View Single Post
Old January 9 2012, 04:23 AM   #27
The Overlord
Re: Is Picard a hypocrite?

horatio83 wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post
Removing the aboriginals from their new planet was done to appease a morally repulsive dictatorship who had no real desire for peace with the Federation.
Some folks thought the same about the Klingons and yet a hundred years later a fragile peace between the Feds and the Klingons existed.
Nobody in Starfleet believes that the Romulans have a real desire with peace, their agenda is unlimited expansion. Nonetheless a peace treaty between the two powers exists and it is worth to fight for any time.

Playing the "oh my God, they are wicked fascists, no peace with them" is something I agree with if we talk about intraspecies conflicts, i.e. our really existing world. Not so in the case of interspecies conflicts, here such rhetoric is plain warmongering. Plenty of nasty folks out there, you can't wage war against all of them just because you got a moral boner.
Peace between the Klingons and Federation only happened after one of their moons exploded, I doubt the Klingons would have been impressed with the type of weak posturing the Federation did in "Journey's End". This type of hand ringing just makes aggressive regimes think you are weak and then they come back with more demands.

Its not war mongering to call a spade a spade. Yes, after the Dominion war, it is likely that there is peace between Federation and the Cardassian Union, but that only occurred after a war that killed billions and after the Federation occupied Cardassia and likely replaced.

Sometimes there cannot peace between nations, if a particularly bad regime exists is power in one of these nations. As long as the Nazis controlled Germany, there was never going to be peace between Germany and its neighbours. The same deal with Cardassia, as long as Cardassia was controlled by a military, there would never be peace between cardassia and the Federation, there was only peace after that government was gone.

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post

They moved away from the Federation though,
At the end of the episode as part of the compromise that let them stay on the planet before that they were still federation citizens.

A short while later, the Central Command did everything short of open warfare to try and force the colonists out of the DMZ, how is that a compromise? Its not a compromise if one side has no intention of abiding by the deal.

7thsealord wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post
In "Journey's End" Picard was, reluctantly, willing to remove a group of aboriginals from this planet they moved to, because it was claimed by the Cardassian Union. In Star Trek Insurrection, Picard was ordered to remove the Ba'ku, aliens who looked like white people, from an a planet they moved to, Picard actively fought against his superiors. That seems like a contradiction to me.

Why is Picard willing to removed the aboriginals from their adopted home, but he fights the removal of the Ba'ku with every fiber of his being.

Removing the aboriginals from their new planet was done to appease a morally repulsive dictatorship who had no real desire for peace with the Federation. Removing the Ba'ku could have resulted in medical cures that would have helped billions of people, one of these goals sounds better then the other. So is Picard a hypocrite on this issue?
I don't see a contradiction here.

In 'Journey's End', the people were (at that point) still Federation citizens, which I daresay Star Fleet felt obligated to protect. If they stayed, the Cardassians would see this as the UFP breaking its word and intruding on what was supposed to now be THEIR turf. If the Cardassians then started acting aggressively against Federation citizens, what was Star Fleet supposed to do then? Start another war?
And yet another war between the Cardassian Union and the Federation did happen and since the Cardassian Union had the Dominion as allies, this war was far worse

7thsealord wrote: View Post
Also, most of the .... less palatable aspects of the Cardassian Union were yet to be fully established. Even if they were KNOWN to be a bunch of scumbags, does it follow that the UFP should only keep its word if the other side fits the UFP's moral code?
As far back as their first appearance, it was heavily suggested that the Cardassians still had territorial ambitions on the Federation.

And if the Cardassian Union didn't really respect this treaty and did everything in their power to undermine it, how is it not worthless? If you sign a contract with someone and that person doesn't fulfill it, its a void agreement. Keeping your word when the other side has no intention to isn't wise, its just foolish.

7thsealord wrote: View Post
It is also conceivable that similar things happened on BOTH sides of the DMZ, as various groups of colonists on either side were obligated to up stakes and move on.

The Baku. Their world. Not UFP citizens. Different ballgame.
So the Federation cares far about the rights of another civilization, then the rights of its own citizens? That makes the federation seem like far less of a utopia, if the Federation council has no problem treating its own citizens as pawns.

Last edited by The Overlord; January 9 2012 at 04:44 AM.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote