|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#31 |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Terra 3
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
But as for the Maquis against the Federation? They started out attacking only Cardassian targets. The Federation just repeatedly interfered, attacked them at every oppurtunity, and the such. You do get the impression they weren't actively targetting the Federation until Eddington took over though, which did up the ante to say the least, but can't be surprising in hindsight.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams |
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
And the only reason the Federation 'interfered' was because the actions of the Maquis were risking war with Cardassia.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
|
#34 | |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Terra 3
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
![]() Really Sisko and Eddington are two sides of the same coin. Both of them do have huge egos. Eddington wants to go play romantic hero, Sisko takes Eddington's betrayal personally and wants revenge. The grudge match between the two is pretty much a personal vendetta more than Federation vs Maquis. Eddington raises the stakes by using biogenic weapons against the Cardassian planets in the DMZ, Sisko responds in turn against the Maquis colonies(which is really a WTF moment when Worf, the most trigger happy guy in Trek, questions an order to fire). Eddington definitely was a war criminal by using said biogenic weapons, but Sisko was just as guilty. Sisko using that trilithium resin is the equivilent of a US sub captain firing a tactical nuke at an Arabian village he suspects of holding an Al Qaida cell without bothering to check with his chain of command. Eddington was dead on about "And you're betraying [your uniform]! The said part is you don't even realize it!" They really should have been sharing a cell.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Eddington, by the very action of initiating the use of bioweapons, demonstrated his belief in his own ego (and possibly the genocide of the Cardassian race). Eddington would have been quite happy to kill every Cardassian in the DMZ, whether or not they were involved in any actions against the Maquis colonies. Sisko, OTOH, simply leveled the playing field. By deploying the same weapons against the Maquis, Sisko merely ensured that the two sides - Cardassian and Maquis - would have to exchange colony sites. Nothing more than that. By his own actions Sisko stopped any further genocide, by ensuring that the Maquis would have to give up no more, and no less, than what the Cardassians would have suffered at Eddington's hand. Side note: If Eddington had lived to see what happened to Cardassia itself at the end of the Dominion War, I wonder what he'd think. He'd probably be laughing his ass off. Oh well...whether it be a personal comparison (Sisko vs. Eddington), or Federation vs. Maquis, the basic theme is the same. Order (Federation) vs. Chaos (Maquis). The same process repeats on multiple levels.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. |
|
|
|
|
#36 | |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Terra 3
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Really though, both Sisko and Eddington have a lot of blood on their hands. Unless you really think that on planets with thousands, if not millions of people, everyone has a spaceship they can hop onto with a few minutes notice even assuming you can get in touch with everyone. That's cheap saying Eddington's a villain for doing it but when Sisko does it, it's just "evening the playing field." The method of poisoning entire planets should be morally condemnable no matter the reasons. As for his reaction to the Cardassian masscre? That's hard. I don't think he'd be laughing his ass off, he was an antagonist sure, but he was no Gul Dukat or any other traditional Trek Villain. Assuming he surived in a Federation prison(or who knows, they might have given back his commision with all the manpower shortages during the war), in my opinion, he'd be spiteful at first, even calling it poetic justice(just like Martok) until the enormity of the statistic set in for him.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
As we have no idea how many Maquis were on the planet Sisko torpedoed, nor how much access they had to ships (given they were refugees by this point, it's quite possible they were ready to make a speedy exit if necessary) I'm not sure it's reasonable to assume there were any casualties. I can see Starfleet overlooking the situation much more readily if no death ensued, and it's obvious that Sisko didn't take any serious heat for his actions.
__________________
--DonIago It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek... "If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!" |
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Terra 3
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 | ||||||
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
The Federation of Kirk's day wouldn't leave the Maquis hanging out to dry. It says something terrible about the 24th century Federation that it would. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#40 | ||
|
Lieutenant Commander
Location: The broken state of California
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Where's the morality in that?
Again the morality of those actions are where, exactly? How is it right and fair?
__________________
Centurion: "...power is danger."
Romulan Commander: "Danger and I are old companions." - TOS episode Balance of Terror "Living in your dreams is like living in exile." - Calyx, A Stitch in Time "Shame on you, Barack Obama!" - Hillary Clinton "It's the economy, stupid." - Bill Clinton |
||
|
|
|
|
#41 | ||||||||||
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Even Nechayev didn't buy that.
It's like if the US suddenly ceeded Texas back to Mexico to settle some dispute and simply ordered the Texans to move out. Do you think they would take that laying down? No. Nor should they.
Pack up your stuff...I have just decreed YOU don't need to have and live wherever it is you do. See how YOU like having your property and life stolen from you. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#42 | |||
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Anarchy is a misunderstood concept. Literally, it means nothing more and nothing less then not believing in the benefits of a single ruler or rulingbody. End of story. All the other horror stories connected to anarchy are the result of punk teenagers in the (mostly) the UK, who had no sense of identity and used a misinterpreted version of anarchy as something to rally behind, thinking it ment they could plunder, riot and be violent. That's not what anarchy is. And just because leaders are chosen by the people, doesn't automatically mean that all there actions are just and right. Just look at history to see how that has worked out so well over the centuries. And honoustly people, some of the reactions of people in this thread.... It's just and right that these colonists were burned for not listening to their government?? That's not really the message of understanding and having respect for others and their opinions that Trek is teaching us.
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
Isn't that basicly what happened with the war for independence in the United States? When the colonies said we want to be independant? When England said no? And then the colonists and England went to war? Over a random piece of property...? Not trying to start a flame-war here, just playing advocate to the devil. But it seems a bit weird that some people are judging the Maquis for something that other leaders or groups of rebels have been praised for in the past.
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: Australia
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
I feel sorry for those who where negative impacted by the treaty, and maybe the Federation did give up too much in the Treaty. In the end the Federation was looking to end the risk of a restart of a war against the Cardassians while at the time there was instability in the Klingon Empire, the Romulan Star Empire had returned to prominence and was throwing its weight around, and Borg had also wandered in, destroyed a colony, dozens of ships and nearly took Earth. So the few in the DMZ were sacrificed for the greater security of many.
__________________
Those who lose dreaming are lost. |
|
|
|
|
#45 | ||
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?
|
||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| cardassian, eddington, federation, maquis, starfleet |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:14 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.






















