Spoilers Does the Strange New World’s Finale Justify Discovery’s Premiere?

[Sci]

how could Pike staying on as captain of the Enterprise have anything to do with the choice of Romulan praetor? The Romulans and the Federation had no contact with each other, in either timeline, until the BoT incident.

The Tal Shiar might have been monitoring developments in Starfleet without the UFP being aware. If Pike had a reputation as a great diplomat, I could imagine a scenario where a nationalist faction seizes upon that fact to drum up support and take the praetorship.

 

[Christopher]

The Tal Shiar might have been monitoring developments in Starfleet without the UFP being aware. If Pike had a reputation as a great diplomat, I could imagine a scenario where a nationalist faction seizes upon that fact to drum up support and take the praetorship.

Except the Enterprise isn't the only ship in Starfleet, and it was probably just by chance that it happened to be in range of the border outposts when they were attacked. Remember the Commander's line to his subordinate in "Balance" -- "The Earth outpost called to an Earth vessel." That tells us that they didn't know about the "Earth vessel" until they picked up that distress call. And the crew was still uncertain that it was there at all, believing it was just a sensor echo. So they clearly did not have advance knowledge that the Enterprise was in the region. Indeed, they would've been stupid to attack if they had known it was there. The same is presumably true in the "Quality of Mercy" version.

Looking at it from outside the perspective of a TV show where everything revolves around the main characters, isn't it more logical that the Romulan government and military leaders would base their decisions on who the Federation President is, or who the Commanding Admiral of Starfleet is, rather than just one of its many captains?

 

[Sci]

Except the Enterprise isn't the only ship in Starfleet, and it was probably just by chance that it happened to be in range of the border outposts when they were attacked. Remember the Commander's line to his subordinate in "Balance" -- "The Earth outpost called to an Earth vessel." That tells us that they didn't know about the "Earth vessel" until they picked up that distress call. And the crew was still uncertain that it was there at all, believing it was just a sensor echo. So they clearly did not have advance knowledge that the Enterprise was in the region. Indeed, they would've been stupid to attack if they had known it was there. The same is presumably true in the "Quality of Mercy" version.

Looking at it from outside the perspective of a TV show where everything revolves around the main characters, isn't it more logical that the Romulan government and military leaders would base their decisions on who the Federation President is, or who the Commanding Admiral of Starfleet is, rather than just one of its many captains?

Ah, but it's been established that the 1701 is the flagship of the fleet, so it would appear that being commanding officer of the Enterprise is already a high-level assignment as of the 2250s. I could imagine a scenario where the Tal Shiar is aware of Pike's reputation even if the Romulans didn't know that it would be the Enterprise that would respond to their attack on the outposts.

 

[Christopher]

Ah, but it's been established that the 1701 is the flagship of the fleet

Which is a nonsensical, vaguely defined notion that wasn't introduced until TNG and thus should not apply to the TOS ship, despite Strange New Worlds regrettably using it that way.

Although it could sort of make sense if Pike were already a Fleet Captain, because the term "flagship" should properly mean the ship on which the commander of a larger fleet is based. Perhaps the E was the "flagship" under Pike's command but not under Kirk's, because Kirk was a younger captain with less seniority.

, so it would appear that being commanding officer of the Enterprise is already a high-level assignment as of the 2250s.

But I still say it's insular thinking to assume everything in galactic politics has to revolve around the characters we watch on the show, rather than around people in the actual Federation government or Starfleet Command. Even a "flagship" captain (ugh) is much lower in the hierarchy than any of them, so it doesn't make objective sense to assume that governments would be basing their decisions more on starship captains than on presidents or councillors or admirals. We have to remember to step outside our TV-viewer tunnel vision and think about how the universe would look to the people who actually live in it.

I could imagine a scenario where the Tal Shiar is aware of Pike's reputation even if the Romulans didn't know that it would be the Enterprise that would respond to their attack on the outposts.

Then that still makes it irrelevant here, because we're talking specifically about what factors influenced their decision to attack the outposts. My point is that they would not have been basing their strategy on any specific starship captain, because they didn't know the starship would be there, and indeed it would've been idiotic for them to attack if they had known it was there.

 

[Ovation]

The Romulans and the Federation had no contact with each other, in either timeline, until the BoT incident.

No official contact. But at least some Vulcan officials had had contact when Archer was captain of the Enterprise.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I forget, did the SNW episode establish how long the woman Praetor had been in her position or whether she was responsible for dispatching the Bird of Prey on this most recent aggressive test of Earth's/the Federation's resolve? Maybe she took over when the previous male Praetor's mission to test the Federation failed, and she rushed out to the Neutral Zone to clean up his mess and distance the Romulan Empire from this "rogue commander's" actions. Or maybe she was serving alongside the other Praetor as an equal partner.

 

[Christopher]

I forget, did the SNW episode establish how long the woman Praetor had been in her position or whether she was responsible for dispatching the Bird of Prey on this most recent aggressive test of Earth's/the Federation's resolve? Maybe she took over when the previous male Praetor's mission to test the Federation failed, and she rushed out to the Neutral Zone to clean up his mess and distance the Romulan Empire from this "rogue commander's" actions.

Except in this version, the mission didn't fail, because the Bird-of-Prey wasn't destroyed and was able to report the success of its cloak and plasma weapon to its superiors. The implication in "A Quality of Mercy" was that the fleet was already waiting and ready to launch the invasion immediately if the scout Bird-of-Prey made it back successfully, with the Praetor aboard to lead the charge (safely from the rear, no doubt, but close enough to the action to claim the glory). The fact that the invasion was, indeed, launched is a direct result of the mission succeeding. As opposed to "Balance of Terror," where the failure of the scout mission was what prevented the invasion from going forward.

Not to mention that you're talking about a successful coup, rearrangement of the power structure, and travel out to the Neutral Zone happening in less than two hours. That's unfeasible even with modern Trek's quick-n-easy interstellar commutes.

 

[Dee1891]

The Romulans will wait 100 years for their enemy to make the wrong move, and then they'll wait another 100.

And yet, the Romulans got played by Sisko and Starfleet and ended up being dragged into a war against their will.

 

[Lord Garth]

And yet, the Romulans got played by Sisko and Starfleet and ended up being dragged into a war against their will.

More like the Romulans got played by a Sisko and a Starfleet who were being pulled by Garak's strings.

Romulans vs. Garak --> Garak wins.

 

[Deks]

I’m not sure where this should should be posted exactly, so I’m posting it here.

But the central question I have is this: does “A Quality of Mercy” justify/redeem Michael’s actions (or least the reasoning behind those actions) in “The Vulcan Hello”?

Michael Burnham never got a chance to instigate any real action against the Klingons.
The Klingons were already in violation of Federation space, and the Shenzou was dispatched to investigate what happened to one of their relays (that was intentionally damaged by the Klingons)... this in turn prompted the Shenzou towards an anomalous reading (which turned out to be a cloaked Klingon ship) in the Binary system.

The only thing that M.B. did was kill a Klingon in self-defense who attacked her first on the hull of that artifact - but this didn't start the war in itself because the Klingons were already bent on waging war agains the Federation from what we saw. They simply put on a show and lured SF into an ambush. If that Klingon killed M.B. on the artifact's hull in the opening intro, it would have changed nothing and the Klingons would have attacked still - but this didn't happen, so M.B. killed the Klingon in self-defense.

Onboard the Shenzou, M.B. DID mutiny, but was thrown in the brig before she could open fire on the Klingons, and therefore, couldn't have really started the war (unless you're going to say her killing the Klingon in self-defense was what started the war - but SF would have exonerated her on that premise because she was acting in self-defense) and as I said, the Klingons already violated UFP space and damaged one of their relays as a ploy to start a war.

So, I don't understand how M.B. can be held responsible for the war between UFP and the Klingon empire in the 23rd century.
Was she a mutineer?
Strictly speaking for what she did on the Shenzou that day? Yes. Did she start the war between UFP and Klingons? Nope. The Klingons did that.

 

[JRob94]

I think what separates the two scenarios is that Michael Burnham’s committing mutiny or not would have changed very little. In the SNW finale, we were dramatically shown the drastic changes that the captaincy of the Enterprise would make.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Michael Burnham never got a chance to instigate any real action against the Klingons.
The Klingons were already in violation of Federation space, and the Shenzou was dispatched to investigate what happened to one of their relays (that was intentionally damaged by the Klingons)... this in turn prompted the Shenzou towards an anomalous reading (which turned out to be a cloaked Klingon ship) in the Binary system.

The only thing that M.B. did was kill a Klingon in self-defense who attacked her first on the hull of that artifact - but this didn't start the war in itself because the Klingons were already bent on waging war agains the Federation from what we saw. They simply put on a show and lured SF into an ambush. If that Klingon killed M.B. on the artifact's hull in the opening intro, it would have changed nothing and the Klingons would have attacked still - but this didn't happen, so M.B. killed the Klingon in self-defense.

Onboard the Shenzou, M.B. DID mutiny, but was thrown in the brig before she could open fire on the Klingons, and therefore, couldn't have really started the war (unless you're going to say her killing the Klingon in self-defense was what started the war - but SF would have exonerated her on that premise because she was acting in self-defense) and as I said, the Klingons already violated UFP space and damaged one of their relays as a ploy to start a war.

So, I don't understand how M.B. can be held responsible for the war between UFP and the Klingon empire in the 23rd century.
Was she a mutineer?
Strictly speaking for what she did on the Shenzou that day? Yes. Did she start the war between UFP and Klingons? Nope. The Klingons did that.

Burnham felt incredible remorse for betraying Georgiou.
As for Starfleet, they had a war on their hands and a mutiny correlation.
They needed a scapegoat for political reasons.
Burnham was the easy Choice.

 

[Deks]

Burnham felt incredible remorse for betraying Georgiou.
As for Starfleet, they had a war on their hands and a mutiny correlation.
They needed a scapegoat for political reasons.
Burnham was the easy Choice.

But why need a scapegoat in the first place? Nither she or SF started the war... the Klingons did.
Seems to me like it was sloppy writing.

 

[fireproof78]

But why need a scapegoat in the first place? Nither she or SF started the war... the Klingons did.
Seems to me like it was sloppy writing.

Because of the attempted mutiny.

 

[Deks]

Because of the attempted mutiny.

I can't see how that's relevant though.
Had SF started the war, I'd agree, but since they hadn't... the need for a scapegoat is pointless.

Just charge her for mutiny (the thing is practically unheard of happening in SF so that would have been enough for other SF officers to hate her - at least initially), but leave the war with the Klingons out of it.

 

[fireproof78]

I can't see how that's relevant though.
Had SF started the war, I'd agree, but since they hadn't... the need for a scapegoat is pointless.

Just charge her for mutiny (the thing is practically unheard of happening in SF so that would have been enough for other SF officers to hate her - at least initially), but leave the war with the Klingons out of it.

Except, the whole encounter was FUBAR. Starfleet committed war crimes, and fired on a Klingon national. Regardless of what we saw what was reported was a train wreck with massive losses and a mutiny and a war crime. Yeah, it was Klingons wanting war but what information was available to Starfleet didn't paint a pretty picture.

 

[Deks]

Except, the whole encounter was FUBAR. Starfleet committed war crimes, and fired on a Klingon national. Regardless of what we saw what was reported was a train wreck with massive losses and a mutiny and a war crime. Yeah, it was Klingons wanting war but what information was available to Starfleet didn't paint a pretty picture.

Wait... you've lost me.
How did SF commit war crimes and fired on a klingon national in the first 2 episodes?

Prior to the BOTBS ship to ship fighting actually starting, the only thing that happened was that M.B. killed a Klingon warrior in self-defense on the hull of the artifact (whilst keeping in mind that the Shenzou was originally dispatched to that position to investigate one of SF's relays being destroyed - aka, first Klingon attack).

As for what info was reported back...
Let's see if I get the timeline from SF's perspective here:
1. SF gets notice that a relay stopped transmitting in the binary star system,
2. SF dispathes Shenzou to investigate.
3. Shortly after, the Klingon artifact puts out a massive amount of luminosity and frequency which turned out to be a call to arms (for reinforcements).
4. SF is alerted about the Klingons and dispatches more ships to the Binary system.
5. A battle ensues which results in SF's defeat.
6. The some crew from the Shenzou (incl. M.B.) and other ships are retrieved by SF and debriefed.
7. M.B. is implicated to have staged a mutiny onboard the Shenzou in an attempt to deal with the Klingons how she deems is necessary (but is was at the time unable to execute it because the bridge crew [some of which survived and found themselves on Disco] SAW Burnham being intercepted by Georgiou and throwing her into the brig).

Now, the only thing the crew wouldn't know for sure is whether or not M.B. was being honest when she decribed what happened during heir space walk on the Klingon artifact vessel (which again is moot because they could have been scanning her to ensure that she was being honest - like Admiral Cornwall did when she was interviewing Spock in Season 2).

 

[fireproof78]

Wait... you've lost me.
How did SF commit war crimes and fired on a klingon national in the first 2 episodes?

If I recall correctly they booby trapped a coffin, I anticipation of Klingons taking it aboard. Now, it's been a minute since I watched but I believe this was even called out in episode.

 

[Deks]

If I recall correctly they booby trapped a coffin, I anticipation of Klingons taking it aboard. Now, it's been a minute since I watched but I believe this was even called out in episode.

That happened when the battle was pretty much over though.
Most of the Klingon ships were retrieting, and the Shenzou was left for dead... with most of their systems down, the Shenzou crew managed to come up with a plan to destroy (or at least, severely damage) the Klingon coffin ship by planting charges among the dead which detonated as they tractored them aboard.

That wasn't a war crime. And again, when did they fire on a Klingon national? They did nothing of the kind as far as I recall.
The Klingons attacked and fired first.

 

[fireproof78]

That happened when the battle was pretty much over though.
Most of the Klingon ships were retrieting, and the Shenzou was left for dead... with most of their systems down, the Shenzou crew managed to come up with a plan to destroy (or at least, severely damage) the Klingon coffin ship by planting charges among the dead which detonated as they tractored them aboard.

That wasn't a war crime. And again, when did they fire on a Klingon national? They did nothing of the kind as far as I recall.
The Klingons attacked and fired first.

Booby trapping the dead is a war crime. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule80

Is the Torchbearer not a Klingon national?