• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Michael Burnham and the Klingon War

Oh yes, in The Vulcan Hello, Mike Burns is straight up obnoxious in her efforts to sweet talk her captain into going out there to examine the mystery firsthand. She is super argumentative with Phillipa and Saru, both of whom value forbearance.
You may forget that this was a Federation outpost which the Shenzhou had been sent to investigate. Saru, Georgiou, and Burnham all concluded that there was no way of completing their investigation using the ship's instruments and probes. They even resorted to using Georgiou's "ancient" telescope to see if they could view the problem.

Having failed in every effort to determine the nature of the problem, there really is no other choice than to have someone to physically go out to view the problem.
 
So they made a mess of things on Kronos, leaving a religious zealot with a bomb that can destroy the whole planet? Then walking away thinking they done right? :lol:

Not just thinking but actually delivering a speech congratulating themselves!

Even just a slight bit of dissent at the end, some ambiguity of emotion, would have helped tremendously, IMO.
 
So installing a dictator of your choosing to rule an empire, backed by a massively powerful weapon that can destroy a whole world, is in line with Federation values?

Better than genocide, I guess.
Given that if they hadn’t done anything the Federation would be destroyed, the Klingons would wipe out anything left before turning on each other resulting in trillions of deaths they didn’t have much of a choice. Some decisions are the right one just because it saves the most lives.
 
Not just thinking but actually delivering a speech congratulating themselves!

Even just a slight bit of dissent at the end, some ambiguity of emotion, would have helped tremendously, IMO.

It definitely sounds like the current USA. Going in and making a mess, then leaving and patting ourselves on the back for a job well done.

Not sure that was what the writers were really going for, but that is what they gave us.
 
So they made a mess of things on Kronos, leaving a religious zealot with a bomb that can destroy the whole planet? Then walking away thinking they done right? :lol:
It will probably come back to haunt them in future seasons. We should stop pretending that this is a decision that will never be mentioned again like on previous shows.
 
It will probably come back to haunt them in future seasons. We should stop pretending that this is a decision that will never be mentioned again like on previous shows.

They can't really do too much, because it is PRIME after all. There's less than eight years til "Errand of Mercy". Where everyone acts like it is the first time they've went toe-to-toe with the Klingons.
 
It definitely sounds like the current USA. Going in and making a mess, then leaving and patting ourselves on the back for a job well done.

Not sure that was what the writers were really going for, but that is what they gave us.
It probably was. Trek should criticize the current US, we need it.
 
They can't really do too much, because it is PRIME after all. There's less than eight years til "Errand of Mercy". Where everyone acts like it is the first time they've went toe-to-toe with the Klingons.
I really don’t care about canon on any level. I find the devotion to it cultlike.
 
It probably was. Trek should criticize the current US, we need it.

But they weren't really criticizing anything if they were all patting themselves on the back at the end. And the Klingons aren't supposed to be around for season two.
 
So i guess the real lesson is that Starfleet's values are malleable when times get tough.
No, the lesson is that Starfleet personnel, including leadership, none of whom are infallible, are malleable when times get tough. They were at war and facing extinction.
I'd actually have been interested in that story,
That's the story you got. :wtf:
 
Given that if they hadn’t done anything the Federation would be destroyed, the Klingons would wipe out anything left before turning on each other resulting in trillions of deaths they didn’t have much of a choice. Some decisions are the right one just because it saves the most lives.

But how does that affirm the Federation values? That's my point: There's a hypocrisy to this. What the story lectures us about -- standing tall for your values even when things are at their worst -- and what the story does just don't line up.

I'd have loved a shades-of-gray story that really tested the Federation values, but instead we get the Lorca reveal -- don't worry, he's not from here! -- and a painful awards ceremony.
 
They can't really do too much, because it is PRIME after all. There's less than eight years til "Errand of Mercy". Where everyone acts like it is the first time they've went toe-to-toe with the Klingons.

I never got the sense from "Errand of Mercy" that it was their first time fighting. I spent my entire time as a Trekkie thinking tension with Klingons in TOS was the norm. Not necessarily war, but tensions. Spock did say in Star Trek VI, "an end to almost 70 years of unremitting hostility the Klingons can no longer afford." And that movie came out the end of the same year I became a fan, and I started with the movies. I thought there were tensions all along and I thought it all along.

In fact, in "Errand of Mercy", when Kor found out who Kirk really was he was excited. Too excited! He said he hoped to see him in battle. And Kirk sounded very familiar with the Klingons and their ways when he was explaining to The Organians what the Klingons were like.

Hell, the territory the Klingons captured in DSC could very be well be the disputed areas still being argued about in "Errand of Mercy".
 
But they weren't really criticizing anything if they were all patting themselves on the back at the end. And the Klingons aren't supposed to be around for season two.
The problem with the present is that we can’t see the future.
oLnAxEE.jpg
 
No, the lesson is that Starfleet personnel, including leadership, none of whom are infallible, are malleable when times get tough. They were at war and facing extinction.

That's the story you got. :wtf:

That would have required introspection and self-awareness Discovery lacked, IMO.
 
Last edited:
So installing a dictator of your choosing to rule an empire, backed by a massively powerful weapon that can destroy a whole world, is in line with Federation values?

Better than genocide, I guess.

It'll do as long as you don't think your audience expects much. But yes, it's a stupid and thoughtless bit of plotting.

So they made a mess of things on Kronos, leaving a religious zealot with a bomb that can destroy the whole planet? Then walking away thinking they done right? :lol:

No one has yet come up with a respectable defense for this, have they?
 
The Klingons don't think like the Federation. Especially not in this time. They only respect power and strength. L'Rell had it with the bomb. It brought the 24 Houses in line quickly because none of them want Qo'noS destroyed.

But, eventually, someone probably will want to get their hands on it and depose L'Rell.

Now, this is the part where someone will try to tell me "Nope! Uh-uh!" Doesn't change the fact that the Klingons only respect strength.
 
So installing a dictator of your choosing to rule an empire, backed by a massively powerful weapon that can destroy a whole world, is in line with Federation values?

Better than genocide, I guess.
Those are the values that propelled the whole war arc. I think we have become too comfortable demonising the other side to even for one second consider they might have reason for their 'hatred'. Obviously the Klingons united for power and were spoiling for a fight, but the threat they saw in the Federation was in recognising the potential that this federation would put aside its values to win.
 
What really chaps me is that the writing at the end is calculated to cause the audience to cheer for their heroes and the vindication of their values. There's no complexity or self-reflection or suggestion that there will be consequences, so I think the authorial intent is pretty clear. TOS would have taken a more nuanced approach in 48 minutes.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top