Ensigns of Command question..

[los2188]

I was watching the TNG episode of The Ensigns of Command and I started to think a little bit...which can be dangerous of course... Anyway, if you had the final say, would you just let the group of people who wanted to stay on the planet Tau Cygna V, just stay after trying to convince them to leave? I see this as another Maquis/Federation type issue and I tend to think more along the lines of, "hey, we'll try to help the Maquis to a point, but if they refuse, then they're on their own.." So if you had the final say, what would you do?

[Timo]

Well, Starfleet probably is obligated to protect UFP citizens even against their will. If the Cygnans decide they no longer want to be UFP citizens, then that frees the hands of our heroes; the Maquis never had the gall to take that step, but the Cygnans probably would have done it in a heartbeat.

Then again, allowing the Sheliak to kill the colonists would probably have repercussions beyond the immediate deaths. If I served in the same organization that expected Kirk to evacuate all the folks in "This Side of Paradise" against their will despite there being no danger to them as such, I would clearly be expected to force these contrarians to evacuate as well, quite regardless of their feelings.

Timo Saloniemi

[Christopher]

There's no "just stay" in this situation. This isn't like "Journey's End" where the DMZ colonists simply came under Cardassian rule and ended up being harassed and persecuted. The Tau Cygnans' only options were 1) evacuate and 2) die horrible flaming deaths. There would've been no one left to be "on their own." Perhaps hypothetically a few of them could've fled to the mountains and waged a guerrilla war Afghan-style, but I wouldn't think much of their long-term chances.

[los2188]

Christopher wrote:

---

There's no "just stay" in this situation. This isn't like "Journey's End" where the DMZ colonists simply came under Cardassian rule and ended up being harassed and persecuted. The Tau Cygnans' only options were 1) evacuate and 2) die horrible flaming deaths. There would've been no one left to be "on their own." Perhaps hypothetically a few of them could've fled to the mountains and waged a guerrilla war Afghan-style, but I wouldn't think much of their long-term chances.

There most certainly is a "just stay" option. When I say just stay, I'm talking about staying and taking your chances that all will more than likely be killed by the Sheliak. I mean don't get me wrong, by staying they are committing themselves to being killed, which in this case I find stupid, but there were some that were willing to take their chances with the Sheliak.

[Christopher]

But the point is, once they were killed, they wouldn't have been "staying" there anymore. Any stay would've been quite temporary, and thus effectively wouldn't have counted. It's fundamentally different from the Cardassian DMZ situation, since that was a choice between leaving and living under oppression and harassment designed to force you to leave. This was a choice between leaving and dying, which I don't see as any choice at all.

[Mojochi]

Actually, I'm of the opinion that it's about Federation citizenship. So long as the inhabitants of Dorvan V were Federation citizens, they were going to be forcibly removed, because it's Starfleet's duty to protect Federation citizens, & adhere to treaty stipulations

But the inhabitants of Tau Cygna V aren't Federation citizens... technically. Originally they were going to be a Federation colony somewhere else. They weren't even known to the Federation, & that expedition was considered lost.

I suppose once they knew of them they could have claimed it as Federation. The Sheliak certainly considered it such, but if they didn't capitulate, they really have no jurisdiction to remove them forcibly.

In fact, at the end of Journey's End, The Dorvan V inhabitants seceded from the Federation. Ultimately, the Cardassians could have just executed everyone on that planet, 5 minutes after the Enterprise left orbit, despite the Cardassian commander's assurances, & they'd have had no jurisdiction to do anything about it.

So the answer is that Starfleet couldn't forcibly remove either colony, if they renounce their Federation citizenship, but if they are considered citizens, then they are able to be forced out by the Feds

[T'Girl]

Mojochi wrote:

---

So the answer is that Starfleet couldn't forcibly remove either colony, if they renounce their Federation citizenship, but if they are considered citizens, then they are able to be forced out by the Feds

No, what allowed the Federation not to remove the colonists in Journey's End wasn't their renouncing their citizenship, it was the Cardassians permitting them to stay, despite the conditions of the treaty between the Federation and the Cardassians.

If the colonists had still renounce their citizenship's, but the Cardassians still insisted upon the letter of the treaty, then Starfleet still would have ultimately removed them.

In the case of the Tau Cygna V colonists, it wasn't my impression that Starfleet was ever going to force them to leave. Picard apparently expect them to voluntarily leave once they understood the situation. In the end that's what happen.

Given the numbers of the colony, and the length of the Shelak time extension, if the colonists hadn't decided to willingly go I don't think there would have been much the Enterprise could have done about it.

[Leviathan]

I probably would have filmed their orbital bombardment for pay-per-view.

Personally, I just wanted to know what the Grisellas look like. Mostly because I pictured a planet inhabited entirely by beings who looked exactly like Clark Griswold.

[Mojochi]

T'Girl wrote:

---

No, what allowed the Federation not to remove the colonists in Journey's End wasn't their renouncing their citizenship, it was the Cardassians permitting them to stay, despite the conditions of the treaty between the Federation and the Cardassians.

That's not how I remember it. True, they reached a peaceable agreement to let the inhabitants stay, but the planet fell under Cardassian rule henceforth, & Picard is adamant about making it understood that the inhabitants are no longer Federation citizens & any concerns they had in the future would go unanswered

Picard: Anthwara... I want to make absolutely sure you understand the implications of this agreement. By giving up your status as Federation citizens... any future request you or your people make for assistance from Starfleet will go unanswered. You will be on your own... and under Cardassian jurisdiction.

By choosing to renounce their citizenship, they are no longer Starfleet's responsibility, & therefore they would not be able to remove them forcibly. I would believe the same would hold true for any colony renouncing their citizenship, including Tau Cygna V

Both could have chosen to stay & die, though that would be a pretty stupid decision, & in the case of Tau Cygna V, they realized that, & in the Dorvan V case, they worked around that having to happen by coming to an agreement with the Cardassians, one which the Sheliak would not have agreed to

But like I said. Cardies are hardly honorable. They could have just wiped them clean from the planet at a later time if it suited their purpose

[los2188]

Christopher wrote:

---

But the point is, once they were killed, they wouldn't have been "staying" there anymore. Any stay would've been quite temporary, and thus effectively wouldn't have counted. It's fundamentally different from the Cardassian DMZ situation, since that was a choice between leaving and living under oppression and harassment designed to force you to leave. This was a choice between leaving and dying, which I don't see as any choice at all.

I see the context of what you mean, but I meant it in a way of, if you stay, then you'll die, so technically they won't be "staying" which I think is obvious and didn't need to be said, but again I do understand what you meant and that's an excellent point. So let me ask you this Christopher, do you side with the Maquis or the Federation? I've asked that question before, but I love to hear what others think.

[Tiberius]

Christopher wrote:

---

But the point is, once they were killed, they wouldn't have been "staying" there anymore. Any stay would've been quite temporary, and thus effectively wouldn't have counted. It's fundamentally different from the Cardassian DMZ situation, since that was a choice between leaving and living under oppression and harassment designed to force you to leave. This was a choice between leaving and dying, which I don't see as any choice at all.

I think the point is that they can choose to go with the Enterprise or choose to stay on the planet. Yes, staying would mean their certain deaths, but the colonists were convinced (however wrongly) that their deaths were not certain if they remained on the planet.

[Timo]

...Or perhaps some of them (chiefly, Gosheven) were convinced that their inevitable deaths would be beneficial to their ideals, and possibly to the greater good of mankind, while leaving and surviving would be detrimental?

The fundamental setup in this and the Maquis setup would then be the same: forcing an evacuation would mean betrayal of the locals' ideals (with the dead/alive question a secondary concern), and Starfleet and the Federation would need to ponder the political consequences of this, especially because forced evacuation would result in the people surviving to complain, while failure to evacuate would eliminate all complaint by the double virtue of these people dying happy.

Timo Saloniemi

[Tiberius]

Timo wrote:

---

...Or perhaps some of them (chiefly, Gosheven) were convinced that their inevitable deaths would be beneficial to their ideals, and possibly to the greater good of mankind, while leaving and surviving would be detrimental?

Well, I'm not going to argue about whether there are really people who think like that, because I sadly know that there are.

But I think anyone who holds this attitude is insane. There are no ideals if you are dead.

The fundamental setup in this and the Maquis setup would then be the same: forcing an evacuation would mean betrayal of the locals' ideals (with the dead/alive question a secondary concern), and Starfleet and the Federation would need to ponder the political consequences of this, especially because forced evacuation would result in the people surviving to complain, while failure to evacuate would eliminate all complaint by the double virtue of these people dying happy.

Timo Saloniemi

But there is a difference. The Maquis were Federation citizens. Were the Cygnians Federation citizens?

[Timo]

But I think anyone who holds this attitude is insane. There are no ideals if you are dead.

Only if one thinks in purely selfish terms... Setting an example through suicide is pretty common, especially if suicide is the only plausible future prospect anyway!

The Maquis were Federation citizens. Were the Cygnians Federation citizens?

We never learned of a mechanism by which a bunch of colonists from Earth would not be Federation citizens - even if said bunch left for their destination before the UFP was even founded. Conversely, we never really heard it established that the DMZ colonists would all be Federation citizens, either by default or by later agreement; all we heard that some bunch Eddington called "us" was considering secession but never got around to it. So, no telling if there really was a difference there.

Timo Saloniemi

[Tiberius]

Timo wrote:

---

Only if one thinks in purely selfish terms... Setting an example through suicide is pretty common, especially if suicide is the only plausible future prospect anyway!

But if everyone you are setting the example for is about to die as well, what's the point?

We never learned of a mechanism by which a bunch of colonists from Earth would not be Federation citizens - even if said bunch left for their destination before the UFP was even founded. Conversely, we never really heard it established that the DMZ colonists would all be Federation citizens, either by default or by later agreement; all we heard that some bunch Eddington called "us" was considering secession but never got around to it. So, no telling if there really was a difference there.

Timo Saloniemi

I think that's a bit of a stretch, and a little contradictory. In the first instance, you are implaying that any Humans are automatically Federation citizens, and then in the next you are suggesting that they aren't.