RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,108
Posts: 5,432,755
Members: 24,932
Currently online: 609
Newest member: Cani

TrekToday headlines

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 8 2013, 09:44 AM   #61
Danger Ace
Commander
 
Danger Ace's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
My biggest gripe about Section 31 when i was watching DS9 was it was completely counter to Roddenberry's vision of the future.
I don't think Section 31 violated GR's vision. At least not as originally given us in TOS and the TOS movies. We had covert activities. We had an "if push comes to shove then we choose us" philosophy.

Section 31 is an organization that acts to preserve and protect humanity. Not the Federation, but humanity.
Keeping in mind that your human, what is at all wrong with their mission being the protection and preservation of humanity?

That is the brand of thinking I just don't get. Not knocking anyone, but I am honestly confessing that I just don't get it. Where does this ideal that under the right conditions a self-inflicted extinction is okay? And that keeping tabs on openly antagonistic races is wrong? Or keeping a technological parity is provocatory and wrong?

If Roddenberry did this then he bait-and-switched us first generation fans, and fortunately DS9 corrected that fraud.

I think fans would be more comfortable with Section 31 if there were public and not a cloak and dagger organization under Star Fleet.
Which would pretty much defeat its purpose and nullify its effectiveness.
__________________
Yours Truly,
Vic Falcone
Danger Ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 10:19 AM   #62
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

I don't think it defeats the purpose since we know other organizations like the Tal Shiar and Obsidian Order function just fine. I think it morally corrupts the Federations "advertised" principles about freedom and enlightenment. Take that away and what makes the Fed and Star Fleet any different from The Romulan Star Empire, TOS Klingons, Cardassian Union, Breen or Dominion? Nothing. The Fed is just as cut throat and ruthless as any of them and advanced technology and pursuit of enlighten like Roddenberry envision for his series completely disappears. That what I think fans don't like about it. Yes Star Fleet is a military. However fans don't like the idea of Trek's military keeping company with Stargate's, NuBSG, and even our modern militaries in western countries.

Unfortunately this ideal is impossible in practice but easy to preach and by extension completely subverts Roddenberry's utopian future. It's a work in progress and it's something writers could write about. Season 1 Picard was probably given a Star Fleet manifesto about preaching points to his first contacts about enlightened society.

Now i think in the books Section 31 is credited or at least alluded to be responsible for a number of things we've seen throughout Trek history.
Such as

Kirk and Spock's actions in TOS "The Enterprise Incident" being under orders from the Federation (we can assume Star Fleet started the conversation) to steal the cloaking device. Kirk even states his unusal behavior and entering the Neutral Zone was to "keep the Enterprise and Federation off the hook".

TNG's "Pegasus" with the phasing cloak. Sanctioned by Star Fleet Command to be carried out by then Capt Pressman who was later promoted to Admiral.

TNG's "Insurrection" with Admiral Doughtery sanctioning the removal of the Ba'ku to get technology for the regenerative properties of their planet and using cloaked Federation ships and working with a known Dominion ally during the Dominion War.

There are a few others but I can't think of them off the top of my head.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 11:04 AM   #63
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post

TNG's "Insurrection" with Admiral Doughtery sanctioning the removal of the Ba'ku to get technology for the regenerative properties of their planet and using cloaked Federation ships and working with a known Dominion ally during the Dominion War.
I always got the impression the S'ona joined up with the Dominion as a result of the Insurrection incidents.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 11:20 AM   #64
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

R. Star wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post

TNG's "Insurrection" with Admiral Doughtery sanctioning the removal of the Ba'ku to get technology for the regenerative properties of their planet and using cloaked Federation ships and working with a known Dominion ally during the Dominion War.
I always got the impression the S'ona joined up with the Dominion as a result of the Insurrection incidents.
No it was before since Riker stated in INS the Son'a were known producers of ketracel white.

Regardless that's still some shady dealing on StarFleets behalf. Makes you question the whole we are desperate and losing this war thing in DS9, if Section 31 and Star Fleet command are making deals openly with the Dominion's allies.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 12:36 PM   #65
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

T'Girl wrote: View Post
. Why would the hundred of billions of people from the many Member worlds have to "answer to" the Federation?
Becuase Section 31 conducts covert operations supposedly in defense of it, many of which could bite the federation in the ass if they were found out so they should have to get authorization from their freaking government before they do that kind of stuff.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 04:36 PM   #66
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post

TNG's "Insurrection" with Admiral Doughtery sanctioning the removal of the Ba'ku to get technology for the regenerative properties of their planet and using cloaked Federation ships and working with a known Dominion ally during the Dominion War.
I always got the impression the S'ona joined up with the Dominion as a result of the Insurrection incidents.
No it was before since Riker stated in INS the Son'a were known producers of ketracel white.

Regardless that's still some shady dealing on StarFleets behalf. Makes you question the whole we are desperate and losing this war thing in DS9, if Section 31 and Star Fleet command are making deals openly with the Dominion's allies.

there's a difference between supplier and ally. The Son'a weren't allies of the Dominion until Picard's actions in INS pushed them to that point.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 06:21 PM   #67
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

sonak wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post

I always got the impression the S'ona joined up with the Dominion as a result of the Insurrection incidents.
No it was before since Riker stated in INS the Son'a were known producers of ketracel white.

Regardless that's still some shady dealing on StarFleets behalf. Makes you question the whole we are desperate and losing this war thing in DS9, if Section 31 and Star Fleet command are making deals openly with the Dominion's allies.

there's a difference between supplier and ally. The Son'a weren't allies of the Dominion until Picard's actions in INS pushed them to that point.
Rather speculative don't you think? Considering
he importance of the white to the Dominions foot soldiers and starship operators the Jem'hadar. Its doubtful the Founders would trust the manufacture and distribution of the white to a casual ally. The Son a had to be full partners with the Dominion to be held with such responsibility and confidence of a task. Unlike Romulus and Bajor who both signed non-agression pacts with the Dominion. We never saw either actively contribute to the Dominion's war effort like the Son a were stated to in INS and DS9 'penumbra'. I believe it was stated the Son a colonies were located on the edge of Cardassian and Bajoran space. Potentially making the Son'a one of the first allies the Dominion made after entering the wormhole.

Back on topic, Star Fleet Command had sanctioned the mission with the Son'a, set up the duck blind mission with a cloaked ship and even pulled officers from certain ships to assist (Data). They retracted their support for the plan after Picard got all high and mighty and subverted their attempts. Star Fleet Command got caught and had to appear sympathetic and ignorant of the goings on. Had Doughtery not been killed I wager he would've been the fall guy for the whole fiasco.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 08:49 PM   #68
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

Actually that makes the Federation's involvement in this make even more sense then. Not only will this get us great medical technology which will save lives for the war, but it takes a potential ally away from the Dominion.

Your OP did speculate they were "allies" though, not partners AllStarEnterprise, hence my original reaction though. As for trading with the neutral S'ona? That actually makes perfect sense. They're neutral and the Federation isn't about to start the equivalent of unrestricted submarine warfare, and it's stated a few times in Season 6 that white supplies were getting low, so having a neutral power make it that's not going to be targeted makes a good amount of sense.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 09:06 PM   #69
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

Hadn't thought out it that way. I agree whole heartedly. If only the showrunners had made the point as defined as that in TNG and DS9
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 09:24 PM   #70
Danger Ace
Commander
 
Danger Ace's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
I don't think it defeats the purpose since we know other organizations like the Tal Shiar and Obsidian Order function just fine.
Apples and oranges. Those organizations operate within a very different set of circumstances.


I think it morally corrupts the Federations "advertised" principles about freedom and enlightenment.
I disagree. Nothing in their "advertised principles" says they have to follow a "naive-yokel" doctrine in foreign policy.

Take that away and what makes the Fed and Star Fleet any different from The Romulan Star Empire, TOS Klingons, Cardassian Union, Breen or Dominion? Nothing.
Everything. Our side is our side. All we have been given in DS9 has been Section 31 working in defense of Starfleet in the face of an agressor who vowed to extinguish humanity. A threat such as that justifies everything in terms of defense (e.g. the genocidal virus unleashed on The Founders). Why do those other than the Federation or Starfleet have a superior claim to life, liberty and the pursuit of property or happiness?

The Fed is just as cut throat and ruthless as any of them and advanced technology and pursuit of enlighten like Roddenberry envision for his series completely disappears.
I think it's debatable as to whether GR's vision is as you claim it to be based on episodes of TOS and the TOS era films. Star Trek: TOS was a hawkish and "talk softly but carry a big stick" affair. It wasn't until The Next Generation that things went dovish and soft.

Unfortunately this ideal is impossible in practice but easy to preach and by extension completely subverts Roddenberry's utopian future.
Gene Roddenberry's "utopia" has never held up to close scrutiny as even he seemed to contradict himself with regards to its defined form (money versus no money, the existance of greed or of vanity, etc.). So you argue for an ideal that was never really given us in the televised or big screen adventures.

Now i think in the books Section 31
I'm sorry, I do not place any stock in the novels. I respect that you do however there is just too much unvetted and contradictory aspects to those works.

Kirk and Spock's actions in TOS "The Enterprise Incident" being under orders from the Federation
Justified by the actions seen in "The balance of terror." And the disavowal of Federation or ship's knowledge was meaningless.

TNG's "Pegasus" with the phasing cloak. Sanctioned by Star Fleet Command to be carried out by then Capt Pressman who was later promoted to Admiral.
Those experiments were illegal and as such exactly illustrates the necessity of why a Section 31 was needed.

Nothing in GR's vision required Starfleet/Federation to agree to not pursuing cloaking technology yet they wrote that in. That was a pervertion of the "vision." Why would any entity agree to a unilateral ban on pursuing a technology (if for no other reason then to devise a practical defense against it).

Again, a position they later were forced to abandon due to practical considerations which further legitimizes the reasons for the existance of a Section 31.
__________________
Yours Truly,
Vic Falcone
Danger Ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 09:41 PM   #71
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

I don't disagree with you Danger Ace. I was merely playing devils advocate for the Roddenberryites who believe Section 31 ruins his vision. When in TOS, and TNG his ideals of utopian, enlightened society never really lived up to scrutiny. I can ramble off examples from early TNG when the whole enlightened preachiness began but I wont. I just think fa s were disappointed such a bent Org like Section 31 with its everything is on the table attitude exists in Star Trek universe. I feel Section 31 has it's place . Gene ideals about the future were just that ideals.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 10:07 PM   #72
Vanyel
The Imperious Leader
 
Vanyel's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

One thing I want to know: What keeps a super secret agency, that is not accountable to anyone but itself, from taking over the Federation (covertly or overtly) in order to protect it?
__________________
Imogene, get serious! Who do you think you're talking to?! I've known you for 27 years, and all I can say is, if God was giving out sexually transmitted diseases to people as a punishment for sinning, then you would be at the free clinic all the time! And so would the rest of us!
--Julia Sugarbaker
Vanyel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 11:15 PM   #73
Rusty Nova
Fleet Captain
 
Rusty Nova's Avatar
 
Location: Avon
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

and once they take over, someone would have to form section32 to protect section31
__________________

Hello to Jason Isaacs!
Rusty Nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 11:40 PM   #74
Danger Ace
Commander
 
Danger Ace's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
I don't disagree with you Danger Ace. I was merely playing devils advocate for the Roddenberryites who believe Section 31 ruins his vision. When in TOS, and TNG his ideals of utopian, enlightened society never really lived up to scrutiny. I can ramble off examples from early TNG when the whole enlightened preachiness began but I wont. I just think fa s were disappointed such a bent Org like Section 31 with its everything is on the table attitude exists in Star Trek universe. I feel Section 31 has it's place . Gene ideals about the future were just that ideals.
All-Star, just so you know ... the fun is in the back-and-forth and exchanging of point-of-views. Yours were excellent posts.

Admittedly I couldn't keep up with regards to the novels because I haven't read one since 1983 when I purchased "Black Fire" to read on a flight to Oklahoma. That one was so bad I swore off them - it just burst my bubble. I did enjoy "Spock Must Die" and "Klingon Gambit" though.

A caveat to that I did read the novelizations to the TOS series back in the 70s and movie adaptions (TMP and TWoK).
__________________
Yours Truly,
Vic Falcone
Danger Ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 11:50 PM   #75
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Section 31 is a positive for the Federation (spoilers from TV & bo

Vanyel wrote: View Post
One thing I want to know: What keeps a super secret agency, that is not accountable to anyone but itself, from taking over the Federation (covertly or overtly) in order to protect it?

With The collaboration between StarFleet Command and Section 31 we can presume they are accountable to StarFleet Command and the Admiralty. Section 31 is outside StarFleet Intelligence and Starfleet security. I believe Section 31 is only invested in protecting Earth and humanity above all else. They are sanctioned in the first Earth starfleet charter. Taking over the entire Fed would be a challenge with the hundreds of worlds and not every starfleet vessel is run only by humans. They could theoretically take over Earth and by extenstion the Fed like that one Admiral did in DS9 Paradise Lost. But expect a resitance nd secession from the Fed if that happened.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
section 31

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 04:13 PM.

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