Dukat - the Real Star of DS9???

[Kobayshi Maru]

I think there is NO ONE star, that rules them all.
Kind of what makes alot of great series great.
I like Alamo's acting alot, but i find it sad, he is only a villain in the end of the series.
Cisco calls him pure evil in 1 of the later episodes (season 6 or something), a very weird assessment that simply contradicts what we saw of Dukat in the earlier episodes and it was always, what made him interesting.
Not his diabolical mind, but his diabolical mind combines with alot of shreds of decency as well.

I think Sisko was just pissed (and I don't mean drunk) at Dukat for beating him up. I am sure once he had time to cool down his judgment was more balanced.

And Speaking of evil: I am not sure what to call a man that drops deadly poison on a planet where there are children, just to secure the capture of one man.

I call him human. Humans are capable of great good and reprehensible evil. While I can't stand Sisko's actions, he at least provided warning and the Maquis were able to evacuate. That is more than could ever be said of Dukat.

The thing about DS9 is that they rarely played it safe. Sisko made morally questionable decisions, but so did Starfleet. The aspects of the impact of the cold war, and eventually hot war, with the Dominion led to some pretty nasty behaviors.

As much as I like the optimism of the Federation, there has to be challenge to those ideals, or they mean very little.

I know DS9 had its ups and downs, but it was interesting, to me, to see the charactesr go through them.

I don't know. When I heard Sisko in that episode call Dukat "absolute evil" regardless of the fact that the latter was clearly out of his mind (talking to people that weren't there). I thought that was a bit stupid of him and only excusable from someone that was still under the shock of having been beaten up. Sisko's never been one for nuances and subtle thinking at any rate. His way of solving problems is running toward the tsunami and hoping that a miracle will get him out of there.

 

[fireproof78]

I think Sisko was just pissed (and I don't mean drunk) at Dukat for beating him up. I am sure once he had time to cool down his judgment was more balanced.

And Speaking of evil: I am not sure what to call a man that drops deadly poison on a planet where there are children, just to secure the capture of one man.

I call him human. Humans are capable of great good and reprehensible evil. While I can't stand Sisko's actions, he at least provided warning and the Maquis were able to evacuate. That is more than could ever be said of Dukat.

The thing about DS9 is that they rarely played it safe. Sisko made morally questionable decisions, but so did Starfleet. The aspects of the impact of the cold war, and eventually hot war, with the Dominion led to some pretty nasty behaviors.

As much as I like the optimism of the Federation, there has to be challenge to those ideals, or they mean very little.

I know DS9 had its ups and downs, but it was interesting, to me, to see the charactesr go through them.

I don't know. When I heard Sisko in that episode call Dukat "absolute evil" regardless of the fact that the latter was clearly out of his mind (talking to people that weren't there). I thought that was a bit stupid of him and only excusable from someone that was still under the shock of having been beaten up. Sisko's never been one for nuances and subtle thinking at any rate. His way of solving problems is running toward the tsunami and hoping that a miracle will get him out of there.

Well, that is something that each viewer has to determine on their own. I agree that Sisko is not nuanced or subtle, but I don't quite agree with the summation of his problem solving strategy.

I think Sisko is practical in his application of both action and diplomacy. The "hope for a miracle" attitude doesn't really appear until after the business with the Prophets, and dealing with the Bajorans for a couple of years. Regardless, he is a man of principle, and is one who doesn't mince words. For that reason, I kind of like him. I may not always agree with him, but I like him. That doesn't make him perfect.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

I call him human. Humans are capable of great good and reprehensible evil. While I can't stand Sisko's actions, he at least provided warning and the Maquis were able to evacuate. That is more than could ever be said of Dukat.

The thing about DS9 is that they rarely played it safe. Sisko made morally questionable decisions, but so did Starfleet. The aspects of the impact of the cold war, and eventually hot war, with the Dominion led to some pretty nasty behaviors.

As much as I like the optimism of the Federation, there has to be challenge to those ideals, or they mean very little.

I know DS9 had its ups and downs, but it was interesting, to me, to see the charactesr go through them.

I don't know. When I heard Sisko in that episode call Dukat "absolute evil" regardless of the fact that the latter was clearly out of his mind (talking to people that weren't there). I thought that was a bit stupid of him and only excusable from someone that was still under the shock of having been beaten up. Sisko's never been one for nuances and subtle thinking at any rate. His way of solving problems is running toward the tsunami and hoping that a miracle will get him out of there.

Well, that is something that each viewer has to determine on their own. I agree that Sisko is not nuanced or subtle, but I don't quite agree with the summation of his problem solving strategy.

I think Sisko is practical in his application of both action and diplomacy. The "hope for a miracle" attitude doesn't really appear until after the business with the Prophets, and dealing with the Bajorans for a couple of years. Regardless, he is a man of principle, and is one who doesn't mince words. For that reason, I kind of like him. I may not always agree with him, but I like him. That doesn't make him perfect.

I am sorry but I for one will never call a man, who drops poison on children under ANY set of circumstances, principled, I may call him a bunch of other things that need not be said to be guessed but none of them will ever be a synonym for principled.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't know. When I heard Sisko in that episode call Dukat "absolute evil" regardless of the fact that the latter was clearly out of his mind (talking to people that weren't there). I thought that was a bit stupid of him and only excusable from someone that was still under the shock of having been beaten up. Sisko's never been one for nuances and subtle thinking at any rate. His way of solving problems is running toward the tsunami and hoping that a miracle will get him out of there.

Well, that is something that each viewer has to determine on their own. I agree that Sisko is not nuanced or subtle, but I don't quite agree with the summation of his problem solving strategy.

I think Sisko is practical in his application of both action and diplomacy. The "hope for a miracle" attitude doesn't really appear until after the business with the Prophets, and dealing with the Bajorans for a couple of years. Regardless, he is a man of principle, and is one who doesn't mince words. For that reason, I kind of like him. I may not always agree with him, but I like him. That doesn't make him perfect.

I am sorry but I for one will never call a man, who drops poison on children under ANY set of circumstances, principled, I may call him a bunch of other things that need not be said to be guessed but none of them will ever be a synonym for principled.

Well, that is understandable.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Well, that is something that each viewer has to determine on their own. I agree that Sisko is not nuanced or subtle, but I don't quite agree with the summation of his problem solving strategy.

I think Sisko is practical in his application of both action and diplomacy. The "hope for a miracle" attitude doesn't really appear until after the business with the Prophets, and dealing with the Bajorans for a couple of years. Regardless, he is a man of principle, and is one who doesn't mince words. For that reason, I kind of like him. I may not always agree with him, but I like him. That doesn't make him perfect.

I am sorry but I for one will never call a man, who drops poison on children under ANY set of circumstances, principled, I may call him a bunch of other things that need not be said to be guessed but none of them will ever be a synonym for principled.

Well, that is understandable.

Thank you!

 

[Tosk]

I'll do it then. "Sisko is a man of principles."

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

I'll do it then. "Sisko is a man of principles."

His principles include dropping deadly poison on children. Some principles! You get the same kind among the neo-nazis.

 

[Tosk]

Having principles doesn't mean that you abide by them 100% of the time. I'm not debating the ethics of his plan, but he is clearly a man of principles generally speaking.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Having principles doesn't mean that you abide by them 100% of the time. I'm not debating the ethics of his plan, but he is clearly a man of principles generally speaking.

Principles only exist if you abide by them all the time; especially when it's inconvenient.

Plus choosing the one time when puts the lives of children in peril to violate those so called principles. Are kidding me????

 

[Tosk]

Is Sisko had poisoned the planet in a way that killed everyone rather than just forcing them off-world I'd agree with you.

You may not agree with his principles, but it doesn't mean he doesn't have any.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Is Sisko had poisoned the planet in a way that killed everyone rather than just forcing them off-world I'd agree with you.

You may not agree with his principles, but it doesn't mean he doesn't have any.

You can't call them principles if the person violates them whenever it's convenient to do so. "Principles" are precepts one will not infringe upon no matter what.

Why do I get the feeling that you didn't get that concept?

 

[Tosk]

You can't call them principles if the person violates them whenever it's convenient to do so. "Principles" are precepts one will not infringe upon no matter what.

What episode was it where Sisko specifically stated that his principles did not include poisoning a planet?

Why do I get the feeling that you didn't get that concept?

I get the concept, I just disagree with your take on the definition.

Having principles does not mean the person lives like a saint. It simply means that they have a rule of conduct.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

....What episode was it where Sisko specifically stated that his principles did not include poisoning a planet?....

What kind of monster's principles would include dropping deadly poison on children? Hitler's? Charles Manson's?

Seems your Sisko is in good company there.

 

[fireproof78]

You can't call them principles if the person violates them whenever it's convenient to do so. "Principles" are precepts one will not infringe upon no matter what.

What episode was it where Sisko specifically stated that his principles did not include poisoning a planet?

Why do I get the feeling that you didn't get that concept?

I get the concept, I just disagree with your take on the definition.

Having principles does not mean the person lives like a saint. It simply means that they have a rule of conduct.

I don't think Sisko would ever claim to be a saint or that he is perfect. I think DS9 goes out of its way to demonstrate the opposite of almost all the characters. He goes out of his way to point out that he has to play the villain.

There also is no indication that any Maquis died in the attack. Obviously, a clear violation of principle on Sisko's part, but does that make him irredeemable?

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

You can't call them principles if the person violates them whenever it's convenient to do so. "Principles" are precepts one will not infringe upon no matter what.

What episode was it where Sisko specifically stated that his principles did not include poisoning a planet?

Why do I get the feeling that you didn't get that concept?

I get the concept, I just disagree with your take on the definition.

Having principles does not mean the person lives like a saint. It simply means that they have a rule of conduct.

I don't think Sisko would ever claim to be a saint or that he is perfect. I think DS9 goes out of its way to demonstrate the opposite of almost all the characters. He goes out of his way to point out that he has to play the villain.

There also is no indication that any Maquis died in the attack. Obviously, a clear violation of principle on Sisko's part, but does that make him irredeemable?

The children do. If there were only maquis adults there, his decision though still disgusting would be partially excusable. The fact that he endangered children is what makes him a criminal. Seriously! Can you people imagine your own children being put in harm's way that way and the sob that did it getting away with it!!! Think about it for one minute.

 

[JD5000]

Think of the CHILDREN!!!

Now do it again!

And again!

Do you hate Sisko yet??? No? Then THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

 

[fireproof78]

What episode was it where Sisko specifically stated that his principles did not include poisoning a planet?

I get the concept, I just disagree with your take on the definition.

Having principles does not mean the person lives like a saint. It simply means that they have a rule of conduct.

I don't think Sisko would ever claim to be a saint or that he is perfect. I think DS9 goes out of its way to demonstrate the opposite of almost all the characters. He goes out of his way to point out that he has to play the villain.

There also is no indication that any Maquis died in the attack. Obviously, a clear violation of principle on Sisko's part, but does that make him irredeemable?

The children do. If there were only maquis adults there, his decision though still disgusting would be partially excusable. The fact that he endangered children is what makes him a criminal. Seriously! Can you people imagine your own children being put in harm's way that way and the sob that did it getting away with it!!! Think about it for one minute.

Ok, I thought about it. I'm angry and would want the person punished. Obviously, a text based representation of that emotion will not be clear.

I would not hate him. I do not believe that makes him irredeemable as a human being.

I still don't think that the context of the episode indicates that any children died.

 

[JD5000]

The context of the episode indicates that the evacuation warning was received in time and everyone was able to get off the planet.

Think of the bacteria, though. There might have still been puppies and kittens and baby chickens left on the planet as well.

Benjamin Sisko, puppy-slayer!

 

[kkt]

is it really necessary to have the same conversation in two different threads? It makes it hard to follow.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

The context of the episode indicates that the evacuation warning was received in time and everyone was able to get off the planet.

Think of the bacteria, though. There might have still been puppies and kittens and baby chickens left on the planet as well.

Benjamin Sisko, puppy-slayer!

I was speaking of the children; I don't particularly appreciate your straw-men.