IV never aired. You'd all be going, Kirk's done, career over, probably sent to prison.
That's Burnham. The stories where she earns her way back HAVEN'T AIRED YET.
Furthermore: Kirk's saving the day in TVH had jack to do with his crimes in TSfS; he got let go basically because he'd made prosecuting him politically dicey (maybe it was an election year). Whereas Burnham's presumed redemption arc is directly related to her offenses. I'm prepared to give that a lot more slack than what Kirk did.
the fundamental problem is, she's going to be right back in uniform, with rank, and without any self-examination, and we know this, because that's how these arcs work with the sort of writing we've already seen and the scenario they've already given us.
and for all we know, she might have been right - Georgiou shut her down before her method could be tried
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
except at no point did she actually ACT in a logical manner.
You could theoretically be right, but... I don't think it will be that easy.
This isn't your TNG era Star Trek where everything is neatly resolved at the end of the episode (or the end of a two-parter). This also seems not be focused much on an ensemble cast either, and really focus mostly on her. So I expect the first season to be a redemption arc for her. There will certainly be dramaturgical convenience (like how she gets out of prison), but that doesn't mean it's all forgiven or forgotten by episode 3.
I suspect the only thing that's going to be "Redeemed" is her reputation-because the showrunners took great heavy pains to anvil through that she was RIGHT in every single thing, while everyone else is "Wrong".
Actually, they didn't actually took heavy pains to anvil through she was RIGHT.
We don't know if her "shoot first" plan would have even worked. We don't know if her capture plan would have worked. And she probably didn't do the right thing when she shot T'Kuvma instead of capturing him, though I am also not sure she could have still pulled the capture off without the Captain.
What we know (IMO) is that she had reasons to think her plans could have worked. But we'll never know for sure. (Unless they tell us at some point, but the writers suggested in an interview that neither we nor Burnham will never know.)
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Burnham was attempting to apply Vulcan logic. It's clear, however, that while she has striven for that goal, she's never actually reached it - she's far too emotional. In this instance, I think she may have been using Vulcan logic to justify her Human emotional response (her parents were apparently killed in a Klingon raid, after all - she's hardly detached on that topic).
Now, she might have been right - but the show also points out that she might have been wrong. Sarek himself told her that a Vulcan solution might not work at all for a Human. She chose to ignore this.
And it's clear that many people here are either unfamiliar or uncomfortable with the idea of a protagonist who isn't always right in the end. Burnham's not a captain because she still has a lot to learn. She's not a paragon. Yet.
And it's clear that many people here are either unfamiliar or uncomfortable with the idea of a protagonist who isn't always right in the end. Burnham's not a captain because she still has a lot to learn. She's not a paragon. Yet.
I love protagonists that are flawed and occasionally wrong, I just feel that Burnham has no redeeming qualities, infact I think it's entirely possible her Vulcan upbringing has turned her into a sociopath.
So Khaless formed the empire after defeating Molor and the Fek'lhri, using the sword of Khaless - the most revered item in the universe to Klingons - which was made by Khaless throwing a lock of his hair into the lava of Mt. Kri'stak
...now Klingons don't have hair. If you want to explore the inner parts of the Klingon's culture... consistency is a good place to start.
Comments
And you think there aren't consequences for Burnham? She gets a life sentence for mutiny, I'd say that's pretty damn consequential.
What happens next is part of a long-standing trope in Star Trek: since, whatever her many faults, she nonetheless did read the Klingons' intentions correctly, Captain Lorca gives her an opportunity to earn her way back in as a subject matter expert. Just like Tom Paris (drummed out of Starfleet for falsifying official documents, then convicted of terrorism later). Just like Ro Laren (BCD and prison for insubordination leading to the death of eight crew members). And you can bet Lorca's going to be watching her like a hawk.
So, yeah, accusation of a double standard is IMHO completely justified.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Based on everything we've seen regarding Klingons since the start of Trek, I have a hard time believing that an attack would have had any result other than the total loss of the Shenzhou and her crew. The Klingons have never done anything to make me believe they would back down from an attack (infact I think they would consider backing down to be dishonorable), Shenzhou looked to be massively outgunned, and they were completely motionless at that time so any advantage in maneuverability would be completely negated.
So, imo, by shutting down Burnham's idiocy Georgiou saved the crew members that managed to survive the battle, such as Saru, from the certain death they would have experienced if an attack had been made. The Klingons didn't back down to the Vulcans after getting hit with a torpedo, they opened diplomatic relations after multiple Klingon warships were destroyed.
Now you are starting to understand the logic in the situation from one angle. the other angle is that the Klingons have made a big deal that Starfleet lies about their coming in peace, they knew what Georgiou was going to do in text book Starfleet fashion as you mentioned and used that to convince other Klingons to join the fight. They knew she wouldn't fight.
If Burnham had acted first it would of proved T'Kuvma false in his belief and as a result he would of needed to act in a different way in a hurry. Klingons are slow to changing circumstances, they always have been but if the House leaders saw that the Shenzhou attacked first any support T'Kuvma could of used would of immediately been removed from the picture. It would of reduced the potential for a massacre into a quick defeat for T'Kuvma, but only if Burnham was allowed to act.
Klingons respect strength and if an opponent is worthy, they will respect it. T'Kuvma didn't respect Starfleet as it was evident when the USS Europa was destroyed by a cloaked ship that literally rammed and cut through that ship before the Admiral activated the self destruct that destroyed what remained of the ship. It's unknown what happened to Admiral Brett or his crew.
Had Burnham acted, the house leaders would of respected Starfleet and their strength no matter what happened next, the Klingons would be seriously considering their next dealing with T'Kuvma.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Since Kirk et al.'s exoneration for their various acts of sabotage and barratry in Star Trek III didn't take place until Star Trek IV, let's pretend Star Trek IV never aired. You'd all be going, Kirk's done, career over, probably sent to prison.
That's Burnham. The stories where she earns her way back HAVEN'T AIRED YET.
Furthermore: Kirk's saving the day in TVH had jack to do with his crimes in TSfS; he got let go basically because he'd made prosecuting him politically dicey (maybe it was an election year). Whereas Burnham's presumed redemption arc is directly related to her offenses. I'm prepared to give that a lot more slack than what Kirk did.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Burnham's plan may have prevented the war, but Shenzhou would still be destroyed. That would match typical Vulcan logic, but it goes against her stated reason for doing it, to save her Captain.
Vulcan logic: The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few. It would of been a necessary sacrifice that Burham would of been willing to make. That is what this whole debate comes down to, this is the reason she acted and the reason she commited mutiny. She only knew things from the Vulcan point of view, she was raised and trained to believe those things.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Correct, but as I said her stated reasoning was very different. She told the captain "I'm trying to save you", she didn't say anything about preventing war until they hatched their plan to capture T'kuvma, and then when she finally had the opportunity to do so she instead switched her phaser from stun to kill and, without any hesitation, gunned him down. So if that really was what the writers were going for, they should find a new line of work because they did a terrible job.
The thing is what does Burnham mean when she wanted to save the Captain? Was it to save her and the ship, or her reputation?
As mentioned days ago, it's possible the killing of T'Kuvma could of been an accident or on purpose, considering the fight with Qov, Burnham looked uneasy on her feet, she may not of known the phaser was accidentally dropped and set to kill. But then again after Georgiou went down it could of been simply out of revenge or honor that drove her to kill T'Kuvma, but i am basing that on her reaction after beaming out to the Shenzhou before abandoning ship.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
#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!"
any and all options are on the table regarding this point in her life. But as starswordc mentioned, i think her character needs to be given the benefit of the doubt until we know a bit more.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
An interesting thought on the subject, but i would imagine that with her lockstepping ways proven correct in a communication with T'Kuvma and then later on she comes on T'Kuvma's ship. Regardless of the actions of Burnham and T'Kuvma being shot. It's very possible they could see her as a cowardly assassin sent to kill one of the most important Klingons in recent history. While Klingons are slow to changing circumstances like a complete investigation, they are not slow when it comes to framing their enemies as a propaganda piece back home.
Unfortunately it is likely the Klingons claimed Qov along with Georgiou and T'Kuvma's bodies and used that as political firepower to unite the houses further, it could even swing Kol's vote to join in to fight against Starfleets matra, "we come in peace".
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Imagine if this was the tactic Burnham fought over so intensely with Georgiou.
Picard beats a challenger on Q'Onos. Riker beats someone up in the Bird of Prey mess hall to get respect.
When Worf trains the DS9 crew for an undercover mission, he also recommends getting physical (though Sisko does it the wrong way in their little training exercise, so you can get it wrong.)
This isn't your TNG era Star Trek where everything is neatly resolved at the end of the episode (or the end of a two-parter). This also seems not be focused much on an ensemble cast either, and really focus mostly on her. So I expect the first season to be a redemption arc for her. There will certainly be dramaturgical convenience (like how she gets out of prison), but that doesn't mean it's all forgiven or forgotten by episode 3.
She did but from certain points of view, however in certain other points of view she might not of, Logic is funny like that.
She acted within the bounds of her Vulcan upbringing and training but at the same time one could accuse her of acting without a good reason because of her human nature.
For example her need to relieve Captain Georgiou of her command while she went to the bridge, to Burnham she acted on the logic that firing first was the best option because of what Sarek said. Sarek pointed out that a Vulcan ship was destroyed by Klingons before and ever since the Vulcans have always fired first to force the Klingons to respect their Vulcan opponents so they are not shown to be weak. To Burnham this was the best way of dealing with the Klingons by forcing them to realise Starfleet isn't weak and that she didn't want history to repeat itself.
From another point of view she comes across as a stark-raving mad woman who attacked her captain and siezed the ship.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
you actually make a good point there. +1.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Actually, they didn't actually took heavy pains to anvil through she was RIGHT.
We don't know if her "shoot first" plan would have even worked. We don't know if her capture plan would have worked. And she probably didn't do the right thing when she shot T'Kuvma instead of capturing him, though I am also not sure she could have still pulled the capture off without the Captain.
What we know (IMO) is that she had reasons to think her plans could have worked. But we'll never know for sure. (Unless they tell us at some point, but the writers suggested in an interview that neither we nor Burnham will never know.)
Now, she might have been right - but the show also points out that she might have been wrong. Sarek himself told her that a Vulcan solution might not work at all for a Human. She chose to ignore this.
And it's clear that many people here are either unfamiliar or uncomfortable with the idea of a protagonist who isn't always right in the end. Burnham's not a captain because she still has a lot to learn. She's not a paragon. Yet.
I love protagonists that are flawed and occasionally wrong, I just feel that Burnham has no redeeming qualities, infact I think it's entirely possible her Vulcan upbringing has turned her into a sociopath.
WARNING: Click at your own risk