RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,597
Posts: 5,424,412
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 521
Newest member: David Ellerman

TrekToday headlines

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12


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 TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 21 2013, 04:02 PM   #76
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
indolover wrote: View Post

lol.. Governments don't even exist. I personally don't give a shit what Sisko did since morality doesn't even exist. Only fools and losers believe in "morality".

someone's been taking his Nietzsche reading a little too seriously...
indolover tends to do ~'X doesn't exist' whenever he loses an argument.

He probably thinks he appears cool and mysterious.
Little does he know the reaction his faux profound statements engender.

Well - a laugh now and then is good for the health.
I wasn't even interested in an "argument". Also, morality doesn't exist. Reality is no obstacle, so it's up to you whether you believe that or not.
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 04:04 PM   #77
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

sonak wrote: View Post
indolover wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post


if you don't think a government's first responsibility is self-defense then there's no point in arguing this. A government cannot carry out ANY OTHER responsibilities if it is destroyed or conquered. Arguing about "federation principles" when there is no federation left is just silly.

The Federation and the Klingons were fighting FOR the Romulans whether the Romulans would admit it or not. The Dominion would have gone after them next.
lol.. Governments don't even exist. I personally don't give a shit what Sisko did since morality doesn't even exist. Only fools and losers believe in "morality".

someone's been taking his Nietzsche reading a little too seriously...
the beliefs of philosophers don't stack up with me. There is no such thing as "morals" get with it.
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 04:17 PM   #78
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Because you say so? Well, there's hard evidence if ever I saw it.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 06:12 PM   #79
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

R. Star wrote: View Post
Because you say so? Well, there's hard evidence if ever I saw it.
I say so? Well, that's how society is based.

You cannot be stupid to acknowledge that "morality" exists, can you?
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2013, 11:54 PM   #80
horatio83
Commodore
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Despite being a hardcore Roddenberryian I am fine with Sisko turning a blind eye to Garak doing some nasty stuff for him to get the Rommies into the war.
Sisko bribed Quark and allowed Garak to kill some people. The distinction between looking away and doing it yourself might seem trivial but I don't think it is. At least I would have a problem with Sisko's actions if he had done all of Garak's dirty work himself. We all know the trolley problem so I know that it is not rational, doing it yourself or allowing somebody to do something which you don't wanna yet admit to yourself but basically know boils down to the same thing. It is irrational but feels right to me.
__________________
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. - former US Secretary of State and unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger
horatio83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2013, 02:50 AM   #81
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

sonak wrote: View Post
indolover wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post


if you don't think a government's first responsibility is self-defense then there's no point in arguing this. A government cannot carry out ANY OTHER responsibilities if it is destroyed or conquered. Arguing about "federation principles" when there is no federation left is just silly.

The Federation and the Klingons were fighting FOR the Romulans whether the Romulans would admit it or not. The Dominion would have gone after them next.
lol.. Governments don't even exist. I personally don't give a shit what Sisko did since morality doesn't even exist. Only fools and losers believe in "morality".

someone's been taking his Nietzsche reading a little too seriously...
Then if you're stupid enough to believe in "morals", that's your own business.
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2013, 03:34 AM   #82
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

^
Got any more pearls of wisdom?
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2013, 07:48 AM   #83
wingsabre
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

I though it was one of, if not the best episode in the season/series. Gene Roddenberry had an ideal universe, where humanity eventually evolved to the point of avoiding conflict. However, humans will always be humans. We can built great things such as the pyramids, or reach for the stars, but we can still be capable of doing horrible things to each others a well.
wingsabre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2013, 01:31 PM   #84
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

wingsabre wrote: View Post
I though it was one of, if not the best episode in the season/series. Gene Roddenberry had an ideal universe, where humanity eventually evolved to the point of avoiding conflict. However, humans will always be humans. We can built great things such as the pyramids, or reach for the stars, but we can still be capable of doing horrible things to each others a well.
Yeah, so all unrealistic artistic works have to be canned....
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2013, 02:24 PM   #85
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

indolover wrote: View Post
wingsabre wrote: View Post
I though it was one of, if not the best episode in the season/series. Gene Roddenberry had an ideal universe, where humanity eventually evolved to the point of avoiding conflict. However, humans will always be humans. We can built great things such as the pyramids, or reach for the stars, but we can still be capable of doing horrible things to each others a well.
Yeah, so all unrealistic artistic works have to be canned....
Whenever arguments like this come up, I think of a line from Encounter at Farpoint...

Jean-Luc Picard wrote:
If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 01:11 PM   #86
Jarvisimo
Commander
 
Jarvisimo's Avatar
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Dream wrote: View Post
The episode only works if the Romulans find out the truth after the Dominion War and declare war on the Federation. The writers wimped out by not showing that.
Sorry to add a late reply, but there is a subtle discussion of Romulan perceptions of Vreenak's demise in Una McCormack's Treklit sequel to the episode, Hollow Men.

More to the point, Hollow Men is a wonderful examination of espionage in Trek, as well as the Sisko's guilt and sense of honour, the utilitarian attitudes of Starfleet (& S31) during war and, most of all, McCormack's excellent recurrent treatment of Garak (see also the Never-Ending Sacrifice and The Lotus Flower).
Jarvisimo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 01:14 PM   #87
indolover
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

BillJ wrote: View Post
indolover wrote: View Post
wingsabre wrote: View Post
I though it was one of, if not the best episode in the season/series. Gene Roddenberry had an ideal universe, where humanity eventually evolved to the point of avoiding conflict. However, humans will always be humans. We can built great things such as the pyramids, or reach for the stars, but we can still be capable of doing horrible things to each others a well.
Yeah, so all unrealistic artistic works have to be canned....
Whenever arguments like this come up, I think of a line from Encounter at Farpoint...

Jean-Luc Picard wrote:
If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are.
Then you're probably autistic or something and don't have an imagination. Do you think this of all supposedly "unrealistic" art works?

I personally don't give a crap if any art work has to be realistic. The Roddenberry vision can be seen as it is, as a hope and dream.
indolover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 01:23 PM   #88
marksound
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Planet Carcazed
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

indolover wrote: View Post
Only fools and losers believe in "morality".


First good laugh of the day. Thanks.
marksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 04:15 PM   #89
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Jarvisimo wrote: View Post
Dream wrote: View Post
The episode only works if the Romulans find out the truth after the Dominion War and declare war on the Federation. The writers wimped out by not showing that.
Sorry to add a late reply, but there is a subtle discussion of Romulan perceptions of Vreenak's demise in Una McCormack's Treklit sequel to the episode, Hollow Men.

More to the point, Hollow Men is a wonderful examination of espionage in Trek, as well as the Sisko's guilt and sense of honour, the utilitarian attitudes of Starfleet (& S31) during war and, most of all, McCormack's excellent recurrent treatment of Garak (see also the Never-Ending Sacrifice and The Lotus Flower).

you made me want to check out that book.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 06:16 PM   #90
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

sonak wrote: View Post
Jarvisimo wrote: View Post
Dream wrote: View Post
The episode only works if the Romulans find out the truth after the Dominion War and declare war on the Federation. The writers wimped out by not showing that.
Sorry to add a late reply, but there is a subtle discussion of Romulan perceptions of Vreenak's demise in Una McCormack's Treklit sequel to the episode, Hollow Men.

More to the point, Hollow Men is a wonderful examination of espionage in Trek, as well as the Sisko's guilt and sense of honour, the utilitarian attitudes of Starfleet (& S31) during war and, most of all, McCormack's excellent recurrent treatment of Garak (see also the Never-Ending Sacrifice and The Lotus Flower).

you made me want to check out that book.
Hollow Men is a great book.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ 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 12:16 AM.

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