RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,506
Posts: 5,511,462
Members: 25,136
Currently online: 425
Newest member: aprizan

TrekToday headlines

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17


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.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 6 2012, 03:43 AM   #61
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
Oh please. One could just as easily say the DW never would have happened if the Maquis hadn't been entitled douchebags who pushed Cardassia into the alliance.
One could say that, but they'd be wrong. The very first episode they're directly in they attacked and destroyed a Federation ship for no other reason than they could. They weren't going to "peacefully coexist" with anyone.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 6 2012, 03:56 AM   #62
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

I agree. As with any war there were a combination of factors that led to it.
__________________
--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!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 12:13 AM   #63
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
Oh please. One could just as easily say the DW never would have happened if the Maquis hadn't been entitled douchebags who pushed Cardassia into the alliance.
That was the Klingons.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 03:18 AM   #64
commanderkai
Lieutenant
 
commanderkai's Avatar
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

Yeah, I think the Marquis really highlights the dark side of the Federation. I have no idea how, knowing how the Cardassians operate their government and justice system, any Federation diplomat could not see the dangers of putting Federation colonies under Cardassian "protection". A government is supposed to protect its people, not trade entire colonies to a fascist state for a "peace treaty".

Oh, and, what did the Federation do once Sisko became aware of the Cardassian government arming its colonies? It did nothing. Hell, even worse, it worked WITH the Cardassians to try to destroy the Marquis. So, even with the Cardassians blatantly violating the treaty, it does nothing to bring any sort of consequence against them.
commanderkai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 04:30 AM   #65
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

Apparently you're ignoring the part where the colonists were intended to be relocated and -at their request- were given the -option- of staying where they were under Cardassian rule.

The Federation was protecting its people by signing the treaty. Specifically they were protecting millions of people from a war with Cardassia. Treaties -always- involve compromise. It's the way the universe works, and yeah, it sucks if you end up on the short end of the stick, but if you'd really rather have a war between two powers than move? That, IMO, doesn't speak well of you.

We have no idea exactly what the Feds may have done once they became aware of what the Cardassians were doing. Sisko's team made a point of trying to stop the Cardassian arms shipments, but "The Maquis" doesn't make it clear what other repercussions may have ensued.

As far as I'm aware the Federation didn't particularly do anything to actively end the Maquis threat until Eddington's group started openly attacking Federation assets...good move on his part....
__________________
--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!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 04:50 AM   #66
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
Apparently you're ignoring the part where the colonists were intended to be relocated and -at their request- were given the -option- of staying where they were under Cardassian rule.

The Federation was protecting its people by signing the treaty. Specifically they were protecting millions of people from a war with Cardassia. Treaties -always- involve compromise. It's the way the universe works, and yeah, it sucks if you end up on the short end of the stick, but if you'd really rather have a war between two powers than move? That, IMO, doesn't speak well of you.

We have no idea exactly what the Feds may have done once they became aware of what the Cardassians were doing. Sisko's team made a point of trying to stop the Cardassian arms shipments, but "The Maquis" doesn't make it clear what other repercussions may have ensued.

As far as I'm aware the Federation didn't particularly do anything to actively end the Maquis threat until Eddington's group started openly attacking Federation assets...good move on his part....
You didn't watch Parts 1 and 2 of the Maquis or TNG's Preemptive Strike then. They were acting against the Maquis from day one. That's why Eddington started hitting back.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 06:58 AM   #67
commanderkai
Lieutenant
 
commanderkai's Avatar
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
Apparently you're ignoring the part where the colonists were intended to be relocated and -at their request- were given the -option- of staying where they were under Cardassian rule.
Now forgive me, since I don't have all the details on the treaty, so I am basing this on personal opinion from what I saw during my viewings of DS9.

If the treaty was signed before discussing the issue with the various colonies, the Federation government screwed up, royally. It's one thing to convince people to leave for the greater good, it's quite another to give them no choice or input. So yes, the Federation certainly intended to relocate them, but I never got the impression that the colonies had any say in the process at all, which, as you can imagine, would upset all of those colonists who saw their worlds as their new home that they built.

On the other hand, the colonists took a gamble, and bet that if they stayed, the Federation would not allow its citizens to be unjustly treated by Cardassia, an aggressive, fascist state, much like Western governments wouldn't exactly stand to see their citizens being unjustly treated when visiting nations like China. In the end, they were still Federation citizens, even if they were now apart of Cardassian territory, and they should still have the rights and freedoms of all other Federation citizens, no matter what world they live on, or the amount of political influence they can leverage

The Federation was protecting its people by signing the treaty. Specifically they were protecting millions of people from a war with Cardassia. Treaties -always- involve compromise. It's the way the universe works, and yeah, it sucks if you end up on the short end of the stick, but if you'd really rather have a war between two powers than move? That, IMO, doesn't speak well of you.
Compromise can be achieved without infringing on the rights of your citizens in such an unjust way. These colonists had the protection of the Federation...up until the Federation decided to wholly cede colonies without their input. Imagine any democratic state ceding territory in such a way to a fascist dictatorship.

Hell, let's imagine the United States ceding Maine to Canada without the input of anybody within Maine. Once the treaty is signed, they're told to relocate. Yeah...I don't see that playing well, and that's from one democratic state to another.

We have no idea exactly what the Feds may have done once they became aware of what the Cardassians were doing. Sisko's team made a point of trying to stop the Cardassian arms shipments, but "The Maquis" doesn't make it clear what other repercussions may have ensued.
Sure we have an idea. There were none. The Federation didn't carry out anything within the series against Cardassia over violating the treaty by arming its colonies. The Federation did not do anything to protect its citizens from Cardassian violence. The Federations did not make the Cardassians abide by the treaty, and abandoned its citizens because it might start a war...

Oh, but wait, once the Maquis started fighting Cardassia, the Federation was more than happy to fight the Maquis. Sisko freaking gassed a Maquis colony without any canon consequences.

Oh, and should we forget how Cardassia basically kidnapped O'Brien from Federation space and framed him as a Maquis agent? Seriously, compromise in treaties are fine...if both sides are acting in good faith. As we're all aware, the Cardassians weren't.

To be honest, how the Federation handled the Maquis on screen, I'm amazed that huge swaths of non-core worlds didn't rebel immediately. How would you feel if you lived near the Romulan or Klingon border, (just to name two) and realized that, if the Federation decided it was necessary, will sign your home away, and will not protect your rights even when it blatantly violates the treaty they just signed. More than that, if you try to fight back, they'll help said treaty violaters against you, and if they're having a really hard time with one of your rebellion leaders, might just decide to use a WMD against your colony without any consequence.
commanderkai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 07:53 AM   #68
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

I'd probably decide that choosing to live on a disputed border world near a hostile power probably wasn't the smartest move I ever made.

Sorry for not replying to the rest at this point, I'm about ten seconds away from crashing.
__________________
--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!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 09:35 AM   #69
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

That would only be true if you had moved there knowing you would be on a disputed border line. It is implied that they had been there for a long time, possibly before the Federation encountered the Cardassians and before the War.

The real question is why you would want to stay there after the numerous (and told to be very violent) conflicts never mind after the treaty was signed. Then again we could ask many why they would want to live anywhere near either side of the Israeli border (as one example).
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 03:30 PM   #70
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

But are people living near the Israeli border being offered every possible form of aid they could desire if they are willing to relocate? I somehow doubt it.

That's the biggest sticking point for me in terms of comparing a contemporary relocation effort with relocating in the 24th century; a number of the concerns that would apply in this day and age seem likely to be less valid in the future depicted in Trek.
__________________
--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!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 07:43 PM   #71
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
But are people living near the Israeli border being offered every possible form of aid they could desire if they are willing to relocate? I somehow doubt it.
We don't know if they were being offered every possible form of aid they could desire if they are willing to relocate or not.

That's the biggest sticking point for me in terms of comparing a contemporary relocation effort with relocating in the 24th century; a number of the concerns that would apply in this day and age seem likely to be less valid in the future depicted in Trek.
Except we really don't know if those concerns applied in the 24th century or not. I guessing they still do seeing as planetary evacuations weren't treated as a minor thing seeing as its a whole freaking planet.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 08:06 PM   #72
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

Borders have been redrawn for centuries on Earth, and yes sometimes a group of people are affected by it.

So place yourself as the Federation President, would you not sign a treaty and risk a war that could potnetially cost tens of thousands of lives or a agree to a few worlds swapping ownershp and relocating those citizens.

Which is more important those worlds of the lives of thousands?

I think many would say preserving life is more important. Remember the Federation wasn't abandoning these people it offered them relocation.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 09:38 PM   #73
commanderkai
Lieutenant
 
commanderkai's Avatar
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

DonIago wrote: View Post
I'd probably decide that choosing to live on a disputed border world near a hostile power probably wasn't the smartest move I ever made.

Sorry for not replying to the rest at this point, I'm about ten seconds away from crashing.
It always came off as they were settled there before the worlds became disputed.

To me, this really comes down to the fact that the Federation surrendered these worlds without the consent of the populations that have already been established there. Once the treaty was signed, the Federation was basically going to forcibly relocate their populations, possibly even violently.

The question is not would you stay or go. The question is did the Federation government have the authority to violate the rights of the colonists "for the greater good" of the Federation.
commanderkai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 09:49 PM   #74
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

Why should the colonies solely have the right to decide whether or not the treaty is enacted?

You ask any population of size a question and you'll get disagreement. If 98% of the Federation supported the treaty and 2% said war would be preferable, should the Federation go to war?

Seriously, for the people who don't favor the treaty, I'd like to hear what they would have done instead. There seems to be a lack of alternative suggestions in this thread.
__________________
--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!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2012, 10:36 PM   #75
Nightdiamond
Fleet Captain
 
Nightdiamond's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: The Maquis or the Federation?

It's interesting, but if you look at the first season of Voyager, the Maquis come off as hostile and violent. Or it least there were small suggestions hinting at it.

As if to contrast against the more peaceful and calm Starfleet characters. Later they seemed to be more Federation-like and honorable.

I think that was part of the view the writing was attempting to show at times- 'the Maquis are bad, see how violent and ruthless they can be?'.
Nightdiamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
cardassian, eddington, federation, maquis, starfleet

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.