RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,403
Posts: 5,359,116
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 638
Newest member: space2050


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 > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 29 2012, 01:06 PM   #16
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

I don't believe Starfleet has a hand salute. In the first TNG episode/pilot, while Picard is touring the ship and is in engineering (coming off the lift), you do see a crewman come to the position of attention. And Picard once chewed out Worf for not coming to his feet fast enough in Picard's presence.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 01:36 PM   #17
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

One wonders... Might Starfleet be one of those organizations where hand salutes are only used in connection with headgear? That is, virtually never indoors.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 02:49 PM   #18
neozeks
Captain
 
neozeks's Avatar
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

-Brett- wrote: View Post
I'd like to see a little more common sense. Like wearing something resembling armor if they're going into a firefight.

I wouldn't particularly care to see BSG style militarism though.
Agreed. Just a bit more competence and readiness wouldn't hurt. Stuff that's important for them being good and competent at their actual jobs (and combat/defense definitely is one of those jobs), not stuff that's just posturing, tradition and formality for it's own sake.

But otherwise, I'm fine with Starfleet being a more relaxed military. I actually quite like the idea of Starfleet being a fundamentally different kind of military for a fundamentally different kind of society, it makes Starfleet itself an interesting science-fictional concept (in the sense of social sciences, not hard sciences, obviously) and not just "present-day-preferably-American-military-IN-SPACE!". And in-universe, seeing how Starfleet is a multi-species organization of unprecedented diversity and size, I'd argue flexibility and informality would actually be neccessary for it's proper functioning.

EDIT: Just to add, I understand that a lot of the seemingly pointless traditionalism and formality in today's militaries isn't just for it's own sake but is actually important for building discipline, morale and esprit-de-corps. But that's where the "different military for a different society" comes in. Starfleet is the military of a post-scarcity near-utopia. People that join it do it truly of their own volition. There's no conscription, they don't join it because they're poor or for any other economic reason. Plus, it has a pool of probably at least a trillion well-educated people to recruit from. Even at the highest reasonable estimate of Starfleet's size, it means it can pick and choose like no other military can. As a result, Starfleet should be an elite force made almost completely of top-quality people that already fully believe in Starfleet's mission and values and are fully devoted to them (which might explain some of that occasional smugness ). The need for any further indoctrination or disciplining would be small.
__________________
What if it's a smart fungus?

Last edited by neozeks; November 29 2012 at 03:40 PM. Reason: Added some stuff
neozeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 03:25 PM   #19
Deks
Rear Admiral
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

Picard stated that SF is not a military organization.
Its more along the lines of 'jack of all trades'.
While one of its functions is to defend the Federation, it has a much bigger emphasis is on exploration/discovery/research/science/diplomacy.

The writers merely presented in a more pseudo-military fashion though because its related in a way to it (but its not that).
And people today will often mistake SF as a military because it bears a resemblance to what we have today (even though its not the same thing).

I will agree though that more common sense should have been applied, but that much was down to writer stupidity who had little idea on how to manage such a universe properly.
Add to it that as time went by, SF was portrayed in a more military fashion than it was earlier (the show de-evolved more into 'today in space').
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us.
Deks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 04:08 PM   #20
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

I'm fine with the more balanced approach where Starfleet is more relaxed yet still handles Defense when it needs to.

I DON'T want to see Trek do BSG.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 05:10 PM   #21
Pavonis
Commodore
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

T'Girl wrote: View Post
And Picard once chewed out Worf for not coming to his feet fast enough in Picard's presence.
I'm unable to recall this instance. The only incident that I recall was that Worf once overslept and was late to his duty shift, but Picard joked about "skipping the court-martial this time", rather than chewing him out.
Pavonis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 05:50 PM   #22
st.barthgirl
Lieutenant
 
Location: I Believe in Dog
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

Some thoughts:
"I'm a soldier, not a diplomat" - James T. Kirk (TOS: "Errand of Mercy") But, as TNG evolved, the writers had to remind themselves that the Officers aboard were essentially " Scientists, not soldiers".



I guess their Charter has a lot to do with how they are perceived and how they perceive themselves, Militarily: 5 year mission, to explore.....


Well- honestly, i'm hard put to think of soldiers who explore... So it's a conundrum, a paradox. Soldiers generally do not "explore", and Explorers are generally not "soldiers", tho they might be accompanied by some (as in the Military SEAL-ish guys on enterprise after the xindi attack); and explorers generally need to be able to defend themselves- tho anthropologists are more wont to immerse themselves peacefully into a new culture.


interesting topic.
st.barthgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 06:07 PM   #23
Pavonis
Commodore
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

Soldiers and sailors have explored in the past. Zebulon Pike lead twenty soldiers on an exploration of the Louisiana Purchase (the Pike Expedition), and Lewis and Clark were soldiers in the sense that they were veterans of war with the native Americans.

The US Navy was sent to explore and show the flag in the early 19th century, such as on the Wilkes expedition, which went as far south as the Antarctic coast. So it's not as odd as you think.
Pavonis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 06:10 PM   #24
LobsterAfternoon
Commander
 
LobsterAfternoon's Avatar
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

Some of the relief missions that we see the Enterprise on (delivering medical supplies, helping with infrastructure) has roots in our current military. Look at how the US military aided Pakistan after those mudslides a few years back.
LobsterAfternoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 06:39 PM   #25
st.barthgirl
Lieutenant
 
Location: I Believe in Dog
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

"I DON'T want to see Trek do BSG."

Sonak: So Say We All!

This topic has me loopy. Starfleet Acadamy has me Loopy. it's a boarding school/ it's a college/it's a graduate school/ it has weird courses for 'enlisted' men like o'brien's temporal mechanics class...and military options like advanced tactical training.. but with no age minimums/maximums... what: like a Montessori school?
st.barthgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 07:32 PM   #26
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

Pavonis wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
And Picard once chewed out Worf for not coming to his feet fast enough in Picard's presence.
I'm unable to recall this instance.
It's the episode where Worf starts a fire in his quarters.

st.barthgirl wrote: View Post
Well- honestly, i'm hard put to think of soldiers who explore... So it's a conundrum, a paradox. Soldiers generally do not "explore"
Think the British Navy of the 15th, 16th, 17th centuries. They defended their nation yes, but also engaged in world exploration, and defense of colonies, and protected trade.

During that time period, the British Navy also did not consider themselves "the military."

.. and Explorers are generally not "soldiers"
Often they were the same people.


Deks wrote: View Post
Picard stated that SF is not a military organization.
Then they engaged in war games. Just another example of Picard being wrong when he opens his mouth.

Its more along the lines of 'jack of all trades'.
Which is the miltary in the modern world (and the past). When there is a large natural disaster somewhere, among of the first people there are the military.

While one of its functions is to defend the Federation, it has a much bigger emphasis is on exploration/discovery/research/science/diplomacy.
But which is the primary mission? Put it this way, if a ship is on a science mission, it will likely drop that in a hot second to perform a mission of defense. If a ship is on a active combat mission, unlikely they will abandon that to survey a new planet.

It would be like saying that the primary mission of the US military is training, because that's what they spend the most amount of time doing.

And people today will often mistake SF as a military because it bears a resemblance to what we have today (even though its not the same thing).
You would have to squint pretty hard to not see Starfleet as the Federation's uniformed armed forces.

writer stupidity
You seem to use this a lot.


T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 07:40 PM   #27
Avon
Fleet Captain
 
Avon's Avatar
 
Location: Space Wales
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

i call hypocrisy on the part of your last sentence
__________________

Hello to Jason Isaacs!
Avon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 07:48 PM   #28
st.barthgirl
Lieutenant
 
Location: I Believe in Dog
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

i stand corrected on the soldier/explorer thing.

Contemporary Astronauts, as i understand it, can be Scientists "trained" to do the job in space... Yes? But, originally, they were all Military.. mostly Pilots, if i recall... tho it's hardly the same skill set, these days.. {are scientists given a rank on board, say, the Int'l Space Station? or are they strictly Cilivilian? Wouldn't there have to be a ranking of sorts in case of a Catastrophe- who trumps who if so-and-so bites the dust? Would that rank transfer back to their Life On Earth?}

it's hard to see starfleet as anything BUT military given that it's organized Hierarchically and everyone has a military rank... don't they? But Professors and PhDs and MDs etc. are Addressed by Title? And Government officials? Wheres the overlap in Gov't & Starfleet? The President of the Federation doesn't need be Starfleet, right? My Knowledge of the Gov't of Earth & the Federation in the 22nd century and beyond is based only on Series and Movies... and not very complete, at that. Politics, Arggh!
st.barthgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 07:57 PM   #29
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

I would think that are more serious Stargate SG-1 would be more like what Star Trek should aim for instead of NuBSG. I mean Stargate is about exploring the galaxy while Battlestar Galactica is about the last survivors of humanity on the run from killer robots that are relentlessly hunting them down like dogs.
Hartzilla2007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 29 2012, 08:03 PM   #30
AggieJohn
Lieutenant
 
Location: Houston Tx
Re: How militarized should Starfleet be?

I always saw starfleet then more than just a military force. I think that was what Riker meant when he said that a military organization. Kind of separating them from say the Klingons and Romulans that do have full time military organizations.

I do see starfleet as an evolution of the US Navy now, multipurpose. Able to defend the Federation but also provide exploration and humanitarian missions. On the ship, it would be a matter of commander's choice and style of leadership. Kirk is more direct and in an earlier time. He is still somewhat democratic and values Spock and Bone's info. Picard is a bit more democratic but there is less threats, at first, in the 24th century. Picard did have final say and could be very direct when he wanted to be. And as far as being a solider, I would not sleep on Picard, he proved he could throw down when needed.
AggieJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 04:41 PM.

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