Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Godless Raven, Apr 11, 2013.

  1. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    :lol: All your arguments are basically circular- Kirk would do it because it's the "right thing to do." Ru'afo has to be wrong because the film has declared that he's supposed to be the bad guy.

    Sorry, I don't find those persuasive. Permanently defending a tiny village of pacifists who are such hypocrites that they'll let others fight for them but won't do it themselves, and didn't tell anyone else about a revolutionary discovery because it would have spoiled their private little Eden is not "the right thing to do." It would also be blatantly picking sides in a dispute where the Son'a have equal claim to the planet, so in addition to being strategically foolish during a time of war, it's a violation of the PD as well.

    You're asking the Federation to violate its own laws and sabotage its own war effort to help a small village that contributes nothing to the Federation.
     
  2. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Hartzilla... obviously we don't see eye to eye. You're nitpicking minutiae and your arguments seem based more on your opinions than fact. There were tons of ground battles during DS9. Martok and Damar mentioned 500,000 Cardassian casualties in a single conflict on Septimus 3 for example. Just because it doesn't happen on screen doesn't mean there's not a bigger picture outside the main ship of the show.

    As for the Ship and Nor the Battle to the Strong... they're examples of ground fighting and the types of casualties seen. If you don't think they're relevant then you're intentionally narrowing your viewpoint I should say. Munez took freaking DAYS to die after getting shot by the Jem'Hadar for example in the Ship. Even in ship to ship fighting, which you seem to think equals instant death, there are things called damaged ships with injured people... the type that send out distress calls regularly in Trek... to say nothing of escape escape pods with injured people. Heck in the final battle alone, the Defiant wasn't even hit that bad and O'brien suffered an injury.

    As for Anij dying in the cave? They're on a planet surrounded by a low levels of the radiation. Her injuries sustained were killing her more quickly than she'd be healed. Like if you're bleeding from a deep wound, a band-aid and some ointment isn't going to do much to stop it even if they're helpful in normal circumstances. You need more.

    Healing the injured never mentioned? What the heck do you call Geordi's eyes freaking regenerating themselves? They even said it would revolutionize medicine as they knew it. So if you think that "goes against" what's on screen, I'd submit you need to watch the movie again.
     
  3. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Says the guy making stuff up that was never said in the film.

    But they're not really good examples of the type of war the federation is fighting.

    What they are fighting is a war of attrition with an enemy with limitless troops and ships. The particles are not going to affect that in any sizable way.

    Hell the fact that the federation won without the particles pretty much shows how little effect there loss or prescience had on the war.

    Where in the film was that ever mentioned.

    Wow regeneration an optic nerve, thats so impressive:rolleyes:

    Just like when Pulaski seemed to think she could do the same thing with existing federation medical technology.

    That doesn't exactly equate to a military advantage though does it. And it's pretty vague seeing as they never went into specifics outside of healing optic nerves and extending lifespans, so I find it dubious that this statement is enough to prove all the claims you made about these wonder particles.

    And all of yours are based on misremembering factoids about the federation said and shown in the the various series, a lack of understanding of actual terms with definitions, and an over estimation of just how valuable the particles are seeing they did not in fact mean the difference between victory and defeat in the Dominion War and that's if this film even takes place during that war.
     
  4. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Fixed it for you. ;)
     
  5. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    [​IMG]

    This is from Generations, this man (the one in the air) just had a console explode in front of him, powerful enough to throw him fifteen/twenty feet. Assuming he isn't already dead, he is going to have burns and sever internal injuries. Space battles don't alway solely result in death.

    [​IMG]

    This is from Sacrifice of Angels. There are two badly damaged Starfleet vessels in this shot, one has it's entire bow section missing. Both likely have many injured along with their dead. Space battles don't alway solely result in death.

    :)
     
  6. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    You claim that the Sona had "zero intentions" to betray the Federation which is simply wrong.
    Let's take a look at what happened in the movie.

    After Picard revealed that the Sona lied (in order to make the Feds not talk with these actually quite sophisticated people) and that the Baku are of the same race Dougherty wants to abort the mission (for the reason you spelled out, Dougherty cannot disavow the Prime Directive any longer). Ruafo them kills Dougherty and tries to to kill all the Baku in order to quickly get the particles. If it were not for Picard he would have succeeded.

    DOUGHERTY: We're taking this ship out of here. This mission is over.
    RU'AFO: It is not over.
    DOUGHERTY: It is over!
    RU'AFO: I do not take orders from you.
    DOUGHERTY: If you launch the injector while the planet's still populated, the Federation will pursue you until...
    RU'AFO: The Federation ...will never know what happened here.

    So much about "zero intentions" and so much about the supposed ethical dilemma of the movie. As I say the entire time, there is none, the movie is utterly simple and the Sona are the bad guys.
    I don't like simple villains either but I don't lie and claim that Nero is a good guy to make my point.

    About the Baku being evil assholes who wanna keep everything for themselves, they never kill anybody, force anybody or even tell anybody to do anything. They accidentally landed on a planet which prolongs their lives and as they gave up technology up to a certain level they can hardly use subspace communication to tell the galaxy about the goldmine they are sitting on.

    So you wanna seriously claim that giving up technology and not telling anybody about having found a fountain of youth is a horrible crime but actually killing people makes you the only good guys in this game? Seriously? Do all the Picard bashers somehow enter the Mirror Universe when they enter this thread?

    As I already said, if the Feds had been aware of who the Baku and Sona were the proper way to act would have been to stay our of their conflict and contact the current leadership (which were the Baku when the movie started and assuming that the Sona reconquer the world could have later been the Sona) to make a deal about the resources.
    I know that you come from a "relocate people to benefit the majority" angle and I would totally agree with you if this were an intrasociety issue. An example from Trek would be the relocation of settlers after the "land for peace" treaty with the Cardassians. I am totally for this. But in INS we deal with an intersociety issue which is a different ballgame. The UFP has authority over itself and thus its own citizens but forcing their will upon another people in the name of the right of the(ir) majority is, unlike forcing your settlers near the Cardassian border to give up their land for the more important common good peace, an act of violence and theft. The Klingons can justify raping a planet in the same way. We are trillions but you are just millions so give us your dilithium. Klingon children will go hungry if you do otherwise you selfish bastards!
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2013
  7. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Okay, let's break this down.

    Is the dilithium on a Klingon territorial planet, the way the particles are orbiting a Federation territorial planet? In that case, yes "the Klingons" could simply come in and mine the dilithium.

    Are the Klingon willing to relocate anyone who would be adversely effected by the mining process? The Federation/Sona partnership were.

    Are Klingon children actually going to go hungry? If that is factually the case, and there is no other way of pervent this, then yes the dilithium should be mined.

    Are the people in question indeed "selfish bastards?" If approached for negotiation, would they be amenable to trading for the dilithium, or would they be like the Baku and (probably) refuse no matter how many would be helped.

    1,000,000 people are a lot different than only 600 people. A million people is the population of a small country, six hundred is the number of people in the stands at a high school football game.

    :)
     
  8. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    er, you sort of proved my point. Ru'afo's actions against the Federation came only AFTER Picard had already been sabotaging the mission. There's no on-screen evidence that the Son'a had been INTENDING to betray them from the beginning, and actually there is much on-screen evidence that they were cooperating.

    sorry, the Baku were not prevented from telling anyone about the particles because of their lack of technology. They had the CAPABILITY to do so, they simply chose not to. That's not really an excuse. I'm not required to endorse their stupid Luddite lifestyle and use it as an excuse.
     
  9. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    But you seemingly have no problems to find excuses for murder.

    By the way, Dougherty and Picard both agreed that the Sona are untrustworthy. But unlike Picard Dougherty erred and thought he could handle them nonetheless. So there you have the noble intentions of the Sona. Not that intentions matters. Actions do.
     
  10. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    care to be specific? What did I get wrong? Is taking sides against the Son'a not a violation of the PD? Do the Son'a not have an equal claim on the planet?

    Therefore, it's you, with your use of "kidnapping" to describe actions against the Baku who've been using a term wrongly.

    1. Either it's a Federation planet and it's not kidnapping

    2. or it's just as much a Son'a planet as a Baku one, and therefore not kidnapping


    you don't want to admit that putting it either as an issue of eminent domain or a PD issue means that the BAKU LOSE EITHER WAY, because then you realize how flawed the entire premise is. You're forced to change the argument to "prime directive be screwed, the Federation has to protect them" in order to salvage it.
     
  11. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    No. If the Sona wanted to conquer Baku, subjugate the people and enslave them the Feds would have no business stopping them because of the Prime Directive.

    But in the actual scenario the Feds work together with the Sona and wanna kidnap the Baku. They violate the Prime Directive and Picard tries to stop this violation.

    The other options is to just go home but I think this would bw wrong. They are already in the mess and cannot pretend that they can just pull out. When you fucked up you don't walk away, you try to amend your mistake. Picard doesn't run away in "Who Watches the Watchers?" once the Mintakans believe that he is a God, he goes down there and undoes this false belief.
     
  12. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    And here is what I'm talking about I posted the legal definition of
    eminent domain and even quoted the relevant part and you still refuse to accept that even IF its an issue of eminent domain the federation is still doing it wrong becuase their not respecting the Ba'ku's due process rights and as such YES, it's still kidnapping even if its federation territory.

    And no it being all but clear that the federation gets to do it is not a good excuse or else Kirk would have been sent off to the penal colony since they had him on tape blowing a guy out into space instead of still having a Courtmartial.
     
  13. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
    ok, so they didn't give them due process. It's still academic-had they given them due process, they would still have been removed, as any competent judge would have ruled that there was reason for them to be removed.

    And again, if it's not a Federation planet, then the Son'a can do what they'd like to with the Baku, so as I wrote, heads they lose, tails they lose. That's the definition of a stupid premise.
     
  14. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
    there's no way to "clean up" the mess in this scenario without taking sides. After finding out the truth about the situation, Picard and Dougherty should have gone to Ru'afo and said "we're sorry we became involved in this civil war, once you've removed the Baku and started the process, we'll be happy to discuss buying or trading for the particles. Have a good day."
     
  15. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Remove, nice euphemism. In the actual movie no genocide occured, violence ended and reconciliation began whereas you seem to be eager to eradicate the hippies because, well, because you don't like them.

    Trading with a recent winner of a civil war is not somebody the Feds do, let alone indirectly encourage side A to eradicate side B via the promise of commerce ... and thus take sides once again. And this is the crux of the issue, the total neglect of rules, ethics and consistency of the anti-Picard faction.

    Anyway, I hope you understand at least now why the Sona lied to the UFP. They knew very well that telling them the truth would have stopped the Feds from cooperating with them.
     
  16. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain

    If it's ok to forcible relocate 600 people, then is it ok if it's 6000, 60 000, 600 000, 6million, 6 billion at what number does it become wrong? There are plenty of inhabited planets within the Federation that have pre-warp cultures, have told the UFP to leave them alone. Is it ok if the Federation decides one day, that we'd like that resource and for them just to remove the people who live on that world to gain acces to that resource?
     
  17. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    You missed the part of the definition where it is pointed out how its not clear cut like you think it is.

    relevant quote

    Yeah that doesn't sound like they would defiantly be removed.

    Again its not as clear cut as you think it is.
     
  18. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    I think the scenario in the movie presents a clear-cut case for removal. But I'm not going to keep arguing the point, because the question of "who gets to do the removal, the Federation or the Son'a?" is a pointless one. The premise presented in the movie is such a poorly-written one that the writer seems not to have realized that the Baku are doomed either way.
     
  19. horatio83

    horatio83 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Eminent domain, due process? This is nonsense, the Federation has no authority over the planet, the Baku or the Sona.
     
  20. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Oh I agree with you I'm just pointing out the problems with what the federation is doing even if they had the authority to do it.
     

Share This Page