View Single Post
Old February 18 2013, 05:27 AM   #172
Robert Maxwell
Robert Maxwell's Avatar
View Robert Maxwell's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Robert Maxwell Send a message via AIM to Robert Maxwell Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Robert Maxwell Send a message via Yahoo to Robert Maxwell
Re: My "Just Saw Insurrection For the First Time" Review.

sonak wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post

so again, as I wrote, you're trying to have it both ways:

1. the Baku have every right to be there because it's their planet. Find, then they're a sovereign power, and Dougherty can tell the Son'a to do what they'd like.

2. It's in Federation space, but not only does that NOT mean that eminent domain applies, it actually OBLIGATES the UFP to help the Baku!

That's simply ridiculous-pick an argument. Either it's a Federation planet and they can remove the Baku, or the Baku are an independent power, and the Federation can tell them what to go do with themselves.
The Federation has jurisdiction over the planet by virtue of it being within their space. However, that doesn't mean they have the right to relocate the people living on it without their consent. That's not trying to have it both ways, it's the Federation having limits to its power.

Finally, I'm not surprised that the UFP would act inconsistently-I'm surprised that slavery and mass murder DON'T serve as a cause for intervention for them, but removal of a small village to benefit billions with a revolutionary medical advance DOES. It's not the inconsistency, it's the wild imbalance in the cause for intervention.
Had Bajor been in Federation space, they would not have let the Cardassians have it. For that matter, the Federation did fight a lengthy border war with the Cardassians pre-TNG, so who is to say the Federation didn't try to curb Cardassian war crimes?

the Federation has jurisdiction, and it's their territory, but they don't have the right to re-locate a small group within their territory for a greater good, but they ARE obligated to defend that group?
It's Federation space. Not necessarily a Federation planet over which they have jurisdiction to do as they please. You can understand the distinction between a planet and the space around it, yes?

so they have all of the responsibilities of protecting this group, yet they have no authority over them, and can't remove them even if 99% of Federation citizens voted to do so?
They aren't legally obligated to protect the Ba'ku. I only said they have a moral obligation to if the Ba'ku ask for help, since the Ba'ku are effectively defenseless and the So'na are aggressors who a) are allied with the Dominion and b) have no business in Federation space at all.

Why is the Federation in a position where they have all of the responsibilities to the Baku, yet none of the rights as far as governing them? Why would they agree to such a situation?
They have no legal responsibility to the Ba'ku. You constantly saying that's what I said is a total distortion. The Federation didn't have to "agree" to anything. If they don't want the bother of protecting the Briar Patch, they should let someone else have it.

I could see if it was a mutual defense treaty or something, but the UFP weren't even aware of the Baku's existence and there's no reason to sign such a treaty with the Baku.
Of course, they had no such treaty, nor did anyone suggest anything of the sort. You're simply making things up to turn my argument into something it isn't. Why you would do that, I don't know. Either criticize what I actually said or don't, but don't make shit up.
Robert Maxwell is offline   Reply With Quote