Starfleet Marine Corps

[Longinus]

If we go to etymology, then Starfleet certainly will not have 'marines' as they do not operate at the sea.

[T'Girl]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

... aside from Vulcan having its own intelligence agency on TNG, we have every indication that Starfleet covers all security and defense of the Federation.

Both Vulcan and Betazed have their own defenses, implying that Federation members in general have their own fleets and planetary defenses.

Or, Vulcan and Betazed are the exceptions.

Sci wrote:

---

In other words, the HOA does not have the authority to issue a nation-wide speed limit. The Federation Council does.

The point about the HOA was that they could establish a speed limit within the area where they had authority, without being a "sovereign state." Sovereignty isn't a requirement for a body to exercise a degree authority, control is.

The Council could restrict access and speed in a limited area for members of the alliance, but their authority didn't extend to imposing those same restriction upon others in the same area. This was point out by the Enterprise officers in the episode.

And it wasn't a "nation-wide speed limit," it was only select areas (where subspace rifts are likely to form) within the single sector that held the Hekaras Corridor. Not throughout the Federation.

And Worf's comment that " The Klingons will observe these restrictions, but the Romulans will not," might suggest that the affected sector isn't even within Federation territory. Why would the Romulans have access to a Federation sector?

Are we also contending that the Royal Navy is not the United Kingdom's navy just because it doesn't have the term "United Kingdom" in its name?

We're contending that the Royal Navy is not "The Kingdom's Navy," it's the UK's navy. When was Starfleet ever specifically called the "United Federation Starfleet?" Reading is fundamental.

Alliances do not have constitutions that guarantee civil rights to all persons within their territory.

You mean terrestrial alliances don't?

We've (of course) have never been a part of a interstellar multi-species alliance, so our previous alliances wouldn't be a restriction on possibilities.

Should the alliance membership wish to draw up a charter that include guarantees on civil rights, something like the UDHR* (but better thought-out), they could. The different members then could either ratify all of it, portions of it, or none of it, as they saw fit.

Just as they could form a interstellar court, if they choice to.

Just as the members could build defense ships of a similar design and even paint them in a similar color scheme.

* The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

[Drago-Kazov]

Longinus wrote:

---

If we go to etymology, then Starfleet certainly will not have 'marines' as they do not operate at the sea.

They are Space Marines.

[Nerys Myk]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

They are Space Marines.

Marine means ocean/sea. Its the whole reason we call them Marines.

[The Wormhole]

Merry Christmas wrote:

---

Both Vulcan and Betazed have their own defenses, implying that Federation members in general have their own fleets and planetary defenses.

Or, Vulcan and Betazed are the exceptions.

"Defenses" could just mean an orbital defense network. It was due to inaction on Starfleet's part that Betazed fell to the Dominion.

[Drago-Kazov]

Santa Kang wrote:

---

Marine means ocean/sea. Its the whole reason we call them Marines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_M...mmer_40,000%29

The concept showed up in other franchises too, so why not?

[Star Wolf]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_M...mmer_40,000%29

The concept showed up in other franchises too, so why not?

Because it is Star Trek and the nature of ground combat seen is more in line with SEALs Space Air Land commandos doing their thing then a USMC MAU storming the beaches of Tarawa

Edit to add are not SEALS lead by Naval officers with tradition navel rank structures. There seems to be a famous Master Chief in another game franchise.

[Skywalker]

Santa Kang wrote:

---

Marine means ocean/sea. Its the whole reason we call them Marines.

Astrines just doesn't have the same ring to it.

[Nerys Myk]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_M...mmer_40,000%29

The concept showed up in other franchises too, so why not?

What concept? We're talking about the origin (etymology) of the term "Marine".

[Sci]

Merry Christmas wrote:

---

The point about the HOA was that they could establish a speed limit within the area where they had authority, without being a "sovereign state." Sovereignty isn't a requirement for a body to exercise a degree authority, control is.

It is when the speed limit is being imposed on areas that are not private property.

And it wasn't a "nation-wide speed limit," it was only select areas (where subspace rifts are likely to form) within the single sector that held the Hekaras Corridor. Not throughout the Federation.

False.

"Until we can find a way to counteract the warp field effect, the Council feels our best course is to slow the damage as much as possible. Therefore, areas of space found susceptible to warp fields will be restricted to essential travel only, and effective immediately, all Federation vessels will be limited to a speed of – Warp 5? – except in cases of extreme emergency."

You were right about one thing, though -- this wasn't just a Federation-wide speed limit. It apparently extends to all Federation vessels operating outside of Federation territory as well.

And Worf's comment that " The Klingons will observe these restrictions, but the Romulans will not,"

Worf was referring to traffic within their own territory, not to traffic within the Hekaris sector.

* The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Is a treaty subject to sovereign state ratification, not a Constitution.

You mean terrestrial alliances don't?

We've (of course) have never been a part of a interstellar multi-species alliance, so our previous alliances wouldn't be a restriction on possibilities.

Meaning at this point you're just making shit up.

But let's play this game -- "the Federation is an alliance." An alliance that has been given and which exercises all of the powers you describe, is an alliance that has become a sovereign state in all but name. It has clearly replaced its members as the actual center of power.

And that's assuming the Federation is just an alliance. Which it obviously isn't, because it has been shown to possess and exercise all of the powers and authorities of a sovereign state.

[Drago-Kazov]

Because it is Star Trek and the nature of ground combat seen is more in line with SEALs Space Air Land commandos doing their thing then a USMC MAU storming the beaches of Tarawa

There cold easily be Starfleet Marines, we just had not seen them.

What concept? We're talking about the origin (etymology) of the term "Marine".

I don't see if the Marine Corps would be integrated into some space fleet, why would they stop calling themselves marines?

[Star Wolf]

Because it is not the United States Marine Corps or the Royal Marines being intergrated infto Starfleet. It is some kind of international armyy/space air force being forced to join or be ceremonial palace guards. And when you get around to it there are just as many airborne units in nations unable to drop airborne battalions as there are marine units in nations unable to afford water landing craft all calling themselves the elite of their armies

[Timo]

...Clearly, all other parts of the United States defense establishment have abandoned their traditional names and most of the other pertaining traditions as well in the founding of this Starfleet thing. Probably in stages, so that Archer's Starfleet may have absorbed a couple of earlier United Earth defense branches, which in turn have absorbed the national defense branches, in an unholy mess that left the Royal Navy survive long enough to be the employer of Reed's dad.

Something of the British naval tradition survives, though, including the rank scheme. And it appears to survive through its brief stint as the US naval tradition, so we have lieutenants rather than leftenants there... But generally, there doesn't seem to be any sort of national pride or unit pride that would have made the transition from 20th century fractured Earth to the 23rd century United Federation of Planets, or even to the 22nd century United Earth.

Both Vulcan and Betazed have their own defenses, implying that Federation members in general have their own fleets and planetary defenses.

There's nothing to suggest that these forces would be separate from Starfleet in any way, or even predominantly (or at all!) crewed by Vulcans or Betazoids. As far as we can tell, they just happen to be those parts of the overall force that at that time are engaged in defending the respective worlds. In "Unification", the E-D would be part of the force of Vulcan defense vessels spoken of; in "Take Me In The Holosuite, Hard", the Vulcan vessel USS T'Kumbra was part of Starfleet and would have been part of the Bajoran defense force had said force come under attack during the events.

I am truly at a loss as to what the distinction is between "Federation Starfleet" and "United Federation Starfleet."

The only one that matters?

Remember that the question was solely about what the futuro-space-jarheads ought to be called. One side advocated "United Federation Marine Corps" for the sake of tradition, the other ridiculed this because the use of the prefix "United Federation" is not part of the Star Trek culture in any context. It would be odd to the extreme for one sub-organization to use UF when others exclusively use either UFP or just F.

On the other hand, the use of "Corps" in the title has some canon precedent from the Starfleet Engineering Corps mentioned in ST2:TWok...

Timo Saloniemi

[KamenRiderBlade]

Timo wrote:

---

Remember that the question was solely about what the futuro-space-jarheads ought to be called. One side advocated "United Federation Marine Corps" for the sake of tradition, the other ridiculed this because the use of the prefix "United Federation" is not part of the Star Trek culture in any context. It would be odd to the extreme for one sub-organization to use UF when others exclusively use either UFP or just F.

On the other hand, the use of "Corps" in the title has some canon precedent from the Starfleet Engineering Corps mentioned in ST2:TWok...

Timo Saloniemi

I personally think any Starfleet force primarily composed of sentient beings that serve as security / tactical personnel should be labeled "Soldier" or "Soldiers" for simplicity.

Whether they serve on land on some random planet, in/on the sea on some planet, within the confines of a space vessel or facility, or even falling through the sky / space to land on a target, they all come down to the same fundamental skill sets, job goals, and duties that can be easily cross trained and learned.

That one term "Soldier" encompasses what they do without associating them with any specific branch of the US military that has ground forces like the US Army, Marines, and Navy SEALs.

As far as the overall group term, they all belong to "Starfleet". They just happen to fall under the "Soldier" division of "Starfleet" which serves the "United Federation of Planets".

I personally think this kind of terminology would be acceptable and show less favoritism towards any one branch of the US military.

The term "Starfleet" implies a organization whose domain is amongst the 'Stars' and has a fleet of vessel's / facilities to facilitate their operation amonst the 'Stars'.

Ergo, my idea for any future personnel force should be "Soldier" and they have it's own division within Starfleet just like there is the "Science" / "Command" / "Operations" division. They could also be a sub division of "Operations" and that would make perfect sense too.

[T'Girl]

Sci wrote:

---

Is a treaty subject to sovereign state ratification, not a Constitution.

I never said anything about a constitution, or a treaty. Although the member world governments would likely have had to ratify the charter at some point.

Meaning at this point you're just making up.

Well, I wouldn't use the word shit. I'm exploring a fictional universe Sci, it's a universe with rules. One of the agreed upon rules has to do with what's called "canon."

Like it or not Sci, twice the Federation was blatantly referred to as a alliance. Despite your efforts to dismiss that, and attempts to explain it away. And in over seven hundred episodes and near dozen movies, the Federation was never once explicitly named as "a state."

So by canon it is one, and not the other.

We all get it, you personally WANT the Federation to be a liberal democracy sovereign state, you've been pushing this theory for years. It's an idea that has been advanced in the novels. The Federation Council certainly has some of the same internal organizations as a government of some sort, but only bits and pieces. I've (also for years) have held that the alliance does have a central organization for interstellar matters, speaking with a single voice and common defense. But I maintain that it still isn't a "state" in the usual meaning, it's a collection of sovereign states.

I have my two obvious canon quotes, and you don't have the word "state."