Dumb and Bizarre Trek Novel Moments...

[Christopher]

MNM wrote:

---

...and the Thalaron weapon stuff was to show these characters dont cross certain lines, regardless of the consequences.

The fact was, the thalaron weapon wouldn't have done much good. There's no way it could've wiped out enough of the Borg before they adapted to it. Ultimately, regardless of which specific weapon you're talking about, brute force could never be the solution to the Borg problem. So Picard's desire to lash out at his tormentors was blinding him to a better solution, a more mature and intelligent solution than just "keep finding ways to hit them harder."

[ProtoAvatar]

Christopher wrote:

---

The fact was, the thalaron weapon wouldn't have done much good. There's no way it could've wiped out enough of the Borg before they adapted to it. Ultimately, regardless of which specific weapon you're talking about, brute force could never be the solution to the Borg problem. So Picard's desire to lash out at his tormentors was blinding him to a better solution, a more mature and intelligent solution than just "keep finding ways to hit them harder."

At the very least, the thalaron weapon would have slowed the borg down, would have saved worlds, BILLIONS of lives.
In other words, the thalaron weapon would have done a LOT of good.

And the 'moral' reason that 'justified' not using the thalaron weapon had so many holes in it that it was ridiculous:
It's immoral to 'kill' in self defence enemy soldiers;
They worried that use of the weapon would have created an arms race in a nebulous future, when complete extermination was upon them (in those conditions, they should pray to be so lucky as to be alive in a month and worry about a cold war).

[MNM]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

It's immoral to 'kill' in self defence enemy soldiers;

The point made of course was that the drones were less soliders as they were slaves, forced to do things against their will, and in the end the heroes decided that it would be immoral to try and mass murder them using the thalaron weapon. I have no problem with that decision, as Christopher said, the weapon would never have worked anyway. Certainly not worked to a level that would have stopped the Borg armada.

[Christopher]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

At the very least, the thalaron weapon would have slowed the borg down, would have saved worlds, BILLIONS of lives.
In other words, the thalaron weapon would have done a LOT of good.

Maybe, temporarily, until the Borg brought even more cubes through from the Delta Quadrant and wiped out those billions of lives a few days or weeks later. We're not talking about anything remotely resembling symmetrical warfare here. The Borg's numbers and resources profoundly exceeded those of the Federation and all its allies combined.

The point, again, was that it's shortsighted to assume the right way to solve a problem is to shoot at it, that all you need is a bigger weapon and you can save the day. Ultimately, nobody can do brute force on the same level as the Borg, so it's like fighting a hurricane with a leaf blower. Replace the leaf blower with a jet engine and it's still barely going to make any difference against the hurricane. The Borg were too big a problem to be solved with dumb brute force. The only solution was for our Starfleet heroes to remember the values that they've always stood for, wield reason instead of force, and find a smarter, better approach. That's what Star Trek has always been about -- finding the smart way to solve a problem rather than just hitting it until it breaks. Recognizing that some problems can't be solved by force, only made worse, and that focusing exclusively on force can blind you to other, more effective solutions.

[ProtoAvatar]

Christopher wrote:

---

Maybe, temporarily, until the Borg brought even more cubes through from the Delta Quadrant and wiped out those billions of lives a few days or weeks later. We're not talking about anything remotely resembling symmetrical warfare here. The Borg's numbers and resources profoundly exceeded those of the Federation and all its allies combined.

"Maybe, temporarily" - it would have 'temporarily' saved BILLIONS OF LIVES, it would have gained time for Starfleet to come up with a new plan.
Not using it condemned, in the end, BILLIONS of federation - and not only - citizens to death. The borg would not have managed to kill them until the Caelliar took pity on the Federation.

"a few days or weeks later" - That would be 70 to 100 YEARS later until the borg could bring reinforcements - I even quoted the relevant passages from "Destiny" to you once, Christopher.

MNM wrote:

---

The point made of course was that the drones were less soliders as they were slaves

Who were an enemy army killing BILLIONS of federation citizens each hour. Who were, practically, impossible to save.
If, under these conditions, Picard&co are not willing to kill in self-defense, if they have such an uncompromisingly do-not-kill-in-any-situation morals, they are not fit to serve in Starfleet, who is sworn to defend the Federation and the lives of its citizens.


The Jem'hadar were also slaves to their genetic conditioning, correct? By your argument, Starfleet had no right to kill in self defense a single Jem'hadar - after all, they had no choice. The Federation should have surrendered, let Weyoun exterminate Earth (as he was planning) and turn all Alpha/Beta quadrant civilizations into slaves. Yes?

[Hartzilla2007]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

"Maybe, temporarily" - it would have 'temporarily' saved BILLIONS OF LIVES, it would have gained time for Starfleet to come up with a new plan.
Not using it condemned, in the end, BILLIONS of federation - and not only - citizens to death. The borg would not have managed to kill them until the Caelliar took pity on the Federation.

"a few days or weeks later" - That would be 70 to 100 YEARS later until the borg could bring reinforcements - I even quoted the relevant passages from "Destiny" to you once, Christopher.

Well considering how everything worked out I think they didn't need the weapon.

[JoeZhang]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

Well considering how everything worked out I think they didn't need the weapon.

"Let's not use this weapon for tactical advantage in case some god like aliens swoop in at the end of the book to save us".

[ProtoAvatar]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

Well considering how everything worked out I think they didn't need the weapon.

Hartzilla2007, using the thalaron weapon would have saved BILLLIONS of lives in the end. These BILLIONS died. How is that "everything working out"?

[Hartzilla2007]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Hartzilla2007, using the thalaron weapon would have saved BILLLIONS of lives in the end. These BILLIONS died. How is that "everything working out"?

They didn't get around to consider using the damned thing until after the Borg were on their way to the nebula so using it wouldn't have saved those that had ALREDAY DIED AT THAT POINT, plus this al depends on the Borg never having encountered Thalaron radiation before.

[ProtoAvatar]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

They didn't get around to consider using the damned thing until after the Borg were on their way to the nebula so using it wouldn't have saved those that had ALREDAY DIED AT THAT POINT, plus this al depends on the Borg never having encountered Thalaron radiation before.

Seven 'got around' to using the thalaron weapon even before the borg came on mass - and, since then, they didn't even use the weapon when the borg were burning everything in their path, killing BILLIONS - because of that so-called 'moral' argument.

I'll tell you again - NOT using the weapon condemned BILLIONS to death, Hartzilla2007!

[Hartzilla2007]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Seven 'got around' to using the thalaron weapon even before the borg came on mass - and, since then, they didn't even use the weapon when the borg were burning everything in their path, killing BILLIONS - because of that so-called 'moral' argument.

I'll tell you again - NOT using the weapon condemned BILLIONS to death, Hartzilla2007!

So I take it the Federation should have killed the Founders too, then used the nanoprobe weapons to take out Species 8472, and finally glased the members of the Typhon Pact just incase they turn out to be a major threat and maybe to keep the rest of the Alpha Qudrant residents in line. I mean if you're going to shit on everything your civilization is founded on why only get rid of one enemy when you can go and crush them all.

[ProtoAvatar]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

So I take it the Federation should have killed the Founders too, then used the nanoprobe weapons to take out Species 8472, and finally glased the members of the Typhon Pact just incase they turn out to be a major threat and maybe to keep the rest of the Alpha Qudrant residents in line. I mean if you're going to shit on everything your civilization is founded on why only get rid of one enemy when you can go and crush them all.

You've only managed to present obvious straw-man arguments, Hartzilla2007.

[Hartzilla2007]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

You've only managed to present obvious straw-man arguments, Hartzilla2007.

Says that guy who thinks killing the Founders was wrong, but killing an army of brain wahsed slaves is the greatest thin ever without getting the hypocrisy of it.

Any way to bring this thread back to it's actual topic

Why the hell would Stafleet need a wargame to test a landable saucer in Rouge Saucer and why would an environmental terrorist organization unleash a virus weapon that they plan to cure to teach a lesson but not have a cure for in Avenger?

[ProwlAlpha]

What most I did not like about Destiny, was Picard's officers complaining about not being able to go back exploring. That's more important than saving your civilization.

[ProtoAvatar]

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

Says that guy who thinks killing the Founders was wrong, but killing an army of brain wahsed slaves is the greatest thin ever without getting the hypocrisy of it.

Unlike you, I argumented WHY it's wrong to genocide the Founders, not simply presented straw-man arguments, Hartzilla2007:
http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=114440&page=15

In short, they are not combatants - killing them won't save a single life.

You want to kill them in order to punish them for conquering the Alpha/Beta Quadrants.
And you think it just.
I must have missed the parts of the criminal codes that present GENOCIDE as a just punishment.

Killing a genocidal army that kills BILLIONS every hour, on the other hand, is pure self-defence, Hartzilla2007.