Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Discussion in 'Deep Space Nine' started by WesleysDisciple, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. marksound

    marksound Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Location:
    Planet Carcazed
    I thought it was good. It showed that in time of war, even good men must do "bad" things for the greater good.

    It does beg the question though, would Sisko murder Tuvix? :lol:
     
  2. Kelthaz

    Kelthaz Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    The only thing I disliked was that Sisko got permission from StarFleet for his actions. Sisko should have acted alone.
     
  3. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    The thing about Roddenberry's 'No conflict' edict is that it barred the writers from laziness. Interpersonal conflict can be great, but only if it's original, character driven interpersonal conflict. The 'Roddenberry box' took away a crutch and forced the writers to be creative.

    And the DS9 writers were very creative in general, but not when it came to interpersonal conflict. When Worf came aboard and had difficulty accepting that Odo was security chief and not him, that was lazy, and it turned out to be a very bad episode that made Worf look more like a pathetic child than a Starfleet officer.

    DS9 was at it's best when it wasn't focusing on interpersonal conflict among the cast. When DS9 had interpersonal conflict is when the cast seemed the most like spoiled children.
     
  4. TheRoyalFamily

    TheRoyalFamily Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    If by "creative" you mean "having less ways to be lazy," then I suppose you are right. Still doesn't stop lazy writers from being lazy, as Roddenberry TNG showed - we just got more of the same junk. Inter-crew conflict would have at least added some variety.
     
  5. indolover

    indolover Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Well the dilemma is at what cost will the Federation be saved. The cost is deceiving an empire into war.
     
  6. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    um, and...?

    had they not been brought in, the war would have been lost, the UFP would have been conquered, and eventually the Romulan Empire as well.

    Sisko was saving both, while at the cost of some deception and a few lives.

    As I wrote, Garak's quote sums it up
     
  7. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    FYI: Mike Taylor, who wrote this ep, is involved with the new show, Defiance.
     
  8. Jeyl

    Jeyl Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Location:
    Asheville, NC
    Whenever I think of good Trek vs. bad Trek, I always compare this episode to Enterprise's "Dear, Doctor". Where as Sisko ends this story with self-guilt and no respect for what he's done, Archer is openly confident in his decision to let a whole species die out and earns respect from his crew.
     
  9. indolover

    indolover Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    And saving the Federation doesn't warrant that.
    Which Sisko could not prove totally.

    When?
     
  10. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    We have no idea what Archer's crew though beyond Phlox. We don't even get T'Pol's thoughts on withholding the cure.
     
  11. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    saving the Federation doesn't warrant that?:wtf: Your "principles" won't mean a thing when the peoples of the Federation are killed or enslaved. A government's first responsibility is self-defense. They owed the Romulans nothing. The Romulans would have been fine with watching the UFP and the Klingons be destroyed while fighting for the freedom of the Alpha Quadrant.


    The Garak quote is something like "you probably saved the Alpha Quadrant. And all it cost was the life of one criminal, one senator, and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I'd call that a bargain."
     
  12. USS Firefly

    USS Firefly Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    In my opinion it was one of the best Star Trek episode and Garak was great.

    Geat line
     
  13. indolover

    indolover Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    lol.. Sisko tricked an entire Empire into war. I don't see how that deceit was justified, based upon the Romulans who may have died in the war. As for the Romulans, they didn't need to give a shit, the Federation was their long-term enemy, whilst they were blood enemies of the Klingons. Who says a government's first responsibility is self-defence?
     
  14. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    The Founders weren't going to allow the Romulan Empire to exist free from Dominion control when they controlled the rest of the quadrant.
     
  15. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    I'd agree with that, but just because Sisko said so isn't exactly hard evidence.
     
  16. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    It's really just simple logic. The Founders, who fear solids, weren't going to take over the Federation, the Cardassians and the Klingons and yet allow the Romulan Empire to continue to operate as it always has.

    After conquering the rest, they would have been controlling Romulus inside of six weeks.
     
  17. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Dax(as Romulan advocate): That's speculation.
     
  18. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    if you don't think a government's first responsibility is self-defense then there's no point in arguing this. A government cannot carry out ANY OTHER responsibilities if it is destroyed or conquered. Arguing about "federation principles" when there is no federation left is just silly.

    The Federation and the Klingons were fighting FOR the Romulans whether the Romulans would admit it or not. The Dominion would have gone after them next.
     
  19. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    If the Romulans can't see that the fall of the Federation, Klingons and Cardassians to an extra-quadrant power isn't bad for their long-term sustainability, then they deserved to fall.
     
  20. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Could be. But the war wasn't ever -that- one sided. The momentum swung back and forth a number of times. The Federation and Klingons managed to hold the line and take DS9 by themselves. Betazed falling... unfortunate but happens. Sisko indicated it was more because the Fed fleet was out of position than sheer overwhelming force though.

    The power disparity couldn't have been that great because when the Romulans joined that tilted the balance of power to the Federation's side and they went on the offensive in Chintaka. It took the Breen joining up with the Dominion for them to get the initiative back and even then that was mainly due to their super weapon which once countered, the good guys were right back on the offensive.

    Without bring tricked into having a personal stake in the war... from the Romulans perspective their two greatest rivals are slugging it out. Yeah... too bad.