The Omega Directive.... thoughts?

[Timo]

Starfleet is obviously military. What it is not, however, is militarISTIC.

It's difficult to see how Starfleet could be more militaristic than shown!

These people are the judge, jury and executioner out there in space, displacing entire colonies at a whim, killing people with their stun guns when it's "the right thing to do", with no sign of a civilian police force anywhere. They are also soldiers out of control, carpet-bombing planets hosting people who looked at them wrong, making field decisions of whether or not to commit acts of war against interstellar enemies, or occasionally giving "the Council", whatever that is, fifteen minutes to rubber-stamp a decision to do war. And when a council of some sort is seen in session, Starfleet uniforms are everywhere.

All we're missing is the drafts and the propaganda, and that probably only because we don't get the civilian viewpoint.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Bagofmostlywatr]

The thing that always bugged me was... What if it was detected while the captain was off the ship?

For a ship in the Alpha Quadrant it probably wouldn't be that much of an issue. Presumably an automated signal would also be sent to the nearest starbase who could dispatch someone to the ship to unlock the computers. The crew might have to go several hours or even a whole day without computer access, which would be frustrating.

For a ship like Voyager stuck out of contact with Starfleet, yeah, they screwed.

Possibly even more of a pain in the arse if you're not even in starfleet, but commanding a starfleet vessel in the delta quadrant, and your CO is only a commander. If you could get word back, would he even know what to do?

 

[T'Girl]

I just think the exploration aspect makes it "quasi"

When the US Air Force flies into a hurricane, or supports a Antarctic base, or rushes in after a natural disaster, there nothing "quasi" about them being the military.

And when it is appropriate, Starfleet gets damned militaristic.

 

[The Wormhole]

I just think the exploration aspect makes it "quasi".

Exploration was handled by militaries in the past. Should exploration become a thing again, it will be handled by the military. Even NASA selects military officers to lead exploratory missions. Neil Armstrong was a military officer when he walked on the moon.

Possibly even more of a pain in the arse if you're not even in starfleet, but commanding a starfleet vessel in the delta quadrant, and your CO is only a commander. If you could get word back, would he even know what to do?

If this hypothetical commander were the officer assigned to command the ship by Starfleet, than they would most certainly have been briefed about Omega. Janeway said all Starfleet captains are informed, I would assume that applies to officers who hold both the rank of Captain or the position of Captain.

 

[nx1701g]

Ok, so Military.

Sorry, didn't mean to restart one of the military/not military discussions. I've been involved in several over the years and it wasn't my intention.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Starfleet is clearly military. Just their primary mission is exploration, science, and diplomacy, and acting in defense is 'When necessary'.

 

[Nebusj]

I just think the exploration aspect makes it "quasi".

Exploration was handled by militaries in the past. Should exploration become a thing again, it will be handled by the military. Even NASA selects military officers to lead exploratory missions. Neil Armstrong was a military officer when he walked on the moon.

No, he was not. Armstrong left the Navy in 1952, and resigned his reserve commission in 1960. This was before his work as an X-15 pilot and well before he became an astronaut.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I just think the exploration aspect makes it "quasi".

Exploration was handled by militaries in the past. Should exploration become a thing again, it will be handled by the military. Even NASA selects military officers to lead exploratory missions. Neil Armstrong was a military officer when he walked on the moon.

No, he was not. Armstrong left the Navy in 1952, and resigned his reserve commission in 1960. This was before his work as an X-15 pilot and well before he became an astronaut.

He does have a point, most astronauts are at least ex-military.
Starfleet is part of Roddenberry's utopian view of the future, I think he meant the organization to be more than just a military.

 

[BillJ]

Starfleet is part of Roddenberry's utopian view of the future, I think he meant the organization to be more than just a military.

But even the military that Roddenberry was part of was about more than just fighting wars.

Roddenberry's views changed between TOS and TNG, but even after the change, the evidence points to Starfleet being the military.

 

[The Wormhole]

He does have a point, most astronauts are at least ex-military.

Even a number of NASA's directors have been military officers, or at least ex-military.

Starfleet is part of Roddenberry's utopian view of the future, I think he meant the organization to be more than just a military.

This statement gets tossed around the military debates all the time, but it never makes sense to me. Everything we've seen Starfleet do is done by militaries. The only real notable difference is Starfleet has a larger science program than most militaries have today or historically. But that is a necessity to working in space, not evidence of being "more than a military" or less military or non-militaristic.

 

[Drone]

Starfleet is obviously military. What it is not, however, is militarISTIC.

It's difficult to see how Starfleet could be more militaristic than shown!

These people are the judge, jury and executioner out there in space, displacing entire colonies at a whim, killing people with their stun guns when it's "the right thing to do", with no sign of a civilian police force anywhere. They are also soldiers out of control, carpet-bombing planets hosting people who looked at them wrong, making field decisions of whether or not to commit acts of war against interstellar enemies, or occasionally giving "the Council", whatever that is, fifteen minutes to rubber-stamp a decision to do war. And when a council of some sort is seen in session, Starfleet uniforms are everywhere.

All we're missing is the drafts and the propaganda, and that probably only because we don't get the civilian viewpoint.

Timo Saloniemi

Whoa there now!!! I know you're not talking about the MU, so where are the examples, numerous given the certainty of your tone, of the killing of people with their stun guns (odd choice of phrase) as it's the right thing to do or this planetary destruction you speak of when looked at the wrong way, for example.

As I'm wont to do, I admit ignorance of the specifics of a significant number of episodes from a couple of series, so I may be absolutely unaware of certain incidences, but it seems to me that you've gone way beyond the wearing of one's heart on one's sleeve, in what appears to be a rather hyperbolic characterization of the Starfleet I'm familiar with. If you're giving some extra weight to extra-legal organizations or unhinged individuals in positions of power, OK, but otherwise I think you're using not only a broad brush, but one dipped in the wrong color.

 

[T'Girl]

Captain's log, stardate 3289.8.

I am faced with the most difficult decision of my life. Unless we find a way to destroy the creatures without killing their human hosts ...

... my command responsibilities will force me to kill over a million people.

 

[Timo]

where are the examples, numerous given the certainty of your tone, of the killing of people with their stun guns (odd choice of phrase)

Well, everywhere. A blatant case would be Riker gunning down Lyta in "Vengeance Factor": his gun is capable of rendering the criminal harmless without killing her, but he chooses cold-blooded (well, grim-faced) murder instead. This is not considered exceptional in any way, or held against Riker.

as it's the right thing to do

This seemed to be Riker's viewpoint: there was no hope of continuing life for Lyta even if Riker failed to murder him. After all, she was a killing machine incapable of not committing heinous crimes. The "best case scenario" would be to lock her in a padded cell where she would claw her nails and then her fingers out in desperate lust to commit murder.

No doubt other options might have existed - the trivial being to put her in jail (or in stasis!) until her designated victims died natural deaths, and ignore the trauma to her from the procedure. But would she have been able to function in any fashion after her only reason for existence went away?

or this planetary destruction you speak of when looked at the wrong way, for example.

Both Kirk and Sisko readily chose orbital bombardment when a way of life on a human or sorta-human settlement did not appeal to them, even though no known crimes had been committed by those victimized. Again, the actions in about one TOS episode in four, or in DS9 "For the Uniform", were considered acceptable or at least clearly did not hinder the careers of the bombers.

The portrayal of Starfleet as a militaristic organization easily goes unnoticed, but it really is the obvious thing to look for - the heroes are killers by profession, after all. It's just not pronouncedly fascist or communist or Prussian or Hun militarism, but its own Technicolor variant, perhaps somewhat confusing the issue.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Riker gunning down Lyta in "Vengeance Factor": his gun is capable of rendering the criminal harmless without killing her, but he chooses cold-blooded (well, grim-faced) murder instead. This is not considered exceptional in any way, or held against Riker.

You missed the part where Riker tries every setting on his phaser and none of them work, since Yuta's conditioning rendered her impervious to all phaser hits except vaporize.

As for punishment: Riker acted to save another person's life; doing so is not murder.

 

[Drone]

or this planetary destruction you speak of when looked at the wrong way, for example.

Both Kirk and Sisko readily chose orbital bombardment when a way of life on a human or sorta-human settlement did not appeal to them, even though no known crimes had been committed by those victimized. Again, the actions in about one TOS episode in four, or in DS9 "For the Uniform", were considered acceptable or at least clearly did not hinder the careers of the bombers.

The portrayal of Starfleet as a militaristic organization easily goes unnoticed, but it really is the obvious thing to look for - the heroes are killers by profession, after all. It's just not pronouncedly fascist or communist or Prussian or Hun militarism, but its own Technicolor variant, perhaps somewhat confusing the issue.

Timo Saloniemi

Well, as to your estimation of the number of TOS episodes that featured what your describing, I will just page through them sequentially and see if I can find the type of action you mention in approximately 20, as your calculation suggests. I can't see how I will find such examples, but will name those that I do to see if they agree with your qualifications.

I believe we just had a thread that questioned the nature of Starfleet's role, as essentially military or exploratory. I believe a majority of posters offered the former or at least that it was an unarguable facet of its mission, either in defense of Federation members or offensively against incontrovertible threats. Now you are using the word militaristic, which puts
somewhat of a different spin on it, especially in the description of its members as killers by profession. Are you saying then that the preponderance of training that is focused on at the Academy revolves around the application of the art of the war, to the vast exclusion of any other pursuits? That would seem to be the case, if killing is in fact the profession that its graduates are being prepared for.

Would you not concede that the vast majority of Starfleet personnel have never taken the lives of others? Are they to be considered failures then, or just the cohort being held in reserve to replace the murderers when their ranks are endangered by attrition? Honestly, such a characterization seems to beggar credulity, IMO.

 

[Commishsleer]

or this planetary destruction you speak of when looked at the wrong way, for example.

Both Kirk and Sisko readily chose orbital bombardment when a way of life on a human or sorta-human settlement did not appeal to them, even though no known crimes had been committed by those victimized. Again, the actions in about one TOS episode in four, or in DS9 "For the Uniform", were considered acceptable or at least clearly did not hinder the careers of the bombers.

The portrayal of Starfleet as a militaristic organization easily goes unnoticed, but it really is the obvious thing to look for - the heroes are killers by profession, after all. It's just not pronouncedly fascist or communist or Prussian or Hun militarism, but its own Technicolor variant, perhaps somewhat confusing the issue.

Timo Saloniemi

Well, as to your estimation of the number of TOS episodes that featured what your describing, I will just page through them sequentially and see if I can find the type of action you mention in approximately 20, as your calculation suggests. I can't see how I will find such examples, but will name those that I do to see if they agree with your qualifications.

I'm thinking of two episodes maybe from the first season. There were other episodes where Kirk destroyed some machine /despot overlord but only threatened orbital bombardment once or twice (and in one of those cases the landing team and the Enterprise were being threatened - Kirk wasn't just angry with the planets stupid "life choices"). I'm also thinking it was mainly used as a threat.

 

[Drone]

or this planetary destruction you speak of when looked at the wrong way, for example.

Both Kirk and Sisko readily chose orbital bombardment when a way of life on a human or sorta-human settlement did not appeal to them, even though no known crimes had been committed by those victimized. Again, the actions in about one TOS episode in four, or in DS9 "For the Uniform", were considered acceptable or at least clearly did not hinder the careers of the bombers.

The portrayal of Starfleet as a militaristic organization easily goes unnoticed, but it really is the obvious thing to look for - the heroes are killers by profession, after all. It's just not pronouncedly fascist or communist or Prussian or Hun militarism, but its own Technicolor variant, perhaps somewhat confusing the issue.

Timo Saloniemi

Well, as to your estimation of the number of TOS episodes that featured what your describing, I will just page through them sequentially and see if I can find the type of action you mention in approximately 20, as your calculation suggests. I can't see how I will find such examples, but will name those that I do to see if they agree with your qualifications.

I believe we just had a thread that questioned the nature of Starfleet's role, as essentially military or exploratory. I believe a majority of posters offered the former or at least that it was an unarguable facet of its mission, either in defense of Federation members or offensively against incontrovertible threats. Now you are using the word militaristic, which puts
somewhat of a different spin on it, especially in the description of its members as killers by profession. Are you saying then that the preponderance of training that is focused on at the Academy revolves around the application of the art of the war, to the vast exclusion of any other pursuits? That would seem to be the case, if killing is in fact the profession that its graduates are being prepared for.

Would you not concede that the vast majority of Starfleet personnel have never taken the lives of others? Are they to be considered failures then, or just the cohort being held in reserve to replace the murderers when their ranks are endangered by attrition? Honestly, such a characterization seems to beggar credulity, IMO.

Well, not that it takes an especially long period to review, but here are the episodes that I think fit within your description of orbital bombardment in TOS, some stretched a little but probably within your parameters. Taste of Armageddon (threat), Operation Annihilate, The Apple, Obsession, Omega Glory, Lights Of Zetar (iffy). That's it. I don't even think there were even any others where there was even a serious threat of such violence. No, I don't count A Piece of the Action. Who Mourns for Adonais, well the power source was attacked not the entity and unlike The Apple, the action didn't represent one that would change the nature of a civilization's development.

So a grand total of six. Out of seventy-nine. Not quite one in four. Please, comment on whether you agree with these examples and where the remaining dozen or so instances that you cite of these cold blooded killer's planetary scale mayhem took place.

 

[Tim Thomason]

It's all semantics, really. Archer seemed to have the view that Starfleet was not military. Kirk seemed to have the opposite view. Officially, NASA in the real world isn't military, and Starfleet is sometimes shown as an extension of that (with phasers!).

I think that Starfleet might not define itself as military, having "outgrown" the need for one, but it fits all the definitions of one (even in Archer's time):

The military, also called the armed forces, are forces authorized to use deadly force, and weapons, to support the interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually defined as defense of the state and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military can also function as a discrete subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures, which may include housing, schools, utilities, food production and banking.

When the Dominion War started, it was Starfleet and its Admirals that took the lead in fighting it. If some "UFP Army" had ever been shown, then we'd have a better argument here, but that has never been the case (MACOs in Archer's time, aside).

 

[T'Girl]

Well, not that it takes an especially long period to review, but here are the episodes that I think fit within your description of orbital bombardment in TOS

Errand of Mercy spoke of "destroying life on a planetary scale."

 

[Commishsleer]

Well, not that it takes an especially long period to review, but here are the episodes that I think fit within your description of orbital bombardment in TOS

Errand of Mercy spoke of "destroying life on a planetary scale."

Yes but that wasn't Kirk willing to wipe out a planet because it disagreed with his philosophy on life.

And the reason Kirk was contemplating wiping out the planet in "Operation: Annihilate" was to save the rest of the galaxy from being taken over - not a Kirk whim.

The Omega Directive in practice wouldn't really work. What about all those alien intelligences who took over the Enterprise for example. They'd have access to the "Omega Directive" from the Computer. Surely the Borg would know if Picard knew. What about the Admirals who got taken over in Season1 TNG or those Captains who went bad (or was that only TOS?)