Starfleet General Order 24.
I rest my case. A real order at that time in Starfleet history or just a ruse to trick the Eminian High Council, that was some savage stuff to drop on that world's leaders.
We could've had the First Asian Female Captain, but no....
- Thread starter Kamen Rider Blade
- Start date
Starfleet General Order 24.
I rest my case. A real order at that time in Starfleet history or just a ruse to trick the Eminian High Council, that was some savage stuff to drop on that world's leaders.
Sisko?
Really?
We throw around the label "war criminal" in these threads like some other posters toss around gifs and cat memes. And sometimes the usage is just as ridiculous and worthy of laughter.
He participated in a criminal conspiracy to murder a foreign diplomat in order to trick said foreign power into a war. He also used biological weapons against a human settlement.Sisko?
Really?
We throw around the label "war criminal" in these threads like some other posters toss around gifs and cat memes. And sometimes the usage is just as ridiculous and worthy of laughter.
Unsavory and very regrettable decisions to say the least. But I don't know if I'd label Benjamin Sisko a bona fide war criminal based on two acts in a career that lasted two decades and saw far more victories and moments of celebration than drink-inducing moments of regret during the recording of a Captain's Log.
Yeah, what he did was arguably terrible. But if Senator Vreenak - a genuine asshole and a man who was no fan of Starfleet nor the Federation - had to die so that the Alpha Quadrant could win the worst war in recent interstellar history and save not only the democratic institutions of the Federation but also bring it, the Klingons and the Romulans closer together in a shared sacrifice that could make the entire quadrant more stable and peaceful in the long run then, you know what, I guess you can label Ben Sisko a war criminal. Whatever that means in the context of 24th century Starfleet and Federation law.
I'd feel bad, too, if I did what he did because I'm not someone who regards the taking of another life cavalierly, but sometimes far greater things are at stake than one man's discomfort over an authoritarian official's demise. Vreenak was no friend of the Federation nor of the Allied war effort and was just as willing to sign a peace treaty or even align the Romulan Star Empire with the Dominion if he saw it in the best interests of his people. Ben Sisko acted in a very unpleasant and morally questionable manner that should have bothered his conscience, but was he a man who should have been brought up on war crimes charges?
Debatable. Very debatable.
Yeah, what he did was arguably terrible. But if Senator Vreenak - a genuine asshole and a man who was no fan of Starfleet nor the Federation - had to die so that the Alpha Quadrant could win the worst war in recent interstellar history and save not only the democratic institutions of the Federation but also bring it, the Klingons and the Romulans closer together in a shared sacrifice that could make the entire quadrant more stable and peaceful in the long run then, you know what, I guess you can label Ben Sisko a war criminal. Whatever that means in the context of 24th century Starfleet and Federation law.
I'd feel bad, too, if I did what he did because I'm not someone who regards the taking of another life cavalierly, but sometimes far greater things are at stake than one man's discomfort over an authoritarian official's demise. Vreenak was no friend of the Federation nor of the Allied war effort and was just as willing to sign a peace treaty or even align the Romulan Star Empire with the Dominion if he saw it in the best interests of his people. Ben Sisko acted in a very unpleasant and morally questionable manner that should have bothered his conscience, but was he a man who should have been brought up on war crimes charges?
Debatable. Very debatable.
It depends how literally we are applying modern standards. Use of biological weapons is near automatically considered a war crime, rest of career notwithstanding. Use of conventional weapons to kill, maim, displace and starve is oddly not. So how the 24th century interprets things is hard to predict.
Well, it's easy to be a saint in paradise. In other words, it's easy to preach morality and remain ethical yourself when aren't being limited to choosing between unconscionable alternatives. Sure, immersing the character in a trolley problem is the choice of the writers, but that's the standard we're asked to judge the character by. Sisko always chose the lesser of two evils. A real war criminal is someone who commits evil when their survival is not at stake and for example commits the crime for purely ideological reasons. Sisko only did what he was convinced was necessary for the cause of Federation survival.
And that's the big real difference with Sisko - he was written to face scenarios where there wasn't the easy 'out' or obviously correct choice that Picard was often presented with. DS9 writers didn't usually let him tech the tech and make everyone happy, or give a Kirk Speech and convince everyone. So he had to make choices between shit options. It's the 20th anniversary of In the Pale Moonlight, which simultaneously makes me feel really old (I still think of anything with the STFC uniform in it as 'new Trek') and also quite proud that the episode still holds up like it does. It presents Sisko with a version of the I, Borg dilemma, using underhand tactics to beat an enemy. But it ratchets up the stakes by making the enemy a real, present and immediate threat - Sisko faces the imminent possibility of defeat. Picard never faced annihilation because of his choice to be moral. It was all about what ifs and maybes.
Now I'm not saying he made the right choice, and I would disagree with anyone who thought his choice was presented as easy, but I love that the episode presented such a meaty problem to chew on for two decades. It (along with I, Borg actually) remains a favourite of mine. I prefer Star Trek to present difficult problems, not sanctimonious moral lessons.
Sounds like RL American, French and British foreign policy
Vreenak would have the Federation burn in hell and be extinct, as long as the Dominion left Romulus alone
Ultimately, the writers let Sisko off the hook by having Garak set up the assassination of the ambassador without Sisko knowing about it.
That's actually a pretty good point. Even if it WAS just a ruse, I'm in agreement with the proposition that it is immoral to threaten that which it would be immoral to actually do.
It's pure fanwank that GO 24 was a ruse. There's literally zero evidence in "A Taste of Armageddon" that it was a ruse, and everybody to a person acted like it was the real deal all the time. See also "Whom Gods Destroy."
... where Garth's crew mutinied over him ordering exactly this? That's one point in favor of the "ruse" theory.
Besides, it's the wording of the order that kind of makes it suspicious. It's unlikely Starfleet has a GENERAL ORDER that compels them to glass entire planets just because they won't return their hostages; that happens to Starfleet practically every month, and that order -- or even the threat of it -- has never been mentioned or even implied to be on the books.
For all we know "General Order 24" is the name of a famous academy simulation involving exactly this sort of bluff.
I don't think so.
This is indisputably true.
Fans need to dump the preposterous notion that if a thing is canon it is either consistent with other parts of canon or can be made so without considerable equivocation or invention.
General Order 24 was presented as a valid, real Starfleet regulation. No one in the episode suggested otherwise.
It was contradicted, at least by implication, in several later episodes. There is a simple contradiction there which remains no matter what people make up.
Plugging contradictions is kind of our thing, though.
Neither do the Vanguard novels
I can see a case for GO 24. When you can't save two planets from a destructive death spiral, you can maybe save one by blowing up the other. Doesn't apply to the situation Kirk was actually in, though, which was stable. Might have applied in "Patterns of Force."
Perhaps. And I want Federation to be better than that.
This is not about morals of Vreenak. It is actually still immortal to kill nasty people. Besides, I'm sure he was acting the best interests of the Romulan people in mind, just like a senators should (even if we might disagree with his assessment of the situation.)
As well made episode 'In the Pale Moonlight' is (unlike 'Damage') I still not like the ultimate conclusion or the message, and it pretty much ruined Sisko's character for me, especially as he never suffered any repercussions for it. I would have preferred a follow up episode where the Romulans eventually learn what happened and the situation blows on Federation's face. (There of course should have been some out, instead of allied Romulans and Dominion just destroying the Federation. It should have probably involved Federation somehow regaining the Romulan's trust, preferably via some great personal sacrifice by Sisko.)
Nope.
Similar threads
