View Single Post
Old January 9 2012, 05:34 AM   #38
The Overlord
Re: Is Picard a hypocrite?

horatio83 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
horatio83 wrote: View Post
If you refer to my acceptance of such trade-offs in one case and not another, the difference is that here the Federation decided about Federation citizens whereas in the Ba'ku issue the Federation decided the fate of non-Federation citizens.
If there had been a war your government might have the right to redraw the border lines and force you to move. If oil is found under your house your government might also have the right to force you to move and compensate you for it but only your government and not any other government.
Problem is this...

The settlers of Dorvan V left Earth two centuries prior, which would have put it around the beginnings of the Federation. If they left Earth for good it could be seen as them renouncing their citizenship. If they renounced their Earth citizenship prior to the formation of the Federation, their citizenship could be in doubt.

So the Federation may have given away a world that wasn't theirs to give away...
That's the conflict I mentioned earlier, even if they are Federation citizens according to some Federation laws they definitely do not perceive them as subjects of the UFP.
Same with many settlers on the Cardassian border, they live a harsh life in the "outer rim" beyond the comforts of the "core worlds", they are proud of whatever they have created there and they don't take order from anyone but themselves ... until one day the bureaucrats far away decide that their world is no longer theirs. Their world is probably too small to send a representative to the council so they feel disempowered.

It is not clear what the best way is, whether the Feds or the Maquis is right or whether there should be third options. That's why we love the Maquis stories, isn't it, shades of grey and so on.

The Overlord wrote: View Post
And the Romulans didn't honor that treaty either, the Federation did not develop cloaking tech and the Romulans did everything besides open war fare to undermine the peace between them and the Federation. I don't see how planning to invade to Vulcan is abiding by a peace agreement. Sometimes I think the Federation has the worst diplomats ever, where their whole strategy is to give the other side everything it wants and hope they won't come back with more insane demands later.

Like I said before a contract where one side doesn't honor it isn't worth the paper its printed on, if you sign a peace treaty and the other side has no intention of honoring it, its worthless.

Also considering civilizations in Star Trek were often supposed to allegories for nation states in the real world, I think we should be comparing these civilizations to real world nation states.
There have been some border incidents, some plots and the Vulcan "Trojan Horse" mission but war between the Romulan Empire and the Federation did not ever break out again. For me this sounds like a success. Yet if this is a bad deal for the Federation in your eyes, what do you suggest they should do differently?
And if Spock hadn't revealed the Romulans were about to invade Vulcan and the treaty would have been the worst kind of failure. A treaty that almost fails and only succeeds by chance, is not a good treaty.

What I do, after the attempted invasion of Vulcan, I would have said the treaty is now on thin ice and if there are any more "plots", any more ploys to start a conflict or any other bad faith measures by the Romulan Empire, the treaty would be void and the Federation would start developing its own cloaking tech. If the Romulan government isn't acting in good faith, then I see the treaty as worthless, either the Romulans will have to act in good faith or they will show their true colors, that they had no real intention of honoring the treaty and that has always been a sham, but they won't be able to hide behind it anymore, expecting other people to play by the rules, while they just ignore them.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote