If (hypothetically) the Captain of a US Navy warship stated that the US Navy wasn't a military organization, is it your position that the US Navy would stop being, in fact, a military organization?
Is Starfleet Military?
- Thread starter Prometheus59650
- Start date
As I have pointed out before with actual legal citations, there are individuals who do not hold military status who are potentially subject to court martial. Specifically, NOAA and PHS officers currently serving alongside military forces are subject to the UCMJ.
What you have described are out of universe reasons for the ambiguity and I largely agree. However, the very fact that there is a long running, contradictory body of language used throughout the franchise regarding this issue points to there being an in universe reason for it. Generally, an in universe reason need not specifically explain any point in detail. It just needs to be understood that it simply exists. We (the audience) need not be told the inner workings of the new technology featured this week in a show, as long as we understand that it causes whatever outcome. For example, Voyager’s holodeck power system is somehow incompatible with the rest of Voyager’s power systems. This has been specifically stated on screen. While this was chosen to move along the plot due to out of universe reasons, it still remains clear in universe that the systems are incompatable with no logical reason stated which has launched lengthy debates as to how it could possibly be true.
That’s not my position at all. Moreover, do you think a US Navy Captain would in all seriousness believe he’s not in the military?
I’m not really aware of any other time where a character said they weren’t the military outside of “Peak Performance”.
Scotty in Star Trek Beyond stated, “We’re not a military agency”.
Jaeger in TOS: The Squire of Gothos stated, “I’m a scientist. Not a military man,” while he was wearing a Starfleet Uniform.
Last edited:
So across 800 or so hours, we have two characters claim Starfleet isn’t the military and hundreds of hours of Starfleet acting like a military would, from structure to being the primary defensive arm of the UFP.
It is tough to take the word of two officers over the tangible actions of Starfleet across the franchise. YMMV.
Kirk: "I'm a soldier."
David Marcus: "Are we going to let the military take it?"
PICARD: I want all departments prepared for a warp six trip into the Neutral Zone as soon as the away team completes its mission.
WORF: Trouble, Captain?
PICARD: Insurance. Romulan battle cruisers have been detected near one of our border posts.
(Angel One)
All the various wars that the Federation fights is by Starfleet. Not just out of necessity, but from a tactical perspective, legal authority, and choices that reflect the foreign policy of the Federation.
He is making a claim about himself, not the organization.
Plus, the scene continues...
We have Ron Tracy who admits to killing thousands with his phaser in "The Omega Glory"
These people are carrying weapons of mass destruction on their belts.
Look at the context of that scene. Trelane was asking Jaeger questions about battle tactics and so forth, Jaeger was simply stating that his specialty was science, not tactical.
I still would find his response bizarre if he is in the military and said he’s not a military man. He could have said he was not a combat officer or something along those lines. YMMV.
Not at all. It is common for Navy personnel to refer to the Army as "the military" despite also being military themselves. I suspect this was the mentality they were applying when writing that scene. At the very least, TOS definitely treated Starfleet as a military. Roddenberry himself often got after the other writers to write Starfleet "more militaristically." Indeed, TOS was not trying to reinvent the wheel or do anything exotic. They knew "space navy/military" was a relatable concept for the audience to grasp and they knew they had to keep the concept simple in order to grab the audience's attention.
[QUOTE="Also, you said that Starfleet isn't a "pure" military...well, what does that even mean? 
[/QUOTE] Well maybe a starfleet "mission statement" exists somewhere in an official book. I haven't read it or tried to find and read it-It'd take the air out of this long discussion. In any case not a "pure military" is like a hybrid, like your gas/electric car, like splitting hairs. I suspect star fleet's mission is science, diplomacy, exploration, law enforcement, first-second contact, homeland defense, emergency preparedness disaster response, oh, and full scale intergalactic war, etc. But 'pure' military? No not in my mind. A pure military wasn't Gene's vision. So who to blame, Nic Meyer? A newby who arbitrarily changed the look of our beloved franchise in STII? Also do star fleet officers get paid? Oops, forget that last sentence 
LOL
[/QUOTE] Well maybe a starfleet "mission statement" exists somewhere in an official book. I haven't read it or tried to find and read it-It'd take the air out of this long discussion. In any case not a "pure military" is like a hybrid, like your gas/electric car, like splitting hairs. I suspect star fleet's mission is science, diplomacy, exploration, law enforcement, first-second contact, homeland defense, emergency preparedness disaster response, oh, and full scale intergalactic war, etc. But 'pure' military? No not in my mind. A pure military wasn't Gene's vision. So who to blame, Nic Meyer? A newby who arbitrarily changed the look of our beloved franchise in STII? Also do star fleet officers get paid? Oops, forget that last sentence LOL
I’d imagine that defining what constitutes a “military” would change a great deal in a 200-400 year timespan, especially when you consider the inclusion of norms / influence from several alien species, thus rendering all this speculation based on current norms pretty useless.
As many have noted throughout this (and other threads) the responsibilities of Starfleet reflect militaries across the centuries, specifically Royal Navy and US Navy missions and assignment. The idea that Starfleet is not a military comes down to personal preference of one's opinion on Star Trek.
I think it also depends on whether someone associates the military in a negative way or not.
I don't automatically think military is inherently a bad thing, so I'm fine with Starfleet being the Federation's military. Others that may think the word military is a bad thing likely don't want to associate Starfleet in a negative way, so they are more eager to go the opposite.
I don't automatically think military is inherently a bad thing, so I'm fine with Starfleet being the Federation's military. Others that may think the word military is a bad thing likely don't want to associate Starfleet in a negative way, so they are more eager to go the opposite.
I always assumed it was closer to the United Nations on the Federation of planets level and that Starfleet was like the deployable force. The UN has NATO peacekeepers who mostly (but not always) act as a military but also non-military divisions such as election monitors, disaster relief, medical care etc.
So they are all trained to be in war zones but that’s not the primary training of some but of others.
But I have no proof of this outside that some officers seem to have advanced military training/experience and others seem to be officers who are essentially scientists trained as explorers/astronauts but not operating as combatants primarily.
So they are all trained to be in war zones but that’s not the primary training of some but of others.
But I have no proof of this outside that some officers seem to have advanced military training/experience and others seem to be officers who are essentially scientists trained as explorers/astronauts but not operating as combatants primarily.
The US NAVY has doctors, lawyers, clergy, scientists, microbiologists, meteorologists, and engineers.
Not everyone is in a combat role. Just like Starfleet.
Not everyone is in a combat role. Just like Starfleet.
Yes…there are some major logic-defying gymnastics at play to support personal bias I think.
I'm not sure how common it is in modern day, but the navy even being legally integrated within "the military" rather than being it's own thing was less than a generation old in the United States (if we ignore a brief period between 1789 and 1798).
Classically, "the military" (at least in the Anglosphere) was largely something that was called up during wartime with the exception of local militias that were mainly used in their native locale (who were often as not used for policing and similar operations), whereas the Navy was a separate thing that was often continually active (particularly the "cruising vessels" that most clearly parallel the average starship in role and mission)
Last edited:
US ARMY Noncombatant jobs, just to add to the other lists.
My wife's uncle retired at lieutenant colonel, 0-5, from the US Army as part of a regional support group and distributions manager. His training is as an engineer.
Similar threads
