Picard does not need to describe himself as a soldier his whole career is based on what soldiers, sailors and other armed force personnel do.
Last edited:
Why is there resistance to the idea of Starfleet being military?
- Thread starter The Wormhole
- Start date
- Status
@The Wormhole I just read the first page of this thread and realized that debating whether or not Starfleet is a military was not your intent, so....sorry about that! Maybe we can get things back on track?
I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea that Starfleet is a military organization. Not on its face, anyway. I just think defining it as a military is limiting, at least in terms of what "military" means today and what their purpose is. Star Trek has always said that we will achieve peace and prosperity through embracing our diversity and our differences, and working together as a species. I find it hard to make that argument if the UFP is essentially governed by a military organization. I just don't see Starfleet that way. I see them as explorers who occasionally have to defend the UFP.
I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea that Starfleet is a military organization. Not on its face, anyway. I just think defining it as a military is limiting, at least in terms of what "military" means today and what their purpose is. Star Trek has always said that we will achieve peace and prosperity through embracing our diversity and our differences, and working together as a species. I find it hard to make that argument if the UFP is essentially governed by a military organization. I just don't see Starfleet that way. I see them as explorers who occasionally have to defend the UFP.
TNG The Wounded and DS9 Empok Nor. Also, Paradise draws on his ground combat experience Also, in DS9 Hippocratic Oath, O'Brien is the one the Jem'Hadar leader in the episode is able to relate to the most because of his specialty in ground combat.
They weren't all security, security wears gold, and those guys wear coloured stripes on their uniforms corresponding to all three of Starfleet's department colours. What else would Starfleet personnel who specialize in ground combat be if not an infantry? Even the novels recognize this, even if they do name them the rather unimaginative "Starfleet Ground Forces."
"Essentially governed?" Starfleet is not the Federation government, regardless if it's a military or not. It has no role in governing the Federation, and is in the service to the Federation government.
And just because the Federation prefers peaceful solutions does not mean Starfleet can't be military. Again military does not mean "shoot first and ask questions never."
What? Of course not. The specifically state (and have shown us) that their primary missions include defense, exploration, science, diplomacy, etc.
Let's examine the "trappings" "and the like" shall we?
1. Their ships have military designations (cruiser, frigate, etc) and weapons.
2. They are a uniformed service.
3. They are armed, the only armed forces the Federation has, and are the only ones that respond to threats.
4. Their mission includes patrolling the borders.
5. They have military ranks (Lieutenant, Captain, Admiral, etc) and a clear chain of command.
6. If they disobey their superiors they face Court martial by JAG. (Only militaries have that).
7. They have war games and military maneuvers.
8. They have fought every battle/war of the Federation without blinking an eye and are the only ones to do so for the UFP.
That's quite a lot for "trappings". However you want to examine it, Starfleet is a military or a quasi-military organization.
It's just that Starfleet does shoot first and ask questions never, just about as often as not...
There's the whole Romulan thing when acts of war are spelled out for the audience and then committed by our heroes on the "authority" of a starship CO. Then there's the Dominion War thing amounting to same, with an outpost CO deciding to conduct the act of war to get the fighting started. These are do or die situations, where contacting the HQ is barely possible, contacting the civilian government is almost unimaginable, and waiting for them to decide on anything is right out. Basically, then, Starfleet does rule the UFP on the one thing that matters, that is, foreign policy. In the Trek environment, anything else is just peanuts.
Timo Saloniemi
There's the whole Romulan thing when acts of war are spelled out for the audience and then committed by our heroes on the "authority" of a starship CO. Then there's the Dominion War thing amounting to same, with an outpost CO deciding to conduct the act of war to get the fighting started. These are do or die situations, where contacting the HQ is barely possible, contacting the civilian government is almost unimaginable, and waiting for them to decide on anything is right out. Basically, then, Starfleet does rule the UFP on the one thing that matters, that is, foreign policy. In the Trek environment, anything else is just peanuts.
Timo Saloniemi
Because in different places you are gonna get different understandings. Conquistadors in space is going to be divisive concept. And that's why there's a 'just' in baloks paraphrase. It's to separate out the connotations. Which is probably what makes it look like a moral judgement on the military. Which is why this debate always leads to much twisted gussets. First time you meet a culture, if you send soldiers, that's gonna send a particular message. And if you don't send soldiers and that new culture is aggressive, your explorers better be good at defending themselves or the message you get sent back 'we're coming to eat you' (see The Borg.) So you send explorers, diplomats, and give them a big stick cos it's a jungle out there. (Think I said something similar but longer last time I weighed in on this kind of discussion.)
If they are not a military why are they so well armed/trained/have ranks: Space is dangerous
What's wrong with sending the military to meet new cultures: you then set yourself up as foe or agressor, which if you are actually a peaceful culture, like the federation, really isn't your goal. If you even look like the above, you can appear to be an invader (spaceship with the tech to level the planet turns up with a thousand people in orbit and says 'hey, want to join my club, by the way we are our nations top soldiers') and that's not going to go well.
Sg1 gets away with it (a) because it's written that way, but more plausibly (b) there's 4 of them usually, with what they can carry, and as high tech as modern weapons are...the principles are visibly the same as lower tech. A gun is only a way of throwing a really fast really small spear at the end of the day. And there's generally a bigger bad already operating somewhere to make it plausible...they can go 'we are the good soldiers' because the big bad has illustrated it's big badness a lot of the time already. There are deviations from that, but sg1 is not at all the same concept as Trek, even it's superficial similarities don't cover that. In many ways sg1 aren't even explorers...they are investigators, because the stargate network preexists them...they don't boldly go where no one has gone before Ina grand sense, they go boldly where the intergalactic metro system has taken some folks before, even if they were then forgotten about. It's a very different approach....I think even the first film specifically took the nuke with them in case they found a threat on the other side, because they were expecting such a threat since the gate tech was so advanced. Which is very different from Trek.
That's such a tortured metaphor the writers should be tried for war crimes.
Fair enough. Let me rephrase. There are many ways to achieve peace and unity. You can do it through military strength (whether soft power or hard power), or you can do it through diplomacy. I always viewed Trek as saying we'll get there from the latter method. That's not a judgment of the morals or merits of militaries; it's a judgment of the ideal. Ideally, militaries would never have to engage in armed combat. It just so happens we live in a world in which that is sometimes necessary. And I think Trek's view of the future is one in which that call for armed conflict is so rare that the idea of "military" is transformed, such that their essential purpose becomes exploration because defense/war is so infrequently required. In that sense, I think perhaps I (and others) might be more swayed by the Starfleet is a military argument if we have a totally different definition and conception of what a military is 200 years in the future. If the future's definition of a military is "an organization of exploration, science, and discovery, that seeks out new worlds and new civilizations, and defends the Federation when called upon," then sure, Starfleet is a military in that sense. But by current definitions, roles, and standards, I don't think Starfleet is that narrow in its scope.
EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, Star Trek Beyond perfectly illustrates this transformation. Edison came from a time when Starfleet was a military, exclusively, defending the Federation against the Xindi and the Romulans. By the time we get to Kirk and the Enterprise, that's not what Starfleet is anymore. And Edison believes that's what Starfleet should be once again -- that strife and struggle are necessary, and that peace with former enemies insults his sacrifices. See also: the quote in my signature line.
Last edited:
Starfleet officers are equally explorers/diplomats, scientists and soldiers. Hmm, perhaps they should give them different colored uniforms or something to distinguish between the three?
They even received an honorary award from the USAF for their accurate and respectful portrayal of military personnel. They also featured two high ranking generals in cameos talking with General Hammond.
I don't think there is any exclusion of exploration by being a military. I think Starfleet can be both.
Outdoorsman clothing.
Expensive suit and tie.
Lab coat.
Camo and cargo pants.
Might need to take into account that Marcus's and Picard's claims are a century apart.
Last edited:
Who does?
Even though there are many examples in this very thread of navies doing exactly the same things Starfleet is shown doing. And I don't know what episode gave Starfleet's mission statement, but practicing to fight wars and fighting wars would seem to be an actual military role, more than just a "trapping."
How is it inconsistent? It's perfectly in keeping with the historical naval role outlined in early OS materials and the writer's guide. And that episode was made after "Balance of Terror," which essentially cuts and pastes Enterprise into a WW2 movie. When the Romulans enter Federation space Enterprise does not put out a call to the "real" defensive forces. They handle the potential war themselves.
And in fact, exploration has historically been heavily military. Some forces, including the US Army, had branches specifically dedicated to exploration, survey and mapping as mentioned earlier. And the number of unforeseen threats that have come from exploration into unknown space would seem to argue for a Starfleet more military than less, with the exploration and defense roles overlapping and sometimes merging.
I don't think there is any question that Starfleet in TOS and TNG is tasked with war-fighting for the Federation, because they are seen practicing to do just that, and indeed carry out warlike, if not wartime, assignments. Whether it is the only organization so charged is open to question, I guess, though I would tend to think it is since no other force is ever mentioned. If a war-fighting force is not a military force, that's beyond any definition I can agree with.
Actually, it's the other way around: Starfleet of that era was the Earth Starfleet, and was not military (the MACOS, like Edison, fulfilled all military functions). But the Federation Starfleet is military.
And I hate to keep harping on this, but not only does the majority of evidence dictate that the UFP Starfleet is military, the very fact that it fights wars proves it is. Only a military can fight a war. Therefore any organization which does, must logically be military.
War on Drugs - fought by legislation and law enforcement.
War on Poverty - fought by legislation and federal agencies.
War the card game - fought by family members looking to create hard feelings.
^ War the song - fought by Bruce Springsteen 
I dunno, quite frankly I think we're all kinda running around in circles, and I think we're all correct. Seriously, we're all correct because Starfleet is an organization for peace and diplomacy and exploration and science and defense. It's literally all of these things at the same time. It's just that sometimes, depending on context and circumstance, it is one more than it is the other.
Perhaps the question should be "What isn't Starfleet?" I guess my main point of contention isn't whether Starfleet is/is not a military -- my problem is that it isn't only a military.
Perhaps the question should be "What isn't Starfleet?" I guess my main point of contention isn't whether Starfleet is/is not a military -- my problem is that it isn't only a military.
But as has already been pointed out, most militaries IRL aren't "only" a military either. What does that word even mean, in this context? It's not like, say, the US Army does nothing all day but fight. No military does.
- Status
