Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? - Page 4

Frodo Lives · September 11 2008, 08:46 AM

No IGO? Have we forgotten the Organians?

Timo · September 11 2008, 09:08 AM

...Those ultimate isolationists? I doubt they'd even remember that "governments" or other such childish nonsense existed, after they had finished shooing the annoying Klingons and Feds away from their lawn.

Okay, perhaps their influence over mortal governments would count. But then we should declare winter an IGO, for its mediating-dictating role in Germano-Russian and Franco-Russian political relationships in the early 20th and 19th centuries...

Timo Saloniemi

Frodo Lives · September 11 2008, 09:18 AM

What about the Metrons, then?

Sci · September 11 2008, 09:20 AM

Frodo Lives wrote:

What about the Metrons, then?

For the Metrons to be an intergovernmental organization, there'd have to be some, y'know, organization. The Metrons are just a powerful race that forced two less powerful races to get along. You might as well claim that the United States is an IGO if it threatens Israel and Palestine with mutual annihilation if they don't stop fighting.

Frodo Lives · September 11 2008, 09:32 AM

So their methods are a little unorthodox, doesn't mean they weren't good diplomats.

And you know I'm kidding, right?

You're right, there's no IGO-type body in the Trek-verse, but all the non-corporeal/super advanced aliens are as close as they've come - and who's to say not better than a simple mediating party, since they can actually do something to stop the fighting.

But then you get into that whole free will thing, and that never ends well.

Christopher · September 11 2008, 01:25 PM

Sci wrote:

The Metrons are just a powerful race that forced two less powerful races to get along.

Actually the Metrons did nothing of the kind. They merely provided an arena (hey, there's a catchy word for it!) to allow representatives of those two races to work out their own conflict, one way or the other. The Metrons even claimed they'd destroy the ship of the loser, so as to give both captains incentive to fight. Hardly forcing them to get along -- rather the opposite, I'd say. (Though personally I've always believed they actually would've destroyed the winner's ship as the greater threat.)

William Leisner · September 11 2008, 01:32 PM

Timo wrote:

Sorry, no. I refuse to cede the word to the neo-brownshirts who insist you must wear a lapel flag pin or else risk being branded a traitor.

That's what I think is wrong with the world today: your refusal (or mine) has no power over anything.

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

Mr. Laser Beam · September 11 2008, 01:32 PM

Sci wrote:

I mean, really, there's nothing you could call it that doesn't sound pulp-y. I mean, really -- "Star Fleet?" "Space Force?" "Space Command?" "Star Command?" "Extrasolar Command?" Etc.

I mean, if you follow the name construction of the aeronautical military forces of most countries -- "Air Force" -- and apply it to space, what do you get? "Space Force." "Star Force." Etc. It sounds a bit silly. I'm sure that to people living in 1887, the term "Air Force" would have sounded ridiculous, too.

I just like the name 'Starfleet' (one word, not two

) the best of all. It gets rid of as much of the pulp, the cheesiness, the inefficiency, etc. as possible. Just one word: Starfleet. You can't get much clearer than that, really. I wonder who first came up with that word. Was it Gene? If so, my respect for the man just went up.

I did hear talk of a real-world movement to change the name of the actual USAF slightly, to United States Aerospace Force. I wonder if that was ever real, or just an urban legend.

Timo · September 11 2008, 01:37 PM

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

Much seconded. I'm honestly curious - what would be the practical means of fighting this? What would you do to demonstrate your patriotism without becoming labeled militant?

I did hear talk of a real-world movement to change the name of the actual USAF slightly, to United States Aerospace Force. I wonder if that was ever real, or just an urban legend.

Ben Bova popularized the idea somewhat in his Kinsman novels where the USAF hero, during a pseudorealistically portrayed era of transition to real space age, tries to promote the new interpretation of the 'A'. I haven't heard of a real-world movement to that effect, though.

Timo Saloniemi

William Leisner · September 11 2008, 04:04 PM

Timo wrote:

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

Much seconded. I'm honestly curious - what would be the practical means of fighting this? What would you do to demonstrate your patriotism without becoming labeled militant?

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

BrotherBenny · September 11 2008, 06:06 PM

Sci wrote:

I mean, really, there's nothing you could call it that doesn't sound pulp-y. I mean, really -- "Star Fleet?" "Space Force?" "Space Command?" "Star Command?" "Extrasolar Command?" Etc.

I mean, if you follow the name construction of the aeronautical military forces of most countries -- "Air Force" -- and apply it to space, what do you get? "Space Force." "Star Force." Etc. It sounds a bit silly. I'm sure that to people living in 1887, the term "Air Force" would have sounded ridiculous, too.

Science fiction writers have used "Stellar Navy" which I rather like and have used for my own short fiction. It works, without such prefixes as Intra- or Inter-.

Timo · September 11 2008, 09:33 PM

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

Oh, all right then. The militant patriots win this round, is all.

Science fiction writers have used "Stellar Navy" which I rather like and have used for my own short fiction. It works, without such prefixes as Intra- or Inter-.

...Although the secondary meaning of "stellar" as "splendid, great, dippidy-do, good show lads" gives it a bit of a comical touch.

And semantically taken, "stellar navy" or "starfleet" would seem to suggest that stars are being arranged into a naval force. Which is of course true of TV shows and movies such as Star Trek or Star Wars, but not literally true of the universes depicted therein.

Timo Saloniemi

William Leisner · September 11 2008, 09:44 PM

Timo wrote:

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

Oh, all right then. The militant patriots win this round, is all.

How do you figure that? The only person questioning my patriotism here is you.

Nerroth · September 12 2008, 12:51 AM

Calling it Star Fleet (two words, not one) works for me!

prometheuspan · September 12 2008, 01:23 AM

well, i read the first few posts and i don't agree. I think what happened
was that there was one organization which we can think of as more or less replacing NASA. But for a few years, you'd expect to see things still labeled
with the NASA tag out of habit and inertia. But after a while NASA is a totally replaced agency. Then the same thing. I mean "probe agency"? Should say it all don't you think? Probes are unmanned craft. Starfleet at first probably starts out as a division of that agency, then overtakes it, and finally replaces
it completely.

I think whats going on is slow transitions between agencies and joint agency ventures while that transition is happening.

However, i don't really have any proof- thats just always been my supposition.

September 11 2008, 08:46 AM	#46
Frodo Lives Captain Location: NZ	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? No IGO? Have we forgotten the Organians? __________________ I'm the keeper of the cheese. And you're the lemon merchant.

September 11 2008, 09:08 AM	#47
Timo Admiral	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? ...Those ultimate isolationists? I doubt they'd even remember that "governments" or other such childish nonsense existed, after they had finished shooing the annoying Klingons and Feds away from their lawn. Okay, perhaps their influence over mortal governments would count. But then we should declare winter an IGO, for its mediating-dictating role in Germano-Russian and Franco-Russian political relationships in the early 20th and 19th centuries... Timo Saloniemi

September 11 2008, 09:18 AM	#48
Frodo Lives Captain Location: NZ	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? What about the Metrons, then? __________________ I'm the keeper of the cheese. And you're the lemon merchant.

September 11 2008, 09:32 AM	#50
Frodo Lives Captain Location: NZ	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? So their methods are a little unorthodox, doesn't mean they weren't good diplomats. And you know I'm kidding, right? You're right, there's no IGO-type body in the Trek-verse, but all the non-corporeal/super advanced aliens are as close as they've come - and who's to say not better than a simple mediating party, since they can actually do something to stop the fighting. But then you get into that whole free will thing, and that never ends well. __________________ I'm the keeper of the cheese. And you're the lemon merchant.

September 12 2008, 12:51 AM	#59
Nerroth Fleet Captain Location: Ontario, Canada	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? Calling it Star Fleet (two words, not one) works for me! __________________ You think you know a story, but you only know how it ends. To get to the heart of the story, you have to go back to the beginning. ---------------------- The Star Fleet Universe: ST: TOS' other legacy.

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

September 12 2008, 01:23 AM	#60
prometheuspan Lieutenant Commander Location: yes, i do live	Re: Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA? well, i read the first few posts and i don't agree. I think what happened was that there was one organization which we can think of as more or less replacing NASA. But for a few years, you'd expect to see things still labeled with the NASA tag out of habit and inertia. But after a while NASA is a totally replaced agency. Then the same thing. I mean "probe agency"? Should say it all don't you think? Probes are unmanned craft. Starfleet at first probably starts out as a division of that agency, then overtakes it, and finally replaces it completely. I think whats going on is slow transitions between agencies and joint agency ventures while that transition is happening. However, i don't really have any proof- thats just always been my supposition. __________________ http://mytalktoday.com/solutions/viewforum.php?f=50 please come help get us into space for real!!