Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 4x07 - "…But to Connect"

[nic3636]

The thing I liked most about this episode is that in both stories the choice to be made wasn't clear cut. Destroying the DMA is completely justifiable given the damage it's caused and the people it's killed. When you are dealing with something that can wipe out a planet in seconds, maybe the best course of action is to eliminate the threat ASAP and deal with any fallout afterwards, especially considering there's no guarantee diplomacy will work. What if first contact fails and they have to use the weapon anyways, but the DMA destroyed Earth in the meantime?

Same thing with Zora, extracting her is also a justifiable move given the circumstances. Starfleet had that regulation around sentient AIs not running starships for good reason and they were only able to sidestep that on a technicality that isn't really in line with the intention of the regulation. Allowing Zora to continue running the ship (which is still the only ship under control of Starfleet with a spore drive) requires a lot of trust and carries some degree of risk. I could easily see Starfleet brass considering that an unacceptable risk.

Both stories weren't original, a version of each has been done before (but what hasn't been done before these days?). But I still found both stories thought provoking. I've been critical of Discovery's writing staff in the past (particularly during S3), but I will give credit where it's due. This was excellent writing!

 

[Precious Tritium]

So if Zora's going to become a member of Starfleet, is she gonna need to get a crash course of Academy training? Is that how they're gonna bring Tilly back later this season?

 

[valkyrie013]

Waiting for Zora to create a holographic interface. Ala andromeda.. Have her go on away missions..

 

[JoaquinSlowly]

Although I am glad the Zora scenario worked out, I don't know that some of the arguments from the crew on her behalf were very convincing. I especially found the idea that any crew member can turn rogue to be kind of a silly counter. Even a powerhouse like Saru can be subdued or killed if necessary and thus limit casualties. If Zora wanted to kill the crew, there would be very little the crew could do.

I would argue that every StarFleet Captain has the authority to initiate a self destruct sequence of their vessel, giving them the same kind of power over the entirety of a ship and its passengers.

 

[Romulan_spy]

maybe the best course of action is to eliminate the threat ASAP and deal with any fallout afterwards, especially considering there's no guarantee diplomacy will work.

And if the fallout is 10-C retaliates by sending 20 DMAs? That would be much worse than just 1 DMA. How would Starfleet stop 20 DMAs sent on purpose to wipe out the Federation? And if you do destroy the DMA, you can't try diplomacy later. No, there is no guarantee that diplomacy works but if it doesn't work, you can always fallback to destroying the DMA. But if diplomacy does work, then you are good. So the logical course of action is to try diplomacy first.

 

[Amaris]

"It feels wonderful."
"What does?"
"To be seen."


8/10.
Lovely.

 

[IMC Headquarters]

Damn I was really hoping to see an Ocampa representative above all others.

 

[StarMan]

Damn I was really hoping to see an Ocampa representative above all others.

They were behind The Butterfly people beside The Founders, Vorta, Voth, Hirogen, Talaxians and Klingons.

 

[Noname Given]

Couldn’t they do both plans? Make contact and if that fails, use the weapon.

That seemed to be what they were going for. Nobody took using the weapon off the table entirely, they just said let's try diplomacy first and if that fails then we have other options.

What Burnham did with the Klingons (I was happy Book brought up during their discussion); she took the action she did because she was aware of aspects of Klingon culture. However given the current situation, they know nothing about the species that created the DMA, culturally or otherwise, so it makes sense to try and start with diplomacy and first contact and see where it goes.

 

[nic3636]

And if the fallout is 10-C retaliates by sending 20 DMAs? That would be much worse than just 1 DMA. How would Starfleet stop 20 DMAs sent on purpose to wipe out the Federation? And if you do destroy the DMA, you can't try diplomacy later. No, there is no guarantee that diplomacy works but if it doesn't work, you can always fallback to destroying the DMA. But if diplomacy does work, then you are good. So the logical course of action is to try diplomacy first.

I assume Starfleet would stop 20 DMAs the same way they stopped one. Just load a bunch of those explosives on Discovery and jump around destroying them one by one. I also don't agree that destroying the DMA precludes diplomacy. Whoever created the DMA is still responsible for the damage it causes, whether they realize the damage is happening or not. The creators of the DMA might be not be happy someone destroyed it but any reasonable species would understand that reaction given the circumstances and might use diplomacy to end the conflict.

There are unknowns and risks no matter what, but the only way to ensure this DMA doesn't kill anyone else is to destroy it immediately.

 

[Romulan_spy]

I assume Starfleet would stop 20 DMAs the same way they stopped one.

Not before a few DMAs destroy entire planets.

I also don't agree that destroying the DMA precludes diplomacy. Whoever created the DMA is still responsible for the damage it causes, whether they realize the damage is happening or not. The creators of the DMA might be not be happy someone destroyed it but any reasonable species would understand that reaction given the circumstances and might use diplomacy to end the conflict.

You are assuming the DMA creators are reasonable and will totally understand why Starfleet destroyed their DMA. We don't know that. We can't make that assumption. It is more likely that they will take it as an act of war, which it is, and declare all out war against the Federation. If they are so powerful that they can create something like a DMA, it is likely they could squash the Federation like a bug.

There are unknowns and risks no matter what, but the only way to ensure this DMA doesn't kill anyone else is to destroy it immediately.

Yes, there are unknowns. That is why diplomacy is the right move. Starfleet should try to learn as much about 10-C as possible to remove some of those unknowns. And destroying the DMA is not the only way to stop it from killing anyone else. Diplomacy might also work to stop the DMA from killing anyone else.

 

[Turtletrekker]

One hand outstretched in friendship, and the other clasping the sword behind one's back.

Diplomacy!

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

 

[fireproof78]

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

We come in peace; shoot to kill.

Speak softly and carry a big phaser bank.

 

[nic3636]

Not before a few DMAs destroy entire planets.

Not necessarily, it depends on how long it takes for Discovery to launch the weapon. Also given the size and scope of the DMA, its creators probably can't launch 20 of them at the same time on a whim. I assume it takes some time to build them.

You are assuming the DMA creators are reasonable and will totally understand why Starfleet destroyed their DMA. We don't know that. We can't make that assumption.

Yeah, but you also need to assume the DMA creators are reasonable for diplomacy to work in the first place.

It is more likely that they will take it as an act of war, which it is, and declare all out war against the Federation.

The DMA committed the act of war when it destroyed Kwejan and killed billions of people, this is self defense.

If they are so powerful that they can create something like a DMA, it is likely they could squash the Federation like a bug.

And in those types of situations it can be good to use every advantage you have and show strength.

Yes, there are unknowns. That is why diplomacy is the right move. Starfleet should try to learn as much about 10-C as possible to remove some of those unknowns. And destroying the DMA is not the only way to stop it from killing anyone else. Diplomacy might also work to stop the DMA from killing anyone else.

Might is the key word. The only way to be certain is to destroy it immediately.

 

[SG-17]

With all the talk about Voyager, I think it's going to have a role in Season 4.5. I think it'll be the backup to the Discovery like the Excelsior was the backup to the Enterprise in TUC.

I really hope The Doctor is the captain if we get more of Voyager-J.

And the Backup Doctor the CMO.



Also I wonder if the other universe that Tarka and his partner found was the Kelvinverse? IIRC the TV/Movie divide is no longer an issue with Star Trek.

 

[Romulan_spy]

Not necessarily, it depends on how long it takes for Discovery to launch the weapon. Also given the size and scope of the DMA, its creators probably can't launch 20 of them at the same time on a whim. I assume it takes some time to build them.

Yeah, but you also need to assume the DMA creators are reasonable for diplomacy to work in the first place.

The DMA committed the act of war when it destroyed Kwejan and killed billions of people, this is self defense.

And in those types of situations it can be good to use every advantage you have and show strength.

Might is the key word. The only way to be certain is to destroy it immediately.

If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. So I just don't see the downside of trying diplomacy. If diplomacy works, you win. If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. Win-Win. But if you destroy the DMA first, there is only a downside as the DMA Creators will likely retaliate.

 

[thribs]

they could, but those in favor of using the weapon wanted to do so immediately as every second that goes by increases the chances of the next planet getting destroyed and billions dying.

Give Discovery a time limit then. They have a certain amount of time to make contact. If not they will use the weapon

 

[nic3636]

If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. So I just don't see the downside of trying diplomacy. If diplomacy works, you win. If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. Win-Win. But if you destroy the DMA first, there is only a downside as the DMA Creators will likely retaliate.

The downside of trying diplomacy is that it takes time and every second the DMA is allowed to continue increases the risk of a planet (or multiple planets) getting destroyed.

If diplomacy fails you may no longer be able to destroy the DMA. Currently the creators of the DMA may not even be aware a threat to it exists. Once you reveal yourself to make contact you lose some element of surprise. So what if the creators of the DMA don't want to stop using it and do the equivalent of raising its shields, making it completely impenetrable? Then using the weapon is no longer an option and you are completely helpless.

 

[fireproof78]

If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. So I just don't see the downside of trying diplomacy. If diplomacy works, you win. If diplomacy fails, you can still destroy the DMA. Win-Win. But if you destroy the DMA first, there is only a downside as the DMA Creators will likely retaliate.

The downside is time. Do they have the time before more lives are lost?

 

[ToddCam]

I would argue that every StarFleet Captain has the authority to initiate a self destruct sequence of their vessel, giving them the same kind of power over the entirety of a ship and its passengers.

This is true to an extent. And I actually thought about this in considering the idea Zora was in the chain of command. But for the most part, a captain has been (presumed; obviously there are holes) cleared to be of sound mind enough to have such authority. And, other than on VGR, I think all self-destruct sequences required multiple authorizations, not just some random captain declaring herself arbiter of death for a large group of people. Any other actions would have failsafes, as well as a crew working to monitor the ship to make sure it's functioning normally.

The key difference is checks (effective or not). Other than trust, there is no check against Zora. If Zora decided to reject her role as a member of the crew and decide it was her will that should rule, they'd be at her mercy. Zora decides to kill the crew? She just purges the atmosphere (one of the things I thought was crazy last season was having a fire suppression system that just vents the Jeffries tubes into space) and opens the airlocks, turns off all consoles so no one can override her through those, puts up forcefields between sections, and send out DOTs to attack the people who physically try to damage the ship's components before they pass out from air loss. She can spew anesthetic or poisonous gas, screw with the heat, turn off gravity and light, and probably any number of things to slow down any die-hards. Unlike with Burnham or another crewmember, she is not really affected by the conditions she imparts, so it wouldn't be a potential suicide mission if she doesn't want it to be. And if she did, do all that and warp into a star.

This is not to say I thought they were wrong to have trusted Zora. I think trust was the way to go. I just think comparing her power vs. any other crewperson is not a good argument.