Star Trek: INS- Son'a/Dominion Question

[Robert Maxwell]

sonak wrote:

---

I'm bringing this up because the events of the movie take place during a war, so of course the military application of it is relevant.

And it is, as Hartzilla2007 so astutely pointed out, an utterly worthless "advantage" given whom they were fighting.

[sonak]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

And it is, as Hartzilla2007 so astutely pointed out, an utterly worthless "advantage" given whom they were fighting.

something's not worthless just because your opponent does it better.

[Locutus of Bored]

T'Girl wrote:

---

The scene was filmed, but not used. Toward the end of the movie Quark (of all people) shows up and anounces that he is indeed going to open a spa somewhere on the planet, so people can come for the health benefits of the rings. Picard tell him that he (the guy who make all important decisions in the Federation) will not allow any spas on the planet.

Non-canon of course, never made he final cut.

Why would any facilities have to be "low tech?" Having modern 24th century mega-cities on the planet shouldn't interfere with the incoming radiation.

Again why?

However, the ring planet is in fact Federation property. Also there is no indication in the movie that the Baku ever formed themselves into a state. Given that they are living on someone else's planet, how could they? It was the Romulan's, then the Klingon's, then the Federation's.

Never was it the Baku's.

T'Girl wrote:

---

First, it difficult to see how you consider the estrangement of the Baku and the Sona to be a matter that falls under the Prime Directive.

Second, the Federation wasn't involved as a player in that matter. Remember the Federation's involvement was solely as the the possessors of the planet and the region surrounding it, who wanted to extract a natural resource. The Sona possess the technology to do so. This is where the Federation's involvement comes to a crashing end.

The Sona/Baku thing was a separate issue, that was none of the Federation's business. This is why I think that after the Council's review, they would have reaffirmed their original decision to harvest the particles.

With the exception of Picard and his immediate crew, everyone in the movie knew the Baku were not a "non-technological species." And it wasn't an invasion by any meaning of the term. It was a Federation planet.

Locutus of Bored, where in the movie did they ever invite Picard to stay? He simply arrived with boxes of weapons and stated giving instructions/orders.

This would be the part where Picard employs the Baku children as human shields. Picard could have transferred the children to the Enterprise prior to it's departure, also the "Captain's gig" could have remove at least some of the children. Picard brought a considerable amount of weapons to the surface, he was expecting trouble.

tighr wrote:

---

I know the film states that they were exiled, but based on how readily the Ba'ku welcome them back at the end of the film it seems more like a self-exile. They tried to take over the colony (including a return to technology), were found to be in the minority, and subsequently left. It seems as if the Ba'ku would not have kicked them off the planet if the Son'a simply abandoned their plans to use technology.

As another poster upthread stated, the Ba'ku had very simple rules for their planet: No technology. They would probably have been receptive to offworlders if they had been asked, but no one bothered to ask.

As far as the Federation establishing a "spa" or rehab colony on the planet, it would probably have to be governed under the local laws of the Ba'ku, including no technology. That would limit the number of Federation citizens interested in making the planet a home. Being that the planet was in the Briar Patch and not very hospitable to travel in the first place, it makes sense why the Federation agreed to the particle theft plan. They (wrongly) figured no one would want to live on that crappy planet anyway.

Can I just tell you two how strange your replies are? T'Girl parses my posts down to two-word or one-sentence snippets and then asks questions that were already addressed in my post had she not deleted the relevant portions, and tighr quotes back the things I said myself as if they disagree with what I'm saying now, while citing points from a "poster upthread" who was in fact me.

So, I'm not ignoring you two or anything, I'm just not sure what to say.

[tighr]

Locutus of Bored wrote:

---

tighr quotes back the things I said myself as if they disagree with what I'm saying now, while citing points from a "poster upthread" who was in fact me.

Sorry, regarding the "nobody asked the Ba'ku to share", I was referring back to a Robert Maxwell post from several pages back in addition to your comments. As far as the rehab colony comments, I directly attribute those to you I just didn't explicitly quote you on that part. I'm not disagreeing with your points, just providing an alternate viewpoint/expanding on the rationale. I actually agreed with most of what you said. Didn't mean to seem contradictory.

[T'Girl]

Locutus of Bored wrote:

---

T'Girl parses my posts down to two-word or one-sentence snippets

To indicate the portion of your previous posting that I was going to refer to, comment upon, or question.

In case you didn't notice, in both cases your posting was immediately prior to mine. Personally, I dislike it when entire (sometimes long) posts are quoted in their entirety, when the person responding is going to be commenting on only a certain passage.

and then asks questions that were already addressed in my post had she not deleted the relevant portions

FYI, I lack the ability to delete anything on this forum other than my own postings, all your posting exist in their original form where you first posted them.

And where did you address the point of your own posts that I questioned? When you say that Picard "was well within his rights to act on their behalf since they invited him to stay." The Baku never invited Picard to stay, I specifically asked you where in the movie this was supposed to have happen. If you choose not to elaborate on your statement fine, your option. But you did not already address it.

You pointed out that "at no time was the possibility of establishing low tech rehabilitation facilities for Federation and other government's citizens on the planet raised in the film." I wondered why such facilities would have to be low tech. And I pointed out it wouldn't seem to be a requirement for the radiation to do it's work. You still haven't gone into the reasoning of the low tech.

The movie did say at one point that for truly serious medical cases, the radiation would require multiple years to have the desired effect. Some people wouldn't be simply visiting the planet, they would be basically moving there. They might be required to be in a hospital on the planet when they first arrive, could need that hospital for months or years. Taking people in serious physical need, and just dumping them into a one of thousands of rustic villages scattered on the surface (even with the radiation) would be a death sentence.

Also, of the people seeking the benefits of the rings, while some might prefer it, not all are going to want to live in a low tech community. So why the low tech?

[Sindatur]

T'Girl, it's common in SciFi when you have a civiliation that has chosen to live Low Tech, they don't want neighbors with anything but low Tech, "camel's nose under the tent" or "slippery slope" thinkng (IE: You let one High Tech facility in, and before you know it, the whole place is High Tech and your peaceul low tech society is ruined. And it does make sense, the more comfortable you make it for them, the more will come)

As far as visitors coming for the ring benefits, when was the last time you went to a Hospital and were able to dictate the environent to them? Why, if they would allow the Low Tech facilities, should they be criticized for not alowing High Tech, they believe will spread and destroy their way of life?

[T'Girl]

Sindatur wrote:

---

T'Girl, it's common in SciFi when you have a civiliation that has chosen to live Low Tech, they don't want neighbors with anything but low Tech

They being the Baku I presume? Again a Federation planet, why would the Baku have any say in the matter?

If the decision of the Federation Council was made to leave the particles in place, bringing the patients to the medicine, instead of the medicine to the patients, this means in addition to the hospital I wrote of, there would be entire communities.

The Admiral spoke of the particles helping billions, that would imply the necessary of massive infrastructure being introduced to the surface of the planet. Not just little villages, but lots of large cities like modern day Los Angeles, in multiple places across the planet.

After becoming well again, not everyone is going to want to return home, they will settle there permanently. I would imagine it becoming a popular retirement location.

sonak wrote:

---

... that only Dougherty's bringing the Federation in ...

While it was never broached in the movie directly, the feeling I get is that the Sona themselves first approached the Federation Council and that Admiral Dougherty would have been assigned to the operation at some later date.

[Locutus of Bored]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Personally, I dislike it when entire (sometimes long) posts are quoted in their entirety, when the person responding is going to be commenting on only a certain passage.

Yes, but when it leaves out the portion relevant to the question you're asking, it just looks either kind of dumb, or like you're deliberately messing around.

FYI, I lack the ability to delete anything on this forum other than my own postings, all your posting exist in their original form where you first posted them.

See, now this seems like either you completely lack the ability to use context, or you're messing with me as well, since I know you have a decent grasp of the English language and can tell that I was referring to deleting the content from your post. It's things like this that make me question whether I even want to bother responding at all, or if I'm just wasting my time because it's going to be about playing games.

I'll give it a try, though.

And where did you address the point of your own posts that I questioned? When you say that Picard "was well within his rights to act on their behalf since they invited him to stay." The Baku never invited Picard to stay.

You don't think the joint Starfleet/Bak'u planning session where they were discussing the complete evacuation of their village and the use of transport inhibitors to cover their movements until they reached the transporter blocking mineral caves demonstrated their invitation to Picard and willingness to participate in the evacuation plan with the exception of them using weapons? Did these people give any prior indication that if Picard just waltzed in and ordered them to obey his commands they would do so unquestioningly? If they didn't want to evacuate under the protection of the Starfleet personnel, they wouldn't have evacuated. Assertiveness was not a quality they lacked.

You pointed out that "at no time was the possibility of establishing low tech rehabilitation facilities for Federation and other government's citizens on the planet raised in the film." I wondered why such facilities would have to be low tech. And I pointed out it wouldn't seem to be a requirement for the radiation to do it's work. You still haven't gone into the reasoning of the low tech.

Actually, yes, I did. I postulated that the Bak'u might be agreeable to the possibility of establishing rehabilitation centers on other parts of the planet if the people who settled there agreed to observe the spirit of their rules; relatively low tech (as compared to what can be found in the Federation - the Bak'u are not actually devoid of technology and machines despite what's implied in the film - I'm pretty sure that dam of theirs was a fairly complex mechanism, for example), disarmament, and preservation of the planetary environment. The technology level had nothing to do with preventing the metaphasic particles from working, it was about respecting the Bak'u philosophy if you wanted to live on their planet.

And despite your insistence otherwise, from what little information we know from the various series and the film, the Bak'u were the first settlers of the planet around 2065 (300 years before Insurrection). In 2154 we know the Klingons referred to the entire nebula area as Klach D'Kel Brakt, that there were at least two habitable planets there, and that Earth authorities had not yet named the region the Briar Patch, since Soong named it. In 2371 the Klingons defeated the Romulans in a battle there, but no indication of ownership of the area is given. One or both of the combatants could simply have been using the Briar Patch as an equalizer much the same way the Mutara Nebula was used in TWoK. We do know that by 2365 that the Briar Patch region fell within the territory of the Federation, but they were apparently not aware of the presence of the Bak'u until the Son'a informed them. None of that gives any indication of who officially claimed the metaphasic ringed planet first, so all we have to go on is that the Bak'u presence there 300 years earlier is the first known reference.

The movie did say at one point that for truly serious medical cases, the radiation would require multiple years to have the desired effect. Some people wouldn't be simply visiting the planet, they would be basically moving there. They might be required to be in a hospital on the planet when they first arrive, could need that hospital for months or years. Taking people in serious physical need, and just dumping them into a one of thousands of rustic villages scattered on the surface (even with the radiation) would be a death sentence.

Also, of the people seeking the benefits of the rings, while some might prefer it, not all are going to want to live in a low tech community. So why the low tech?

I didn't say anything about dumping terminal or severely ill patients in a rustic cabin without ANY technology and leaving them to fend for themselves, I said the Bak'u would probably be fine with people living there as long as they maintained a relatively low tech lifestyle that didn't overrun the planet with technology, people, and weapons. IE, no giant spaceports, planetary defenses, urban sprawl, severe pollution, massive tapping of energy resources, etc. Rehabilitation facilities with modern Federation medical equipment would probably be fine, however. I also addressed the part about how not everyone is going to want to give up their Federation creature comforts even to live a healthier lifestyle, so that would serve as a check on population overcrowding. But that's all just speculation.

Locutus of Bored wrote:

---

At no time was the possibility of establishing low tech rehabilitation facilities for Federation and other government's citizens on the planet raised in the film, so you don't know if they might have been okay with that, especially given how little of the planet their society occupied. Just because they weren't okay with destroying their planet's ecosystem, being forcibly relocated, and being relegated to earlier deaths doesn't mean they weren't open to other, less invasive options. They were perfectly welcoming to Picard and crew even after they beamed down with phasers and after a firefight broke out in their secretly spied upon village earlier. Their only stipulation was that the Starfleet personnel disarm themselves. They would have had every right to be hostile in that situation but weren't, so they might have been open to the possibility of allowing elderly or sick Federation citizens to rehab on their world as long as they preserved the planetary environment, disarmed themselves, and lived a simple lifestyle without overrunning the planet with technology and people.

Given the rise of various return to nature/manual labor and New Essentialist groups in the Federation, I suspect many would gladly move there and live the Bak'u lifestyle elsewhere on the planet, while the rules would also serve as a natural population control since not everyone would want to give up their futuristic creature comforts even for the promise of a long, healthy life. People with illnesses or severe injuries could stay there temporarily until they healed or permanently if it's a chronic condition that would return once they left.

[sonak]

T'Girl wrote:

---

They being the Baku I presume? Again a Federation planet, why would the Baku have any say in the matter?

If the decision of the Federation Council was made to leave the particles in place, bringing the patients to the medicine, instead of the medicine to the patients, this means in addition to the hospital I wrote of, there would be entire communities.

The Admiral spoke of the particles helping billions, that would imply the necessary of massive infrastructure being introduced to the surface of the planet. Not just little villages, but lots of large cities like modern day Los Angeles, in multiple places across the planet.

After becoming well again, not everyone is going to want to return home, they will settle there permanently. I would imagine it becoming a popular retirement location.

While it was never broached in the movie directly, the feeling I get is that the Sona themselves first approached the Federation Council and that Admiral Dougherty would have been assigned to the operation at some later date.

then what sense does the whole "have Riker tell the Council what's happening to the Baku?" plan make. Actually, I've never understood that. Wouldn't it have been funny if there's a scene where Riker contacts them and tells them what's going on and their response is

"well yes, we already knew that. We voted on and agreed to the removal in the first place. What kind of idiots does your insubordinate Captain take us for?"

[T'Girl]

sonak wrote:

---

then what sense does the whole "have Riker tell the Council what's happening to the Baku?" plan make.

The thing there is, who was actually in a position to exercise control over the planet? In order to stop the relocation and the harvesting, Picard didn't bother speaking to the Baku on the matter, Picard sent Riker to speak to the Federation Council, why? Because ultimately they were the ones making the decisions. The Baku, the Sona, and Picard's crew could all act on their own accord, but the Council were the ones with the authority.

Not the Baku.

Picard, as with the Admiral before him, never asked the Baku what they wanted. He didn't ask if they wanted to go or stay, Picard made the decision for their group.

Riker: "The Federation Council has asked me to inform you that the Baku relocation will be halted, while they conduct a top-level review."

Halted, not cancelled.

What happens then? Well, the Council could (after review) reaffirm their original decision to harvest the particles, have the remaining Sona (or their servants) build a second collector/take the time to build one themselves. Relocate the Baku openly to a Federation planet. Harvest the particles, with the Baku having the same access to them as others.

The Council could formally inform the Baku that the Federation renounces sovereignty over the planet and the Brier Patch, congratulate them, and inform them that they are completely on their own from that point forward.

The Council could stop the harvest, retain sovereignty, and open the planet to "spas" and large scale colonization. The Federation/Starfleet would establish an exclusion zone on the planet's surface around the Baku's valley, say several hundred kilometres across, room for the Baku to eventually grow. It would be entirely up to the Baku who came and went from the exclusion zone.

Other possibilities exist. However, whatever the decision, the decision won't be made by the Baku.

Picard: "I strongly urge you to request an emergency session of the Federation Council. The issue of Dorvan Five must be reopened."

Necheyev: "Captain, I made that request two days ago. The answer was no. I'm sorry but you have your orders."

*******************

Locutus of Bored wrote:

---

the Bak'u were the first settlers of the planet around 2065

Without question. They are by all indications the first people to live on the surface.

It isn't a matter of who crosses the finish line first.

There are vast areas of the western United States interior, either public land or privately owned, where no one lives. There are likely places in America where historically no one has ever set foot. If a group of people settles on any of this this land, it doesn't become their sovereign state.

I own a hectare of land on the Atlantic coast of Brazil (conveniently located forty kilometres from the nearest road), I've only been there twice, camped overnight once. There are no signs that anyone has ever "settled" there. That doesn't mean a group of people can just settle there and achieve ownership.

It doesn't matter if the Baku were the first to settle there, that in of itself doesn't award them sovereignty of the entire world and it's rings.

[tighr]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Without question. They are by all indications the first people to live on the surface.

It isn't a matter of who crosses the finish line first.

There are vast areas of the western United States interior, either public land or privately owned, where no one lives. There are likely places in America where historically no one has ever set foot. If a group of people settles on any of this this land, it doesn't become their sovereign state.

I own a hectare of land on the Atlantic coast of Brazil (conveniently located forty kilometres from the nearest road), I've only been there twice, camped overnight once. There are no signs that anyone has ever "settled" there. That doesn't mean a group of people can just settle there and achieve ownership.

It doesn't matter if the Baku were the first to settle there, that in of itself doesn't award them sovereignty of the entire world and it's rings.

Non-sequitur. The 2065 settlement predates the Federation and any other presumed ownership of the area. Land in the Western interior is already owned (and purchased) by the United States government. Apart from any unfortunate atrocities in our past (Trail of Tears, forced relocation, oddly relevant in this case actually) that land was not currently settled by anyone, and as you mentioned unless it is bought by private owners from the government, no one can just show up and settle there.

This is a forced relocation of the Ba'ku. You would think a 24th Century Federation would be more tolerant than a 19th Century United States.

[T'Girl]

^^^
Non sequitur? Not at all. It's very germane to whether the Baku are the ones who control the disposition of the particles.

************

600 people preventing billions of people from receiving an important medical advance, a medical advance in orbit around a Federation planet, why would the Council be "tolerant" of that? Why would the many people of the Federation be tolerant of that?

If the Baku are taken to a different Federation planet, they can have the same access to the collected particles as the rest of the population, no less, and certainly no more.

It's important to keep remembering that the Federation doesn't want the Baku off the planet, so the Federation can use the planet themselves. The Federation doesn't want the planet at all. They want the Baku off, so the Baku won't be harmed when the particles are harvested.

In generations, when the planet recovers, the Baku could conceivable re-establish their community. Assuming they would wish too.

[tighr]

T'Girl wrote:

---

Non sequitur? Not at all. It's very germane to whether the Baku are the ones who control the disposition of the particles.

Uh, absolutely it is. Those people were there first, and they predate the existence of the organization that is claiming ownership of the planet. It is THEIRS.

T'Girl wrote:

---

600 people preventing billions of people from receiving an important medical advance, a medical advance in orbit around a Federation planet, why would the Council be "tolerant" of that? Why would the many people of the Federation be tolerant of that?

I don't see why the rest of the Federation gets to have an opinion. The planet belongs to the Ba'ku. That should be end of story.

T'Girl wrote:

---

If the Baku are taken to a different Federation planet, they can have the same access to the collected particles as the rest of the population, no less, and certainly no more.

Now you're talking eminent domain, as well as socialism. Other people feel like they should get access to something that wasn't initially theirs. If you believe that's what's right, then good for you. But as long as you realize it's theft no matter how you slice it.

It's not explained in the film, so we'd have to extrapolate, but it's entirely possible that any medical procedures developed from the particles would not have the same effect as simply living on the planet in the first place. These people currently enjoy an extended life, but it's possible that taking those particles condemns them to eventual death. How is that fair? The "same access as the rest of the Federation" is not the same as "the same access they have RIGHT NOW."

T'Girl wrote:

---

It's important to keep remembering that the Federation doesn't want the Baku off the planet, so the Federation can use the planet themselves. The Federation doesn't want the planet at all. They want the Baku off, so the Baku won't be harmed when the particles are harvested.

In generations, when the planet recovers, the Baku could conceivable re-establish their community. Assuming they would wish too.

Um, good for the Federation? They are sooo humanitarian. "Hey guys, we're going to eff up your planet, so it'd be nice if you vacate. KTHXBYE! BTW, we don't actually want your planet, just the natural resource in orbit. But in order for us to get it, we have to make your planet uninhabitable."

This just seems incredibly wrong to me.

[Hartzilla2007]

tighr wrote:

---

Um, good for the Federation? They are sooo humanitarian. "Hey guys, we're going to eff up your planet, so it'd be nice if you vacate. KTHXBYE! BTW, we don't actually want your planet, just the natural resource in orbit. But in order for us to get it, we have to make your planet uninhabitable."

This just seems incredibly wrong to me.

Interestingly enough thinking about it and remembering what I know from DS9, it makes the Federation sound like the Cardassians just without the enslavement part.

[BillJ]

Since Worf was an ambassador at the end of DS9 (the end of the Dominion War) and he's still wearing a Starfleet uniform and rank pips, I'd say the film takes place sometime during the war.