It may be futile at this point to sway people looking for a militaristic territory-seeking resource grabbing armada masquerading as a fleet of explorers, from any other point of view but what they're looking for.
Every time I see evidence presented to counter their views, it seems they just ignore it and keep quoting their favorite exceptions.
I guess they want Starship Troopers with phasers. Which is odd because there's better places to find that, thematically.
^^ A straw man, in its entirety.
I have yet to see anyone claim Star Fleet is merely "a militaristic territory-seeking resource grabbing armada masquerading as a fleet of explorers." I have, however, seen people like myself point out that there's a somewhat odd duality between Picard's spaceship of exploration also doubling as the military might of the Federation. And I even added that, for practical purposes, I can readily see why the writers didn't want an entire separate (anonymous) military that would have to be drummed up for each and every conflict. ST was a show, after all, in which we wanted both: an idealistic image of a United Federation of Planets, with a sensible admix of pew-pew.
Gameplay in STO is skewed towards conflict. Why? Because this is what market research shows pwe/cryptic that potential and actual customers want. Is it Star Trek? No not entirely. If they change the game around to Uncle Jean-Luc's Feel-Good Happy Hour, how many will still play? Riiight.
Finally someone who understood it.
Ever ran around from diplomat to diplomat (where was it? Memory Alpha?) to try and do these annoying diplomatic missions? That gets old really, really fast. People want their spaceships to fight with: simple as that.
There are many other aspects about the 'real' Federation than mere combat, but harder to deploy in a useful game-mechanic way in STO. "Welcome to Season 8! Meet the Voth; we're friends with them... The End."
I have yet to see anyone claim Star Fleet is merely "a militaristic territory-seeking resource grabbing armada masquerading as a fleet of explorers." I have, however, seen people like myself point out that there's a somewhat odd duality between Picard's spaceship of exploration also doubling as the military might of the Federation. And I even added that, for practical purposes, I can readily see why the writers didn't want an entire separate (anonymous) military that would have to be drummed up for each and every conflict. ST was a show, after all, in which we wanted both: an idealistic image of a United Federation of Planets, with a sensible admix of pew-pew.
Picard's ship being the military might of the Federation would be a presumption. It would take one to presume that the ship were the most armed and battle ready ship of the fleet. The ship was armed and capable of battle. The writers did create a seperate entity that could be drummed up for conflict but wasn't used entirely. Saucer seperation. Putting some personell on the star drive, while the rest were safely in the saucer during a conflict.
We are all too ready to embrace war, militarism and destructive angles too redily and find them where they can be found in things like Star Trek to justify these wants. If a future utopia bends to war and sacrifices ethics for resources and territory, we feel justified.
Perhaps despite its defense, despite shields, photon torpedos and phasers. DESPITE all this, it is a ship of exploration.
Star Trek, in most iterations, is a morality play. We do not like being taught morals.
Picard's ship being the military might of the Federation would be a presumption. It would take one to presume that the ship were the most armed and battle ready ship of the fleet. The ship was armed and capable of battle. The writers did create a seperate entity that could be drummed up for conflict but wasn't used entirely. Saucer seperation. Putting some personell on the star drive, while the rest were safely in the saucer during a conflict.
We are all too ready to embrace war, militarism and destructive angles too redily and find them where they can be found in things like Star Trek to justify these wants. If a future utopia bends to war and sacrifices ethics for resources and territory, we feel justified.
Perhaps despite its defense, despite shields, photon torpedos and phasers. DESPITE all this, it is a ship of exploration.
Star Trek, in most iterations, is a morality play. We do not like being taught morals.
Pre-emptivly. Yes. This is a game. We can argue about the game and leave it, cause it's a game. It's just a game.
But we argue on ethics. When ew do, we aren't arguing about a game. It isn't just a game. If that deserves a thread lock or movement to another section, then this shouldn't be in general discussion anymore.
STO should have ship fights, becaue they're enjoyable and fun and exciting and neat looking and all.
This sort of debate was a major influence on the story direction we took when we made the Purity Foundry Series. I won't spoil it for those who haven't played it, but we wanted to address why the Federation seemed to be more imperialistic than we had seen in the shows and what, or whom, might be influencing it.
Picard's ship being the military might of the Federation would be a presumption. It would take one to presume that the ship were the most armed and battle ready ship of the fleet. The ship was armed and capable of battle. The writers did create a seperate entity that could be drummed up for conflict but wasn't used entirely. Saucer seperation. Putting some personell on the star drive, while the rest were safely in the saucer during a conflict.
We are all too ready to embrace war, militarism and destructive angles too redily and find them where they can be found in things like Star Trek to justify these wants. If a future utopia bends to war and sacrifices ethics for resources and territory, we feel justified.
Perhaps despite its defense, despite shields, photon torpedos and phasers. DESPITE all this, it is a ship of exploration.
Star Trek, in most iterations, is a morality play. We do not like being taught morals.
I'm sorry but you did see the many times when the Enterprise D was called the flagship of the federation and most advanced ship?
Hell just watch generations again and wait for the bit where the Klingons say they'd be bouncing off the walls stupid to even attempt to attack it as they would be obliterated.
Sure it wasn't a ship intended for war but it was more than capable of blasting any hostiles to oblivion.
This sort of debate was a major influence on the story direction we took when we made the Purity Foundry Series. I won't spoil it for those who haven't played it, but we wanted to address why the Federation seemed to be more imperialistic than we had seen in the shows and what, or whom, might be influencing it.
And you actually did a damn good job of it IMO.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
People are also forgetting that space is a big, cold, unfriendly place. There are lots of things out there that want to eat us as soon as look at us. (Borg, Undine, Voth, Dominion, the list goes on) So any exploration vessel MUST be capable of defending itself against the unknown. That doesn't mean token defenses and a phaser bank or two. That's fine on a diplomatic run to a nearby solar system, but going into uncharted space where who knows what might be lurking? Speak softly a carry a large stick.
Also, let's not forget that as of the current state of the game, the Federation is on a WAR footing. The Klingons, opportunistic vultures that they are, got uppity and tried to take over all the territory lost by the Romulans and decided to punch anyone who disagreed with them. The Romulan Remnant (not the Republic) is lashing out because they're angry at their loss and now serve the Iconians. The Dominion are sore losers and are picking another fight with the Alpha Quadrant. The Borg came back with a vengeance out of nowhere. For all intents and purposes, as far as life in the Federation goes, the entire galaxy is going to hell in a handbasket and it's unbelievably naive to think ANY of these factions are just going to leave the Federation alone if we ask nicely. As such, Starfleet is on a war footing.
As for the peaceful, diplomatic side of Starfleet, only naive hippies really claim that we should never, ever resort to war. War isn't the first choice, but it's always a possibility. When somebody has no interest in negotiating because they think they can just TAKE what they want from you, they're not going to talk to you, no matter how hard you try. They will just kill you, loot your corpse, and go on to pillage and burn the city/planet behind you. Those diplomats and negotiators who broker peace are great men and women, worthy of commendation for what they do when it works, but at the end of the day, it's the men and women standing on the wall, ready to fight and give life and limb, who keep us safe.
Ethics of the Federation take a beating quite often and they always have issues. The Federation is not the borg. They do not have one way of thought they are a multitude. Each member species and subfactions in those species, giving input to how the Federation attempts to behave.
In Undiscovered Country when they learned of peace talks with the Klingon Empire the first question was. "Does this mean moth balling the Star Fleet?"
Answer: "Our scientific and exploration missions should be unaffected."
From this we can assume that at that time the admiralty felt the primary role of the Star Fleet was battle readiness. The reason why is they had aggressive neighbors and needed to be ready to defend themselves.
As things settled down the ships became more capable of long duration cruises. But the crews would need time off. Starting a family is fairly normal among humans, and assumed as such in other species. So berthing for families if you have served enough time on the ship. (Thomas Riker mentioned time on board before he could have dependants.) And right up till she was shot down the Enterprise D had her civilian population. One prays that the Oddyessy did not when they encountered the Dominion. Otherwise it is not just the loss of the uniformed Starfleet members. But the tragedy of putting civilians in harms way.
Ethically, knowing they were going to engage hostiles they did/do remove them from ships.
Now we look at the Federation of STO and see only the part of what Starfleet has to do. They are the fighting arm. Would they prefer to hold a balm and heal the sick and walk in peace? Certainly, but that is not what they have. They have a war. More than one based on how many people are taking shots at them.
The Klingon Empire, the True Way, the Romulan Remnant, pirates of varying shades, the Dominion (fraction there of), the Breen, the Borg, the Undine. And now the Voth. Every major power and many minor ones shoot first and don't bother talking after at all. So the fleet is forced to work on the same rule set. Shoot what is in front of you and pray you are doing justice. Because only history can tell them if they are right at this point.
We do not see most of the Federation here, only those ships and crews engaged. To evaluate an entire nation on just her soldiers at war. . . Well look to the conflicts around today and judge a people by only the fighters.
The Federation, in all her multitudes and diversity, tries to be the good guys. If you let them, they will be your friend. If you let them.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
People are also forgetting that space is a big, cold, unfriendly place. There are lots of things out there that want to eat us as soon as look at us. (Borg, Undine, Voth, Dominion, the list goes on) So any exploration vessel MUST be capable of defending itself against the unknown. That doesn't mean token defenses and a phaser bank or two. That's fine on a diplomatic run to a nearby solar system, but going into uncharted space where who knows what might be lurking? Speak softly a carry a large stick.
Also, let's not forget that as of the current state of the game, the Federation is on a WAR footing. The Klingons, opportunistic vultures that they are, got uppity and tried to take over all the territory lost by the Romulans and decided to punch anyone who disagreed with them. The Romulan Remnant (not the Republic) is lashing out because they're angry at their loss and now serve the Iconians. The Dominion are sore losers and are picking another fight with the Alpha Quadrant. The Borg came back with a vengeance out of nowhere. For all intents and purposes, as far as life in the Federation goes, the entire galaxy is going to hell in a handbasket and it's unbelievably naive to think ANY of these factions are just going to leave the Federation alone if we ask nicely. As such, Starfleet is on a war footing.
As for the peaceful, diplomatic side of Starfleet, only naive hippies really claim that we should never, ever resort to war. War isn't the first choice, but it's always a possibility. When somebody has no interest in negotiating because they think they can just TAKE what they want from you, they're not going to talk to you, no matter how hard you try. They will just kill you, loot your corpse, and go on to pillage and burn the city/planet behind you. Those diplomats and negotiators who broker peace are great men and women, worthy of commendation for what they do when it works, but at the end of the day, it's the men and women standing on the wall, ready to fight and give life and limb, who keep us safe.
To somewhat quote Von Clauswitz "war is just diplomacy through other means." Sometimes, it comes down to a fight. Better have a gun handy, or be prepared to surrender that which you hold dear.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
I'm sorry but you did see the many times when the Enterprise D was called the flagship of the federation and most advanced ship?
Hell just watch generations again and wait for the bit where the Klingons say they'd be bouncing off the walls stupid to even attempt to attack it as they would be obliterated.
Sure it wasn't a ship intended for war but it was more than capable of blasting any hostiles to oblivion.
There was even a one-off mention that the very creation of a ship as large and powerful as the Galaxy-class was considered by some powers to be a threat in and of itself.
It's very much the same argument as the US's carrier fleet being more often used for humanitarian purposes than combat ones - it's easy to say and even easy to demonstrate - those carriers regularly lead international efforts to bring power, supplies, and medicine to disaster areas.
No matter how many times you say that, though, it still doesn't diminish the impression generated by one country building eleven ships which with their escorts and aircraft exceed the military power of most entire nations.
Even if they were exclusively used on their humanitarian missions, they would still be called military ships, their existence would still be considered by any military confronting that navy, and their mere appearance near contested areas would still be decried as an aggressive act (even as it is, they don't have to launch a single aircraft or fire a single weapon to earn official protests and send local dictators into hysterics).
To get it back on Star Trek, consider the episode Conundrum, and the Lysians' reaction to the Enterprise simply showing up.
Considering how many threads have been made in the past demanding exploration, diplomacy, and lasting Trek-themed consequences for captain decisions (as hard as that can be to even begin to design in an MMO setting), I disagree about none of this "mattering."
Yes, the game we got has a lot of shooting and a lot of exploding ships and a lot of people being shot and disintegrated with exploit attacks. That doesn't incriminate the Federation or Starfleet any more than the cherry picking of finding a DS9 episode (and it's usually a DS9 episode for previously mentioned reasons) and ignoring everything else.
Well, strength in numbers isn't much of an indicator really.... MORE threads have been made about wanting the K'Vort and a T5 connie....
We know the federation stance on "Omega"... It's has to go at any cost, so... Even Starfleet ships are coded with a alarm for the captain, nullifying all other objectives.
Agree fully on the "non-attacking" support ships.
Medics and Scientists: If they shoot at you, they are combatants, and you shoot back... It's that simple.
The Dinos are animals... We hold animals as pets...? I don't see the problem.
Two words.
Prime Directive. They are shooting at you because Starfleet is in violation of everything dear to the General Orders of Starfleet and the Prime Directive of the United Federation of Planets. The fact that they were there first is a clear indication that Starfleet is interfering in any sentient life forms progression.
Hell even Kirk was not this brutal gung ho with the Klingons.
It is what it is, and there are dinosaurs in STO, but for the love of Sweet ... lets not pretend that this is remotely what Starfleet stands for, even IN times of war.
To somewhat quote Von Clauswitz "war is just diplomacy through other means." Sometimes, it comes down to a fight. Better have a gun handy, or be prepared to surrender that which you hold dear.
The Federation would never in a million years follow such a course of action. Need I remind you that one of the reasons why the Federation was founded was to escape the nightmare of war.
Prime Directive. They are shooting at you because Starfleet is in violation of everything dear to the General Orders of Starfleet and the Prime Directive of the United Federation of Planets. The fact that they were there first is a clear indication that Starfleet is interfering in any sentient life forms progression.
Hell even Kirk was not this brutal gung ho with the Klingons.
It is what it is, and there are dinosaurs in STO, but for the love of Sweet ... lets not pretend that this is remotely what Starfleet stands for, even IN times of war.
The Prime Directive is really not meant to be used in this situation.
kirk was once in a similar situation.... He ordered the implementation of General Order 24. So yeah, the current situation makes sense to me.
The Prime Directive is really not meant to be used in this situation.
kirk was once in a similar situation.... He ordered the implementation of General Order 24. So yeah, the current situation makes sense to me.
("A Taste of Armageddon") Kirk was calling Anan 7's bluff. There is no way he would have had the conscience to wipe out that civilization when he was there to try and prevent the needless sacrifice of people through disintegration.
General Order 24, was only ever "called for" on two occasion. The above and another by Captain Garth ("Whom Gods Destroy")
He pranked some members, got decked by Sisko and basically kept pointing out that some serious **** was about to go down.
He was willing to let them die yes, but he was pointing them in the right direction to avoid it too.
One noteworthy (and easily missed) thing about Q is that in some ways he is not inherently sadistic. Simple fact of the matter is though, he does not often think on the level of individual mortals, with the captains being an exception (presumably because they are so extraordinary). They think along the lines of larger groups and even whole civilizations.
It's a very interesting point - if you follow the canon and extended canon, Q goes from being a random bully in Encounter at Farpoint to making sure that the Federation in fact survives. The entire point of the Borg encounter he forced was to show them what was out there. And although it wasn't written at the time, he would have known that the Borg were ALREADY COMING, so the Federation needed a slap in the face before it really was too late. He considered the casualties sustained trivial to make the point, and chances are, he was probably right.
Prime Directive. They are shooting at you because Starfleet is in violation of everything dear to the General Orders of Starfleet and the Prime Directive of the United Federation of Planets. The fact that they were there first is a clear indication that Starfleet is interfering in any sentient life forms progression.
Hell even Kirk was not this brutal gung ho with the Klingons.
It is what it is, and there are dinosaurs in STO, but for the love of Sweet ... lets not pretend that this is remotely what Starfleet stands for, even IN times of war.
The Omega Directive supersedes the Prime Directive.
Omega molecules are so dangerous that they must be eliminated at "ANY" cost, this is hard canon.
I'm sorry but you did see the many times when the Enterprise D was called the flagship of the federation and most advanced ship?
Hell just watch generations again and wait for the bit where the Klingons say they'd be bouncing off the walls stupid to even attempt to attack it as they would be obliterated.
Sure it wasn't a ship intended for war but it was more than capable of blasting any hostiles to oblivion.
And what does the ability to defend a ship have to do with your champing-at-the-bit need to find militarism wherever you please?
You're playing a cognitive trick here: nothing short of an unarmed, defenseless vessel would satisfy your definition of "peaceful" yet you would probably mock such a thing as hopelessly doomed. Add a phaser, some torpedoes, and shields, and you have the "warship" you seek.
I'm not buying it. And neither should you, except you're selectively finding things you're looking for and ignoring the rest of the picture.
To somewhat quote Von Clauswitz "war is just diplomacy through other means." Sometimes, it comes down to a fight. Better have a gun handy, or be prepared to surrender that which you hold dear.
I think a good number of the posters here, under the guise of "war is possible" want a "war is inevitable" approach to Trek. It may be an over-reaction to the majority of the series and its messages, or an infatuation with a minority of the series (especially Deep Space Nine) at the expense of all else.
Thing is, you may all get your wish due to popular demand. Trek will be poorer for it, but it will certainly sell.
The Omega Directive supersedes the Prime Directive.
Omega molecules are so dangerous that they must be eliminated at "ANY" cost, this is hard canon.
You'll excuse me if I don't consider Janeway's actions remotely demonstrative of what any other Starfleet officer would have done. She is an incompetent, violent, hypocritical psychopath who should've been cashiered the minute Starfleet got back in touch with Voyager.
"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"
You'll excuse me if I don't consider Janeway's actions remotely demonstrative of what any other Starfleet officer would have done. She is a violent, hypocritical psychopath who should've been cashiered the minute Starfleet got back in touch with Voyager.
That is going too far. She would have a lot to answer for with Starfleet Command, certainly, and may have even been retired upon return to Federation space.
Hyperbolizing her doesn't help analysis here. That she became an admiral in the later TNG movies implies either writer fiat or a bending of Federation codes and ethics after the Dominion War, that much I might concede.
I remember back in 1990 I was ten and was in my fourth or fifth grade class and a TV got rolled in and we watched as the first Gulf War began, presented by a CNN newscast. For one year there was this conflict and then it ended. Then from 1991 to 2001 I knew peace. Now there were the events in Somalia and Kosovo and I am not sure on what scope they were by comparison, but we didn't have a war mindset. We even asked "is it right for us to intervene and do these things in these countries."
Since 2001 I have not known but war. Not just the conflicts existing in the middle east, but the war mindset. The war doctrines and expressions. The war time sentiments. Time was I could watch a show without seeing these sentiments. I wouldn't have to hear the words "We are at war" to bring justification when another has said "we shouldn't do this terrible thing"
Star Trek was my place where I could find another universe where wars were averted, where peace was a solution, where pacifists were revered even if not followed and they were certainly not reviled.
I worry when some want to bring Star Trek into the mud of violence, war, conflict and sentiments of "our values change when we are at war, because winning the war, even at the cost of our own ethics, is all that matters"
To those who want to do this to Star Trek, be they writer or fan, I have this.
HAD I the heavens? embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
You'll excuse me if I don't consider Janeway's actions remotely demonstrative of what any other Starfleet officer would have done. She is an incompetent, violent, hypocritical psychopath who should've been cashiered the minute Starfleet got back in touch with Voyager.
Ok we get it you hate janeway, got that printed on the underwear also?
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
("A Taste of Armageddon") Kirk was calling Anan 7's bluff. There is no way he would have had the conscience to wipe out that civilization when he was there to try and prevent the needless sacrifice of people through disintegration.
General Order 24, was only ever "called for" on two occasion. The above and another by Captain Garth ("Whom Gods Destroy")
Neither were ever carried out.
Oh my G@d ~ I'm such a geek!
Actually... I think Kirk would have done it. Why? there were THREE groups involved. The Eminians, the Enterprise(which the Eminians were trying to destroy), and the Vendikar.
IF the order would have been carried out the Eminians would have been either destroyed completely or bombed back to the stone age.... It's not completely clear which. Either way, the Enterprise and Vendikar would have been saved.
I remember back in 1990 I was ten and was in my fourth or fifth grade class and a TV got rolled in and we watched as the first Gulf War began, presented by a CNN newscast. For one year there was this conflict and then it ended. Then from 1991 to 2001 I knew peace. Now there were the events in Somalia and Kosovo and I am not sure on what scope they were by comparison, but we didn't have a war mindset. We even asked "is it right for us to intervene and do these things in these countries."
Since 2001 I have not known but war. Not just the conflicts existing in the middle east, but the war mindset. The war doctrines and expressions. The war time sentiments. Time was I could watch a show without seeing these sentiments. I wouldn't have to hear the words "We are at war" to bring justification when another has said "we shouldn't do this terrible thing"
Star Trek was my place where I could find another universe where wars were averted, where peace was a solution, where pacifists were revered even if not followed and they were certainly not reviled.
I worry when some want to bring Star Trek into the mud of violence, war, conflict and sentiments of "our values change when we are at war, because winning the war, even at the cost of our own ethics, is all that matters"
To those who want to do this to Star Trek, be they writer or fan, I have this.
HAD I the heavens? embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
Well, even in a fantasy environment, if you're not willing to do what it takes, to win, when you're attacked, you deserve to lose. As well as this, No civilization has the right to exist. It either exists, or it fails. But it doesn't have an inherent right to exist.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Well, even in a fantasy environment, if you're not willing to do what it takes, to win, when you're attacked, you deserve to lose. As well as this, No civilization has the right to exist. It either exists, or it fails. But it doesn't have an inherent right to exist.
This is fallacious thinking. You're failing to see any difference between war mongering and self defense (there IS a difference). Saying "what it takes to win" is intellectually bankrupt, because after the fact, just about any atrocity, no matter how unnecessary or counterproductive, can be blanket justified with this sort of rhetoric.
Nope. Not here, and not in real life. Apartheid, lebensraum, the Great Leap Forward, and many other horrid things have all been justified by your idea. None were necessary, mind you, but were certainly sold as "we need to do this thing because we must survive and can't survive without it!"
It is quite possible to "win" without becoming a monster in just about all dilemmas where winning is possible, outside of course very specific scenarios that modern writers seem so excited about: terrorists with OMG TICKING TIME BOMBS that will only tell you where the bomb is if you torture them, zombie apocalypses that go out of their way to justify barbarism and cruelty to fellow survivors because the writers (and audience) love it that way, and so on.
And what does the ability to defend a ship have to do with your champing-at-the-bit need to find militarism wherever you please?
You're playing a cognitive trick here: nothing short of an unarmed, defenseless vessel would satisfy your definition of "peaceful" yet you would probably mock such a thing as hopelessly doomed. Add a phaser, some torpedoes, and shields, and you have the "warship" you seek.
I'm not buying it. And neither should you, except you're selectively finding things you're looking for and ignoring the rest of the picture.
LOL. I mentioned Picard's Enterprise is often referred to as the flagship of the Federation; bpharma confirmed it, and added that the fact can readily be witnessed on many occasions thru-out ST:TNG. Absolutely true. And I'm not sure why anyone would even want to contest it -- especially so bitterly.
Inconvenient truths often sting, I get that. But your post smacks of angry desperation. And there's no need for that at all; especially since neither I -- nor bpharma, I think -- has any intention to use the 'flagship' matter as evidence of the Federation being primarily a military organization. That is all in your own head. All we said was that there's ample room to conclude that, in ST:TNG at least, there seems to exist a clear amalgamation between civil and military functions of the major ships we see.
Comments
^^ A straw man, in its entirety.
I have yet to see anyone claim Star Fleet is merely "a militaristic territory-seeking resource grabbing armada masquerading as a fleet of explorers." I have, however, seen people like myself point out that there's a somewhat odd duality between Picard's spaceship of exploration also doubling as the military might of the Federation. And I even added that, for practical purposes, I can readily see why the writers didn't want an entire separate (anonymous) military that would have to be drummed up for each and every conflict. ST was a show, after all, in which we wanted both: an idealistic image of a United Federation of Planets, with a sensible admix of pew-pew.
Finally someone who understood it.
Ever ran around from diplomat to diplomat (where was it? Memory Alpha?) to try and do these annoying diplomatic missions? That gets old really, really fast. People want their spaceships to fight with: simple as that.
There are many other aspects about the 'real' Federation than mere combat, but harder to deploy in a useful game-mechanic way in STO. "Welcome to Season 8! Meet the Voth; we're friends with them... The End."
Picard's ship being the military might of the Federation would be a presumption. It would take one to presume that the ship were the most armed and battle ready ship of the fleet. The ship was armed and capable of battle. The writers did create a seperate entity that could be drummed up for conflict but wasn't used entirely. Saucer seperation. Putting some personell on the star drive, while the rest were safely in the saucer during a conflict.
We are all too ready to embrace war, militarism and destructive angles too redily and find them where they can be found in things like Star Trek to justify these wants. If a future utopia bends to war and sacrifices ethics for resources and territory, we feel justified.
Perhaps despite its defense, despite shields, photon torpedos and phasers. DESPITE all this, it is a ship of exploration.
Star Trek, in most iterations, is a morality play. We do not like being taught morals.
Pre-emptivly. Yes. This is a game. We can argue about the game and leave it, cause it's a game. It's just a game.
But we argue on ethics. When ew do, we aren't arguing about a game. It isn't just a game. If that deserves a thread lock or movement to another section, then this shouldn't be in general discussion anymore.
STO should have ship fights, becaue they're enjoyable and fun and exciting and neat looking and all.
But this thread was creating to speak on ethics.
I'm sorry but you did see the many times when the Enterprise D was called the flagship of the federation and most advanced ship?
Hell just watch generations again and wait for the bit where the Klingons say they'd be bouncing off the walls stupid to even attempt to attack it as they would be obliterated.
Sure it wasn't a ship intended for war but it was more than capable of blasting any hostiles to oblivion.
It is through repetition that we learn our weakness.
A master with a stone is better than a novice with a sword.
Has damage got out of control?
This is the last thing I will post.
And you actually did a damn good job of it IMO.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Also, let's not forget that as of the current state of the game, the Federation is on a WAR footing. The Klingons, opportunistic vultures that they are, got uppity and tried to take over all the territory lost by the Romulans and decided to punch anyone who disagreed with them. The Romulan Remnant (not the Republic) is lashing out because they're angry at their loss and now serve the Iconians. The Dominion are sore losers and are picking another fight with the Alpha Quadrant. The Borg came back with a vengeance out of nowhere. For all intents and purposes, as far as life in the Federation goes, the entire galaxy is going to hell in a handbasket and it's unbelievably naive to think ANY of these factions are just going to leave the Federation alone if we ask nicely. As such, Starfleet is on a war footing.
As for the peaceful, diplomatic side of Starfleet, only naive hippies really claim that we should never, ever resort to war. War isn't the first choice, but it's always a possibility. When somebody has no interest in negotiating because they think they can just TAKE what they want from you, they're not going to talk to you, no matter how hard you try. They will just kill you, loot your corpse, and go on to pillage and burn the city/planet behind you. Those diplomats and negotiators who broker peace are great men and women, worthy of commendation for what they do when it works, but at the end of the day, it's the men and women standing on the wall, ready to fight and give life and limb, who keep us safe.
In Undiscovered Country when they learned of peace talks with the Klingon Empire the first question was. "Does this mean moth balling the Star Fleet?"
Answer: "Our scientific and exploration missions should be unaffected."
From this we can assume that at that time the admiralty felt the primary role of the Star Fleet was battle readiness. The reason why is they had aggressive neighbors and needed to be ready to defend themselves.
As things settled down the ships became more capable of long duration cruises. But the crews would need time off. Starting a family is fairly normal among humans, and assumed as such in other species. So berthing for families if you have served enough time on the ship. (Thomas Riker mentioned time on board before he could have dependants.) And right up till she was shot down the Enterprise D had her civilian population. One prays that the Oddyessy did not when they encountered the Dominion. Otherwise it is not just the loss of the uniformed Starfleet members. But the tragedy of putting civilians in harms way.
Ethically, knowing they were going to engage hostiles they did/do remove them from ships.
Now we look at the Federation of STO and see only the part of what Starfleet has to do. They are the fighting arm. Would they prefer to hold a balm and heal the sick and walk in peace? Certainly, but that is not what they have. They have a war. More than one based on how many people are taking shots at them.
The Klingon Empire, the True Way, the Romulan Remnant, pirates of varying shades, the Dominion (fraction there of), the Breen, the Borg, the Undine. And now the Voth. Every major power and many minor ones shoot first and don't bother talking after at all. So the fleet is forced to work on the same rule set. Shoot what is in front of you and pray you are doing justice. Because only history can tell them if they are right at this point.
We do not see most of the Federation here, only those ships and crews engaged. To evaluate an entire nation on just her soldiers at war. . . Well look to the conflicts around today and judge a people by only the fighters.
The Federation, in all her multitudes and diversity, tries to be the good guys. If you let them, they will be your friend. If you let them.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
To somewhat quote Von Clauswitz "war is just diplomacy through other means." Sometimes, it comes down to a fight. Better have a gun handy, or be prepared to surrender that which you hold dear.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
There was even a one-off mention that the very creation of a ship as large and powerful as the Galaxy-class was considered by some powers to be a threat in and of itself.
It's very much the same argument as the US's carrier fleet being more often used for humanitarian purposes than combat ones - it's easy to say and even easy to demonstrate - those carriers regularly lead international efforts to bring power, supplies, and medicine to disaster areas.
No matter how many times you say that, though, it still doesn't diminish the impression generated by one country building eleven ships which with their escorts and aircraft exceed the military power of most entire nations.
Even if they were exclusively used on their humanitarian missions, they would still be called military ships, their existence would still be considered by any military confronting that navy, and their mere appearance near contested areas would still be decried as an aggressive act (even as it is, they don't have to launch a single aircraft or fire a single weapon to earn official protests and send local dictators into hysterics).
To get it back on Star Trek, consider the episode Conundrum, and the Lysians' reaction to the Enterprise simply showing up.
My character Tsin'xing
Two words.
Prime Directive. They are shooting at you because Starfleet is in violation of everything dear to the General Orders of Starfleet and the Prime Directive of the United Federation of Planets. The fact that they were there first is a clear indication that Starfleet is interfering in any sentient life forms progression.
Hell even Kirk was not this brutal gung ho with the Klingons.
It is what it is, and there are dinosaurs in STO, but for the love of Sweet ... lets not pretend that this is remotely what Starfleet stands for, even IN times of war.
The federation's current stance is this:
Sic vis pacis, para bellum.
The Federation would never in a million years follow such a course of action. Need I remind you that one of the reasons why the Federation was founded was to escape the nightmare of war.
kirk was once in a similar situation.... He ordered the implementation of General Order 24. So yeah, the current situation makes sense to me.
My character Tsin'xing
("A Taste of Armageddon") Kirk was calling Anan 7's bluff. There is no way he would have had the conscience to wipe out that civilization when he was there to try and prevent the needless sacrifice of people through disintegration.
General Order 24, was only ever "called for" on two occasion. The above and another by Captain Garth ("Whom Gods Destroy")
Neither were ever carried out.
Oh my G@d ~ I'm such a geek!
What did he do to DS9?
He pranked some members, got decked by Sisko and basically kept pointing out that some serious **** was about to go down.
He was willing to let them die yes, but he was pointing them in the right direction to avoid it too.
One noteworthy (and easily missed) thing about Q is that in some ways he is not inherently sadistic. Simple fact of the matter is though, he does not often think on the level of individual mortals, with the captains being an exception (presumably because they are so extraordinary). They think along the lines of larger groups and even whole civilizations.
It's a very interesting point - if you follow the canon and extended canon, Q goes from being a random bully in Encounter at Farpoint to making sure that the Federation in fact survives. The entire point of the Borg encounter he forced was to show them what was out there. And although it wasn't written at the time, he would have known that the Borg were ALREADY COMING, so the Federation needed a slap in the face before it really was too late. He considered the casualties sustained trivial to make the point, and chances are, he was probably right.
The Omega Directive supersedes the Prime Directive.
Omega molecules are so dangerous that they must be eliminated at "ANY" cost, this is hard canon.
And what does the ability to defend a ship have to do with your champing-at-the-bit need to find militarism wherever you please?
You're playing a cognitive trick here: nothing short of an unarmed, defenseless vessel would satisfy your definition of "peaceful" yet you would probably mock such a thing as hopelessly doomed. Add a phaser, some torpedoes, and shields, and you have the "warship" you seek.
I'm not buying it. And neither should you, except you're selectively finding things you're looking for and ignoring the rest of the picture.
I think a good number of the posters here, under the guise of "war is possible" want a "war is inevitable" approach to Trek. It may be an over-reaction to the majority of the series and its messages, or an infatuation with a minority of the series (especially Deep Space Nine) at the expense of all else.
Thing is, you may all get your wish due to popular demand. Trek will be poorer for it, but it will certainly sell.
You'll excuse me if I don't consider Janeway's actions remotely demonstrative of what any other Starfleet officer would have done. She is an incompetent, violent, hypocritical psychopath who should've been cashiered the minute Starfleet got back in touch with Voyager.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
That is going too far. She would have a lot to answer for with Starfleet Command, certainly, and may have even been retired upon return to Federation space.
Hyperbolizing her doesn't help analysis here. That she became an admiral in the later TNG movies implies either writer fiat or a bending of Federation codes and ethics after the Dominion War, that much I might concede.
Since 2001 I have not known but war. Not just the conflicts existing in the middle east, but the war mindset. The war doctrines and expressions. The war time sentiments. Time was I could watch a show without seeing these sentiments. I wouldn't have to hear the words "We are at war" to bring justification when another has said "we shouldn't do this terrible thing"
Star Trek was my place where I could find another universe where wars were averted, where peace was a solution, where pacifists were revered even if not followed and they were certainly not reviled.
I worry when some want to bring Star Trek into the mud of violence, war, conflict and sentiments of "our values change when we are at war, because winning the war, even at the cost of our own ethics, is all that matters"
To those who want to do this to Star Trek, be they writer or fan, I have this.
HAD I the heavens? embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
Ok we get it you hate janeway, got that printed on the underwear also?
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
IF the order would have been carried out the Eminians would have been either destroyed completely or bombed back to the stone age.... It's not completely clear which. Either way, the Enterprise and Vendikar would have been saved.
My character Tsin'xing
Well, even in a fantasy environment, if you're not willing to do what it takes, to win, when you're attacked, you deserve to lose. As well as this, No civilization has the right to exist. It either exists, or it fails. But it doesn't have an inherent right to exist.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
This is fallacious thinking. You're failing to see any difference between war mongering and self defense (there IS a difference). Saying "what it takes to win" is intellectually bankrupt, because after the fact, just about any atrocity, no matter how unnecessary or counterproductive, can be blanket justified with this sort of rhetoric.
Nope. Not here, and not in real life. Apartheid, lebensraum, the Great Leap Forward, and many other horrid things have all been justified by your idea. None were necessary, mind you, but were certainly sold as "we need to do this thing because we must survive and can't survive without it!"
It is quite possible to "win" without becoming a monster in just about all dilemmas where winning is possible, outside of course very specific scenarios that modern writers seem so excited about: terrorists with OMG TICKING TIME BOMBS that will only tell you where the bomb is if you torture them, zombie apocalypses that go out of their way to justify barbarism and cruelty to fellow survivors because the writers (and audience) love it that way, and so on.
LOL. I mentioned Picard's Enterprise is often referred to as the flagship of the Federation; bpharma confirmed it, and added that the fact can readily be witnessed on many occasions thru-out ST:TNG. Absolutely true. And I'm not sure why anyone would even want to contest it -- especially so bitterly.
Inconvenient truths often sting, I get that. But your post smacks of angry desperation. And there's no need for that at all; especially since neither I -- nor bpharma, I think -- has any intention to use the 'flagship' matter as evidence of the Federation being primarily a military organization. That is all in your own head. All we said was that there's ample room to conclude that, in ST:TNG at least, there seems to exist a clear amalgamation between civil and military functions of the major ships we see.