View Single Post
Old June 12 2013, 01:51 AM   #83
Rear Admiral
Gary7's Avatar
Location: Near Manhattan иии in an alternate reality
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
You're really gonna do this, Timo? You're really going down that road?
He couldn't resist I guess. I wasn't sure if it was merely to goad me on, desperate to twist things around until I give up my side of the argument because he might lose. Or, he's revealing a covert perspective about Star Trek he has been harboring that is rather paradoxical to the premise of the series.

The Prime Directive does not bind Starfleet officers to obey the laws of other cultures, especially cultures who are already aware of the existence of alien life. It's even questionable whether or not the prime directive actually applied to the Eminians for that very reason.
Just to clarify, Starfleet officers are expected to respect the laws of other cultures, but exceptions are permitted when warranted on a reasonable basis. Eminiar Seven did not disclose to the Enterprise that they are fighting a "theoretical war" and that the Enterprise is a target that could be "logically" hit. No, anyone in their right mind would know that for an outsider this must be explained as they'd instead expect a physical attack. This was never qualified by Anan. So the Enterprise was not truly explained the nature of the threat.

We have a pretty good understanding of what Khan's ideology is, and it's clear that Khan doesn't think he's doing anything wrong. Probably, neither do any of his followers. We also understand Kirk's ideology and we understand that Kirk and his followers don't think they're doing anything wrong. The difference between the two is what they respectively think isn't wrong. Khan believes that sabotage, terrorism, torture and mass murder are acceptable (possibly even preferable) means to achieve his goals. Kirk is not known to use torture and avoids killing people when possible. Their MORAL positions are not even comparable.
Thank you. This is pretty much what I've been saying, but our debate adversary here is hell bent on continuing down that twisted dirty road of incongruity... all in the name of avoiding the phrase "Ah OK, you're right--good point."

Timo wrote:
The trouble seems to be that you can't recognize TOS for what it objectively is: an ultra-conservative 1960s show about a military man who unquestioningly fights for a single philosophy and mercilessly stomps down others.
I've been on this board a lot of years, Timo, I've seen a lot of strange things come out of your posts, but this one in particular is gonna rate a special exhibit in the "Weird Shit Timo Comes Up With" hall of fame.
I'm glad to see that another TBBS veteran shares the same point of view. I've had one or two perplexing run-ins with Timo before, but this one "takes the cake". He will only give up a debate position if it's something incidental or not a key overreaching aspect. But something fundamental like the depiction of Khan... he chose a position and refuses to even budge, no matter how compelling the counter-argument. It is enough of an experience where I will now avoid debating with him in the future, because I don't want to risk the waste of time, going down a road that will not be productive to the enlightenment of Star Trek.
Remembering Ensign Mallory.
Gary7 is offline   Reply With Quote