RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,656
Posts: 5,428,787
Members: 24,812
Currently online: 579
Newest member: JamesTKolkSB118


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 XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 3 2013, 09:53 PM   #196
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Scotty and his military comment

The Mighty Monkey of Mim wrote: View Post
Not really, because again, at its foundation Starfleet is a scientific and exploratory program.
Wait, how the hell do you know that ? Isn't that the whole question of the thread ?

His reply is a sideways way of saying they were going to get back to what they were really supposed to be doing and shed the excess built up in response to a threat that would no longer be posed by the Klingons.
Speculation.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3 2013, 10:00 PM   #197
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Belz... wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Because her comment had nothing whatsoever to do with what was actually being discussed.
So you think that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
She knows what she's talking about, and she knows good and damn well that "mothballing Starfleet" is not something that is even remotely being discussed.

It's amazing how peopel can dismiss the movie's script...
Spock doesn't mention decommissioning starships in the script either, thus it REMAINS a strawman for the reasons already mentioned.

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
It's NOT a "straw man " argument!


Again from the SCRIPT AND ONSCREEN DIALOGUE:
Changes nothing. Spock mentioned negotiations for "the dismantling of our space stations and starbases along the neutral zone. There's no discussion whatsoever about "mothballing the fleet." Cartwright even takes it a step further, calling the neutral zone disarmament an offer of "safe haven."

Neither of them are actually raising valid concerns, they're mainly just being dicks.

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
To me that implies that the more combat oriented vessels in the fleet were facing getting mothballed, with the more scientific and exploratory oriented vessels remaining viable in the planned peacetime reorganization.
But again, nobody was talking about vessels. Spock mentions outposts and space stations, which means the fleet would be REDEPLOYED to other duties, not decommissioned as such.

Which is probably what the "but" was leading to. "I'm sure our exploration and scientific programs would be unaffected, but we can definitely afford to ease the schedule on our border patrol units."

KGator wrote: View Post
This is just speculation and not necessarily true. In the US Civil War a great number of high ranking federal officers resigned and fought for the sessecionists.
Which they were only able to do because prior to the civil war the States maintained more direct control over their militaries than they do now, nor was there a great deal of mixing of out-of-state soldiers across state lines. When a state seceded from the union, the military resources it controlled seceded with it. The presence of the few Federal garrisons that WEREN'T loyal to state governments (e.g. Fort Sumter) were what ultimately triggered the war in the first place.

In a coup situation you would likely have various commanders or perhaps entire commands, army groups, corps, brigades, military installations, etc, who could choose to side with one side or the other.

Instead of "regional local defense fleets" battling Starfleet forces you would just as easily have Starfleet Force A battling Starfleet Force B. Especially if many of these installations fall within and are maintained/supported by local races or governments who withdraw from the Federation after the coup.
Although that's a possibility, the fact remains that we have rarely actually seen a Starfleet vessel run by a non-human crew. Quite a few on these boards have tried to claim that these ships (or the alternate space forces of other Federation members) do not exist purely because we've never seen them. I for one refuse to believe that the Andorians and the Tellarites have somehow gone extinct since the 23rd century and I find it VERY difficult to believe that their respective fleets are not at least as large as the Earth branch of Starfleet.

And given all that, we have no reason to expect the Andorians OR the Tellarites would use the same types of starships as the Earth fleet branch. In point of fact, it's entirely possible that the Norway and Steamrunner classes that appeared for the first time in First Contact really ARE native Andorian designs and may not even be their newest ships (Steamrunner might be Andor's equivalent of the Miranda class).

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
There never has been any evidence that Federation member worlds have their own military forces. Indeed, it is mentioned on DS9 that when Bajor was admitted into the Federation the Bajoran Militia would be absorbed into Starfleet. Of course in the novels, we do see Federation member worlds do have their own militaries and even the Bajoran Militia continues after Bajor's admittance into the Federation.
As I said, I just don't see the Andorians putting their security in the hands of a bunch of pinkskins. Although not quite as warlike as the Klingons, their space force predates Starfleet by nearly a century and is UNDENIABLY continuous with their past military tradition.

There are really only two ways to explain the absence of Andorian military forces in Trek.
1) They were there all along, but everyone takes them for granted and nobody goes out of their way to mention them.
2) Federation law prohibits any member to have a spaceborne military and the Andorians -- like everyone else -- was forced to disarm or use similar "it's not really a military" loopholes to get around it.

The second explanation makes the most sense to me, since it would explain why Starfleet doesn't consider itself to be a military organization: the Federation isn't ALLOWED to have a military organization because people like the Andorians or the Tellarites or even the Vulcans have a nasty habit of starting wars with their neighbors and then dragging the rest of the Federation into it with them. Starfleet is allowed to act as a de facto military because it's founding mission is peaceful exploration, and because the pinkskins haven't been in space long enough to really form political ties with anyone other than the existing Federation members.

Belz... wrote: View Post
The Mighty Monkey of Mim wrote: View Post
Not really, because again, at its foundation Starfleet is a scientific and exploratory program.
Wait, how the hell do you know that?
Picard's line in "The Measure of a Man."
"Starfleet was created to seek out new life."

That was, incidentally, also the entire premise of Star Trek: Enterprise.

Furthermore, despite various allusions to military imagery, there is ZERO dialog that suggests that Starfleet was founded for the purpose of defense or combat. Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!

Last edited by M'Sharak; July 3 2013 at 10:46 PM. Reason: merging five consecutive posts by same poster into one post
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3 2013, 10:45 PM   #198
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie: Multi-Quote ( ) - please make use of it more regularly than you have been.

I will fix your quintuple(!) post... this time.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 3 2013, 11:48 PM   #199
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Furthermore, despite various allusions to military imagery, there is ZERO dialog that suggests that Starfleet was founded for the purpose of defense or combat. Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?
Well, after lots of posts on the subject, you and I have finally reached a concencus!

Enterprise would appear to show that, from the inception, Starfleet WAS supposed to be merely a scientific/exploration organization. Seeking out new life and new civilizations.

Unfortunately, the NX01 discovered that a fair number of these new civilizations wanted to actually kill us!

Out of necessity then, Starfleet (from the Romulan War up to say TUC?) became a military organization, with science and exploration as a secondary concern to the security of the Federation's borders. This would explain all the trappings, the military form of organisation and nomenclature, and Kirk's comments during TOS, along with the disagreements between Carol and David Marcus and the discussion at the briefing in TUC.

What then happened between TUC and Encounter at Farpoint? The Klingons had been allies since the Khitomer Accords, the Romulans had gone into self-imposed isolation for decades, and it seems apparent that any conflicts the Federation did get involved in were merely border skirmishes, and small-scale wars.

This could explain the Galaxy Class, a return to the founding ideals, a perceived golden age of exploration, getting back to studying the mysteries of the galaxy, with military matters becoming secondary, but of course never forgotten!

Unfortunately, just as Starfleet had gotten used to this new golden age, the Borg and Dominion came calling! It could also explain the Cardassians flexing their muscles in The Wounded and Chain of Command, they perhaps perceived Starfleet changing their priorities as weakness?
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien
solariabsg25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 04:00 AM   #200
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Scotty and his military comment

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Furthermore, despite various allusions to military imagery, there is ZERO dialog that suggests that Starfleet was founded for the purpose of defense or combat. Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?
Well, after lots of posts on the subject, you and I have finally reached a concencus!

Enterprise would appear to show that, from the inception, Starfleet WAS supposed to be merely a scientific/exploration organization. Seeking out new life and new civilizations.

Unfortunately, the NX01 discovered that a fair number of these new civilizations wanted to actually kill us!

Out of necessity then, Starfleet (from the Romulan War up to say TUC?) became a military organization, with science and exploration as a secondary concern to the security of the Federation's borders. This would explain all the trappings, the military form of organisation and nomenclature, and Kirk's comments during TOS, along with the disagreements between Carol and David Marcus and the discussion at the briefing in TUC.

What then happened between TUC and Encounter at Farpoint? The Klingons had been allies since the Khitomer Accords, the Romulans had gone into self-imposed isolation for decades, and it seems apparent that any conflicts the Federation did get involved in were merely border skirmishes, and small-scale wars.

This could explain the Galaxy Class, a return to the founding ideals, a perceived golden age of exploration, getting back to studying the mysteries of the galaxy, with military matters becoming secondary, but of course never forgotten!

Unfortunately, just as Starfleet had gotten used to this new golden age, the Borg and Dominion came calling! It could also explain the Cardassians flexing their muscles in The Wounded and Chain of Command, they perhaps perceived Starfleet changing their priorities as weakness?
The thing is, I'm not so certain that there is a need to distinguish between military and non-military fighting forces in the Trek universe. To allude to NX-01 again, it wasn't exactly that a lot of aliens in the universe wanted to kill us, it was that alot of them wanted to EAT us and didn't seem to understand why we would find that so objectionable. Even the Xindi threat, ironically, turned out to be little more than a huge misunderstanding and didn't even shape up to be an actual war as such.

My view is that the majority of the things that threaten the Federation aren't categorized as military threats. Starfleet has to deal with sociopathic demigods, uncontrollable ancient technology, cosmic nambla, inexplicably powerful omnicidal robots, temporal anomalies, transporter duplicates, Carmen Sandiego, actual honest-to-god space monsters (including giant amoebas), predatory creatures with crazy superpowers, Reginald Barclay, Space Nazis, space gangsters, and whatever the hell this is. And this for the missions of TWO starships that just happen to share the same name. It makes you think that if Starfleet has hundreds of ships exploring deep space, all of whom are encountering similar phenomenon with their regular missions, the universe must be positively teeming with totally weird shit, most of which is incredibly dangerous.

We like to focus on the occasional skirmish with the Romulans or Klngons over a disputed planet somewhere; we talk about the Hostile Aliens Out of Fucking Nowhere attacks that happen two or three times a year. But that's just a small portion of what Starfleet has to deal with in order to keep the Federation safe, and most of the hazards facing the Federation come in the form of things that are dangerous just by virtue of their existing at all.

I've said before that Starfleet is basically patterned after and otherwise behaves like NOAA with weapons. If you consider that Starfleet operates in a universe that is essentially populated by sentient hurricanes, it's no wonder that the Federation's scientific exploration service is also the best equipped and most heavily armed organization they have; when a pissed off storm cloud declares war on you, you send scientists not soldiers.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 05:08 AM   #201
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
when a pissed off storm cloud declares war on you, you send scientists not soldiers.
Since when is James T. Kirk a scientist?

Because with some of the ways he felt with the stuff you brought up he didn't seem to be using any scientific solutions to the problems, in fact they seemed more like military solutions.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 06:02 AM   #202
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Scotty and his military comment

LobsterAfternoon wrote: View Post
Nah, NASA isn't the military. It makes use of military expertise, like how a news network might hire a retired general to comment on military matters, but NASA doesn't wage war, have members who take an oath, etc.
Coming late to this, but hey, since the 70s NASA has been the military's bitch, at least with respect to the manned program. The entire manned program post-Apollo and -Skylab was with the orbiter, and once they started compromising on the design and the costs went up, they absolutely needed DoD dollars, which is why the payloads were disproportionately military, and also inflicted some other design changes with regard to payload capacity.

With this in mind ... NASA is being used to wage war, because it provides the means for DoD to pursue its objectives. If you're doing a PATRIOT GAMES hit and want to see the action from a satellite, guess who probably placed it there?

All of this is at a total remove from the Apollo era, when the military's space program was essentially shuttered (no Manned Orbital Lab, instead eventually Skylab, no Dyno-Saur, instead the Orbiter, after a fashion.) So you have NASA, which was kicked into prominence to reply to an international political situation, going from a fairly military-free program into one that was dependent on military support, in less than a decade.

So, to get back to the main line of questioning ... if we can have this kind of upheaval, who knows what could have gone on in Starfleet during a century or a decade, stuff that didn't fit into any of the told backstories (and I'm not EVEN going to try to fit UESPA into the Starfleet/Fed thing, because that makes it sound like a civilian program got folded into a military one, and we wouldn't be having THAT in an evolved future, would we?)

Moreover, we're in a unique situation with seeing character stuff over a long haul with some ... so you have their perceptions changed not just by their experiences, but by what they know or have learned about others. I don't for one minute believe the TUC Kirk of 'let them die' infamy is genuine, or even heartfelt (in this, I totally agree with Shat's notion that he is instantly embarrassed for even blurting it, and think Meyer's cutting was a very shortsighted choice), but he certainly was capable of feeling that for a short time in extreme instances.

But Kirk seems to me to be much more about beating HIMSELF up over things that went badly over the long haul, not about carrying grudges. maybe that is because he won so often that he didn't have to carry grudges, but that is a key aspect to how I see his character, informed somewhat by the novels but principally from Shatner, Coon & other key TOS creatives. So when TUC is used as a Starfleet equals military argument, are we assuming it is a change in the trek universe due to meyer or a change in the Federation? If the latter, do we assume that the SFS-TUC era -- which I think of as the X-FILES/TRUST NO ONE era of TREK, since you have some serious surveillance going on with McCoy after Genesis and a real serious paranoid tone in SFS and then again in TUC -- is driven by events we don't even know about, but are enough to make the whole 23rd century seem very retro-20th when looked back at from 237_? (I suppose the abramsverse is kind of stuck in something like this, since it doesn't really put across any of the boldly going stuff with conviction, but uses buzzwords like 'armada' and 'enlist' that push much more conventional MIDWAY/RAMBO buttons vis a vis the military.

When we see the TOS era from the TNG one, there is the usual distancing with 'cowboy diplomacy' and the like, as if, 'yeah, that was before we were civilized' was the mindset. But is it really valid? Just because the frontier era had better color, music, editing and fight scenes doesn't make it less civilized or evolved. In fact, you can probably find as many examples of Kirk NOT doting on the military POV as you can the opposite, such as when he is telling Garth that he thinks of himself primarily as an explorer now. And Kirk goes out of his way to avoid blowing up ships after he has damaged them, same as Picard, though he may have to do some 'kirk strategy' in order to reach that point, instead of just having a vessel 80 times more powerful, which seems the TNG way of taking out the other guy's defenses.

Both of them show similar colors when dealing with hopeless hatfield&mccoy situations - see PRIVATE LITTLE WAR and SYMBIOSIS for the closest parallel -- and yet Kirk is perceived by more viewers as a warrior than an explorer, even when he has made choices that define him not as strictly impulsive or combative but actually answerable to his conscience in nearly all instances. In a real military, could Kirk manage to pull half of this shit and even stay in the service as the guy phasering dust mites off the EXIT signs at HQ? Just the political damage he'd do to his superiors in taking the rules and making them work for his ethics would make him untenable in no time at all, because even when you win big, you make enemies, and therefore he should have the biggest enemies (or the greatest volume of them anyway.)

To me, the fact that Kirk prospers (to some degree) in his career suggests he works for a group that has a military structure applied to a civilian organization, rather than the reverse. And it would follow that there could be aspects of that organization that are the CAPRICORN ONE-style secret portions, a la sec31, which could report to a higher or more secret or inner gov't WHILE technically being a part of the civilian org. A lot of Starfleet's perception as military could just be how the government elects to portray them ... defenders when you need starships built, explorers when you don't ... and there is even Roddenberryesque justification for this, since he seems to think that solutions to all things come from going out there, so that means you get your military and tech and resource stuff answered by going boldly, and therefore your point guys for this are the civiilian science guys who understand chain of command and can also fire phasers, if and when there is a need to do so.

I suppose you can put up so many alternate scenarios that pretty much any grand unified theory would be useless ... reconciling Jellico with TNG only works for me because Jellico is what I always knew they needed but figured they had been afraid to show ... then you see Ron Tracey and you wonder 'did this guy snap like Decker or was he always this much a mess?' and there you have a Starfleet that seems dangerously unenlightened, one where maybe you COULD make captain in an insanely short period of time without assassinating your way up the chain of command, but would anybody be willing to serve in that situation, especially with the ethical issues associated - which takes us up to PEGASUS, which seems entirely 23rd century or earlier in its outlook (outside of Picard, who of course has the high ground because he has the best posture.)

I had such a concise clear idea of what I was writing when I started this, and now I have no idea what that neat point was ... damnit!
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 06:05 AM   #203
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
when a pissed off storm cloud declares war on you, you send scientists not soldiers.
Since when is James T. Kirk a scientist?

Because with some of the ways he felt with the stuff you brought up he didn't seem to be using any scientific solutions to the problems, in fact they seemed more like military solutions.
IMMUNITY SYNDROME he uses scientific premise to destroy the thing, not extra torps. A lot of the time he uses solutions based on human nature or his ability to shape opinion, stuff that LEADERS can manage, whether they are military or not.

I don't for a second believe any of that Abrams stuff about Kirk being some genius level IQ unless he is supposed to be an idiot savant, especially going by his blissfully blank assholishness at the start of this last movie.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 06:26 AM   #204
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
when a pissed off storm cloud declares war on you, you send scientists not soldiers.
Since when is James T. Kirk a scientist?

Because with some of the ways he felt with the stuff you brought up he didn't seem to be using any scientific solutions to the problems, in fact they seemed more like military solutions.
"Military problem" is what happens when an experimental Russian submarine torpedoes one of your patrol ships and you have to hunt it down and sink it

"Starfleet problem" is what happens when a genetically modified flying siberian tiger eats the entire population of Pittsburgh and you have to calculate its hunting patterns in order to track it down and kill it.

The solutions are similar, but "ravenous man-eating beast from hell" isn't usually thought of as a MILITARY problem.

Besides, Kirk's main job is to run the Enterprise and implement solutions; 90% of those solutions are invented by Spock, who is -- let's face it -- the patron saint of spacegoing scientists.

trevanian wrote: View Post
I don't for a second believe any of that Abrams stuff about Kirk being some genius level IQ unless he is supposed to be an idiot savant, especially going by his blissfully blank assholishness at the start of this last movie.
Just because he's a genius doesn't mean he isn't an asshole. Good character comes from experience, having to overcome adversity, and having to accept total failure and then pick yourself up and move on. Accepting failure is something Kirk has never been particularly good at; it is, in fact, his singular character weakness. But having to deal with it from time to time pushes him on the path to maturity, something STID went out of its way to show IMO.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 06:50 AM   #205
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?
1966.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1965-1965½, 1966-1969, Jan. 21-23 1972, 1979-2005, 2009-?
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 10:58 AM   #206
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
She knows what she's talking about, and she knows good and damn well that "mothballing Starfleet" is not something that is even remotely being discussed.
Bullshit. They DID discuss it. They got cut off by Cartwright.

Spock doesn't mention decommissioning starships in the script either, thus it REMAINS a strawman for the reasons already mentioned.
I don't think you're clear about what a strawman is. They were discussing a possibility, and Spock had nothing to do with the conversation anyway.

Changes nothing. Spock mentioned negotiations for "the dismantling of our space stations and starbases along the neutral zone.
Which is also pretty stupid, but there you have it.

Neither of them are actually raising valid concerns, they're mainly just being dicks.
You are offering your opinion as evidence.

But again, nobody was talking about vessels.
Yeah, except the two officers which you want to ignore because your opinion trumps them.

Picard's line in "The Measure of a Man."
"Starfleet was created to seek out new life."
And he's probably not wrong -- not entirely, anyway -- but I wouldn't trust Picard's opinion on this any day. The man's an idealist.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 01:24 PM   #207
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Furthermore, despite various allusions to military imagery, there is ZERO dialog that suggests that Starfleet was founded for the purpose of defense or combat. Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?
Well, after lots of posts on the subject, you and I have finally reached a concencus!

Enterprise would appear to show that, from the inception, Starfleet WAS supposed to be merely a scientific/exploration organization. Seeking out new life and new civilizations.

Unfortunately, the NX01 discovered that a fair number of these new civilizations wanted to actually kill us!

Out of necessity then, Starfleet (from the Romulan War up to say TUC?) became a military organization, with science and exploration as a secondary concern to the security of the Federation's borders. This would explain all the trappings, the military form of organisation and nomenclature, and Kirk's comments during TOS, along with the disagreements between Carol and David Marcus and the discussion at the briefing in TUC.

What then happened between TUC and Encounter at Farpoint? The Klingons had been allies since the Khitomer Accords, the Romulans had gone into self-imposed isolation for decades, and it seems apparent that any conflicts the Federation did get involved in were merely border skirmishes, and small-scale wars.

This could explain the Galaxy Class, a return to the founding ideals, a perceived golden age of exploration, getting back to studying the mysteries of the galaxy, with military matters becoming secondary, but of course never forgotten!

Unfortunately, just as Starfleet had gotten used to this new golden age, the Borg and Dominion came calling! It could also explain the Cardassians flexing their muscles in The Wounded and Chain of Command, they perhaps perceived Starfleet changing their priorities as weakness?
The thing is, I'm not so certain that there is a need to distinguish between military and non-military fighting forces in the Trek universe. To allude to NX-01 again, it wasn't exactly that a lot of aliens in the universe wanted to kill us, it was that alot of them wanted to EAT us and didn't seem to understand why we would find that so objectionable. Even the Xindi threat, ironically, turned out to be little more than a huge misunderstanding and didn't even shape up to be an actual war as such.

My view is that the majority of the things that threaten the Federation aren't categorized as military threats. Starfleet has to deal with sociopathic demigods, uncontrollable ancient technology, cosmic nambla, inexplicably powerful omnicidal robots, temporal anomalies, transporter duplicates, Carmen Sandiego, actual honest-to-god space monsters (including giant amoebas), predatory creatures with crazy superpowers, Reginald Barclay, Space Nazis, space gangsters, and whatever the hell this is. And this for the missions of TWO starships that just happen to share the same name. It makes you think that if Starfleet has hundreds of ships exploring deep space, all of whom are encountering similar phenomenon with their regular missions, the universe must be positively teeming with totally weird shit, most of which is incredibly dangerous.

We like to focus on the occasional skirmish with the Romulans or Klngons over a disputed planet somewhere; we talk about the Hostile Aliens Out of Fucking Nowhere attacks that happen two or three times a year. But that's just a small portion of what Starfleet has to deal with in order to keep the Federation safe, and most of the hazards facing the Federation come in the form of things that are dangerous just by virtue of their existing at all.

I've said before that Starfleet is basically patterned after and otherwise behaves like NOAA with weapons. If you consider that Starfleet operates in a universe that is essentially populated by sentient hurricanes, it's no wonder that the Federation's scientific exploration service is also the best equipped and most heavily armed organization they have; when a pissed off storm cloud declares war on you, you send scientists not soldiers.
Actually, your assessment is quite correct.

Starfleet never probably put up a big sign somewhere saying "We're the military!" There's probably nothing anywhere in the Federation Charter or Starfleet Organisation that says "These people are part of the Military Command" or "These are part of the Science Branch."

Even in the Meyer Trek that you regarded as too militaristic only mentioned the Starfleet Corps of Engineers, and I also remember reference somewhere to Starfleet Intelligence.

I believe that for a long period, it was the military mindset that ran the show. They had a war with the Romulans, were on the verge of war with the Klingons, and then had the Romulans attack outposts which could have been a prelude to starting a Second Romulan War - the Romulan Threat was deemed so important they sent the Enterprise on an extremely risky covert black-ops mission that could have been disastrous if the Romulan Interception Force had followed their normal protocols and just blown her out of space.

The argument of the Marcus's would seem to indicate that the military and scientific "sides" of Starfleet did not always see eye-to eye, the scientific side wanting more labs on ships, the military wanting more phaser banks and photon torpedo stocks. The "kept the peace" line probably indicates that the two viewpoints reached a compromise that was acceptable to both.


If we look again at the TUC exchange at the briefing, it could be read that yes they were talking of mothballing some of Starfleet. NOT reducing a military though, it's just that a large number of starships were probably engaged in normal border patrols along the Neutral Zone rather than exploration. As Starfleet could handle all the exploration missions as well as this security, what would these, possibly hundreds of, starships do, when the Klingons were no longer a threat?


After TUC, any military-heads would have found themselves facing a losing argument. Why bigger and more powerful starships bristling with weapons, when the major threats have gone? You must dictate policy on the day-to-day routine threats you may face, not the anomalies such as doomsday machines and space amoeba!

JJ Abrams also straddles this line.

The Enterprise appears bigger and tougher than the TOS and possibly even TMP Enterprise. There could well be a confidence throughout Starfleet that ships like her (and larger, I seem to recall that the saucer section debris she almost collided with over Vulcan was larger than she was) could handle anything they came across. In such an environment, the science argument could well hold sway, as they already feel they have their military bases covered.

The Narada owned them, but once again an anomaly, a one-off threat.

This would explain why Starfleet appears to have a more scientific/exploration slant in JJ Abrams-Trek, even while it has even more military trappings than TOS (service caps for dress uniforms for example).

Admiral Marcus appears to be one of the military mind-set old-guard, who thinks that "science" and "exploration" is threatening to undermine the safety of the Federation. He would quite happily have almost the entire Starfleet exist as Akiras and Defiants, with maybe a few smaller ships sent off on research missions, than lay down the keel of a single Galaxy Class explorer.

We must all also remember that our discussions are not helped by the actions of individual writers

James Kirk stated "I'm a soldier, not a diplomat."

But, his main mission is to seek out new life, and new civilizations. By this very mission charter, by conducting First Contact, he MUST be capable of being a diplomat - even if you take just one example, in brokering the agreement between the miners and the Horta in Devil in the Dark, he has acted in that role. It was Kirk, not a Federation diplomat, who attempted to negotiate mining rights in Mirror, Mirror.

Certainly the TOS Enterprise never had a specific diplomatic/first-contact team aboard, this was supposed to be carried out initially by the Captain, first and foremost, with weeks, perhaps even months, passing before a proper diplomatic team takes over. Kirk must be capable of delicate negotiations, which can be the difference between friendly relations, or having the new race start building warships to destroy the interlopers!
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien

Last edited by solariabsg25; July 4 2013 at 03:57 PM.
solariabsg25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 04:38 PM   #208
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Belz... wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
She knows what she's talking about, and she knows good and damn well that "mothballing Starfleet" is not something that is even remotely being discussed.
Bullshit. They DID discuss it. They got cut off by Cartwright.
Who continued to discuss it, prolonging the derail until Spock brought everyone back to business.

I don't think you're clear about what a strawman is. They were discussing a possibility
No, they were discussing an extremist totally-out-of-left-field action that was easier to object to in principle than the simple end to hostilities. That's what a strawman is: you attack a position you don't like by assigning to it flaws it doesn't actually have and then denounce that position based on those flaws.

You are offering your opinion as evidence.
It isn't OPINION that nobody was proposing the decommissioning of starships; they weren't. She asked the question as a way of undermining the entire concept of disarmament, and Cartwright merely continued that line of thought with a racist diatribe.

In short, they were both objecting to a proposal that nobody had made; they weren't discussing the nature of Starfleet, they were being dicks.

But again, nobody was talking about vessels.
Yeah, except the two officers which you want to ignore because your opinion trumps them.
Are you confused about what this meeting was about? It was a BRIEFING, not a planning session. It would be no different if she'd popped up and said "Bill, are talking about surrendering to the Klingons?"

Picard's line in "The Measure of a Man."
"Starfleet was created to seek out new life."
And he's probably not wrong -- not entirely, anyway -- but I wouldn't trust Picard's opinion on this any day.
So you trust two officers you've never seen before, at least one of whom is later seen committing high treason... but you don't trust Jean Luc Picard?
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 04:56 PM   #209
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Scotty and his military comment

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post

Certainly the TOS Enterprise never had a specific diplomatic/first-contact team aboard, this was supposed to be carried out initially by the Captain, first and foremost, with weeks, perhaps even months, passing before a proper diplomatic team takes over. Kirk must be capable of delicate negotiations, which can be the difference between friendly relations, or having the new race start building warships to destroy the interlopers!
True,but we also saw Kirk frequently ferrying Federation diplomats around, with the idea that Ambassador So-and-So was going to do most of the heavy lifting when it came to negotiating treaties and such.

In "Elaan of Troyius," for example, Kirk only takes over as a diplomat when the Elasian ambassador is stabbed . . . .

(If you'll indulge me a shameless plug, I actually play with a similar notion in an upcoming TOS novel. During a diplomatic mission, Kirk initially intends to let a visiting Federation commissioner handle the negotiations, but has to take over when it turns out that the aliens in question respect "explorers" more than "bureaucrats" and refuse to deal with anybody but Kirk . . . .)
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 05:04 PM   #210
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: Scotty and his military comment

Greg, there were probably numerous dull missions of this type we never saw, like just ferry diplomat A to alien race B, wait around then take him back to Starbase C.

The only time we got to see it on screen though was when the representative was inept (Taste of Armaggedon), obnoxious (Trouble with Tribbles) or as you said, when he got stabbed and taken out of the equasion. The writers needed to bring Kirk to the fore.
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien
solariabsg25 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 11:06 PM.

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