RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,375
Posts: 5,504,298
Members: 25,126
Currently online: 512
Newest member: Ted Dave

TrekToday headlines

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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 > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 15 2013, 05:43 AM   #106
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Wait? What? There is a plot hole in TWOK? Say it ain't so.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 04:33 PM   #107
Gary7
Rear Admiral
 
Gary7's Avatar
 
Location: Near Manhattan ··· in an alternate reality
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Sran wrote:
As a commanding officer, Kirk doesn't have the luxury of making that assumption. As far as he's concerned, Reliant is threat until it's not, Khan or no Khan. Salvaging the vessel would be a distant tertiary concern behind securing the vessel and getting back the Genesis device.
On the contrary, as commanding officer he has the impetus to make considerations like this. The Reliant no longer had any means of attacking as all weapons were off line. It was adrift, inert. Khan was not responsive, so they had no idea if he was still alive. There was no good cause to destroy the ship at that point.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
^ The Genesis device prevented the transporter from working. Once it's activated, it can't be stopped or beamed away.

Remember Kirk suggested that they beam aboard the Reliant and stop it, and David replied "You can't."
Kirk wanted to beam aboard and stop it, which David said can't be done. He never said that a transporter cannot lock onto it once it is started. It's simply an option that wasn't explored, one that should have been. It would've been just a few seconds of dialog (raising the idea, then finding it's not possible for some specific explanation). That's what gets me in Star Trek, when known techniques to solve a problem aren't given consideration, especially when a technique is easily performed (like using a transporter).
__________________
Remembering Ensign Mallory.
Gary7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 05:26 PM   #108
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

All David meant was once started, the process cant be stopped, and as one of the lead scientists who built the device he would know if it was possible to shut it down or not.

If this were nuTrek likely hood is either the nebula or the Genesis device would actually have interfered with the Enterprise transporter anyway.
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 05:47 PM   #109
Rķu rķu, chķu
Fleet Admiral
 
Rķu rķu, chķu's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View Rķu rķu, chķu's Twitter Profile
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

I'm sure that the Genesis torpedo's radiation would have prevented the transporter from working against it. They don't need to spell it out onscreen, we can infer it. When was the last time a transporter did manage to lock onto something that generated that much energy? They can't even do it with dilithium...
__________________
"A hot dog at the ballpark is better than a steak at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart
Rķu rķu, chķu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 07:03 PM   #110
Sran
Commodore
 
Sran's Avatar
 
Location: The Captain's Table
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
I'm sure that the Genesis torpedo's radiation would have prevented the transporter from working against it. They don't need to spell it out onscreen, we can infer it. When was the last time a transporter did manage to lock onto something that generated that much energy? They can't even do it with dilithium...
What?
__________________
"Many things seem clever to an imbecile." --Captain Thelin th'Valrass, USS Enterprise-- "The Chimes at Midnight"
Sran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 08:28 PM   #111
Rķu rķu, chķu
Fleet Admiral
 
Rķu rķu, chķu's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View Rķu rķu, chķu's Twitter Profile
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

^ Dilithium can't be transported.
__________________
"A hot dog at the ballpark is better than a steak at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart
Rķu rķu, chķu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 08:31 PM   #112
Sran
Commodore
 
Sran's Avatar
 
Location: The Captain's Table
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
^ Dilithium can't be transported.
I wasn't questioning that as I'm aware of it. I was disputing your assessment that we could reasonably conclude Genesis couldn't be beamed off Reliant.

--Sran
__________________
"Many things seem clever to an imbecile." --Captain Thelin th'Valrass, USS Enterprise-- "The Chimes at Midnight"
Sran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 16 2013, 06:50 PM   #113
Gary7
Rear Admiral
 
Gary7's Avatar
 
Location: Near Manhattan ··· in an alternate reality
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Sran wrote: View Post
I wasn't questioning that as I'm aware of it. I was disputing your assessment that we could reasonably conclude Genesis couldn't be beamed off Reliant.
Yes, given how Star Trek typically explores possible avenues of solutions, it's a perfectly good idea to test out. Kirk didn't even know that the Genesis device couldn't be shut down once started, so how could he know that the Genesis device gives off an energy field that transporter beams can't lock onto? My point is that he should have at least asked. Remember Nomad? Beamed into space, despite his enormous system overload. And of course, the idea is not to rematerialize the Genesis device, but simply override the re-energizer and then intentionally scramble the atoms of the Genesis device into a state whereby it can no longer explode.
__________________
Remembering Ensign Mallory.
Gary7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 16 2013, 08:55 PM   #114
jayrath
Fleet Captain
 
Location: West Hollywood, Calif., USA
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Kirk wasting bad guys is not what Star Trek is about.

If it were, I would hate it.

Some people here need to rewatch the scene in "The Corbomite Manuever," right before they go over to the alien ship.
jayrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 02:03 PM   #115
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

^ Dilithium can't be transported.
Umm, what?

Dilithium has been routinely transported in basically every episode featuring it in prop form - sometimes with the transporter operator even unaware that this special material is among the things being transported.

"Mudd's Women": transporter is the supposed means of getting the stuff from the miners.
"Alternative Factor": both of the Lazarus clowns make unauthorized transporter trips to the planet with the stuff. And it's supposed to be a source of power in both cases, so we can't even argue that dilithium only travels in some sort of "inactive" form.
"Elaan of Troyius": Elaan's necklace comes aboard by transporter, and then our heroes realize it's ready-to-use dilithium.

The only things ever quoted as untransportable have been shielded targets or complex, unstable biological substances ("Family Business"), and even that was an issue with an outdated transporter model only...

...as one of the lead scientists who built the device he would know if it was possible to shut it down or not...
Exactly. David says Kirk can't beam over and shut it down. In addition, David is sitting on the bridge of a starship that can blow other starships to smithereens, and neither him nor Kirk can be unaware of the fact that the ship could try to destroy Genesis as well. Since David indicates there is no hope, this course of action is automatically out by his expert opinion. Kirk doesn't need to ask silly questions on exactly why an attempt to destroy Genesis would fail - this would be complete waste of the remaining four minutes, and of audience time as well.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 02:12 PM   #116
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Kirk spared Khan because Khan WASN'T Space Hitler but Space Napoleon.
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 02:33 PM   #117
Cap'n Claus
Rear Admiral
 
Cap'n Claus's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Sran wrote: View Post
Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
^ Dilithium can't be transported.
I wasn't questioning that as I'm aware of it.

--Sran
How were you aware of that, since it has been transported in various episodes?

Really wondering where you guys got that tidbit.
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
Cap'n Claus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 02:37 PM   #118
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Big Daddy wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Big Daddy wrote: View Post
Look at it this way, would you give a group of Hitlers, Stalins, and Napoleons their very own world? Seems to me it'd be safer just to waste them all.
This is called a "human rights violation." (Or, I suppose in the world of Star Trek, a "sentients' rights violation.") People have the right to live, even if they are monsters; killing someone is only acceptable in the act of immediate self-defense or the immediate defense of others.
Killing a megalomaniac and his followers who have a history of oppressing and killing others and who have shown intent to do so again would constitute killing "in the immediate defense of others" in my book. Sometimes human rights are revocable.
The process through which a persons human rights may be revoked is called a "trial" or similar form of due process. You don't have your inalienable human rights pulled just because somebody decides that you're an asshole.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 18 2013, 03:46 PM   #119
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: Why Let Khan Live?

I thought Into Darkness had already covered that one...
__________________
--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 June 20 2013, 04:21 AM   #120
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Why Let Khan Live?

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
Kirk spared Khan because Khan WASN'T Space Hitler but Space Napoleon.
This.
Lance 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 01:19 PM.

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