What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

There was no Klingon Civil War in the final DS9 episodes. It was purely a matter of Gowron being jealous of Martok's popularity, and sidelining him so he can take an active role in the war... which was a mistake because he was doing it only for glory instead of focusing on keeping the defense while Starfleet tries to counter the Breen weapon. Sisko made it clear to Worf he had to be stopped, which after some attempts to get Martok to step in, Worf himself fought Gowron in combat. This was allowed, as "Redemption II" showed us. (The lone Klingon who challenged Gowron with, "Maybe they have better leaders.")

While I agree there could have been a scene or two more about Section 31's genocide attempt, I'm not sure it would have been able to fit into an already packed group of final episodes. Besides, Odo linked with the Female Changeling, and clearly it was okay enough to let go for the time being. (It's very likely Odo said what Bashir said to him about Section 31 being rogues, which is true. The Founders already had at least one attempt at genocide when the Obsidian Order and Tal Shiar joined together secretly to attack their homeworld. The only reason that failed was because the Founders got wind of the plan early enough to lay the trap that decimated both organizations.)

As for the events of "IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT", that was an top secret operation. With the exception of Garak, everyone involved is dead, and Sisko is with the Prophets. There would be no reason to follow it up.

As for the Maquis, that storyline did have some pitfalls. I was really on their side... until they moved from defending their homes to aggressive attacks outside theur colonies. It dud give ys some good episodes and stories, though.

 

I'm liking the thought that if the Romulans ever DO find out the truth, they won't declare war on the Federation or anything like that - on the contrary, they'd applaud the Federation for doing what needs to be done, for using very Romulan-like efforts to fight the Dominion.

Because you all know damn well that if the sides were reversed...the Romulans would have TOTALLY done everything we saw Sisko do, and probably a lot worse.

I mean, publicly the Romulans might complain (just for show)...but in private, they'd be like "Well played! Well played!"

And as I said, Vreenak no doubt had many enemies, who would not shed a single tear at his passing (which, I might add, was Garak's doing, not Sisko's).

 

I don't like that at all; it goes against the spirit of Star Trek.

 

Even in TOS, there were choices made that were not happy endings or what we would consider the spirit of STAR TREK. "A PRIVATE LITTLE WAR" comes quickly to mind, for one.

 

Because happily ever after is not always possible. Star Trek does well to remember that instead of lying to the audience.

 

I agree, and I always liked that about TOS.

But I was specifically saying there are TOS endings that are not in the spirit of the franchise. Kirk basically perpetually continuing a war between the Hill People and the Villagers doesn't strike me as a solution in the spirit of ST.

I'm saying there is precedent for going against the spirit, and it told a good story. The fact that "IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT" is consistently hailed as among the best of DS9 and the franchise and is talked greatly a quarter of a century later is proof that it was a good story told well.

 

And they didn't bother to do it.

In other words, let's make sure the Federation never pay the consequences of t heir actions. Oh well. They never did in the long run. Typical.

 

I don't like that there are noncomissioned members of Starfleet, I prefer that every member be at least Ensign and have attended Starfleet Academy. It doesn't really seem good for either members or the organization to have members who have not gone to Starfleet Academy and therefore do not have and cannot advance in rank.

 

I understand what you're saying, but, for a lot of people, that's really "overqualified" for what they end up doing. There are always going to be the tech people, the workers, the staff that creates the backbone and holds the organization together. Not everyone in the US Army has, or needs to graduate West Point.

And these people can advance. They could earn a commission. But, if their career is going the way they want it to, why bother going for that extra, which actually keeps you from doing what you want to for years. Look at O'Brien. Enlisted and is the Chief Engineer of inarguably one of the most important posts in Starfleet and one of its most advanced starships. Then he moves on to teaching at the Academy. He's already doing what he wants to do.

What would the Academy do for him to advance his career in a way that he wants?

Also, there are the likes of Simon Tarses. Someone has to basically be the nursing assistant that dispenses meds. "I did four years at the Academy for this? Why?"

I think the Academy is as it should be. It's a place for people who have the drive for it, that have a specific life path in mind that requires it.

 

Klingon Civil War or not. For me, it was an arc that came out of nowhere at the last minute. And it seemed designed to distract audiences from the lack of consequences regarding the revelation about the attempt to commit genocide against the Founders. It was an arc that led Ezri to make the following comment to Worf:

"I think that the situation with Gowron is a symptom of a bigger problem. The Klingon Empire is dying; and I think it deserves to die."

This comment, along with this arc about Gowron and Worf came on the heels of the revelation about Section 31's attempt to commit genocide against the Founders. Sisko, along with many Trek fans tried to dismiss what Section 31 did and claim that the Federation never knew about the attempted genocide. Odo - along with myself - didn't buy the bullshit. And worse, I'm still disappointed that there was no follow up on this. Instead, the writers introduced this Klingon arc with Worf and Gowron.

 

True. Starfleet needs worker bees as well as officers. And, there's no reason why a particularly promising Crewman can't be sent to the Academy after a couple years as an enlisted man (in beta canon, Simon Tarses ultimately followed this path). In the actual military, this is called a "mustang" officer. Not too long ago, one such individual rose all the way to the rank of four-star admiral and the post of CNO, i.e. the head of the US Navy.

Also, in a situation like "Voyager" I expect a crewman could simply be given a field commission of ensign, at the captain's discretion. Had the ship actually experienced the deprivations and difficulty it was supposed to, this likely would have happened. One possible scenario: Chakotay dies, so Tuvok is bumped up to first officer, and Ayala is now chief of security (and has to actually talk sometimes). To replace him, Crewman Shmoo is granted the rank of ensign.

 

Quote: This comment, along with this arc about Gowron and Worf came on the heels of the revelation about Section 31's attempt to commit genocide against the Founders. Sisko, along with many Trek fans tried to dismiss what Section 31 did and claim that the Federation never knew about the attempted genocide. Odo - along with myself - didn't buy the bullshit. And worse, I'm still disappointed that there was no follow up on this. Instead, the writers introduced this Klingon arc with Worf and Gowron.

I may be misremembering, but I believe there's a specific line before the finale that states that the Federation Council knew what Section 31 planned to do and approved it.

 

And . . . what happened? Was there any fallout? If not in "DS9", in any other Trek show in the Alpha Quadrant?

 

Nothing at all, which is horrible and/or stupid.

It's horrible because genocide, and the vaunted Federation is supposed to be above something like genocide.

If they were aware of it (as I said, I might be misremembering that aspect) it's stupid of them to be aware of it because the whole point of Section 31 and going to such lengths to compartmentalize its activities is that the dirty work gets done and the Council gets to be morally outraged while holding their hands up and, "We just didn't know."

Forgetting the rest of it:

"We didn't know because we didn't want to know, and we created those men in black so we didn't HAVE to know.

 

Unless it violates the Prime Directive.

 

While I'm not prepared to condone S31's actions, the simple fact is that the Founders are of a level of evil second only to that of the Borg. From the unprovoked annihilation of the New Bajor colony to the slaughter of nearly a billion Cardassians, they left a long trail of terror, torture, mass murder, and other atrocities. If S31's plan had wiped them out... I wouldn't have shed any tears.

 

The Federation Council debated about giving the cure to the Founders, but they ultimately rejected the idea. That's what you were thinking of.

While I don't think genocide is the answer, I can't really blame the council for that decision. The Dominion was proven to be a ruthless organization that has not only committed genocide themselves multiple times, but have also done even worse. (The Blight to the Teplans in "THE QUICKENING", for instance.) They were about to kill every Cardassian left alive, and indeed already killed a billion of them right before Odo's linking. They would have killed every single human without a second thought, per Weyoun's dialogue in "SACRIFICE OF ANGELS".

When faced with an enemy that was not willing to negotiate, even when they were facing certain defeat (the Female Changeling's dialogue in the finale about 'your victory will taste as bitter as defeat', because the Dominion would fight to the very last man, particularly suicide attacks like the Jem'Hadar did to Klingon ships), I don't see they had a choice. It was a matter of survival.

It's hard to be a moral civilization if your civilization is wiped out by an enemy like that. The rules of war change when one side does not fear death. (This was highlighted in season 1's "BATTLE LINES". In that case, both sides ceased to fear death.)

But despite all that happening, we still got the solution that was in the spirit of the franchise... Odo linking with her and an understanding happened that ended the war. Additionally, we get the scene with Sisko, Martok, and Ross where Martok toasts over the fallen ruins, but Sisko and Ross don't.

We got to keep the spirit alive while showing how ugly war really is. And DS9 never glorified war... they showed us how horrible it is and why it should be avoided.

 

I'll argue that the unhappy ending in "A Private Little War" has the spirit of Star Trek.*

In pretty much every Star Trek series, it's an essential part of the premise that the Federation coexists with certain other antagonist superpowers under conditions analogous to the Cold War. Under that aspect of the premise comes the occasional unhappy ending, as in this episode and in TNG "The Defector," to name another.

The unhappiness is there because Federation values are in conflict with the pragmatic reality of the situation, yet the drive of the characters to make the universe a better place, without which the conflict would not exist in the first place, is an essential element of the spirit of Star Trek.*

* - To the degree that the spirit exists.

 

Who says there has to even BE any consequences?

Like I said, the Romulans really have no cause to complain here. Everything Sisko did, was totally within their wheelhouse as well. If the shoe was on the other foot, you know damn well they would have done ALL of that shit, and probably stooped to levels even Sisko would never have dreamed of. The simple fact is, Sisko's actions were very Romulan.

And obviously the Romulans would have found out sooner or later that the Dominion would have come for them as well. Even though the actual invasion plans detailed in the episode were fake...everybody knows the Dominion would have gotten around to it sooner or later, since the Dominion are obviously untrustworthy and would turn on their so-called "allies" whenever it suited them (and also would never respect any "nonaggression" pact). So in the end, it all worked out for the best. The greater good was served.

Also I think it's rather telling that not even Section 31 managed to think of a plan like that. Sisko was effective in a way that they never were.

 

If by "effective" you mean "roped into keeping Garak's murder a secret", then sure...