Did Khan target Harewood's daughter?

But then why not tell us (the audience) that? Sure, it's in Khan's character, but would undermine the mid-film attempts to pass Khan off as a sympathetic character.

I just don't see it. Today there are many very sick children. If I look at my own office, I know of several associates whose kids are battling serious illnesses. While we can expect medicine to advance and assume that it has done so significantly by the 23rd century, there are still doctors. There will still be disease, perhaps and probably new and scarier ones. That there is one desk job Joe with a sick daughter in what looked to be a large facility is one of the more realistic aspects of the movie.

 

Pretty much the way I see it. Besides, even an evil mastermind genius is going to want the simplest plan possible, less of a chance of anything going wrong. Therefore, manipulating the parent of an already sick child is simpler than infecting a child for the purposes of manipulating their parents.

Plus, from a story point of view, the point is that Khan's blood has the ability to cure anything, setting up for later when Kirk dies and they need to get a sample of Khan's blood. You lose that if Khan is curing an illness he gave the girl.

 

Well actually I am just playing 's advocate. Its just that DonIago's conclusion didn't seem to follow logically from his premise. Nothing stands out to me to suggest that Khan engineered the situation, but then I'm not so sure that the chances are that great that one of the 42 (that number rings a bell anyway) people working in the target facility would have a child with a fatal incurable disease.

You make an interesting point though: Who exactly were they trying to pass Khan off as sympathetic to? Not the audience and not Star Fleet. Both groups know what he did and I don't find "creating the problem" much worse than taking advantage of it. Either way you are killing lots of people just to gather the SF leadership together. True, SF might be able to work out he created the situation, but maybe not and we, the audience, still don't know. Actually I don't see it makes much difference. Either you buy the whole "Is the anything you wouldn't do for your family" thing, or you don't.

Sure, its the simplest, if we assume there is a guy with a sick child and he is prepared to be manipulated. If not, Khan might be better picking suitable parents first, then arranging the child's illness.

I don't think that actually follows logically. All we know for sure is Khan's blood can cure that particular girl's illness. Neither option implies it can (or can't) cure everything. Although from the Tribble business, we do know it cures death so ... .

 

I don't think the movie suggests Khan's responsible for the state of Harewood's daughter, and I don't think it necessarily occurred to TPTB to suggest that. I just found it an interesting possibility that would be well within the range of Khan's capabilities and not outside the realm of possibility.

One might assume that the illness's suggested incurability implies that it's also uncommon. If so, then the odds of an S31 operative's daughter having it seem further reduced. There's also the question of how Khan would have discovered this information to begin with. Did he overhear it while standing around the water cooler?

It could be argued that if you need someone to be compromised due to a sick child, the easiest way to get there is to get the child sick yourself.

OTOH, since we don't know the details of the illness itself, there's no way to say how easy it might have been for Khan to attain a sample of it.

Agreed with your last point. If Khan knows his blood can cure basically any illness then as long as the illness he gives the girl is something he knows his blood can cure, he's all set.

 

I agree with that and it was a good thought.

Not sure, perhaps he can hack medical data bases and cross reference with SF personal or something?

 

I guess it's a question of whether Khan would consider it more useful to try to find out whether there was someone exploitable on-hand, or whether he'd just cut to the chase and precipitate such a scenario.

 

Those with cancer and AIDS, just to name a few would disagree.

 

Well, first of all Star Trek doesn't occur in the present, but rather in a future where medical knowledge in particular seems to be greatly advanced. Secondly, I said "implies". And "might".