RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,825
Posts: 5,326,882
Members: 24,551
Currently online: 578
Newest member: Mycroft

TrekToday headlines

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

New Trek Home Fashions
By: T'Bonz on Jul 4

Star Trek Pop-Ups Book Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 3


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 Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 11 2013, 07:58 PM   #31
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
Seems kind of weird that they wouldn't recognize their own kin, but it's been a while since I saw the movie, so you may be right.
How would they be able to recognize them?

All of them were totally distorted by their genetic manipulation and anti age liftings.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 11 2013, 08:19 PM   #32
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
Seems kind of weird that they wouldn't recognize their own kin, but it's been a while since I saw the movie, so you may be right.
How would they be able to recognize them?

All of them were totally distorted by their genetic manipulation and anti age liftings.
Yet Anij recognized one of them towards the end. Said she helper his mother bathe him.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:05 AM   #33
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post

You only think it's built on a house of cards because you don't see how the Ba'ku could say "no" and still appear sympathetic. But that's easy.

"Excuse me, but would you be willing to negotiate for the Federation and Son'a to have access to this little Fountain of Youth you've got here?"

"Uh, you mean the same people who spied on us, disrupted our village, and were going to secretly steal our planet out from under us? These are the people you want us to negotiate in good faith with?"

"Um, well. Yes."

"What kind of morons do you take us for??"

The Ba'ku had no reason to trust Picard or the Federation after the shit they pulled, and frankly they would've had every right to tell them to fuck off after the deception was uncovered. Why negotiate with people who were obviously willing to use underhanded measures to get what they wanted? (Not to mention, they knew the true motives and identity of the Son'a, who did not come back to reconcile, but to uproot/murder their parents.)

why wouldn't they trust Picard? They had no reason not to trust him, he'd done nothing but try to help them. And again, the plot never has Dougherty or Picard explicitly explain what the Son'a technology could do for billions across the galaxy. Now why do you think that is? Because they didn't want a scene where the Baku say no to leaving their planet and resettling to help billions. It just wouldn't have worked.
Because he was a representative of the same people who came to move them? So what if he outwardly appeared genial and conciliatory? Should they be naive enough to take that at face value, after what they'd been through?

You are still harping on the Ba'ku being forced to leave, when that is absolutely not the only choice possible here.

The rings, we are told, regenerate constantly, or at least they will, until the collector sucks all the magic out of them for good, which will make the planet uninhabitable "for generations." So, the Federation would take what is apparently a renewable resource and turn it into a non-renewable one, in order to make it more convenient. That is worth questioning, too.

There's no indication given in the film that the Ba'ku would be against other settlements on the planet, as long as they respected the Ba'ku way, or at least didn't shit up the place too much. Locutus went into this in some detail so I'm not going to repeat him. Suffice it to say, making it a binary choice between "Ba'ku stay" and "Ba'ku go" ignores the other possibilities, and it's the only way to make your argument work.



They choose keeping their homes over helping billions of people they do not know and have no interest in.

Tell me, how much do you go without so you can help people you've never met? Would you give up your home for the benefit of strangers if asked? Would you be okay with being deceived into it? What about being forced to at gunpoint? Those are the scenarios you are promoting.

The group in question is not the issue. I wouldn't care if it's the Ba'ku, a tribe of Native Americans, or a colony of sentient garden gnomes. Forcing people to leave their homes to benefit others is wrong.

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
they knew the true motives and identity of the Son'a, who did not come back to reconcile, but to uproot/murder their parents.)
Actually the Ba'ku didn't know who the Son'a were until after Picard told them they were both from the same race
Seems kind of weird that they wouldn't recognize their own kin, but it's been a while since I saw the movie, so you may be right.

I'm just amazed at this notion that making someone move for a greater good is like one of the biggest rights violations out there. You must think that eminent domain and episodes like "journey's end" are just horrifying. And yes, I know, the difference is citizenship, but that's a legal distinction, not an ethical one. If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and to be guaranteed after the relocation, would that change what's done? I guess it's just an unbridgeable gap in philosophy. To me, resettlement IF there's a legitimate greater good for doing it, is reasonable and acceptable.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:30 AM   #34
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

sonak wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post


why wouldn't they trust Picard? They had no reason not to trust him, he'd done nothing but try to help them. And again, the plot never has Dougherty or Picard explicitly explain what the Son'a technology could do for billions across the galaxy. Now why do you think that is? Because they didn't want a scene where the Baku say no to leaving their planet and resettling to help billions. It just wouldn't have worked.
Because he was a representative of the same people who came to move them? So what if he outwardly appeared genial and conciliatory? Should they be naive enough to take that at face value, after what they'd been through?

You are still harping on the Ba'ku being forced to leave, when that is absolutely not the only choice possible here.

The rings, we are told, regenerate constantly, or at least they will, until the collector sucks all the magic out of them for good, which will make the planet uninhabitable "for generations." So, the Federation would take what is apparently a renewable resource and turn it into a non-renewable one, in order to make it more convenient. That is worth questioning, too.

There's no indication given in the film that the Ba'ku would be against other settlements on the planet, as long as they respected the Ba'ku way, or at least didn't shit up the place too much. Locutus went into this in some detail so I'm not going to repeat him. Suffice it to say, making it a binary choice between "Ba'ku stay" and "Ba'ku go" ignores the other possibilities, and it's the only way to make your argument work.



They choose keeping their homes over helping billions of people they do not know and have no interest in.

Tell me, how much do you go without so you can help people you've never met? Would you give up your home for the benefit of strangers if asked? Would you be okay with being deceived into it? What about being forced to at gunpoint? Those are the scenarios you are promoting.

The group in question is not the issue. I wouldn't care if it's the Ba'ku, a tribe of Native Americans, or a colony of sentient garden gnomes. Forcing people to leave their homes to benefit others is wrong.

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post

Actually the Ba'ku didn't know who the Son'a were until after Picard told them they were both from the same race
Seems kind of weird that they wouldn't recognize their own kin, but it's been a while since I saw the movie, so you may be right.

I'm just amazed at this notion that making someone move for a greater good is like one of the biggest rights violations out there. You must think that eminent domain and episodes like "journey's end" are just horrifying. And yes, I know, the difference is citizenship, but that's a legal distinction, not an ethical one. If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and to be guaranteed after the relocation, would that change what's done? I guess it's just an unbridgeable gap in philosophy. To me, resettlement IF there's a legitimate greater good for doing it, is reasonable and acceptable.
How is it reasonable? They either take injections for the rest of their lives, destroying their culture of no technology, or they are moved off planet and given a death sentence. How is that a reasonable compromise?
__________________
"Cogley was old-fashioned, preferring paper books to computers. He had an extensive collection of books, he claimed never to use the computer in his office."
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:40 AM   #35
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Robert Maxwell wrote: View Post

Because he was a representative of the same people who came to move them? So what if he outwardly appeared genial and conciliatory? Should they be naive enough to take that at face value, after what they'd been through?

You are still harping on the Ba'ku being forced to leave, when that is absolutely not the only choice possible here.

The rings, we are told, regenerate constantly, or at least they will, until the collector sucks all the magic out of them for good, which will make the planet uninhabitable "for generations." So, the Federation would take what is apparently a renewable resource and turn it into a non-renewable one, in order to make it more convenient. That is worth questioning, too.

There's no indication given in the film that the Ba'ku would be against other settlements on the planet, as long as they respected the Ba'ku way, or at least didn't shit up the place too much. Locutus went into this in some detail so I'm not going to repeat him. Suffice it to say, making it a binary choice between "Ba'ku stay" and "Ba'ku go" ignores the other possibilities, and it's the only way to make your argument work.



They choose keeping their homes over helping billions of people they do not know and have no interest in.

Tell me, how much do you go without so you can help people you've never met? Would you give up your home for the benefit of strangers if asked? Would you be okay with being deceived into it? What about being forced to at gunpoint? Those are the scenarios you are promoting.

The group in question is not the issue. I wouldn't care if it's the Ba'ku, a tribe of Native Americans, or a colony of sentient garden gnomes. Forcing people to leave their homes to benefit others is wrong.



Seems kind of weird that they wouldn't recognize their own kin, but it's been a while since I saw the movie, so you may be right.

I'm just amazed at this notion that making someone move for a greater good is like one of the biggest rights violations out there. You must think that eminent domain and episodes like "journey's end" are just horrifying. And yes, I know, the difference is citizenship, but that's a legal distinction, not an ethical one. If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and to be guaranteed after the relocation, would that change what's done? I guess it's just an unbridgeable gap in philosophy. To me, resettlement IF there's a legitimate greater good for doing it, is reasonable and acceptable.
How is it reasonable? They either take injections for the rest of their lives, destroying their culture of no technology, or they are moved off planet and given a death sentence. How is that a reasonable compromise?

er, because BILLIONS are going to get medical benefits from it? The Baku may not care, but that is part of the equation.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:43 AM   #36
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

sonak wrote: View Post
HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post


I'm just amazed at this notion that making someone move for a greater good is like one of the biggest rights violations out there. You must think that eminent domain and episodes like "journey's end" are just horrifying. And yes, I know, the difference is citizenship, but that's a legal distinction, not an ethical one. If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and to be guaranteed after the relocation, would that change what's done? I guess it's just an unbridgeable gap in philosophy. To me, resettlement IF there's a legitimate greater good for doing it, is reasonable and acceptable.
How is it reasonable? They either take injections for the rest of their lives, destroying their culture of no technology, or they are moved off planet and given a death sentence. How is that a reasonable compromise?

er, because BILLIONS are going to get medical benefits from it? The Baku may not care, but that is part of the equation.
From the Federation's point-of-view. Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
__________________
"Cogley was old-fashioned, preferring paper books to computers. He had an extensive collection of books, he claimed never to use the computer in his office."
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:46 AM   #37
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

sonak wrote: View Post
If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and .....
It doesn't work that way.

Thats still conquest.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 04:14 AM   #38
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
If the UFP granted automatic citizenship to the Baku retroactively and .....
It doesn't work that way.

Thats still conquest.

I was being semi-facetious, I realize you can't do it that way, I was just trying to show the absurdity of a legalistic trip-up over citizenship as the main difference between when relocation is okay and when it's not. I grant that it makes a legal difference, just not a difference in evaluating the ethical case for it.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 05:53 AM   #39
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 06:17 AM   #40
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

BillJ wrote: View Post
HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
It's still death where they would be immortal. They would live indefinitely if the Son'a leave their planet alone. And disease would return to their lifespan.
__________________
"Cogley was old-fashioned, preferring paper books to computers. He had an extensive collection of books, he claimed never to use the computer in his office."
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 02:06 PM   #41
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

BillJ wrote: View Post
HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
While people in the federation get to live forever, sounds kind of hypocritical.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 03:31 PM   #42
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
While people in the federation get to live forever, sounds kind of hypocritical.

er, no, the people in the UFP would get greatly extended lifespans. As would the Baku, if they got access to the same process. It's not hypocrisy if all the parties got the same thing from it.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 03:47 PM   #43
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
While people in the federation get to live forever, sounds kind of hypocritical.

er, no, the people in the UFP would get greatly extended lifespans. As would the Baku, if they got access to the same process. It's not hypocrisy if all the parties got the same thing from it.
No technology! They would have to take a hypospray every day. How is that not destroying their culture. They are going to die.
__________________
"Cogley was old-fashioned, preferring paper books to computers. He had an extensive collection of books, he claimed never to use the computer in his office."
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 03:47 PM   #44
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Look, if you were asked to help find the cure for cancer, but be subjected to testing materials that could cause you to almost certainly die or be disabled for the rest of your life, would you submit to that experiment? Billions and all who come after you get cured from cancer, you get to die in a vegetative state for the good of all humanity. Would you take that deal?
But what your proposing isn't what will happen to the Ba'ku, as we've seen in the S'ona. Without treatment they'd simply go back to their normal lifespan and live close to another century.
While people in the federation get to live forever, sounds kind of hypocritical.
Notice I said "without treatment", with treatment we don't know how long they'll live.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper

Last edited by BillJ; March 12 2013 at 05:01 PM.
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2013, 05:01 PM   #45
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Questions on Insurrection, on the Baku

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post

While people in the federation get to live forever, sounds kind of hypocritical.

er, no, the people in the UFP would get greatly extended lifespans. As would the Baku, if they got access to the same process. It's not hypocrisy if all the parties got the same thing from it.
No technology! They would have to take a hypospray every day. How is that not destroying their culture. They are going to die.

um, that would be their choice not to use the technology. I guess my response to that is a shrug.
sonak 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 01:20 AM.

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