My "Just Saw Insurrection For the First Time" Review.

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Dale Sams, Jan 7, 2013.

  1. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    So it's okay if the Romulans, Klingons or Cardassians team-up with the S'ona to extract the meta-phasic particles?
     
  2. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Oh I agree there, except the baku shouldn't have been "asked," they should have been told to get their shit together, because they were leaving.

    If you want to explain the situation ... fine.
    If you want to help them in the move ... fine.

    But the Baku needed to leave for their own safety, because the ring were going to be harvested. It's like the people living behind that brand new hydroelectric dam, once the area behind that dam begins to fill with water, for their own safety, those people have to leave. One way or the other.

    Problem there is of course the Baku did not "own" the planet, the Federation did. Even Picard, who was sympathetic to the Baku, stated that it was a Federation planet.

    I can easily see the Federation setting the Baku up in some valley on another Federation planet, very similar to the one on the Federation planet they were removed from. Residing in that new valley would not entitle them to ownership of the whole planet upon which the new valley was located. That would be silly.

    :)
     
  3. Robert Maxwell

    Robert Maxwell Comfortably Numb Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Location:
    where it hurts
    The Council didn't know that Baku were warp-capable. In fact, they were led to believe the Baku were a primitive, pre-warp culture--hence the duckblind mission and worries about the Prime Directive. Once it turned out they were not pre-warp, the PD didn't apply. This was specifically mentioned in the movie.

    That the Federation was willing to surreptitiously move a pre-warp culture to another planet is pretty unseemly in itself, though. They weren't willing to move such a culture in order to save them from certain destruction ("Homeward"), but they were willing to forcibly move a pre-warp population to get at a natural resource, Prime Directive be damned. I guess forcibly relocating a planet's population doesn't count as "interference" to Federation bureaucrats. :lol:
     
  4. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    relocation of a small village to provide a cure for various diseases would only be regarded as "persecution" or "subjugation" by someone unclear on the meaning of those terms.
     
  5. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Well they would have to seek Federation approval to traverse Federation Space to travel to that planet, and as soon as they sought it, the first thing that the Federation should do is to send a ship to investigate why they are interested in that planet.
     
  6. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    To subjugate: "Bring under domination or control, esp. by conquest." Kind of like rounding them up at gunpoint, stuffing them into a box, and herding them about the galaxy like cattle.

    To persecute: "Subject (someone) to hostility and ill-treatment, esp. because of their race or political or religious beliefs." Kind of like depriving a group of people a resource its entire philosophy, culture (See: artwork.), and way of life has become dependent on because of some sense of falsely-justified entitlement.

    Try harder next time.

    And thanks Google for the assist! :techman:
     
  7. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    If planets that aren't members yet are within the sphere of Federation influence aren't Federation property, there should be more than enough in the way of gaps for other governments ships to make their way to the Briar Patch without passing through systems controlled by the Federation.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the planet belongs to the Federation or its fair game for anyone whose interested in the radiation?
     
  8. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    So what you are basically saying all those inhabited worlds, which fall within Federation space but aren't members for whatever reason. The Federation can just go in and take what they want?
     
  9. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    Aren't precedents wonderful?
     
  10. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Would you expect the Federation to protect them?
     
  11. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Well they do get uppity about those borders of theirs. You know the ones aggressive empires would have to fly through to get to them. I mean if the Romulans do it their on the fed side of the Neutral Zone which is a freaking declaration of war under the terms of the treaty they signed.
     
  12. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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

    sorry, neither definition fits. I don't know what cutting and pasting a five-minute internet definition was supposed to prove, but eminent domain does not equal subjugation or persecution, no matter how many times folks here repeat that it does.


    the absolutism on display here really amazes me. Ethics stripped of context is meaningless. The Federation is moving a small village to get at a resource that will improve quality of life for billions, and many here are fixated on the(dubious) property claims of the small village.
     
  13. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    There is just that pesky little thing known as the Prime Directive.

    If it is wrong to relocate a group of people to save them, it is wrong to relocate a group of people to get at a resource. You can't have it both ways.
     
  14. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    As noted in the movie itself, the Prime Directive doesn't apply.
     
  15. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Most of us here who are for moving the Ba'ku aren't necessarily against saving other cultures in danger if feasible.

    Try again?
     
  16. DavidLeeRoth

    DavidLeeRoth Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    I thought that the film was good, but not great. It had an interesting plot and it's great to see all of the characters of TNG together again. It's a shame that they didn't mention the death of Jadzia Dax and show Worf confiding to his old friends about his loss. It would have been a nice nod to DS9. Overall, I thought it was a pretty solid movie and was better than:

    Star Trek: TMP: zzzzzzzzz

    Star Trek V: Good premise, great cast interaction, but the plot was a mess

    Nemesis: Interesting premise, but the movie seemed so dull and lifeless as did the acting

    ST 2009: All glam and glitter with little substance
     
  17. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    The issue is that Starfleets actions are in clear violation of the Prime Directive. Sometimes holding onto your ideals will place you in a worse position. But they are not called ideals for nothing. Either you truly believe in them or you don't. If you don't why bother having it in the first place.

    Assumed pre-warp culture = stay clear
    Internal affair of another culture = stay clear

    If you want to apply eminant domain. The Government would compensate you. You could in theory oppose the claim of eminant domain through the courts. Most governments won't come in the middle of the night, bundle you into a transport and dump you in a new place.

    Your argument seems to be that an inhabiated world if it falls within Federation space is it's do with as it pleases. So lets take a the Malcorains from TNG's "First Contact". The Federtion could go in transport it's inhabitants to another planet so they cold strip mine that planet. At what number does it becmoe wrong to move people who have evloved/settled there, 1000, 10 000, 100 000 a million?
     
  18. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    One, settling someplace and evolving there are two distinctly different things. Had the Ba'ku evolved there and were somehow inextricably connected to the planet then you have a different ball game. Not being inextricably connected to the planet, they simply return to their normal lifespan.

    Two, it's not about right or wrong it's about the greater good and it's about logistics. It's about costs vs. benefit. The Federation would reap a massive benefit for a small cost.

    Would I have handled the relocation differently? Sure, I've said that on numerous occasions. Would I have relocated the Ba'ku? In a heartbeat. Because the only negative impact is that the Ba'ku returning to their normal lifespan.

    If they personally wanted a say in their own affairs, they should've poked their collective heads up out of Amishville and took part in the galactic community.
     
  19. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Some people want to live in isolation. It's their choice.

    They settled the world as colony before the Federation existed. Even in our own history people have settled in new places for a vareity of reasons.

    So the reason why the settled the world is not important, the fact that they did is important.
     
  20. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    It doesn't change the fact that they are subject to shifting political winds of the galaxy around them. Tomorrow the Federation could sign a new treaty with the "name an empire" and ownership of the Briar Patch would shift. And the new owner would be under no obligation to placate six hundred colonists (which is what they are since many of the first generation Ba'ku are still around) sitting on a fountain of youth.

    It's along the lines of the old mantra "those who don't vote don't get to bitch about whose in charge". The Ba'ku didn't care about the galaxy around them and ended up not being in control of their own destiny.