Or that Reliant would not know where they were and end up at the wrong planet?
Why did Kirk let Khan go at the end of Space Seed?
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
Or that Reliant would not know where they were and end up at the wrong planet?
I'm wondering who's more at fault in that: Kirk, for not placing a warning beacon in orbit, or the Reliant crew, for being so sloppy that they didn't recognize what planet they were looking at.
What leads you to think so?
The explosion of Ceti Alpha Six shift the orbit of Ceti Alpha Five, what chance of survival would any "warning beacons" have had?
If they're placed far enough away (at the very edge of the system, for example)? Probably quite a bit.
What crimes? What war? All of those governments had long sense collapsed or been removed from power. Khan was no more a criminal than Hussein, Stalin, Mao, etc.. Brutal dictators that punished their own people or maybe even engaged in wars with their neighbors, but that doesn't in itself make a dictator a war criminal.
Was Khan a wanted man? Was the government seeking him? Hussein was tried for war crimes only because his country was invaded, his government toppled and he was eventually captured as a part of regime change. Hussein had been doing the same criminal acts against his own people for years and nobody cared. He wasn't a criminal until the 2nd Gulf War. At least, as far as legalities are concerned. Same with Stalin and Mao. No authority ever claimed they were criminals despite their misdeeds against humanity.
Being a brutal dictator is not a crime in a legal sense. The Federation had no authority to arrest him on any charges.
To be fair, our only source that Kirk never informed anyone of Khan's whereabouts is Khan himself, and, being marooned on Ceti Alpha V, he wasn't exactly in a position to know what Kirk was up to. And since Ceti Alpha V apparently fell into something very close to VI's old orbit, the Reliant was mistaking one planet for the other.
On some level, probably, but in "Mudd's Women" all Kirk could do was hold a hearing to determine if Mudd should be held in custody and delivered to legal authorities. What was seen in "Space Seed" would raise the question of what ideals they were bringing to the frontier: A system of impartial justice where everyone had rights to equal treatment and due process under the law, or military commanders personally dispensing justice as they saw fit.
But, the episode said that they did. It's hard for me to imagine that there would be no crime involved in violently interfering with the operation of a Federation vessel, not to mention the violence against the persons thereon.
Yeah. I don't even think Khan is comparable to Hitler or Stalin. Note this dialogue:
KIRK: He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous. They were supermen, in a sense. Stronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring.
SPOCK: Gentlemen, this romanticism about a ruthless dictator is
KIRK: Mister Spock, we humans have a streak of barbarism in us. Appalling, but there, nevertheless.
SCOTT: There were no massacres under his rule.
SPOCK: And as little freedom.
MCCOY: No wars until he was attacked.
SPOCK: Gentlemen.
KIRK: Mister Spock, you misunderstand us. We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.
Sure he was a dictator/tyrant. But he didn't commit massacres and only went to war if he was attacked. Granted he clearly restricted the freedom of his subjects and probably had no qualms about making leaders of political opposition "disappear."
But he was, as Kirk said, "the best of the tyrants."
KIRK: He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous. They were supermen, in a sense. Stronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring.
SPOCK: Gentlemen, this romanticism about a ruthless dictator is
KIRK: Mister Spock, we humans have a streak of barbarism in us. Appalling, but there, nevertheless.
SCOTT: There were no massacres under his rule.
SPOCK: And as little freedom.
MCCOY: No wars until he was attacked.
SPOCK: Gentlemen.
KIRK: Mister Spock, you misunderstand us. We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.
Sure he was a dictator/tyrant. But he didn't commit massacres and only went to war if he was attacked. Granted he clearly restricted the freedom of his subjects and probably had no qualms about making leaders of political opposition "disappear."
But he was, as Kirk said, "the best of the tyrants."
I don't buy for one second that there were no massacres under Khan's rule. There had to have been. We've seen how evil Khan is. There's no way somebody like that can rule without massacring everyone who disagrees with him. Hell, Khan - of the alternate reality, yes, but still Khan - admitted his true intention was the genocide of all non-Augments! (Actually it's Spock who makes the accusation, but you'll notice Khan doesn't deny it...)
Anyone who really believes that Khan committed no massacres? Tell that to the crew of Regula One.
But why didn't Reliant notice that there was one fewer planet than there should be?
Anyone who really believes that Khan committed no massacres? Tell that to the crew of Regula One.
But why didn't Reliant notice that there was one fewer planet than there should be?
Last edited:
Maltuvis...
Ah, the question of the ages. Whole threads have been devoted to this conundrum. Alas, perhaps we'll never know.
Kor
I agree. Khan was also pretty brutal in his methods of taking over the Enterprise. He asphyxiated the bridge and stuck Kirk into McCoy's decompression chamber. And not as last resorts, either. Hell, he even roughed up Marla McGivers a little, and he loved her.
I think the "no massacres" thing was either Khan propaganda or a reflection of the fragmentary records of the Eugenics Wars. Or maybe Khan was very discrete and his enemies just "disappeared" similar to how Mirror-Kirk's did.
I don't know. Maybe one of the planets was way far out in the system? Maybe there was some atmospheric interference that cloaked the ship's sensors? And for that matter, why did Khan's camp only read as one minor reading on one scanner?
It's a plot hole to be sure, but because TWOK works in practically every other aspect, we tend to forgive it.
That's it in a nutshell. Kirk, McCoy and Scotty have ambivalent feelings toward Khan -- something Spock finds it difficult to comprehend.
SCOTT: I must confess, gentlemen. I've always held a sneaking admiration for this one.
KIRK: He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous. They were supermen, in a sense. Stronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring.
SPOCK: Gentlemen, this romanticism about a ruthless dictator is
KIRK: Mister Spock, we humans have a streak of barbarism in us. Appalling, but there, nevertheless.
SCOTT: There were no massacres under his rule.
SPOCK: And as little freedom.
MCCOY: No wars until he was attacked.
SPOCK: Gentlemen . . .
KIRK: Mister Spock, you misunderstand us. We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.
EDIT: I see Uniderth quoted the same dialogue. Well, it bears repeating.
Last edited:
Kirk had to file a report (what do you think captain's logs are, for instance?). If the Federation didn't agree with his handling of the situation they could have sent a ship to pick him and his people up. So the fact he was left there is evidence enough that Kirk's choice was retroactively approved by the powers that be, either via rubber-stamp or some sort of committee hearing.
We never hear Kirk log his decision. And of course, Kirk is famous for never breaking the rules and fudging his reports.
Just ask Cochrane.
He's fictional.
He 'must' do what his writer says. Nothing more, nothing less.
Kirk being a big rule-breaker who constantly disobeys orders is more of a myth that comes from the movies than from TOS itself. I don't think that the Kirk we saw on TV actually disobeyed a direct order until "Amok Time," and there no less a personage than T'Pau went to bat for him. There were other occasions where he creatively interpreted his orders (like while searching for the shuttlecraft in "The Galileo Seven"), but most of the time, he followed orders and obeyed the rules.
I go into the question of how often Kirk may have omitted information from his log in this thread.
Similar threads
