Opinions on Michael Eddington

[Will M.]

Leading the troops into battle, going up against the Titans, yet having a cause you devote your heart and soul for is truly admirable.

Jar Jar Binks meets that description. Leading is fine, being committed is great, people who lead though without fully understanding the reasoning or admitting that its not perfect for each and every situation either end of committing genocides or getting their people killed. I find Eddington true to form in regards so many in society but view him as a cautionary tale of passion without knowledge.

 

[Voth commando1]

I don't think you get it. The changelings wanted the attack to happen, to cripple two of the bigger powers in the Alpha Quadrant. They pushed it along, the Romulan changling we saw and probably others as well. If the Dominion hadn't wanted the attack to happen, their infiltrators would have played up jealousy between factions on both Cardassia and Romulus and between them, and would have had Jem Hadar surrounding the Gamma Quadrant side of the wormhole as well, just in case. Even the location of the Founders' homeworld that the Defiant thought they discovered was probably a set up just for this operation. Why, I bet they layed this trap in the Gamma Quadrant before.

The operation existed before the changelings discovered it and would have gone on regardless. With federation intelligence I suspect it would have succeeded.

Really you attribute near divine awe at the magnificent founders exactly the sort of attitude the founders encouraged.

The OP failed as a result of infiltration/bad coordination/inaccurate Intel. Those things could very easily have been rectified or made less significant.

So long as they got to the planet in a reasonable amount of time, carried out the deed quickly and efficiently, and got back to the wormhole the dominion would have been destroyed or heck. Have the obsidian order be destroyed when the Jem'hadar get there but it's too late though because the planet crust has been burned out.

 

[DonIago]

We have no idea whether the operation would have succeeded even if the Founders hadn't had advance intel.

In this specific case the Founders specifically avoided alerting the Carassians and Romulans that they were aware of their presence because they wanted to lure them in. Who knows what Jem'hadar response time would have been otherwise?

I can't imagine the Founders would typically leave their alleged homeworld as unguarded as it was in this particular case, though.

 

[Voth commando1]

We have no idea whether the operation would have succeeded even if the Founders hadn't had advance intel.

In this specific case the Founders specifically avoided alerting the Carassians and Romulans that they were aware of their presence because they wanted to lure them in. Who knows what Jem'hadar response time would have been otherwise?

I can't imagine the Founders would typically leave their alleged homeworld as unguarded as it was in this particular case, though.

It wasn't guarded during the search, it's a rogue planet IIRC and hence could be tracked.

About Eddington though he really is a tragic figure and I like tragic figures.

 

[fireproof78]

The operation existed before the changelings discovered it and would have gone on regardless. With federation intelligence I suspect it would have succeeded.

Really you attribute near divine awe at the magnificent founders exactly the sort of attitude the founders encouraged.

The OP failed as a result of infiltration/bad coordination/inaccurate Intel. Those things could very easily have been rectified or made less significant.

So long as they got to the planet in a reasonable amount of time, carried out the deed quickly and efficiently, and got back to the wormhole the dominion would have been destroyed or heck. Have the obsidian order be destroyed when the Jem'hadar get there but it's too late though because the planet crust has been burned out.

It's not "divine awe." It's simply an awareness of the resources the Founders have at their disposal. A fleet of 20 Romulan and Cardassian ships just cruising through their space is going to attract some attention.

As much credit as I give the Tal Shiar and Obsidian order for being able to gather intel, the Founders are just as good at manipulating it. I think that it's giving the Romulans and the Cardassians too much credit. Also, given the fact that the plan is genocidal in scope, I don't expect the Federation or Starfleet to throw their support behind this plan.

 

[Voth commando1]

It's not "divine awe." It's simply an awareness of the resources the Founders have at their disposal. A fleet of 20 Romulan and Cardassian ships just cruising through their space is going to attract some attention.

As much credit as I give the Tal Shiar and Obsidian order for being able to gather intel, the Founders are just as good at manipulating it. I think that it's giving the Romulans and the Cardassians too much credit. Also, given the fact that the plan is genocidal in scope, I don't expect the Federation or Starfleet to throw their support behind this plan.

Section 31 would and the more conservative Starfleet admiralty would publicly condemn it while toasting champagne in private.

 

[fireproof78]

Section 31 would and the more conservative Starfleet admiralty would publicly condemn it while toasting champagne in private.

If they have all been infiltrated, as is suggested by multiple characters, then even S31's efforts would be compromised.

 

[Voth commando1]

If they have all been infiltrated, as is suggested by multiple characters, then even S31's efforts would be compromised.

I'm saying if the infiltration was mitigated/avoided.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm saying if the infiltration was mitigated/avoided.

Given how early this was in the Alpha Quadrant's powers' understanding of the Founders, I am struggling to see how they would mitigate or avoid infiltration. Even if they develop counters, it would be a constant warfare to keep those counters ahead of enemy efforts. Especially, given that none of the three major powers being discussed have a reason to trust each other.

Would it be possible? I'm grudgingly willing to say yes, much as I would be willing to say yes to a possible Maquis victory. However, it would take a lot of planning and there would be setbacks before the plan could even move forward, plus trying to infiltrate Dominion space undetected with such a large fleet.

Finally, this is a plan that is condoning genocide on a massive scale. How does that sit with the Federation's principles?

 

[Voth commando1]

Given how early this was in the Alpha Quadrant's powers' understanding of the Founders, I am struggling to see how they would mitigate or avoid infiltration. Even if they develop counters, it would be a constant warfare to keep those counters ahead of enemy efforts. Especially, given that none of the three major powers being discussed have a reason to trust each other.

Would it be possible? I'm grudgingly willing to say yes, much as I would be willing to say yes to a possible Maquis victory. However, it would take a lot of planning and there would be setbacks before the plan could even move forward, plus trying to infiltrate Dominion space undetected with such a large fleet.

Finally, this is a plan that is condoning genocide on a massive scale. How does that sit with the Federation's principles?

As I said official condemnation but private celebration.

 

[DonIago]

It wasn't guarded during the search, it's a rogue planet IIRC and hence could be tracked.

Our Heroes came up against several patrol ships in at least two groups before they even got near the planet. And at least one of those groups detected Defiant even while cloaked.

And for all we know the Jem'hadar were taking it easy on Our Heroes because they knew a Changeling was aboard Defiant.

As it's already been established that more/larger ships are even more detectable, I find it hard to believe the task force would have fared any better.

 

[Voth commando1]

Our Heroes came up against several patrol ships in at least two groups before they even got near the planet. And at least one of those groups detected Defiant even while cloaked.

And for all we know the Jem'hadar were taking it easy on Our Heroes because they knew a Changeling was aboard Defiant.

As it's already been established that more/larger ships are even more detectable, I find it hard to believe the task force would have fared any better.

It is the Tal Shiar and Obsidian Order we're talking about. Anyway they were going slower to avoid detection.

So long as they get there and get back quickly it could have been okay.

 

[Spot261]

What's wrong with wanting a cause more than what you have?

What would Eddington be if he didn't take up the "glorious cause"?

You've somewhat made the opposing point right there, "what would HE be?", not "what would the MAQUIS be?"

You're absolutely right, joining a greater cause CAN be admirable, but only if it's the right cause for the right reasons, otherwise you are just engaging in violence in order to feel better about yourself. When you pick up a gun people die, not necessarily at your hands but also as a consequence.

I've some sympathy for the Maquis whilst ultimately disagreeing with them. Forced relocation is a terrible thing, but the federation was making a deal that would prevent them having to fight a bloody war, not out of fear of losing (they wouldn't) but out of fear of doing damage. Eddington wasn't even one of the people being relocated. Billions of people on both sides could easily have been killed had he provoked a war just to avoid being "just another security officer".

To an extent Sisko came out of it pretty badly too. It was all rather personal and instead of the whole affair being two men obsessed with opposing ideals it was two men obsessed with Michael Eddington.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Neither the Search I or II or The Die Is Cast establish that the Founder's world was unguarded. The Defiant got nowhere near it in the first episodes. Odo, who had always been portrayed as one of the less talented pilots and scientists, makes no note whatsoever of the state of patrols--not to mention, he was acting out a "program" in returning to the nebula. And the Romulan and Cardassian fleet were ultimately attacked by a Jem'hadar fleet hiding in the nebula. It could easily be that a fleet was always hiding therein.

 

[Voth commando1]

You've somewhat made the opposing point right there, "what would HE be?", not "what would the MAQUIS be?"

You're absolutely right, joining a greater cause CAN be admirable, but only if it's the right cause for the right reasons, otherwise you are just engaging in violence in order to feel better about yourself. When you pick up a gun people die, not necessarily at your hands but also as a consequence.

I've some sympathy for the Maquis whilst ultimately disagreeing with them. Forced relocation is a terrible thing, but the federation was making a deal that would prevent them having to fight a bloody war, not out of fear of losing (they wouldn't) but out of fear of doing damage. Eddington wasn't even one of the people being relocated. Billions of people on both sides could easily have been killed had he provoked a war just to avoid being "just another security officer".

To an extent Sisko came out of it pretty badly too. It was all rather personal and instead of the whole affair being two men obsessed with opposing ideals it was two men obsessed with Michael Eddington.

If Eddington led the Maquis to victory then he could say "I am the Maquis and the Maquis are me". Causes and personal glory should not be counterposed.

 

[Spot261]

Yes they should. Whilst not mutually exclusive they are utterly not synonymous and should thus the default should be that they are distinct until demonstrated otherwise. Thus the default is counterposition unless good reason can be given to correlate the two.

Millions have died in the real world because people sought personal glory in the name of causes. Whether the cause is just or not the search for glory is the problem because glory seeking and genuine altruism typically lead to very different decision making processes.

Someone seeking glory will rarely compromise, even if it is the right thing to do. They will rarely seek the most humane or sensible path, which usually IS the right thing to do. They seek the path which draws attention to THEIR courage, THEIR "selfless" contributions, regardless of whther the cause is genuinely best served by those actions, or even if the cause is truly just in the first place.

 

[Voth commando1]

Yes they should, in fact they should ALWAYS be countreposed because whilst not mutually exclusive they are utterly not synonymous.

Millions have died in the real world because people sought personal glory in the name of causes. Whether the cause is just or not the search for glory is the problem because glory seeking and genuine altruism typically lead to very different decision making processes.

Someone seeking glory will rarely compromise, even if it is the right thing to do. They will rarely seek the most humane or sensible path, which usually IS the right thing to do. They seek the path which draws attention to THEIR courage, THEIR "selfless" contributions, regardless of whther the cause is genuinely best served by those actions, or even if the cause is truly just in the first place.

Personal glory shouldn't be incompatible with genuine spirit and love for the cause? Who doesn't to have Alexander the Great's victory streak(with historical paeans) with Lenin's tenacity and devotion combined with the patience and humility of a Saint before Martyrdom, a king leading his men on the last stand. The revolutionary who abandons his comfortable middle class life and fights in the jungle. Glory and sincerity of purpose make "Great Men."

 

[Spot261]

Personal glory shouldn't be incompatible with genuine spirit and love for the cause? Who doesn't to have Alexander the Great's victory streak(with historical paeans) with Lenin's tenacity and devotion combined with the patience and humility of a Saint before Martyrdom, a king leading his men on the last stand. The revolutionary who abandons his comfortable middle class life and fights in the jungle. Glory and sincerity of purpose make "Great Men."

If you say so. Who am I to argue? Tony Blair would doubtless agree with you.

Of course leaders doing things for personal glory is always best for the world and their people. It never leads them to pointless violent horrible deaths or leaves civilian populations brutalised.

History is not just written by the winners, it's written by those who decide what gets written. Those who die along the way don't get a voice.

 

[Voth commando1]

If you say so. Who am I to argue? Tony Blair would doubtless agree with you.

Of course leaders doing things for personal glory is always best for the world and their people. It never leads them to pointless violent horrible deaths or leaves civilian populations brutalised.

History is not just written by the winners, it's written by those who decide what gets written. Those who die along the way don't get a voice.

Ah the post-modernist concern with the "marginalized". Most of the human race has never had a voice. The winners do and the losers do if their lucky and literate.

One's personal glory and desire to be remembered/honored/worshipped(yes that happens) need not be contradicted by a commitment to principle, ideological sincerity and the willingness to let go of the Self in the sea of Things That Really Matter.

 

[Spot261]

One's personal glory and desire to be remembered/honored/worshipped(yes that happens) need not be contradicted by a commitment to principle, ideological sincerity and the willingness to let go of the Self in the sea of Things That Really Matter.

"Personal Glory" and "willingless to let go of the self" sound totally synonymous.

In practise neither are particularly indicators of good judgement and the best leaders are those who are consciencious, objective, professional and careful, mostly because they don't seek death (either theirs or someone else's) as a way of making a point. Thus they avoid having millions die or suffer in order to make them feel good about themselves or enforce their viewpoint on the world regardless of other's wishes or well being. Pursuing a cause should be about the common good, not a historical penis measuring contest.

The "marginalised" in this case by the way means pretty much anyone who's ever been killed or traumatised by a war that was anything other than absolutely necessary. That's a lot of people. So hardly "post modern" and more, well, "compassionate", or even just "human".