Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x05 - "Choose Your Pain"

[Rahul]

Seriously:
How good would you feel about Marines leaving a civilian behind in the hands of ISIS, because he may have sold out some secrets to protect himself?

That's the level of inhumane behaviour you're arguing in favour for!

 

[Gonzo]

I totally agree. It's a time of war and Mudd was a traitor as far as Lorca had determined.

Maybe the old cliche thing to do would have been to smile, save him, and give him a stern lecture at the end of the episode...but last time I watched...DSC has been pretty good at avoiding Trek cliches.

Yeah Picard would have done that, this isn't TNG which for me is a great thing indeed.

Also lets say Lorca shoots him and then continues to escape with Tyler, they fight their way out as we saw in the episode but when Lorca comes to take the final shot against L'Ressa he is out of ammo, all because he fired that first round into Mudd.

Mudd will always see to his own safety and comfort first without exception, he would have sold Lorca out as soon as it suited him to do so, he practically said as much to Lorca while in the cell.

I am fine with his actions, they make perfect military sense.

 

[Vger23]

People will do anything to evade torture. All people. Even Picard. Tell stupid lies, sell out their friends. That really does not make them bad people. Everyone would do anything to evade this sort of torture.

I think there are many, many POW's who would disagree with you. Many of the stories you hear is how people persevered through horrible conditions and torture while remaining true to themselves and not betraying their country.

None of this justifies leaving him behind. In real life, the USA does everything to retrieve even deserters from terrorists.

O RLY??? Source??

 

[Ometiklan]

...Even Picard.

...Yes it is. Because it WOULDN'T take ane additional risks to tug him along! He is ALSO a POW! How hard is this to grasp? Both would do anything in this situation to evade. There is no way Mudd would betray his saviours during the act of saving him...

Not "even Picard". Yeah, eventually Picard broke as most people, even fictional ones, are likely to do. But Picard didn't do "anything he could" to avoid the torture. He didn't sell anyone out and stood up to it, defending what was right as long as he could. Mudd apparently rolled over from the start.

And it would be an additional risk: not only do you have to take along a civilian with no physical training and without the shared tactical training of Starfleet, but the minute there is a chance of recapture, Mudd would sell them out to get back on the good side of the Klingons. Of course he would betray them during the escape, if he thought they might fail.

 

[Vger23]

Seriously:
How good would you feel about Marines leaving a civilian behind in the hands of ISIS, because he may have sold out some secrets to protect himself?

That's the level of inhumane behaviour you're arguing in favour for!

There's a massive difference between "arguing in favor of inhumane behavior" and arguing that someone's actions were realistic and understandable.

But- we get your point. You have argued for the pure, clean, moral decision with regard to this show at every turn. But this ain't that kind of show. So...if you're so troubled...you should unsubscribe and stop torturing yourself.

 

[Gonzo]

I think there are many, many POW's who would disagree with you. Many of the stories you hear is how people persevered through horrible conditions and torture while remaining true to themselves and not betraying their country.




O RLY??? Source??

Indeed, also how do you know said prisoner hasn't been turned while in captivity, its a judgement call each time and has to be decided on its own individual merits, rather than an automatic save everyone mentality.

 

[Rahul]

You guys are horrible.

You know what you are argiung in favour for are war crimes?
And not even the little known ones, like "putting bombs on dead enemy soldiers to prey upon them when they are retrieving their dead". No. The real serious ones. Like leaving behind people for Torture and death for no apparent reason other than "they don't look trustworthy". Seriously. I can't believe I have to argue in favour of basic human rights. On a Star Trek forum no less.

 

[Vger23]

Not "even Picard". Yeah, eventually Picard broke as most people, even fictional ones, are likely to do. But Picard didn't do "anything he could" to avoid the torture. He didn't sell anyone out and stood up to it, defending what was right as long as he could. Mudd apparently rolled over from the start.

And it would be an additional risk: not only do you have to take along a civilian with no physical training and without the shared tactical training of Starfleet, but the minute there is a chance of recapture, Mudd would sell them out to get back on the good side of the Klingons. Of course he would betray them during the escape, if he thought they might fail.

Absolutely...it was an unacceptable risk given the severity of the situation. Mudd had proven to be a traitor, disloyal, and not to be trusted. He had essentially arranged to sell out his own "country."

Not someone you take with you in a life-or-death escape ruse.

 

[Longinus]

Maybe the old cliche thing to do would have been to smile, save him, and give him a stern lecture at the end of the episode...but last time I watched...DSC has been pretty good at avoiding Trek cliches and is far more realistic about portraying realistic human behavior.

Why 'realistic human behaviour' always needs to equal 'being an evil arsehole?' You must have pretty pessimistic view of humanity.

 

[Vger23]

You guys are horrible.

You know what you are argiung in favour for are war crimes?
And not even the little known ones, like "putting bombs on dead enemy soldiers to prey upon them when they are retrieving their dead". No. The real serious ones. Like leaving behind people for Torture and death for no apparent reason other than "they don't look trustworthy". Seriously. I can't believe I have to argue in favour of basic human rights. On a Star Trek forum no less.

Get over yourself, bro. Seriously...nobody's giving you the White Knight award today.

Put it to rest for a few hours. Maybe go for a light jog and eat some yogurt??

 

[Mudd]

You guys are horrible.

You know what you are argiung in favour for are war crimes?

Beneath it all, what people are really arguing in favor of is not having to hear valid criticism of a TV show that they like. No one's supposed to discuss or have opinions of what the characters in Star Trek do now, or whether the show is well-written or not, unless those opinions are dully adulatory.

Let that one sink in.

 

[Rahul]

There's a massive difference between "arguing in favor of inhumane behavior" and arguing that someone's actions were realistic and understandable.

But- we get your point. You have argued for the pure, clean, moral decision with regard to this show at every turn. But this ain't that kind of show. So...if you're so troubled...you should unsubscribe and stop torturing yourself.

This was not a situation where someone had to weigh "moral highground" versus "own survival". This is a situation where the basic rules of engagement apply. And how to treat hostages of a terrorist organisation.

The "realistic and understandable" course of action in this case would be to follow International law and the rules of engagement, which real life armies operate under. What was shown (and what you are arguing in favour for) is the logic terror organisations operate under. "You weren't helpful? Suck it, we leave you to torture and death!"

 

[Vger23]

Why 'realistic human behaviour' always needs to equal 'being an evil arsehole?' You must have pretty pessimistic view of humanity.

Being optimistic and idealistic doesn't equate with survival. Being realistic and pragmatic does. Just because it doesn't equate to your values and morales doesn't mean it's "evil asshole" time.

And war is a game of survival. Pure and simple.

I have a fine view of humanity, thank you. It's realistic. It's not rose-colored. It's not doom-and-gloom. I always find it pleasant when people get all high-and-mighty about what is morally and ethically correct twhen they themselves have likely never been tested in the way the characters they criticize are being tested.

Easy to question the play calling when you're sitting on your couch, drinking a Natty Ice and eating nachos. Hard to call plays on 3rd and 8, down by 6, in a rival's stadium with your best player injured though.

 

[Longinus]

Frankly, I will be Ok with the depiction of Lorca, if this setting him up as the villain of the show. But it is indeed pretty disheartening to see all the people jumping to defend his heinous actions.

 

[ichab]

You didn't. But you blame Mudd for things he did to evade torture. As I said: People will do anything to evade torture. All people.
Even Picard.

You need to rewatch Chain of Command because Picard didn't break. That was the entire point of the episode.

Tell stupid lies, sell out their friends. That really does not make them bad people. Everyone would do anything to evade this sort of torture.

No not EVERYONE would. If you really believe that, go back and watch ,if you can find them, all those videos of american captives being beheaded. Tell me how many were saying to their captors before hand "Don't kill me! I know things that you can find valuable." Many POWs throughout history endured torture without becoming a traitor to tgeir country.

Case in point: What if the situation would have been reversed?

Then the captain would have saved Mudd and probably shot Tyler because the penalty for treason is death.

Yes it is. Because it WOULDN'T have taken any additional risks to tug him along!

Yes it would have. You can't trust him with a phaser. You can't trust him to not turn his back on you. You can't trust him in the event you're captured again...

He is ALSO a POW! How hard is this to grasp?

Who has already betrayed starfleet. How hard is that to grasp?

Both would do anything in this situation to evade.

You keep saying this, but none of us really know the answer to that.

 

[Vger23]

This was not a situation where someone had to weigh "moral highground" versus "own survival". This is a situation where the basic rules of engagement apply. And how to treat hostages of a terrorist organisation.

The "realistic and understandable" course of action in this case would be to follow International law and the rules of engagement, which real life armies operate under. What was shown (and what you are arguing in favour for) is the logic terror organisations operate under. "You weren't helpful? Suck it, we leave you to torture and death!"

No, that is incorrect and nowhere did I say that.

It has NOTHING to do with being helpful. It has everything to do with the fact that the moment Mudd sold out the Federation and the Starfleet prisoners, he was the enemy. He was not a friend.

 

[Vger23]

Frankly, I will be Ok with the depiction of Lorca, if this setting him up as the villain of the show. But it is indeed pretty disheartening to see all the people jumping to defend his heinous actions.

Better be prepared for further disheartening, then.

 

[Myko]

Leaving him with the Klingons to be tortured and possibly killed, or taking him along, putting him in the Discovery's brig and then in Federation prison. It's pretty easy to see which one of these are morally superior, and with very little added risk.

 

[Rahul]

Being optimistic and idealistic doesn't equate with survival. Being realistic and pragmatic does. Just because it doesn't equate to your values and morales doesn't mean it's "evil asshole" time.

And war is a game of survival. Pure and simple.

I have a fine view of humanity, thank you. It's realistic. It's not rose-colored. It's not doom-and-gloom. I always find it pleasant when people get all high-and-mighty about what is morally and ethically correct twhen they themselves have likely never been tested in the way the characters they criticize are being tested.

Easy to question the play calling when you're sitting on your couch, drinking a Natty Ice and eating nachos. Hard to call plays on 3rd and 8, down by 6, in a rival's stadium with your best player injured though.

The "humans are always evil and selfishness"-type of cynicism is at least as flawed as the "humans are always perfect beings" thinking. Both are wrong. The reality is somewhere in the middle.

 

[Vger23]

Leaving him with the Klingons to be tortured and possibly killed, or taking him along, putting him in the Discovery's brig and then in Federation prison. It's pretty easy to see which one of these are morally superior, and with very little added risk.

I don't disagree that taking him along would be "morally superior." Of COURSE it would be.

But I CERTAINLY challenge your thought that there would be "very little added risk." I think that is massively naive.