Starfleet...Military or Not

[Darkwing]

Occupations that ...

... routinely operate weapons of mass destruction?

... have their own independent legal system that includes courts martials (and use that term)?

Military with additional responsibilities that today's military forces don't have.

What exactly does that mean? Everything we see Starfleet do has been done my militaries either today or in the past.

Defence, offence, exploration, first contact situations, engage in diplomacy/treaties, form alliances, pure science missions, mapping, help after natural disasters, search for natural resources.

And more.

Yup, nothing there that's not done by the military today, or in the past.

 

[Darkwing]

Scroll down to patrol. I suspect that most of Star Fleet operates in a manner similar to the U.S. Coast Guard. This might be consistent with having a fleet of Miranda/Soyuz type vessels (call them "cutters"). Scroll down further to "Science" and "Explorers".

The USCG is a military organization that we have to pretend isn't one due to posse comitatus. Yet they lack the bluewater capability of the navy (deep space in Trek terms).

 

[Brie]

Being military myself I see SO MANY similarities between their everyday life and mine which always leads me to say "military" then there's times when we see families on the star ships and I think hmm not very military of them, but all in all I find myself thinking of them as military.

 

[Darkwing]

haha this is great. I get hit with article 92 ALL the time (so does everyone else) that damn catch all is so frustrating. I once ot a counsling chit (article 92) for leaving my house to pick up to-go food while SIQ. Their reasoning was "you should have gone to the galley for food not out in town" I live off base and its a 15 min drive to base and a 5 min drive to get chicken soup to-go at the diner.oh military how sily you are sometimes.

So how did they find out you violated your SIQ? Counseling chits don't mean much, but they do stack up to the point they can be used for mast.

Ah this was something else I found to be very un-military. several times someone will say they "want to resign their commission" (something you cant do in the military) so I always found that interesting (though rules can change I suppose)

Zeros CAN resign their commission after they've served their initial commitment. Enlisted can't, of course, unless we have the money to buy out our contract.

 

[Lance]

Of course, it's not uncommon for military types to bring their families along with them wherever they are posted. So I don't really see the families as a reason to dispute that they are a military.

 

[Darkwing]

So after 100 or so posts, it seems the more appropriate question(s) is:

What country's Armed Forces does Starfleet most resemble?

or

What branch of the Armed Forces does Starfleet most resemble?

US Navy, per TMoST and internal memos. But only for structure, British Royal Navy from 1800 for situation.

Just by virtue of the ranking system (Admirals and Ensigns only exist in the Navy) and by the fact that they are on a Star 'SHIP," I would say the Navy would be the closest service in existence today to Star Trek. As for the country, I would say they seem to resemble the UK or Canada in terms of their demeanor and actions. Of course, that would depend upon the series too. TOS would be a bit more 'cowboy' like the U.S., whereas TNG give me a UK or Aussie feel. That's just a general impression though and it has no basis in anything other than my perceptions of the countries and how they generally react to conflicts.

Ensigns were originally an Army rank - the most junior LT, who carried the ensign.

Only a half dozen (or so) countries use the ranks of Lt. Commander, and Commander. That narrows it down a bit. TOS Starfleet certainly was modeled on the US Navy.

Exactly.

^ST has been occasionally referred to as Hornblower in space, so some resembelence to the 18th-19th centruy RN is not enteirly unexepected.


http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Horatio_Hornblower

Only as inspiration and situational description.

So after 100 or so posts, it seems the more appropriate question(s) is:

What country's Armed Forces does Starfleet most resemble?

or

What branch of the Armed Forces does Starfleet most resemble?

I'd say Starfleet most emulates the US Navy, since like the USN, Starfleet also rebranded single star flag officers. They stopped being Commodore and became Rear Admiral, Lower Half.

specifically called out y the research company used for TMP, which is why Kirk got promoted to ADM, not CMDRE.

 

[Brie]

So how did they find out you violated your SIQ? Counseling chits don't mean much, but they do stack up to the point they can be used for mast.

My neighbor was a rat, and very mean, and worked with me...

Zeros CAN resign their commission after they've served their initial commitment. Enlisted can't, of course, unless we have the money to buy out our contract.

huh I did not know that. And yeah it cost quite a few grand, as in tens lol

Of course, it's not uncommon for military types to bring their families along with them wherever they are posted. So I don't really see the families as a reason to dispute that they are a military.

Yeah but I view star ships as "ships" and we dont bring families on deployments

 

[Nerys Myk]

A ship like the Enterprise D was more like a mobile base though, with all sorts of civilian folks like barbers, bartenders and waiters on board. Made less sense a smaller ship like the Saratoga.

 

[Lance]

Of course, it's not uncommon for military types to bring their families along with them wherever they are posted. So I don't really see the families as a reason to dispute that they are a military.

Yeah but I view star ships as "ships" and we dont bring families on deployments

Fair point. It is a matter of public record that the producers struggled with this concept, given they regularly placed the Enterprise into dangerous situations where the civilian population of the ship would only have been an added burden, but yet they had to give them lip service, because families on board were a part of the series format.

The real answer comes from the early concepts, where the idea was that TNG would begin out on the fatherest reaches of the mapped cosmos, and then explicitly head outwards from there into an exploration of the complete unknown (there's still some semblance of this in "Encounter At Farpoint", the pilot episode). That's why they had the 'generation ship' concept in the first place, because Roddenberry's idea was that this new Enterprise wouldn't be travelling around established space lanes, and would in fact likely be out of contact with familiar territories for anything up to twenty years, so it was unreasonable to expect the crew to leave their families behind for that long. Unfortunately, this idea got dropped pretty quickly, but the families stayed.

(IMHO, they should've taken the opportunity of the battle at Wolf 359 to officially jettison families from all subsequent stories. It would've been a pretty organic development for Starfleet to tacitly acknowledge that nothing is the same anymore.)

 

[Ithekro]

A ship like the Enterprise D was more like a mobile base though, with all sorts of civilian folks like barbers, bartenders and waiters on board. Made less sense a smaller ship like the Saratoga.

From my understanding battleship Yamato had civilans onboard: three hairdressers, a cook, a seamster, and a laundryman. It has some of the best cooking in the Japanese fleet (and because it sat at Truk for about a year without doing much for the war effort was sometimes called Hotel Yamato)

 

[Darkwing]

huh I did not know that. And yeah it cost quite a few grand, as in tens lol

Only whatever they'd pay you through the end of your contract.

Of course, it's not uncommon for military types to bring their families along with them wherever they are posted. So I don't really see the families as a reason to dispute that they are a military.

Yeah but I view star ships as "ships" and we dont bring families on deployments[/QUOTE]
Right now, no, we don't. But as Lance points out, it was originally part of the show concept. Also, I could see Starfleet, as a "kinder, gentler (and stupider)" military that's had too much peacetime softening it doing just that. Morale boost, political statement, and recruitment pitch all in one.

Of course, it's not uncommon for military types to bring their families along with them wherever they are posted. So I don't really see the families as a reason to dispute that they are a military.

Yeah but I view star ships as "ships" and we dont bring families on deployments

Fair point. It is a matter of public record that the producers struggled with this concept, given they regularly placed the Enterprise into dangerous situations where the civilian population of the ship would only have been an added burden, but yet they had to give them lip service, because families on board were a part of the series format.

The real answer comes from the early concepts, where the idea was that TNG would begin out on the fatherest reaches of the mapped cosmos, and then explicitly head outwards from there into an exploration of the complete unknown (there's still some semblance of this in "Encounter At Farpoint", the pilot episode). That's why they had the 'generation ship' concept in the first place, because Roddenberry's idea was that this new Enterprise wouldn't be travelling around established space lanes, and would in fact likely be out of contact with familiar territories for anything up to twenty years, so it was unreasonable to expect the crew to leave their families behind for that long. Unfortunately, this idea got dropped pretty quickly, but the families stayed.

(IMHO, they should've taken the opportunity of the battle at Wolf 359 to officially jettison families from all subsequent stories. It would've been a pretty organic development for Starfleet to tacitly acknowledge that nothing is the same anymore.)

Amen! I wish they HAD been smart enough to do that then, too.

 

[Autistoid]

This is always an absurd argument, is NASA, or the police a miliary.

the hilarious part is that things like rank are used to signify that this is a military when in reality rank is the proof that it's not.

If you pay attention to the rank on the show things make absolutely no sense.

You have junior officers taking command of ships when it's well established there are much higher ranked officers on board.

In fact rank more and more in the series seems like an point of seniority than anything else.

Ship design is not motivated by combat needs in the slightest. It's absurd it's clearly shown that these ships are massive and full of dead weight.

If starfleet was a military it's a highly incompetent one.

Or more logicically it's a blend of different structures.

 

[Lance]

(IMHO, they should've taken the opportunity of the battle at Wolf 359 to officially jettison families from all subsequent stories. It would've been a pretty organic development for Starfleet to tacitly acknowledge that nothing is the same anymore.)

Amen! I wish they HAD been smart enough to do that then, too.

The episode after the battle of Wolf 359 is even titled "Family", and has the Enterprise docked at Earth undergoing repairs... it wouldn't have been too much to have had some line thrown in there along the lines of, "Owing to the unfortunate civilian casualties sustained during the Borg incursion, Starfleet has henceforth ordered that families will no longer be permitted on starships".
In other words, drop them all off at Earth (off-screen), and then simply leave without 'em.

 

[Cyke101]

. That's why they had the 'generation ship' concept in the first place, because Roddenberry's idea was that this new Enterprise wouldn't be travelling around established space lanes, and would in fact likely be out of contact with familiar territories for anything up to twenty years, so it was unreasonable to expect the crew to leave their families behind for that long. Unfortunately, this idea got dropped pretty quickly, but the families stayed.

Huh, I knew about the original concept, but I never put 2 + 2 together about the Enterprise being a generational ship. And I'm pleasantly learning that it means the show's title is a double entendre.

 

[Timo]

Then again, the attack just proved once again that Earth is the least safe place in the entire universe for civilians to live on! Any family truly concerned with survival would have at least one member join Starfleet, and then ask for the rest to come along on a starship assignment...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[The Wormhole]

specifically called out y the research company used for TMP, which is why Kirk got promoted to ADM, not CMDRE.

And yet, we know Commodore is still a rank in TMP, Commodore Probert is mentioned in the Epsilon IX comm chatter.

You have junior officers taking command of ships when it's well established there are much higher ranked officers on board.

In fact rank more and more in the series seems like an point of seniority than anything else.

Even in today's military, a higher rank doesn't always doesn't always leave you in charge. The chain of command is essentially an order of precedence of who takes charge in what order. If for example, a navy ship has a Lieutenant who is in the chain of command and a Commander who is not, the Lieutenant is in command, not the Commander.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

You have junior officers taking command of ships when it's well established there are much higher ranked officers on board.

There's a difference between rank and billet. An officer who's been given the necessary authority and security clearance to preside over a particular vessel or installation may have more power in said setting than a higher ranking officer who's only visiting the facility--a scenario for which there is precedence in real military settings.

--Sran

 

[T'Girl]

specifically called out y the research company used for TMP, which is why Kirk got promoted to ADM, not CMDRE.

And yet, we know Commodore is still a rank in TMP, Commodore Probert is mentioned in the Epsilon IX comm chatter.

We didn't see Kirk for the time period between the last episode (TOS or TAS) and the time of the movie.

Kirk could easily have been promoted to Commodore in his last year aboard the Enterprise.

Ship design is not motivated by combat needs in the slightest.

The big ships have numerious phaser strips, without malnuvering they can fire in any direction.

 

[Makarov]

Then again, the attack just proved once again that Earth is the least safe place in the entire universe for civilians to live on! Any family truly concerned with survival would have at least one member join Starfleet, and then ask for the rest to come along on a starship assignment...

Timo Saloniemi

Also the follow up to Family in Generations shows how much safer Picard's family would have been if they bunked with him on the enterprise

I like the family on the ship thing, even if it's not all that logical.

 

[Ithekro]

One thing about Kirk as Admiral. While most hold that he is a Rear Admiral (either a renamed rank of Commadore, or a two star Admiral), but he holds the position of Chief of Starfleet Operations. If that is like the US Navy's Chief of Naval Operations, that is a full Admirals job. A top admiral's job. Fleet Admiral if you have one. This is the senior military officer of the Department of the Navy. If that translates to Starfleet, than Kirk was promoted a lot from Captain and someone thinks he can do the job, with Nogura being either the Secretary of the Navy, or the admiral in charge of Earth's fleet (or just the deployment of the Constitutions).