The age of the antihero

[O_Kav]

T'Kuvma (enemy or not) was defending himself.

So, T'Kuvma was on the defensive ? Why did he destroy a Federation relay inside Federation Territory in the first place ? When the Federation went there to investigate, why did he deploy an armed warrior to attack a Federation officer ?

You can't just barge in someone else's territory, break their stuff, welcome them with a Bat'leth, start randomly firing at them and claim you were on the defensive the whole time. The Klingons were the aggressors, that's crystal clear.

 

[EnderAKH]

A man goes into someone's house and kills a family. The police pursue him to his own house where he takes shelter. The police enter the house and in the midst of a gun fight, kill him. Technically, I guess, you could say he was merely defending himself, but there is certainly no culpability with the police for entering his home and ending his life. They were there to apprehend him, and defended themselves.

 

[Ovation]

How could anyone miss that it was Georgiou and Burnham who booby trapped the dead, beamed themselves amongst the enemy and tried to take one of them captive? They put themselves there. Burnham killed one of them. That scenario was of their making and from Burnham and Georgiou's aggression.

A completely justified aggressive action, from a motivational standpoint, in response to the initiation of hostilities by the invading Klingons, under T’Kuvma’s explicit orders (the suitability of the specific actions can be debated, but the justification for attacking an invader is clear).

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

T'Kuvma (enemy or not) was defending himself. Two Federation officers were on his ship trying to take him. What was he supposed to do? Of course he saw it as an attack.

It was an attack. A counter-attack. Why do you keep ignoring the context of everything that had taken place up to that point? T'Kuvma attacked first. He invaded Federation space. He tampered with Federation equipment. He called all the other Klingons there and rallied them to war with the Federation. He was offered the chance to retreat or open a dialogue with the Feds. Instead, he ordered the first shot to be fired, kicking off the whole battle. He also was the one who ordered the cleave ship to ram the Europa. He also killed Georgiou. They were at war. What do you think happens in war? Attacking and killing enemy combatants. Unless they surrender, in which case you take them captive. That's how it works.

I can see the argument that booby trapping a body and attacking while they were collecting their dead might be a violation of the rules of war as we know them today. But that wouldn't always have been so in the past, and might not be so in the future. We know their definition of mutiny has changed from today, for example. And they never said the Geneva Conventions are still in effect. (Again, the Geneva Protocol of 1928 only relates to use of biological and chemical weapons.) Indeed, it is unlikely there is any such agreement in effect between the UFP and Klingon Empire given the history described to us. And besides, even outside of the context of war, Burnham's killing of T'Kuvma is justifiable given what was going on right then and there in the moment. There is certainly room to question the ethics of the situation, but the idea that T'Kuvma somehow comes out the victim on balance? Highly dubious IMO.

-MMoM

 

[Ovation]

T’Kuvma as “victim”, in the context of what was portrayed onscreen, is not really open to interpretation. It is a categorical error.

 

[Refuge]

T'Kuvma is dead, you can't be more of a victim than that. Burnham killed him because her and her stupid Captain tried to capture him and failed.

 

[Refuge]

And his actions were not provocative? What were Burnham and Georgiou supposed to do? It's not that they are not responsible for their actions but their actions were appropriate for the situation and justifiable in an act of war.

I disagree. Their actions were ineffective, made the situation worse and did not work. They were not actually appropriate.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

T'Kuvma is dead, you can't be more of a victim than that.

So what about Georgiou and all the other people T'Kuvma killed?

 

[Refuge]

So what about Georgiou and all the other people T'Kuvma killed?

You do realise that Georgiou and Burnham planned to capture T'Kuvma alive right? They had a plan. They initiated this plan. They put themselves in a position where their intended captive... wait for it... might have tried to fight them off. Come on, do they not bear any ownership of any risk? Of having a dumb arse plan? They put themselves there albeit to counter attack, or demoralise the enemy by taking their leader. They beamed themselves right into that situation. Of course when Georgiou died she became a victim too, but hate him or not, T'Kuvma was also a casualty. Burnham killed him and gave his supporters more reason to hate.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

You are just being silly now. T'Kuvma had a plan and put himself there, too. He intentionally brought them all there, Klingons and Feds. Those dead they were gathering? They all got that way because of him. He started the war that he became a casualty of, deliberately. Everyone who died in that battle died because of him; he initiated all of it. T'Kuvma killed a whole bunch of people. It's got nothing to do with "hating" him. That's what happened. From what you say, it really seems like you didn't even watch the whole story that led up to that ending.

The very first words from the very first moment of "The Vulcan Hello" (DSC)...

T'KUVMA: "They are coming."

-MMoM

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I have issues with the way DSC has done things, but I try to confine myself to criticizing only what's actually on the show. At least, I try to....

 

[Refuge]

Really it was a dumb plan (Gergiou's and Burnham's) and that is what was silly.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Really it was a dumb plan (Gergiou's and Burnham's) and that is what was silly.

That's an entirely fair debate to have. They definitely made some questionable decisions; I think so too. The idea that T'Kuvma was an innocent victim who was just defending himself against their aggression, however...is utter nonsense.

-MMoM

 

[Refuge]

Hmmm.. And here I thought the drama was handling a situation as a crew, to do the right thing, and ignore those based impulses while solving issues. That's what I got from both TOS and TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT series

Yes I agree, it seemed to be better handled with other series.

 

[Refuge]

That's an entirely fair debate to have. They definitely made some questionable decisions; I think so too. The idea that T'Kuvma was an innocent victim who was just defending himself against their aggression, however...is utter nonsense.

-MMoM

Who said he was innocent? He was however defending himself when Georgiou and Burnham tried to capture him.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Who said he was innocent? He was however defending himself when Georgiou and Burnham tried to capture him.

You certainly seem to be implying that Georgiou and Burnham are somehow guiltier of something (?) than he is. It was a legitimate aim to try to take him prisoner, and to kill him when that became unfeasible. Whether they made poor decisions in how they went about it or not, T'Kuvma wasn't a "victim" of anything but his own schemes, in the end.

-MMoM

 

[Satron]

There wasn't the time or the resources available to do so. Picard's assimilation was reversible, because the ship was (relatively) at peace, and wasn't half assimilated with Borg drones swarming all over the place.

Sloane saw through Picard's justification that there's nothing they could do to help them after he lost his shit and pumped them full with bullets screaming like a madman. She saw that he wasn't acting rationally.

 

[Satron]

So what about Georgiou and all the other people T'Kuvma killed?

A situation which could have been avoided had the Shenzhou withdrawn as Captain Georgiou wanted. With the Shenzhou gone terrorist leader T'Kuvma wouldn't have had anything to rally any of the Houses behind him. T'Kuvma was the aggressor, but his war plans would have died then and there if Burnham hadn't done everything she could to convince Georgiou to stay.

 

[Satron]

You certainly seem to be implying that Georgiou and Burnham are somehow guiltier of something (?) than he is. It was a legitimate aim to try to take him prisoner, and to kill him when that became unfeasible. Whether they made poor decisions in how they went about it or not, T'Kuvma wasn't a "victim" of anything but his own schemes, in the end.

-MMoM

Through their actions they turned this insignificant terrorist leader into a martyr for a new Klingon period of aggression. Which is something Georgiou and Burnham tried desperately to avoid. When their plan turned to shit Burnham snapped, lost her logic and made herself the final cause for the escalation.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

A situation which could have been avoided had the Shenzhou withdrawn as Captain Georgiou wanted. With the Shenzhou gone terrorist leader T'Kuvma wouldn't have had anything to rally any of the Houses behind him. T'Kuvma was the aggressor, but his war plans would have died then and there if Burnham hadn't done everything she could to convince Georgiou to stay.

(I presume you are talking about after the battle. Before the battle, the Shenzhou wasn't going to withdraw; Anderson ordered them to hold their position there and do nothing until the fleet arrived. Burnham's mutiny failed and she had no effect on anything.)

No, that isn't accurate. What Georgiou was going to do before Burnham suggested they try taking T'Kuvma alive was have the Shenzhou withdraw while she alone piloted a worker bee loaded with torpedoes on a suicide mission to destroy the sarcophagus ship, killing herself and T'Kuvma (along with everyone else on board). And we had seen that the Houses had already rallied around him and taken word of their victory back to Qo'noS. So the outcome would not have changed at all.

Through their actions they turned this insignificant terrorist leader into a martyr for a new Klingon period of aggression. Which is something Georgiou and Burnham tried desperately to avoid.

And it proved to be unavoidable.

When their plan turned to shit Burnham snapped, lost her logic and made herself the final cause for the escalation.

I don't agree. Again, the escalation had already happened by that point, with the battle itself. The war was not going to end there in any case. And the evidence doesn't support Burnham "snapping" to my assessment. (When she tried to mutiny, sure. But again, that had no effect on anything.) She had no choice but to kill T'Kuvma if she wanted to have any chance of saving Georgiou. (The fact that there was no chance of saving her anyway was tragic, but Burnham could not have known that when she made the choice to fire.) Even if she had coldly decided to let Georgiou die and tried to follow through with taking T'Kuvma alive by herself, it's uncertain as to whether she would have succeeded, as Voq was still alive and more Klingons were on their way. It's just as likely Burnham would have been captured or killed herself.

-MMoM