RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,802
Posts: 5,326,019
Members: 24,548
Currently online: 586
Newest member: USS Vesta

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 > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 4 2013, 12:23 PM   #31
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

timmy84 wrote: View Post
Starfleet is the Federations defense agency
I would agree.


Also that the Federation Starfleet has always existed.
Look at it this way, when a Turkish warship is the command ship of a NATO fleet (like off the horn of Africa), it is referred to as the NATO flagship, but it's still a Turkish warship. The other ship's in that fleet are referred to as NATO warships, but are still the property of their individual countries.

****

NATO flag being flown on a Dutch warship.





.
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 12:37 AM   #32
The Old Mixer
Vice Admiral
 
The Old Mixer's Avatar
 
Location: Connecticut
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

My "head canon" based on the situation in Enterprise and various references in TOS: Starfleet was initially an Earth agency, and other Federation members had their own space navies. In its first century or so, the UFP was more like something between the United Nations and NATO...an alliance of independent nations that retained autonomy. In Kirk's time (perhaps after Axanar, an event that was played up as if it were the origin of the Federation), the UFP became more of a centralized authority, and as part of this, Starfleet, probably because it was at that point the dominant space agency in the UFP, started integrating individuals, and sometimes entire crews (e.g., the crew of the Intrepid), from other member planets.
The Old Mixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 07:02 AM   #33
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Mysterion wrote: View Post
Thought? Comment? Pointed-sticks?
Three things.

1) The FJ tech manual is a fan production almost 30 years old. I don't see how it's even relevant anymore (to the extent that it ever was) considering everything that's come after it.

2) The standing definition of "military" is an organization primarily tasked with national defense and border security, particularly against military threats from other nations and/or non-governmental organizations. An organization for which this is a secondary or supplemental mission role would, in modern terms, be described as "paramilitary" or even simply "armed."

3) Despite what many have said time and time again, the practice of maintaining a standing permanent military is relatively recent innovation in human history, and the blanket term "the military" even moreso. Starfleet exists on a spectrum of militarism closer to that of a police department or a coast guard: hardly "civilian" but nowhere close to a specialized combat-ready force.

I've been saying for years now that the depiction of Starfleet throughout eleven (now twelve) films and 24 seasons of television have depicted Starfleet as either a highly versatile and well-armed exploration program or a laughably inept military. The recent theme of "Into Darkness" not only reflects this trend, it's a ringing endorsement for it as clearly Admiral Marcus feels the exact same way about Starfleet and goes through some rather elaborate steps to militarize it (in addition to the direct implication from John Harrison that Marcus recruited him in the first place because the old-style concept of standing militaries is so anachronistic that the Federation barely knows how to do it anymore). Much of what you would expect FROM a halfway competent military is absent from Star Trek's depiction of the fleet, which is easy enough to reconcile by accounting for the notion that Starfleet equipment, training and doctrine puts a FAR greater emphasis on the peaceful and scientific use of its technology than on its defensive/security roles. Moreover, the handful of starships we've seen that actually specialize in combat are in EVERY case depicted as both controversial and highly unusual.

Put simply: too much gets by Starfleet, too much is absent, too much is simply forgotten or let slide for it to actually BE a full-time combat organization. Much of what happens on Star Trek makes a lot more sense if you compare their combat proficiency less to naval officers and soldiers and more to, say, police officers. Federation worlds undoubtedly DO have highly competent and specialized military forces for defending themselves from invaders, but in the age of automated/orbital defense platforms and ground-based weapons that can smash whole starships out of the sky, I doubt any of those military organizations have ever operated their own starships. Most fighting probably takes place on the ground anyway, and what little fighting DOES happen in space can usually be handled by Starfleet.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 07:25 AM   #34
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

timmy84 wrote: View Post
Original Star Trek is hard to reconcile with later Trek if you refuse to accept later Trek as being fact (or at least, the most accurate interpretation of that information). For example, it was mentioned on this thread that Star Fleet doesn't refer to an organization, but to a star fleet. However, in later trek, Starfleet is referred to as an organization, and that the original series Enterprise was a part of that organization. Also that the Federation Starfleet has always existed.

I know we try to desperately find explanations to make original Trek fact, but later Trek contradicts it. Its simply that. We know that UESPA is not giving orders to Starfleet by the end of the 23rd Century. We also know that non Federation governments view the Federation as Earth. Earth is the capitol of the Federation, and what we have seen on screen is that humans make up the most of the Starfleet's population. We also know that everything is in English on a Starfleet vessel (although I'm sure panels can display in any language, that doesn't change the fact that signs, like on doors are in english). English isn't an alien language. Its a language from Earth. Where the Federation has all of its government buildings.

So for me, which of course is just my opinion, is I disregard the UESPA references in the first series. It makes no sense to the greater continuity of this universe. Starfleet is the Federations defense agency, and is responsible for all defensive and offensive operations. At the same time Starfleet is a large organization, and performs many peacetime tasks. Like exploration.

Later trek has inserted UESPA into Trek history. So it did exist.

Some agreement, some not.

IMO, "Starfleet" is Earth's organization and always has been, but Earth -- being a Federation member -- has to obey the edicts of the Federation just like everyone else. I think people are grossly overstating the cohesion of a multi-planet superstate like the Federation professes to be; it's not just "America, only larger." This is a state where individual members constitute whole solar systems. Nothing even comparable to that exists today; with our current level of technology it would be taking every country, every state, every province and territory in the world and putting each one on its own little planet, all orbiting the same distance from the sun. In that scenario, the United States wouldn't share the same military or the same space program; it would be miracle if they shared the same CURRENCY.

I think that Earth just happens to have one of the most prolific and sophisticated space services in the entire Federation. It's a bit like how the Russian Federation and the United States have/had the only workable manned space systems in the world and therefore all the contributing members of the ISS depend on the Soyuz or (until recently) the space shuttle to get astronauts and materials to and from the station. Europe has an unmanned cargo ship that's very efficient at sending supplies, Japan has an effective if slightly less capable one. The SpaceX company now has one too, but at the moment the Russians have the best space program for manned flight and so anyone who wants to do anything in Space these days goes and works with the Russians. I see Starfleet as a similar organization, just diversified to the point that they can do just about ANYTHING in space, up to and including kick ass. Other Federation members almost certainly have their own fleets, their own ships, their own priorities, their own command structures, but like Starfleet they're subject to the overriding authority of the Federation, and UNLIKE Starfleet, their capabilities are so limited that nobody in their right mind would ever send them to do anything in deep space.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 11:09 AM   #35
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Put simply: too much gets by Starfleet, too much is absent, too much is simply forgotten or let slide for it to actually BE a full-time combat organization.
But that much is also true of the old Royal Navy. Due to severe limitations in technology, doctrine and zeitgeist, that force never was able to patrol the oceans, ensure the security of overseas assets, secure the trade routes or even protect immediate offshore interests. The ability to stop an invasion depended largely on other navies being equally inept and very, very timid, and thankfully was never really put to test.

As with most military organizations, the ability to implement some punitive measures every now and then, at least in theory, was sufficient raison d'etré for the Royal Navy, and sufficient for securing England's sovereignty as well. Starfleet isn't all that different from this...

Federation worlds undoubtedly DO have highly competent and specialized military forces for defending themselves from invaders, but in the age of automated/orbital defense platforms and ground-based weapons that can smash whole starships out of the sky, I doubt any of those military organizations have ever operated their own starships. Most fighting probably takes place on the ground anyway, and what little fighting DOES happen in space can usually be handled by Starfleet.
Makes sense - but is based solely on what is not seen. We've never seen actual ground fights of the "pitched battle" type, fights that both sides would have prepared for and desired. We've seen mighty space fortresses in action, but never in the defense of UFP planets. And we've never seen "national" fighting forces represented by characters, sets or VFX - and the scant few dialogue references to such (ambiguous enough to possibly instead be references to Starfleet forces serving on that particular "national" theater) have involved space rather than surface assets.

For all we truly know, no "national" forces exist whatsoever.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 06:48 PM   #36
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Timo wrote: View Post
Put simply: too much gets by Starfleet, too much is absent, too much is simply forgotten or let slide for it to actually BE a full-time combat organization.
But that much is also true of the old Royal Navy.
Not to the extent of what we've seen in Starfleet. In terms of defensive capabilities and tactical readiness even the 17th century RN was far more specialized.

On the other hand, you yourself once pointed out that during that time period the word "military" referred to the land force and wouldn't have been applied to the Royal Navy anyway; by their definitions, the navy wasn't the military either.

As with most military organizations, the ability to implement some punitive measures every now and then, at least in theory, was sufficient raison d'etré for the Royal Navy, and sufficient for securing England's sovereignty as well. Starfleet isn't all that different from this...
Except Starfleet's raison d'etré is peaceful exploration and scientific research. They are armed because the galaxy is a dangerous place, and they perform defense/wartime missions because they are armed. When you consider that the Federation is at peace far more often than it is at war and that even the very few declared wars almost never pose an existential threat to the Federation or any of its members, then a significant expenditure on such a combat force would be politically and logically difficult to justify (and could only be justified by the presence of a permanent military-industrial complex, which poses problems all its own).

Instead, the Federation can afford to build and maintain a truly enormous exploration fleet because under normal circumstances that fleet would be out charting new worlds, identifying new resources, rescuing stranded ships, building good will with Federation neighbors, etc. In the event of war, you have this huge exploration force that already has their own weapons and their own ships; they can slip seemlessly into the combat role until the threat is neutralized, then go back to their day jobs without so much as a hickup.

Makes sense - but is based solely on what is not seen. We've never seen actual ground fights of the "pitched battle" type, fights that both sides would have prepared for and desired.
And yet we've never seen any sort of ground action involving large numbers of Andorians, who by TOS are still described as something of a warrior race. We can positively infer the presence of a large Andorian ground army by both the relative absence of Andorians in Starfleet and their lack of participation in fleet actions; they probably gave up their spaceflight aspirations and stuck to what they do best, which is kick the snot out of people in close quarters combat. The only thing we don't know for sure is WHERE the Andorians are active, but since there's nothing to indicate they have gone extinct or become pacifists, that remains the only relevant question: Where is the Andorian army?

For all we truly know, no "national" forces exist whatsoever.
Well, we know the "Federation Naval Patrol" is a separate entity from Starfleet, so that's one. We also know from "Gambit" that Vulcan has its own intelligence services, so that's two. More recently, we know that private security companies still exist in the 23rd cenury as per Scotty's question to the guard on the Vengeance (and he could well have been right).

Besides, it stands to reason that Starfleet is not the only combat-ready fighting force in the Federation, probably for the same reason the Coast Guard isn't the only fighting force in America.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 08:09 PM   #37
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
IMO, "Starfleet" is Earth's organization and always has been,
The problem with this assertion is that the Starfleet seen in TOS, TNG, DSN, and VOY is explicitly established to be the Federation Starfleet on multiple occasions:

DSN: Tribunal: "O'BRIEN: I've been in service to the Federation Starfleet all my life. No one has ever questioned my loyalty."

VOY, Dark Frontier: "BORG: A vessel has been detected. Unimatrix four two four grid one one six. Activate. Alter course to intercept. Vessel identified. Federation Starfleet, Intrepid class, one hundred forty-three life-forms. Prepare for assimilation."

TNG, The Most Toys: "This is not a mannequin. This is Data. This is formerly Lieutenant Commander Data of the Federation Starfleet. The only sentient android in existence."

And then there are the numerous references to Starfleet ships as "Federation starships" rather than "Earth starships:"

VOY, Initiations: "This is Commander Chakotay of the Federation starship Voyager. Why have you fired on me?"

VOY, Equinox: "This is Captain Ransom of the Federation starship Equinox. We're under attack. We need assistance."

STVI: "Send to Klingon High Command. 'This is Excelsior, a Federation starship. We have monitored a large explosion in your sector. Do you require assistance?'"

DSN, Emissary: "On Stardate 43997, Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the Federation starship Enterprise was kidnapped for six days by an invading force known as the Borg."

TNG, The Pegasus: " I am Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the Federation starship Enterprise."

DSN, For the Uniform: "You should have thought about that before you attacked a Federation starship."

TNG, The Ensigns of Command: "I am Lieutenant Commander Data of the Federation starship Enterprise."

STV: "He requests that you send a Federation starship to parlay for our release at once."

And more.

And that's to say nothing of the fact that we see the Federation President, not the United Earth President or P.M., issuing orders to Starfleet in Star Trek VI; of the fact that the Federation President is referred to as Starfleet's commander-in-chief in DSN: "Paradise Lost;" of the fact that we see the Federation President presiding over a Starfleet court-martial in Star Trek IV; of the fact that we see Starfleet taking orders from the Federation Council in TNG: "The Defector;" etc.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Starfleet seen outside of ENT is an Earth organization. It is the Federation Starfleet, not the United Earth Starfleet.

The logical conclusion is that when the writers created Starfleet in TOS Season One, they retconned the prior mentions of the Enterprise belonging to other organizations out of continuity. ENT's scenic artists may have revived UESPA for their 22nd Century United Earth Starfleet, but the Federation Starfleet is clearly a different thing.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 08:32 PM   #38
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Sci wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
IMO, "Starfleet" is Earth's organization and always has been,
The problem with this assertion is that the Starfleet seen in TOS, TNG, DSN, and VOY is explicitly established to be the Federation Starfleet on multiple occasions
Which makes sense, since Earth is a Federation member.

Don't misunderstand. Starfleet is an Earth organization in the sense that it was invented, maintained, funded and staffed by humans and nonhuman residents of Earth and/or human colonies. Which is to say it's an Earth organization in the same sense that, say, Boeing is an American company.

And if Boing had the overwhelming majority of its operations and personnel in, say, Texas, it could likewise be referred to as a TEXAN company, despite the fact that it provides services to customers all over the world and isn't necessarily beholden exclusively or even primarily to the government of Texas.

IOW, I'm not saying the Enterprise is part of Earth's Starfleet. I'm saying that Earth -- out of the goodness of its collective heart and at its own considerable expense -- contributes to the Federation by providing a Starfleet.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 08:55 PM   #39
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
IMO, "Starfleet" is Earth's organization and always has been,
The problem with this assertion is that the Starfleet seen in TOS, TNG, DSN, and VOY is explicitly established to be the Federation Starfleet on multiple occasions
Which makes sense, since Earth is a Federation member.
No. If it's the Federation Starfleet rather than the United Earth Starfleet, that means that it is an agency of the Federation government (rather than the United Earth government).

By comparison to real life: The Maryland Defense Foce may be an American force, but it is a Maryland agency, not a United States agency; it answers to the Maryland government (not the United States government), and its commander-in-chief is the Governor of the State of Maryland (not the U.S. President).

By contrast, even though the United States Navy's headquarters are in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the USN is not a Virginia agency, does not answer to the Virginia government, and its commander-in-chief is not the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Don't misunderstand. Starfleet is an Earth organization in the sense that it was invented, maintained, funded and staffed by humans and nonhuman residents of Earth and/or human colonies.
On the other hand, the Federation Starfleet seems to use policies about the contact of pre-warp civilizations and a planetary classification system that come from the Vulcans. So I'm not sure if I agree with the notion that Humans invented it. I think it's just as likely, if not more, that the Federation Starfleet was founded by combining the United Earth, Vulcan, Andorian, and Tellarite space services.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 09:03 PM   #40
bryce
Commodore
 
bryce's Avatar
 
Location: bryce
View bryce's Twitter Profile Send a message via Yahoo to bryce
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

As Enterprise puts it, Starfleet was once shorthand for the United Earth Space Probe Agency Starfleet (of Star Fleet)...

Star Trek has always been a bit unclear as to whether (even in post-Federation/post-Enterprise times) Starfleet is a Federation "navy" or an Earth navy. In Star Trek 6 and Into Darkness, we saw a roomful of Starfleet admirals - and they were all human.

We know that there are all-Vulcan ships, and all Benzite ships...(and early on in TNG, the idea seemed to be that the "Klingons had joined the Federation" - and they had their own ships...and the flew both the Klingon and Federation symbol.) It seemed like the Vulcan and Benzite ships were Starfleet...but maybe the ships were managed by the individual species worlds - kinda like how the the 23rd century, the Enterprise was both a Starfleet *and* UNESPA ship.

In DS9 they mentioned how the Bajorian Militia would have to be "incorporated into Starfleet" if Bajor joined the Federation (and, btw, a "milita" is a military or quasi-military organization.) I wonder if the Bajorian branch of Starfleet would have been run from Bajor more-so than Earth?

In "Star Trek" '09 Pine said that "the Federation...in a humanitarian and peacekeeping armada (I think he really meant *Starfleet* was that - and I would have added "scientific exploration" to that.) Peacekeeping is a kinda military thing.

And in Star Trek 6 we had character with the rank of "major".

And I think that the MACOS were eventually absorbed into Starfleet...just look at their patch: http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__...o_insignia.png

^I'm betting that's where Starfleet got that elongated star-shape as part of their emblem/symbol...
__________________
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/bryceburchett
Twitter: https://twitter.com/bryceburchett
03dashk64@gmail.com ("dash" *is* spelled out!)

Last edited by bryce; June 5 2013 at 09:15 PM.
bryce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 09:12 PM   #41
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

bryce wrote: View Post
As Enterprise puts it, Starfleet was once shorthand for the United Earth Space Probe Agency Starfleet (of Star Fleet)...

Star Trek has always been a bit unclear as to whether (even in post-Federation/post-Enterprise times) Starfleet is a Federation "navy" or an Earth navy.
No, it really hasn't. The only times Starfleet has ever been referred to as an Earth "navy" were in early TOS, before they created Starfleet for "Court-Martial" and the Federation for "A Taste of Armageddon." Since then, Starfleet has been explicitly stated on multiple occasions to be a Federation agency, answerable to the Federation government.

In Star Trek 6 and Into Darkness, we saw a roomful of Starfleet admirals - and they were all human.
In STID, we saw several non-Human admirals in that briefing room scene, actually. And of course, we never know:

1. How many of those Human-looking people actually are Human, or how many of them are non-Humans whose species looks Human. Or:

2. How many of those Humans are actually from Earth as compared to, say, former Earth colonies have have become their own separate, independent Federation Members, or to other planets that host large Human populations. For all we know, three or four Human extras in any given scene may be from Andor or Tellar.

Meanwhile, a preponderance of one species at one location does not make that organization an agency of that species's homeworld's government. If Starfleet's Tellar headquarters and Tellar-based fleet is mostly staffed by Tellarites, that doesn't mean Starfleet is a Tellarite agency.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 09:28 PM   #42
bryce
Commodore
 
bryce's Avatar
 
Location: bryce
View bryce's Twitter Profile Send a message via Yahoo to bryce
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

Sci wrote: View Post
bryce wrote: View Post
As Enterprise puts it, Starfleet was once shorthand for the United Earth Space Probe Agency Starfleet (of Star Fleet)...

Star Trek has always been a bit unclear as to whether (even in post-Federation/post-Enterprise times) Starfleet is a Federation "navy" or an Earth navy.
No, it really hasn't. The only times Starfleet has ever been referred to as an Earth "navy" were in early TOS, before they created Starfleet for "Court-Martial" and the Federation for "A Taste of Armageddon." Since then, Starfleet has been explicitly stated on multiple occasions to be a Federation agency, answerable to the Federation government.
I am at the library, so I typed that in a hurry, and just went back and edited it a bit. But I've gotten the impression sometimes that Starfleet was an Earth-centric agency.

I do think that it IS the Federsation navy...but I gte the impression that there are all-Vulcan ships (Intrepid in TOS, and the ship in "Take Me Out To the Holosuite") and all Benzite ships (in that TNG exchange program episode)...so I wonder if, in some cases, individual species/worlds have that own Starfleet branch...so in TOS the Enterprise was a Federation Starfleet vessel, but operated by the UNESPA/United Earth Starfleet (branch.)

In Star Trek 6 and Into Darkness, we saw a roomful of Starfleet admirals - and they were all human.
In STID, we saw several non-Human admirals in that briefing room scene, actually. And of course, we never know:

1. How many of those Human-looking people actually are Human, or how many of them are non-Humans whose species looks Human. Or:

2. How many of those Humans are actually from Earth as compared to, say, former Earth colonies have have become their own separate, independent Federation Members, or to other planets that host large Human populations. For all we know, three or four Human extras in any given scene may be from Andor or Tellar.

Meanwhile, a preponderance of one species at one location does not make that organization an agency of that species's homeworld's government. If Starfleet's Tellar headquarters and Tellar-based fleet is mostly staffed by Tellarites, that doesn't mean Starfleet is a Tellarite agency.
Yeah, good points. I think there may be species-specific branches of Starfleet (which males sense if some species have different environmental and atmosphere needs)...as well as multi-species ships like the Titan in the books. (Plus in Voyager they said that Earth wasn't just a human planet anymore, but home to many species...and so individuals of those species would join the *Earth* branch of Starfleet.

And I really think that there would have to be at least a few Starfleet Academy branches out there too, since I don't see how one academy (which seemed to have a limited number of slots per Federation sector) - could staff all the ships and starbases that we saw in TNG and DS9. (But then again, in TNG and DS9 we were given different impressions of the size of Starfleet. They lost 40 ships at Wolf 359, and they acted like it was a significant fraction of the whole Starfleet...but then in the Dominio War arc in DS9 we saw whole fleets of ships, 40 or more even, go into battle, and most get lost. I think in one DS9 episode they mentioned losing 300 ships in a short amount of time! And yet Starfleet goes on strong.
__________________
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/bryceburchett
Twitter: https://twitter.com/bryceburchett
03dashk64@gmail.com ("dash" *is* spelled out!)
bryce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 09:45 PM   #43
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

bryce wrote: View Post

In DS9 they mentioned how the Bajorian Militia would have to be "incorporated into Starfleet" if Bajor joined the Federation (and, btw, a "milita" is a military or quasi-military organization.) I wonder if the Bajorian branch of Starfleet would have been run from Bajor more-so than Earth?
Well the relaunch novels, especially the Worlds of DS9 novel about Bajor, go into a lot of detail about the process of incorporating the Bajoran Militia into Starfleet. Whlie a lot of it's members(including Kira) were offered commissions, the Militia and it's structure did remain in tact. Albeit in a national guard role, and some of the members were resentful over that.

TNG gives evidence that the individual members still have their own forces. In Gambit Riker contacts a Vulcan security minister to coordinate the mission to ensure "no one starts firing" on the mercenary ship for example.

The Vulcans, Andorians, Tellarites and so forth all had considerable military forces. More so than Earth at the time of the Founding of the Federation. By that, I don't get why the Federation Starfleet is so Earth and specifically western influenced... fleets, ship designs, ship names and what not... other than the authors are.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 01:37 AM   #44
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

R. Star wrote: View Post
bryce wrote: View Post
In DS9 they mentioned how the Bajorian Militia would have to be "incorporated into Starfleet"
Well the relaunch novels, especially the Worlds of DS9 novel about Bajor, go into a lot of detail about the process of incorporating the Bajoran Militia into Starfleet.
I believe the term used was absorbed, as in to accommodate or take in.

When a new member joins NATO they have to alter their military structures so as that they can conduct joint operations with other NATO members . But the member retains "ownership" over their military forces.

Sci wrote: View Post
No. If it's the Federation Starfleet rather than the United Earth Starfleet, that means that it is an agency of the Federation government (rather than the United Earth government).
T'Girl wrote: View Post
Look at it this way, when a Turkish warship is the command ship of a NATO fleet (like off the horn of Africa), it is referred to as the NATO flagship, but it's still a Turkish warship.
In addition to that example, consider this ...

When Brazil assumed command of the United Nations Interim Force task force (Lebanon) in 2011, the frigate União (Union) identified itself officially as the flagship of the United Nations Interim Force. And not officially as a Brazilian naval vessel.

Today, in addition to the Brazilian frigate Constituição (Constitution), the UNIFIL task force is currently comprised of 2 ships from Bangladesh, 3 ships from Germany and 1 ship each from Greece, Indonesia and Turkey. All these ship remain part of their home Navy's, but are also part of the United Nations Interim Force to which they are attached. This would be how they would referred to themselves.

Federation Starfleet = NATO fleet = United Nations Interim Force.

None of the ships are owned by the organization mentioned, but they are attached to it, and refer to it in communications.

the Federation President is referred to as Starfleet's commander-in-chief in DSN
Actually he refers to himself with that term, and no one else ever does. And it is truly strange that he would self-describe himself as such, given that it's made perfectly clear over the course of the show that it is the Federation Council, and not the "commander-in-chief" that is providing instructions to Starfleet.

When have you ever seen in real life (the news), a TV show, or a movie, a US Naval vessel receiving instructions from "Congress?"

It's the Council and not the President that possess the power of commander-in-chief (if not the title).

we see Starfleet taking orders from the Federation Council
If the Member worlds of the Federation formed the Federation in the first place to provide for a common defense (other things too), then this would be expected.

In the case of NATO, there is "SHAPE" (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe) it is the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations.

Allied Command Operations is responsible for all Alliance military operations, analogous perhaps to Starfleet Command.

When different Members starships operate together, they are the Federation's Starfleet.

ENT's scenic artists may have revived UESPA for their 22nd Century United Earth Starfleet, but the Federation Starfleet is clearly a different thing.
Hardly clear at all.

Today many countries have a "Navy." Why would it be odd if both United Earth and the Federation both used the term "Starfleet?"

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Starfleet seen outside of ENT is an Earth organization. It is the Federation Starfleet, not the United Earth Starfleet.
Or there is in fact a "United Earth Starfleet" and when United Earth deploys portions of it's fleet to operate in combination with other Federation Member's starships those ships are part of the "Federation Starfleet."

Christopher: "I see. Did the Navy ... ?"
Kirk: We're a combined service Captain. Our authority is the United Earth Space Probe Agency.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 02:47 AM   #45
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: A Military Star Fleet and UESPA

T'Girl wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post
bryce wrote: View Post
In DS9 they mentioned how the Bajorian Militia would have to be "incorporated into Starfleet"
Well the relaunch novels, especially the Worlds of DS9 novel about Bajor, go into a lot of detail about the process of incorporating the Bajoran Militia into Starfleet.
I believe the term used was absorbed, as in to accommodate or take in.

When a new member joins NATO they have to alter their military structures so as that they can conduct joint operations with other NATO members .
Tell that to the French.

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
No. If it's the Federation Starfleet rather than the United Earth Starfleet, that means that it is an agency of the Federation government (rather than the United Earth government).
T'Girl wrote: View Post
Look at it this way, when a Turkish warship is the command ship of a NATO fleet (like off the horn of Africa), it is referred to as the NATO flagship, but it's still a Turkish warship.
In addition to that example, consider this ...
For the record, T'Girl is being disingenuous above. She quotes herself in post #31 after her quote of myself in Post #39, as though #31 were a reply to #39 -- which it obviously is not. Post #31 did not in any way reply to Post #39.

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
No. If it's the Federation Starfleet rather than the United Earth Starfleet, that means that it is an agency of the Federation government (rather than the United Earth government).
T'Girl wrote: View Post
Look at it this way, when a Turkish warship is the command ship of a NATO fleet (like off the horn of Africa), it is referred to as the NATO flagship, but it's still a Turkish warship.
In addition to that example, consider this ...

When Brazil assumed command of the United Nations Interim Force task force (Lebanon) in 2011, the frigate União (Union) identified itself officially as the flagship of the United Nations Interim Force. And not officially as a Brazilian naval vessel.

Today, in addition to the Brazilian frigate Constituição (Constitution), the UNIFIL task force is currently comprised of 2 ships from Bangladesh, 3 ships from Germany and 1 ship each from Greece, Indonesia and Turkey. All these ship remain part of their home Navy's, but are also part of the United Nations Interim Force to which they are attached. This would be how they would referred to themselves.
The problem with this comparison is that under no circumstances are ships of the Federation Starfleet referred to as being "Earth" or "Vulcan" starships in some non-temporarily-attached-to-the-Federation-Starfleet context, and there is no evidence whatsoever of them being "loaned" to the Federation Starfleet.

In fact, the demobilized, about-to-be-decommissioned, not-on-any-missions-and-therefore-not-attached-to-any-international-organization's-task-forces U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 is explicitly referred to as Federation property in Star Trek IV. There is no way the demobilized Enterprise could be United Earth property, because there is no way a demobilized ship could still be under the command of an international organization's task force.

And that's to say nothing of the fact that no one has ever called those task forces in real life the "NATO Navy" or the "United Nations Navy." Yet the organization in STAR TREK has often been called the Federation Starfleet. Not the "Federation Interim Forces Task Force."

T'Girl wrote:
Sci wrote:
the Federation President is referred to as Starfleet's commander-in-chief in DSN
Actually he refers to himself with that term, and no one else ever does.
This is the context of that scene:

"Paradise Lost," DSN wrote:
SISKO
You want proof... Order Admiral
Leyton to withdraw his troops from
the streets... see what he does.

JARESH-INYO
You think he would refuse a direct
order from his commander-in-chief?

SISKO
If he orders his troops to stand
down, then I'm wrong and I'll
offer my resignation. But I don't
think that's going to happen.
With those troops in place,
Admiral Leyton controls Earth.
And he's not going to give up that
control until he's convinced he's
ended the Dominion threat.
No one else refers to the Federation President as the commander-in-chief because they all recognize and agree that he is the commander-in-chief. Sisko even says that if Leyton obeys the President -- in other words, if he treats the President as his commander-in-chief -- that means that the coup Sisko suspects is coming won't happen.

And it is truly strange that he would self-describe himself as such, given that it's made perfectly clear over the course of the show that it is the Federation Council, and not the "commander-in-chief" that is providing instructions to Starfleet.
Actually, the Federation Council is barely mentioned in that episode.

Yes, we do see other episodes where the Federation Council issues instructions to Starfleet -- though whether or not they constitute orders is questionable. But we have seen the Federation President issue direct orders to Starfleet before in Star Trek VI and in Star Trek IV. So the most this could prove is that Starfleet's chain-of-command functions somewhat differently; it certainly does not prove that Starfleet's commander-in-chief is not the President, and it does not prove that Starfleet is not an agency of the Federation government.

In the case of NATO, there is "SHAPE" (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe) it is the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations.

Allied Command Operations is responsible for all Alliance military operations, analogous perhaps to Starfleet Command.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Starfleet is an international organization's platform for military cooperation between sovereign states' armed forces. Starfleet is only ever referred to as the Federation Starfleet, and it only ever answers to the Federation government. Its ships are never called Earth or Tellarite or whatever ships -- they are Federation property, and remain Federation property even when demobilized, as established in STIV.

When different Members starships operate together, they are the Federation's Starfleet.
There is no evidence of this whatsoever. You are making this up.

ENT's scenic artists may have revived UESPA for their 22nd Century United Earth Starfleet, but the Federation Starfleet is clearly a different thing.
Hardly clear at all.

Today many countries have a "Navy."
True! Yet neither NATO nor the United Nations have their own navies.

Why would it be odd if both United Earth and the Federation both used the term "Starfleet?"
Not odd at all. I have no problem with the idea that the Federation Starfleet and the United Earth Starfleet are separate organizations, one answering to the Federation government and one answering to the United Earth government -- in the same way that the Maryland Defense Forces answer to the State of Maryland and the United States Navy answers to the United States.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Starfleet seen outside of ENT is an Earth organization. It is the Federation Starfleet, not the United Earth Starfleet.
Or there is in fact a "United Earth Starfleet" and when United Earth deploys portions of it's fleet to operate in combination with other Federation Member's starships those ships are part of the "Federation Starfleet."
Then how could Miles O'Brien say he's always been in service to the Federation Starfleet, if he's actually in the United Earth Starfleet? Why would the Borg identify the U.S.S. Voyager as a ship of the Federation Starfleet if it is actually an Earth ship? How could the demobilized U.S.S. Enterprise be Federation property if it's no longer operating in combination with anyone's ships?

It's the Federation Starfleet. Period.

Christopher: "I see. Did the Navy ... ?"
Kirk: We're a combined service Captain. Our authority is the United Earth Space Probe Agency.
As I said before: The writers of TOS retconned UESPA out when they created Starfleet and the Federation. That line is no longer in continuity, any more than claims that Vulcans had been conquered in "The Conscience of the King" remained in continuity after "The Immunity Syndrome" established that Vulcan had never been conquered, or than Kirk's middle name remained "R" after later episodes established his middle name to be "T," or than the idea that the interaction of matter and anti-matter would lead to the destruction of the universe after later episodes established that m/am reactions are the routine way warp power is generated.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci 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 03:19 PM.

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