RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,667
Posts: 5,429,347
Members: 24,819
Currently online: 443
Newest member: Werner Bitterli


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 April 20 2013, 05:19 PM   #151
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: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Apparently it's okay if other people are wielding weapons on their behalf though... Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
__________________
--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 April 20 2013, 07:30 PM   #152
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Just more self-entitlement. Just look how Anij flops herself down on the boat, expecting Data and Picard to row her over to that holoship.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 07:36 PM   #153
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post

The Son'a gave up their right to live there by trying to take over.
Why? Maybe the Son'a had a legitimate point, that doing hours of needless back breaking labor to serve some Luddite philosophy is just pointless and counter productive.

The Ba'ku used force to expell the Son'a from that world and now the Son'a are using force to do remove the Ba'ku. Turn about is fair play.
The thing is with this argument, is your confusing an exile with a theft.

The Son'a knew the rules of the society in which they lived. If you note the dialog, you'll see that it was an attempted coup, somewhat different to a legitimate opposition or difference of viewpoint.

When there is an argument, at some point, one side wins.

In the end, the parents set the rules of the house.
Please, the only difference between a coup and a revolution is who is the winner and who is the loser.

The American colonists revolted against their British colonial system, no one seems to treat that as some sort of illegal act.

Again, maybe the Son'a had good reason to revolt, maybe they felt that a society that created hours of meaninglessness back breaking labor that could be done away with some technology or that a policy of isolation was counter productive.
The Son'a are just doing to the Ba'ku, what the Ba'ku did to them.

Heck, how did the Ba'ku even beat the Son'a if they are pacifists? The whole relationship between the Ba'ku and the Son'a makes no sense.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 07:49 PM   #154
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
First - such legal quibbles as arguments are used only because your side has run out of other, more fundamental objections, MacLeod:
Concerning the moral side, your position is falimentary;
Even with regards to the legal side (as per current law, that is), as long as you don't come with highly improbable speculation such as your last post, you have no argument (simply put, the federation has AT LEAST* the legal right to invoke eminent domain; it didn't only in order for the baku NOT to appear as the elitist jerks who could care less about anyone else they are).

Second:
The baku did not settle unclaimed space.
Why?
Because when this space was claimed by the klingons, they would have searched their new property and evicted these few hundreds of luddites with extreme prejudice, especially considering what a clement/valuable M class world these luddites were on.

The baku's possession of that planet - during klingon reign, at least - was not visible, but hidden - if it was visible, the klingons would never have allowed it.
And hidden possession will not lead to adverse possession no matter how much time passes.
As for the federation - even if it knew about the baku and let them stay on the planet: possession by the allowance of the owner will never lead to adverse possession, no matter how much time passes.

*Eminent domain is invoked to get land from its rightful owner, for reasons of public utility/interest, after compensation - and it doesn't matter whether this owner got his land before or after the forming of the country that incorporates his land.
When it comes to tresspassers - as the baku are - one just evicts them.
Well we don't know the exact date the Ba'ku settled the world or the date that the Klingons claimed that area of space. If the Ba'ku settled on that world prior to the Klingons claiming that region of space. Then they aren't guilty of tresspassing.

And how was their colonisation hidden? Was the planet cloaked, was the settlement concealled somehow? From memory no artifical means where used to hide the colony. The fact that the planet was in the middle of a nebula is irrelevant. If you had explored the nebula you would likely have discovered it.

And you now the thing about eminant domain is that you have the right to appeal against it. Sure your government can want to takeyour land from you but.

1.>They have to compensate you for it fairly
2.>You can appeal against any sort of compulsary purchase

So what compensation were the Ba'ku getting?
When where they informed about they forced relocation, so they could appeal against it through the Federation courts.

If someone comes into your home without your permission they are tressapsing. If however you own a peice of land in another area of the country and someone lives on that for decades without you objecting the offense is squatting.

But we don't know exactly how the Federation defines crime as opposed to how they are defined today in various countries.
__________________
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 April 20 2013, 07:52 PM   #155
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

DonIago wrote: View Post
Apparently it's okay if other people are wielding weapons on their behalf though... Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

most "pacifism" ends up being pretty hypocritical. If you're a pacifist in a society where you're protected from violence by the military or by the police, then you're allowing violence to be used on your behalf in defense anyway.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 07:54 PM   #156
OneBuckFilms
Fleet Captain
 
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
 
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Then again, maybe they didn't have good reason. Baybe does not establish anything. Define Good Reason by their society and rules.

Truth is, we don't know enough about that conflict.

What we DO know is that the Baku were being forced out of their homes, that they had lived in peacefully, bothering nobody, for hundreds of years.

It was a society, in and of itself. A colony from elsewhere on inception? Irrelevant morally, if interesting.

Until the Son'a and Federation situations, it was very productive to live there without depending on their technological knowledge.

Being where they are, and hard to reach, unnoticed, made more sense given their origins.
OneBuckFilms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 08:40 PM   #157
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Then again, maybe they didn't have good reason. Baybe does not establish anything. Define Good Reason by their society and rules.

Truth is, we don't know enough about that conflict.
There are tons of reasons of to oppose a Luddite philosophy: less needless labor, better standard of living with technology, etc. If I was living in a Ba'ku village and I had to live in some medieval village while other people got travel around the universe in star ships, I might be upset too. I would begin to think Ba'ku society was reactionary and flawed. Why should everyone accept that such a philosophy is good for everyone and not try to oppose it if they think its flawed?

The fact that we know nothing about the rift between the Son'a and the Ba'ku hurts the story. The Ba'ku having the right eject the Son'a from their planet and the Son'a not having that same right looks hypocritical.

How this story supposed to be an effective moral dilemma when the Ba'ku are supposedly perfect and the Son'a are one dimensional cartoonish villains?

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
What we DO know is that the Baku were being forced out of their homes, that they had lived in peacefully, bothering nobody, for hundreds of years.

It was a society, in and of itself. A colony from elsewhere on inception? Irrelevant morally, if interesting.

Until the Son'a and Federation situations, it was very productive to live there without depending on their technological knowledge.

Being where they are, and hard to reach, unnoticed, made more sense given their origins.
If the Ba'ku were peaceful, how did they force the Son'a off their planet in the first place? It seems like there a lot of holes in this story.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 09:46 PM   #158
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

The Overlord wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Then again, maybe they didn't have good reason. Baybe does not establish anything. Define Good Reason by their society and rules.

Truth is, we don't know enough about that conflict.
There are tons of reasons of to oppose a Luddite philosophy: less needless labor, better standard of living with technology, etc. If I was living in a Ba'ku village and I had to live in some medieval village while other people got travel around the universe in star ships, I might be upset too. I would begin to think Ba'ku society was reactionary and flawed. Why should everyone accept that such a philosophy is good for everyone and not try to oppose it if they think its flawed?

The fact that we know nothing about the rift between the Son'a and the Ba'ku hurts the story. The Ba'ku having the right eject the Son'a from their planet and the Son'a not having that same right looks hypocritical.

How this story supposed to be an effective moral dilemma when the Ba'ku are supposedly perfect and the Son'a are one dimensional cartoonish villains?

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
What we DO know is that the Baku were being forced out of their homes, that they had lived in peacefully, bothering nobody, for hundreds of years.

It was a society, in and of itself. A colony from elsewhere on inception? Irrelevant morally, if interesting.

Until the Son'a and Federation situations, it was very productive to live there without depending on their technological knowledge.

Being where they are, and hard to reach, unnoticed, made more sense given their origins.
If the Ba'ku were peaceful, how did they force the Son'a off their planet in the first place? It seems like there a lot of holes in this story.

precisely. In adding the Son'a-Baku connection as a "twist" to the story, it made the whole thing make a lot LESS sense. Think about all the plot holes it clears up:


1. we don't have to wonder how a bunch of pacifists kicked a group of fighters off the planet

2. the Son'a would have an actual REASON not to tell Dougherty about the true nature of the Baku, because they genuinely wouldn't know. In the movie, not being straight with Dougherty ultimately SABOTAGES the entire project

3. The Son'a don't automatically get an equal claim on the planet since they're from that world too, making the legality a lot murkier for the Baku

4. We don't have to wonder WHY the Son'a never previously returned, once they had a decent fleet, and conquered the Baku themselves

5. Finally, the Baku remain a little more sympathetic since they didn't exile their family members to die slowly



all in all, the "twist" severely weakens an already weak story
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 09:46 PM   #159
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Eminiar (stipulated to be non-warp)
They were at war with a planet in another star system.

was contact to establish a "treaty port." Treaty ports are areas that are open to foreign trade, are legally extra-territorial, and are removing from the control of the local government.
Which they were doing becuase the two planets were dragging people into their idiotic war.

Janus Six, a mining facility was established to mine natural resources, no consideration was give to whether there was intelligent life there. When intelligent life was found, it was put to work digging for ore. No dialog as to the planet belonging to the indigenous Horta species, or the Humans leaving.
They had a dialog open Kirk go the Horta to agree to let them have the ores that were useless to them that they left in their tunnels becuase they either wouldn't or couldn't eat them.

The Halkans were contacted by the Federation to so that the Federation could mine a natural resource (dilithium), the Halkans were not indicated to be a post-warp species.
And when the Halkans told them to get lost they left. That was kind of the point the episode was making about the difference between the Federation and the Terran Empire.

Capella, the native people of that world were contacted by the Federation so that the Federation could mine a natural resource (topaline), the Capellan were obviously pre-warp.
A resource that the Capellans had no use for and they were already aware of people from outer space.

The argument could be made that the prime directive by law doesn't apply when needed natural resources are involved.
Except they still had to negotiate with the natives to get it they didn't just take it for themselves.

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
Second:
The baku did not settle unclaimed space.
Why?
Because when this space was claimed by the klingons, they would have searched their new property and evicted these few hundreds of luddites with extreme prejudice, especially considering what a clement/valuable M class world these luddites were on.
Except from the data Soong found in the Klingon database the Klingons were aware of two inhabitable planets in the Briar Patch and they didn't move to take them, probably becuase it would be more trouble than it is worth as they would have to move ships into a difficult to navigate area where you have to travel a considerable distance just to communicate with the rest of the galaxy (so basically its Bumf@#k Idaho in space), and they only thing they would seemingly get from all the effort it would take to move in is some particles which go against their philosophy of dying gloriously in battle.

So no I really don't think the Klingons would bother with a backwater planet of little importance (to them probably) thats hard as hell to get to.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 10:51 PM   #160
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

sonak wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Then again, maybe they didn't have good reason. Baybe does not establish anything. Define Good Reason by their society and rules.

Truth is, we don't know enough about that conflict.
There are tons of reasons of to oppose a Luddite philosophy: less needless labor, better standard of living with technology, etc. If I was living in a Ba'ku village and I had to live in some medieval village while other people got travel around the universe in star ships, I might be upset too. I would begin to think Ba'ku society was reactionary and flawed. Why should everyone accept that such a philosophy is good for everyone and not try to oppose it if they think its flawed?

The fact that we know nothing about the rift between the Son'a and the Ba'ku hurts the story. The Ba'ku having the right eject the Son'a from their planet and the Son'a not having that same right looks hypocritical.

How this story supposed to be an effective moral dilemma when the Ba'ku are supposedly perfect and the Son'a are one dimensional cartoonish villains?

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
What we DO know is that the Baku were being forced out of their homes, that they had lived in peacefully, bothering nobody, for hundreds of years.

It was a society, in and of itself. A colony from elsewhere on inception? Irrelevant morally, if interesting.

Until the Son'a and Federation situations, it was very productive to live there without depending on their technological knowledge.

Being where they are, and hard to reach, unnoticed, made more sense given their origins.
If the Ba'ku were peaceful, how did they force the Son'a off their planet in the first place? It seems like there a lot of holes in this story.

precisely. In adding the Son'a-Baku connection as a "twist" to the story, it made the whole thing make a lot LESS sense. Think about all the plot holes it clears up:


1. we don't have to wonder how a bunch of pacifists kicked a group of fighters off the planet

2. the Son'a would have an actual REASON not to tell Dougherty about the true nature of the Baku, because they genuinely wouldn't know. In the movie, not being straight with Dougherty ultimately SABOTAGES the entire project

3. The Son'a don't automatically get an equal claim on the planet since they're from that world too, making the legality a lot murkier for the Baku

4. We don't have to wonder WHY the Son'a never previously returned, once they had a decent fleet, and conquered the Baku themselves

5. Finally, the Baku remain a little more sympathetic since they didn't exile their family members to die slowly



all in all, the "twist" severely weakens an already weak story
Frankly the story would have been a bit better if the Son'a had been generic evil invaders who simply wanted to be immortal and had no legitimate claim to that planet. Sure it would ruin the supposed the moral dilemma that the movie was trying to present, but frankly they ruined that already by presenting the Son'a as cartoon bad guys. You may as well ditch the whole moral dilemma and make the Son'a just some evil that needs defeating.

It seemed like the movie was trying to present the son'a as Hitler or some mafia boss and the Ba'ku as Gandhi and Hitler vs. Gandhi is not an interesting moral debate. A moral dilemma needs to be gray, not black and white like this film.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2013, 11:48 PM   #161
DWF
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

T'Girl wrote: View Post
DWF wrote: View Post
But in the end Picard knew what was right and what was wrong from his point of view and he stood up for people who couldn't stand up for themselves, morally he did the right thing.
Is it your position then that the Federation (through Starfleet) should be consistent and always stand "up for people who couldn't stand up for themselves?" No matter where in the galaxy they find these people?

The Federtion has stood up for the little guy in the past, but this was Picard who personally took up the fight, he took his pips off so he was acting on his own.
__________________
The greatest science fiction series of all time is
Doctor Who! And I'll take you all on, one-by-one
or all in a bunch to back it up!"
--- Harlan Ellison, from his introduction
to the PINNACLE series of Doctor Who books
DWF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 06:35 AM   #162
Edit_XYZ
Fleet Captain
 
Edit_XYZ's Avatar
 
Location: At star's end.
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
Second:
The baku did not settle unclaimed space.
Why?
Because when this space was claimed by the klingons, they would have searched their new property and evicted these few hundreds of luddites with extreme prejudice, especially considering what a clement/valuable M class world these luddites were on.
Except from the data Soong found in the Klingon database the Klingons were aware of two inhabitable planets in the Briar Patch and they didn't move to take them, probably becuase it would be more trouble than it is worth as they would have to move ships into a difficult to navigate area where you have to travel a considerable distance just to communicate with the rest of the galaxy (so basically its Bumf@#k Idaho in space), and they only thing they would seemingly get from all the effort it would take to move in is some particles which go against their philosophy of dying gloriously in battle.

So no I really don't think the Klingons would bother with a backwater planet of little importance (to them probably) thats hard as hell to get to.
One does not have to inhabit the planets to claim them - much as you don't have to be on your land to claim it as property.
As to the notion that the klingons - or the romulans - won't claim VERY valuable real-estate such as M class worlds in their space as their own - .


MacLeod

Before the klingons, the briar patch belonged to the romulans. T'Girl went into detail about it - short version, same considerations as with the klingons apply.

The baku remain tresspasers; they are very far from being able to invoke adverse possesion. BTW, you don't need to cloak a planet for your possession to be hidden; merely hide (not announcing your presence and, generally, trying to stay under the radar) on a small patch of the planet (as the baku were doing by their own admission).

And, as said, tresspassers are evicted - no compensation required. BTW - tresspassers are also the ones entering your land - not only your house.
Squatting is about occuping an abandoned piece of real-estate; and the briar patch is - and was - claimed as property by various polities.

Must a court of law decide over eviction or eminent domanin? Of course.
And considering the situation (billions vs. 600), guess what would the quite moral decision of any court of law be? The baku are relocated + given access to the immortality drug and the rings are harvested.
But wait: The baku don't agree to hyposprays for immortality - it's against their luddite philosophy! They want it to come 'naturally', on the land they tresspass on. And they don't care that billions will suffer and die for this.
As repeatedly said in this thread, the only reason the writers didn't went this route is because they didn't want to telegraph the entitlement complex of the baku. That doesn't stop you and other posters from using this smokescreen of an argument repeatedly, though - along with moving the goalposts vis-a-vis ~'federation law may be different', etc.
__________________
"Let truth and falsehood grapple ... Truth is strong" - John Milton

Last edited by Edit_XYZ; April 21 2013 at 08:06 AM.
Edit_XYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 12:03 PM   #163
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Morally and Ethically, Picard turned on a Federation that had turned it's back on its own core principals.
But wouldn't it make a certain amount of sense that another of the Federation's core principals would be to look after it's own people?

Remember, the Baku didn't have to be moved to get at the particles, they were being move to protect them from the harvest process.

And nothing says that the Baku would not have equal access to the medical properties of the particles after being move to another world.

They just wouldn't have sole access anymore.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 12:15 PM   #164
DWF
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

T'Girl wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Morally and Ethically, Picard turned on a Federation that had turned it's back on its own core principals.
But wouldn't it make a certain amount of sense that another of the Federation's core principals would be to look after it's own people?

Remember, the Baku didn't have to be moved to get at the particles, they were being move to protect them from the harvest process.

And nothing says that the Baku would not have equal access to the medical properties of the particles after being move to another world.

They just wouldn't have sole access anymore.

Do you really believe that the Son'a would've shared the benefits of the process with the Federation or the Baku forthat matter? It was an illegal and immoral operation and they knew it oterhwise there'd be no reason to hide what they were doing.
__________________
The greatest science fiction series of all time is
Doctor Who! And I'll take you all on, one-by-one
or all in a bunch to back it up!"
--- Harlan Ellison, from his introduction
to the PINNACLE series of Doctor Who books
DWF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 03:50 PM   #165
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

DWF wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
OneBuckFilms wrote: View Post
Morally and Ethically, Picard turned on a Federation that had turned it's back on its own core principals.
But wouldn't it make a certain amount of sense that another of the Federation's core principals would be to look after it's own people?

Remember, the Baku didn't have to be moved to get at the particles, they were being move to protect them from the harvest process.

And nothing says that the Baku would not have equal access to the medical properties of the particles after being move to another world.

They just wouldn't have sole access anymore.

Do you really believe that the Son'a would've shared the benefits of the process with the Federation or the Baku forthat matter? It was an illegal and immoral operation and they knew it oterhwise there'd be no reason to hide what they were doing.

another sign of losing the argument-the other side is back to the "but the Son'a were going to betray them in the end!" tactic, for which there is ZERO EVIDENCE.

Once again, the Son'a were very cooperative with the Federation UNTIL Picard began screwing up the whole operation.

if we're not limited by what's on film and can just make stuff up,why not argue that the Baku "peaceful Luddite" thing was a ruse and that they were secretly a guild of assassins?
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
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 10:25 AM.

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