You know what really irks me about "Insurrection"?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Lance, Nov 8, 2013.

  1. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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


    of course no one here is supporting "19th century" imperialism," they're supporting the perfectly reasonable concept that a small, non-indigenous village doesn't have the right to hoard a miracle medical advance that can help billions.:techman:

    playing the name-calling card won't make your position any less absurd.
     
  2. urbandefault

    urbandefault Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit
    The phrase "the ends justify the means" seems to be applicable to many opinions on this situation, even if no one has put it in those words up to this point. The problem with that is that once you can convince yourself that it is ok in one instance, it's easy to apply it in the next.

    That looks like a very slippery slope to me.
     
  3. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Let's see 1) invading someone else's territory because they have something they want - check, 2) (which can be optional) one of the defenses for said annexation is a dislike of the Ba'ku's lifestyle and or beliefs. Aka all the bashing the Ba'ku for being anti tech pacifists - check, 3) (also optional I believe) some sanctimonious justification for the whole affair, ie spreading democracy, saving the heathen locals from hell, supporting the Russian majority who became a majority after they wiped out most of the previous majority, and ect. Or in the federation's case taking a resource they have a questionable need for and planing to horde it for themselves - check.

    No, they just tried tokidnap them and shot at them.

    Also what exactly is the difference between forcing people onto reservations and kidnapping them and dumping them in another place largely at gun point after the stealth abduction plan had to be scraped?

    They have a better claim to it then a civilization that didn't even exist when the Ba'ku colonized the planet.

    Besides the homeland thing falls apart when you remember that with the way people have moved around on the planet in the past, that if one goes far enough back not many people are that indigenous to the nations they formed. They just lived their a really really long time.

    Besides, last I checked the Romulans weren't indigenous to Romulus and Remus and I doubt the Federation would try to claim those planets on that basis.

    [/quote]
    Also, the people who were moved hadn't opted to settle in one place and refuse to move upon being told that if they moved their land could be used to ease the suffering of millions of people.
    [/quote]

    Which would be relevant if one forgets that Federation medical technology being able pretty much already do it makes the sudden need for the particles pretty stupid.

    Not to mention this is the first time the federation has been shown to give a crap about living forever.

    Not really it's still the federation taking someone else's planet becuase they have something the federation wants.

    And no I don't see a substance that let's people live for over 280 years instead of 140 when their tech could probably already do that for them as a pressing need.

    Especially after the Federation according to Dougherty plans to keep the particles for themselves.

    So really still looks like the Federation is being imperialistic douche nozzles.
     
  4. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    For me, it actually comes down to more than that. For me, the Ba'ku will eventually run out of time when their secret gets out. For me, it's better to move them now than see them obliterated by the Romulans or Klingons or Cardassians trying to obtain the particles. For me, it's better to move them instead of risking Starfleet lives defending six hundred people who won't protect themselves.

    For me.
     
  5. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

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


    I'm not sure there are really a lot of comparable scenarios to "small village of selfish bastards hoard cure to cancer," which is more or less the situation given in INS, but if there WERE, I certainly would hope that in all of those scenarios, the greater good(or ends) would prevail, as they SHOULD have here if the writer had a competent understanding of how to write a dilemma.


    Putting all of that aside, the argument for removal also rests on the straightforward case that:

    1. the planet's in Federation space

    2. The Son'a have every right to the planet even if the Federation doesn't (so really either way the Baku are getting removed by someone with a legitimate claim)

    3. The Baku aren't even indigenous to the planet
     
  6. urbandefault

    urbandefault Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit
    Sonak:

    Selfish bastards?

    The Baku had been living peacefully on the planet for hundreds of years. The planet was uninhabited when they found it, and decided to settle there long before any claims to the surrounding space. Their wish to be left alone is something the Federation must respect, regardless of the Baku's ability to achieve warp travel.

    Since there was no initial indication that the Baku were anything but what they appeared to be, the Federation should have left them alone. Prime Directive. Period.

    If they wanted to experiment with the radiation or particles or whatever, they could have done so without the Baku ever knowing. The fact that the Federation Council took the Sona at their word is a demonstration of how people can be made to compromise their values by the lure of possible immortality.

    The Sona are the selfish ones here, demonstrated by their abandonment of their families only to come back when they found that they didn't like growing old. And Dougherty was a self-important jerk.
     
  7. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Say what? They were kicked off the planet because they wanted to do more than to be slaves to an Amish lifestyle. That should be incredibly offensive to someone like Picard.
     
  8. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
     
  9. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Whoosh!

    Of course the Romulans wouldn't be interested in doubling their life span from two to four hundred years. Perish the thought. I've shot down the Klingon non-sense before. The Cardassians? Who knows? Since Insurrection takes place before the end of Deep Space Nine.
     
  10. urbandefault

    urbandefault Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit
    The movie is coming around in my rotation in the next couple of days, so I'll take a look at that again.

    But my understanding was that the Sona wanted to advance and explore. The Baku said fine, but we don't want that. So, off you go. Same as if a rebellious teen coming of legal age might say, and often does, "I don't like your rules so I'm not following them (but I expect you to still be responsible for my housing and food and clothing)." That's when you say to the teen, "Time for you to move out. We love you, but if you want to live here you must follow the rules."

    The Sona weren't expelled, they left of their own accord. And much like the rebellious teen, they found that reality was much different than they had imagined.

    If the Sona didn't want to live within the boundaries set by their settlement, they could have just moved to the other side of the planet and done whatever they wanted. But they left, and suffered the effects of natural aging and all the aches and pains that come with it. Their attempts to maintain a youthful image through the skin stretching and whatever is a dead giveaway. Add to that Ruafo's temper tantrums, and you have a very good example of arrested development.

    I'll look at it again, but I don't think it will change my mind. :)
     
  11. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    It doesn't matter what shape the empires are in. All you need is one ship with a crew that has the technology to do what needs to be done.

    Hell, it could just as easily be one ship of humans who don't think 600 people have the moral right to refuse the metaphorical cure for cancer to millions.

    Starfleet's going to have to picket the planet for the forseeable future, and given the known existence of corrupt agencies even within Starfleet it will be a minor miracle if violence doesn't ensue.
     
  12. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    And they got exactly what the wanted to run around the galaxy and do space faring civilization stuff.

    I'm not seeing how the Son'a got screwed there seeing as they get to do what they want and their parents get to keep living their lifestyle.

    Plus it would be kind of hypocritical for the Federation to criticize the Ba'ku considering one of its founding races basically did the same thing to others of their species and I don't see the Federation rushing to let the Romulans have Vulcan back.
     
  13. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Ru'afo says expelled and no one contradicts him on the point, not Anij and not Picard.

     
  14. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Considering the Ba'ku and the Son'a look to be reconciling said ship and crew could be looking at an isolytic subspace weapon to the face if they try.

    Plus you are under the assumption the Federation would tell anyone about the planet.

    Assuming the Federation Council makes the existence of the planet public and/or doesn't put the place under some kind of quarantine, which according to TOS could have capital punishment as a consequence of violating.

    Plus there is the whole evolved sensibilities thing outside of the criminal elements that Starfleet is supposed to be putting down anyway.

    Plus against possible isolytic subspace weapon to the face.
     
  15. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    From the film:

     
  16. Hartzilla2007

    Hartzilla2007 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Location:
    Star Trekkin Across the universe.
    Yeah, that's the Ba'ku stance not the possibly Ba'ku friendly Son'a stance.

    Plus if all else fails it's not like the federation can't just put some orbital defense platforms in place and call it a day.
     
  17. urbandefault

    urbandefault Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit
    There it is, right there in your post.

    (spelling corrected ;))

    The rebellious teen's story is often much different than that of the parents. That Ruafo's choice of words was not challenged doesn't mean anything. The Baku's calm avoidance of a pointless argument speaks volumes.

    Who are you going to believe?
     
  18. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    But that isn't the Federations job. If they want to petition for membership, join and contribute to it then you could possibly make that argument. But the Federation isn't an intergalactic police force.
     
  19. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Since the Ba'ku never once offered up who might be after their world? I'm likely going to believe the S'ona.
     
  20. urbandefault

    urbandefault Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit
    Ok, well, that's your prerogative. I disagree. Shake on it? ;)