Would a series of Star Trek soldier/pilot novels work?

[William Leisner]

I never thought of myself as anti-military but if that's what these sentiments add up to, I'm cool with it.

Well, dear god, what did you think of yourself as being before now, if not anti-military? 'Cuz you sure as shit ain't showing a lot of neutrality on the topic.

It seems to me that almost every argument being used to say Starfleet is not military could also be used -- to greater effect -- that M*A*S*H wasn't a show about the military. "Yes, they wore Army uniforms and used ranks and many shows involved war, but Hawkeye wasn't a soldier!" Only the historical fact of the Korean War undercuts the argument.

 

[Deano2099]

Have you guys seen Starships lately? Look at them! Bloody expensive things, must take years to build. May as well make them warships while you're at it so you don't have to build an entire other set of vessels for that...

More seriously, I don't think either argument can win here. There's contradictions on both sides. Obviously Starfleet looks pretty military and that seems to make sense, but to raise an objection to that that isn't military = bad: Starfleet is so wide-ranging that to encapsulate it all as military seems wrong. How come it's starship engineers making breakthroughs in warp technology in their spare time, and not civilian researchers? How come diplomatic missions are handled by the ship's captain and the counsellor and not trained diplomats? How come breakthroughs in medical treatment always come from Starfleet medical and not civilian doctors?

Now I know there are exceptions and examples in one episode or other to all of those, but that's primarily the way things are portrayed. That's sort of my issue with it being a military organisation. The fact that it genuinely does seem to be 'the best and the brightest', and they go through an academy that trains them in military operations, soldiering and err... highly advanced research-level physics.

That's where the disconnect comes for me. The idea that Starfleet Academy is where the best of the best go, where all the geniuses (geneii?) go. None of them go 'hang on, I don't want be a soldier, I don't want to spend years being trained in combat manuevers and drilled on this, that and the other, I just want to mess around with warp fields'. I don't buy that all Federation science is driven by Starfleet, and Starfleet is a military organisation.

Again: not saying those of you claiming that it *is* military are wrong. I mean look at it. But there's certainly an argument for why that doesn't make sense. Not complaining mind, am perfectly happy to live with the contradiction.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

I never thought of myself as anti-military but if that's what these sentiments add up to, I'm cool with it.

Well, dear god, what did you think of yourself as being before now, if not anti-military? 'Cuz you sure as shit ain't showing a lot of neutrality on the topic.

It seems to me that almost every argument being used to say Starfleet is not military could also be used -- to greater effect -- that M*A*S*H wasn't a show about the military. "Yes, they wore Army uniforms and used ranks and many shows involved war, but Hawkeye wasn't a soldier!" Only the historical fact of the Korean War undercuts the argument.

I don't think that works really. The M*A*S*H construct is meant to show mavericks within a military organization- round pegs in square holes. Hawkeye was absolutely not a soldier. That's the point. Forcing him to pretend to be one, even under war conditions, was to corrupt him. That isn't to say that soldiers are inherently corrupt, only that to twist a non-soldier in the direction of professional killer is not good for the twistee. Hawkey did pretty much everything he could not to get twisted. And setting the show in the Korean War ( as a proxy for Vietnam initially) was also to show the corruptive nature of 90% of all such conflicts. WW2 it wasn't.

In Star Trek the military persona is uniformly shown to be antithetical to SOP. Often such officers are presented as insane or overzealous or bloodthirsty. Politics aside, this theme is too strong in the various series to ignore. The intent there is clear. Whatever it looks like, Starfleet is not a military org in the time of TNG.

KRAD:

I don't think it's insulting to soldiers to describe accurately what they do. It's a specific kind of training for a very specific job. One that is only necessary because humans are stupid monkeys who like to fight over just about anything. I respect their commitment and sacrifices while simultaneously believing that 100% of their talents would be better spent in other pursuits.

(For the record: If any of you guys are insulted, I never meant to do that and I am sorry, truly sorry, for any offense. )

What if some or all of our ex military friends had been unlucky enough to have done their service now? I think I would consider Ward never getting to write in favor of him having to kill some arabs or, god forbid, getting hurt or killed by them as a TOTAL waste.

An evolved human culture would neither need nor desire a military. I think we can all agree that the Federation is presented as being precisely that culture.

 

[William Leisner]

An evolved human culture would neither need nor desire a military. I think we can all agree that the Federation is presented as being precisely that culture.

Why would you think that, when the majority of the "we" you're addressing are telling you that, yes, of course the Federation needs, desires, and in fact has a military in Starfleet?

 

[KRAD]

The Federation does need and desire a military, because they have one. And the reason I know this is because there are tons and tons and tons and tons of Star Trek episodes and movies in which Starfleet undertakes the responsibilities of a military. How many times did Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Archer, and Janeway order their weapons to be fired on another ship? Or a planet?

 

[Geoff Thorne]

An evolved human culture would neither need nor desire a military. I think we can all agree that the Federation is presented as being precisely that culture.

Why would you think that, when the majority of the "we" you're addressing are telling you that, yes, of course the Federation needs, desires, and in fact has a military in Starfleet?

The Federation has a fleet of Starships. That's the only fact we all agree on. Describing that fleet as a military fleet is not,IMO, an accurate conclusion to be drawn from the available facts about that fleet or its personnel. Or, rather, it is not the only legitimate one.

Clearly there is disagreement. I don't think you guys have a case and you don't think we have one. But the numbers on either side arent really material. It could just as easily be a hundred of you to one of me, opinion-wise. My assessment of the source material wouldn't shake on this particular point.

To me it's just obvious for the reasons I listed. The farther you get from Archer's era the less of a grey area there is on this. Which is why, while I'd be thrilled to write a martial story, preferably about MACOs, in the Trek-verse, there's no way I would be comfortable doing it at any point beyond the TOS era (unless it was a Mirror story). I just don't see the "modern" Federation and Starfleet that way. Never have. Never will. I'm actually surprised that there's any disagreement on this.

Obviously mileage varies.

 

[Smiley]

Starfleet was the organization defending the Federation from Jem'Hadar fleets during the Dominion War. That is pretty clearly a military duty. Obviously, not all Starfleet operations are martial in nature, but the military aspect is always present to some degree.

 

[William Leisner]

An evolved human culture would neither need nor desire a military. I think we can all agree that the Federation is presented as being precisely that culture.

Why would you think that, when the majority of the "we" you're addressing are telling you that, yes, of course the Federation needs, desires, and in fact has a military in Starfleet?

The Federation has a fleet of Starships. That's the only fact we all agree on.

Well, first off, thanks for changing the thing that we agree on to an actual undeniable fact. I think this is real progress you're making.

However, there are a few more things that I believe we can all agree on:

- this fleet of starships are equipped with phasers and photon and/or quantum torpedoes, which are deadly offensive weapons.
- this fleet is manned by people who wear uniforms, follow a rank structure and a chain of command nearly identical to that of the U.S. Navy, which is a military organization.
- this fleet was responsible for defending the Federation against numerous foreign aggressors in numerous conflicts, from the Suliban to the Dominion
- there were other non-Starfleet (i.e. civilian) ships which undertook activities such as exploration, supply runs, personnel transport, etc., while Starfleet was the only organization charged with defensive responsibilities.

We do agree on these points, don't we? The only disagreement, as I see it, is that despite all these duck-like characteristics, your personal opposition to ducks prevents you from drawing the only legitimate conclusion from the preponderance of evidence.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

Starfleet is both the exploration and defense force of the Federation. It's not purely military, but it is military.

Isn't there an argument similar to this in the Reeves-Stevens novel Federation? Or at least, mention of one.

How many other entities have their members wear uniforms and carry weapons, place them on vehicles with weaponry, and are entrusted with keeping nations or groups of nations safe?

 

[captcalhoun]

US Coast Guard

they have Navy-like ranks. they wear uniforms. they use boats with weapons on board. they carry out military-esque missions to interdict people- and drug-smugglers

BUT

they're not the military.

 

[MarianLH]

US Coast Guard

they have Navy-like ranks. they wear uniforms. they use boats with weapons on board. they carry out military-esque missions to interdict people- and drug-smugglers

BUT

they're not the military.

The USCG calls itself a military.

From the USCG Home Page
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is a military branch of the United States involved in maritime law, mariner assistance, and search and rescue, among other duties of coast guards elsewhere.

Marian

 

[Sci]

US Coast Guard

they have Navy-like ranks. they wear uniforms. they use boats with weapons on board. they carry out military-esque missions to interdict people- and drug-smugglers

BUT

they're not the military.

The USCG calls itself a military.

From the USCG Home Page
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is a military branch of the United States involved in maritime law, mariner assistance, and search and rescue, among other duties of coast guards elsewhere.

Marian

To be fair, they are a military service whose culture is not generally known for the kind of aggression and violence that some posters here tend to associate with the armed forces. As such, they're an excellent example of a what kind of military force Starfleet is.

 

[BrotherBenny]

Now we're getting somewhere.

The "soldiers" in Star Trek seem to me to be more like "citizen soldiers," citizens doing their research and exploring, and then soldiers when the need calls for it.

Yesterday's Enterprise was a good example of a fully militarised Starfleet.

Likening the USCG to Starfleet is a good analogy. Let's keep going in that direction

 

[Sci]

Now we're getting somewhere.

The "soldiers" in Star Trek seem to me to be more like "citizen soldiers," citizens doing their research and exploring, and then soldiers when the need calls for it.

Yesterday's Enterprise was a good example of a fully militarised Starfleet.

Likening the USCG to Starfleet is a good analogy. Let's keep going in that direction

I suspect that the conflict here is a matter of definitions. To me, a military is defined by a set of key criteria that can exist independently of whatever culture is cultivated within the organization. I define a military as the organization charted by and in exclusive service to the state which is charged with the authority to use violence in the defense of the state and to use force to compel obedience amongst its members, and to undertake other missions as ordered by the state (including things like humanitarian aid, exploration, and diplomacy, all of which militaries have historically undertaken).

My definition of a military, then, does not address what kind of culture the institution cultivates amongst its members. Certainly an organization possessing all of those traits and cultivating a culture of distrust of outsiders, aggression, violence, and warmongering would be a military under the definition I used, but so too would an institution possessing all the traits I listed in my first paragraph but which cultivates a culture of diplomacy, mutual respect, use of violence as a last-resort, respect for human rights, and a belief in the value of peace and the rule of law. To me, then, military is a value-neutral term that refers to objective behavioral characteristics. To my mind, a military may be relatively "good" insofar as I don't regard its value system as being jingoistic (such as the United States Coast Guard), or it may be relatively "bad" insofar as I regard its value system as being jingoistic and warmongering (such as, say, the Pakistani Army).

 

[Iceburgeruk]

I find it unbeliavable that a lot of people think that the federation has no standing army and just uses security officers.

Starfleet security are just that...security. They are cops or security guards. They are cannon fodder of the weak to get the beat down from the new alien who wants to steal the warp core or whatever. They cannot fight a war more than the old guy watching the tills at wall-mart is gonna be a frontline soldier these days.

People have suggested they would just use engineers and security as soldiers. But none of them are well trained enough to be soldiers, they can fight but they are never going to be as good at it as people who have devoted their lives to fighting in the same way i will never be as good at driving as a James Bond stunt driver. And if you have the security act as troops then who acts as security? The ship`s barber?

Only an insane society would work like that.

Imagine if America worked like that. Imagine that america has no army. Peru decides to invade. So the U.S sends all the mechanics/electricians, medical students/doctors/nurses and security guards/police officers off to war as the country`s soldiers. Next week the country collapses due to a)all systems fail due to lack of maintenance, b) all the ill die due to a lack of qualified medical professionals c)rioting and louting runs rampant as there are no police to protect the innocent. On that level the idea makes no sense. If they sent the security in as infantry then who stops the enemy if they beam over, if you send engineers then you are shot handed if the ship systems fail and if you send the doctors then you can`t heal your casualties.

And it would require that significant a proportion of pwople being reallocated because if an enemy tried to attack the federation then they would do so in mass numbers. I mean if you require hundreds of thousand of troops to attack an enmey today then imagine how many troops you would require to engage in a conflict that spans a solar system, or even a sector or perhaps even the length of the neutral zone. You couldn`t get that many people together and organized in a sufficient way as a last minute effort of redistributing the crewmen who are on leave.

Secondly, the romulans are always waiting for a chance to wipe out the federation , the klingons flip-flop constantly from friendship to mortal enemies at the drop of a hat, the cardassians and breen can`t be trusted and there are more races in the gamma and delta quadrant who want to destroy the federation than is healthy.

Are people seriously telling me that the federation has all these htreats kept at bay and does not have an actual army on standby? So if the romulans decide to hell with the secrecy stuff and amass an invasion force of 5 billion romulan stormtroopers, the federation has... absolutely no professional troops? No a single battle hardened battalion? Not even one veteran with a gammy knee?

So how did the federation keep themselves from being invaded in star trek? Bribes? Sexual favors to enemy diplomats?

To protect the federation you would require a constantly replenishing army force with specialized combat training and a incredibly well organized structure so that every soldier knew he could rely on the guy next to him. If you just called up people randomly at the last moment then your force would be a shambles as the soldiers would not know each other and wouldn`t know how the engineer on their left will react if faced with the terror of combat. Such a force would fall in the face of any enemy army as they would be a loose rabble of strangers with varying levels of experience facing a foe who would, if they were planning to destroy the federation, have to be well trained brotherhood of efficient warriors with conquest in their hearts.

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

Agreed.
What this ground force is actually *called*, is up in the air. Federation Marines, Starfleet Marines, hell even the MACOS (they could still exist as a distinct force). All are possible. But they must have something.

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Starfleet has ground troops - we all know it. They were mentioned AND SHOWN on DS9 (and the MACOS in ENT). We don't know what they're called, but they *must exist*. They are ground troops, and that must be ALL that they are.

And of course there's COLONEL West in ST VI.

Starfleet may not be militarISTIC, but it is MILITARY. There is a difference.

 

[Turtletrekker]

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Well, in Q & A, we did see Zelik Leybenzon training the E-E's security guards like a drill sargeant, in a very military manner. Of course, his off-duty behavior with his "troops" probably differs from your standared drill sargeant.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

Why would you think that, when the majority of the "we" you're addressing are telling you that, yes, of course the Federation needs, desires, and in fact has a military in Starfleet?

The Federation has a fleet of Starships. That's the only fact we all agree on.

Well, first off, thanks for changing the thing that we agree on to an actual undeniable fact. I think this is real progress you're making.

However, there are a few more things that I believe we can all agree on:

- this fleet of starships are equipped with phasers and photon and/or quantum torpedoes, which are deadly offensive weapons.
- this fleet is manned by people who wear uniforms, follow a rank structure and a chain of command nearly identical to that of the U.S. Navy, which is a military organization.
- this fleet was responsible for defending the Federation against numerous foreign aggressors in numerous conflicts, from the Suliban to the Dominion
- there were other non-Starfleet (i.e. civilian) ships which undertook activities such as exploration, supply runs, personnel transport, etc., while Starfleet was the only organization charged with defensive responsibilities.

We do agree on these points, don't we? The only disagreement, as I see it, is that despite all these duck-like characteristics, your personal opposition to ducks prevents you from drawing the only legitimate conclusion from the preponderance of evidence.

I said early on that I would concede paramilitary. Police are paramilitary. So are the Boy Scouts. So is the Salvation Army.

When I look at the ink blot I see a culture that built a slew of powerful vessels with many capabilities but whose PURPOSE was never meant to be martial. They explore, they occasionally function as peace keepers but, again, you don't include permanently resident families on or in military vessels. What is the military function of those kids? Human shields? In a military setting the families and children would be strictly forbidden. That they are not settles this debate. Presence of children = non-military vessel. (unless you're pretty ruthless and cold blooded military which Starfleet, again, is not)

You guys don't take the members of Starfleet at their word (which I find odd), claiming they are either naive or lying, but, for me, it's simple. They are what they say they are. It's not just Picard who has made that statement. Multiple officers in multiple series have done the same. Even Quark does, though it's through the lens of Ferengi disgust.

Using a military management style doesn't make you the military nor does the possession of deadly weapons. Soldiers don't have the option of shooting their opponents with tranquilizer darts or stun gas instead of bullets. Generals don't claim to be explorers when engaged in a campaign (or ever really).

"Yes, we're just exploring Iraq. These tanks and missiles and guys with assault weapons are just the sherpas."

During WW2 everyone in the US was a soldier to some degree, either active duty in the shooting war or as support (back home). The same is true of the Federation during the Dom War and, I presume, the shooting part of the Romulan conflict.

The Federation was unprepared for the Borg and, after BARELY escaping destruction at their hands, what did Starfleet do? Did they commit to a martial posture? No. They rebooted back to their default behavior, exploration with occasional peacekeeping, and did not construct even a single vessel or service division meant strictly for martial activity. You'd think a society that had been naive about the need for an army before that conflict would have their eyes wide open after. And yet the Dominion, within fairly short order, proved they had not done any of that.

Contrast that with our behavior after WW2. Do we have fewer deadly weapons now or more? Do we have more powerful deadly weapons now or less powerful?

The Federation's best equipped, most powerful vessels are their exploration ships. yes they have a stunning array of deadly weapons. If I'm heading into kodiak country to get pictures of some rare fungus or thrush, you can bet I'm taking a gun and a knife. The same is true of the Starfleet ships between TOS and DS9's war.

So it makes sense that, when under threat, those ships would be retasked for battle. But, until the Dominion showed up, they weren't designing ships for war or training the mass of their people for it either.

They don't see themselves that way.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

When I look at the ink blot I see a culture that built a slew of powerful vessels with many capabilities but whose PURPOSE was never meant to be martial. They explore, they occasionally function as peace keepers but, again, you don't include permanently resident families on or in military vessels. What is the military function of those kids? Human shields? In a military setting the families and children would be strictly forbidden. That they are not settles this debate. Presence of children = non-military vessel. (unless you're pretty ruthless and cold blooded military which Starfleet, again, is not)

The Defiant. The Prometheus. The Akira. Hell, even the Steamrunner. Aren't those ships pretty much purely defense or meant for martial purposes?

And after the Enterprise-D bit it on Veridian, families on starships went the way of the dodo, no?

And I would grant you that on the whole Starfleet isn't ruthless and cold-blooded military, but there are a number of officers who are. Nechayev. Leyton. Cartwright. Kennelly. Dougherty. Pressman.

You guys don't take the members of Starfleet at their word (which I find odd), claiming they are either naive or lying, but, for me, it's simple. They are what they say they are. It's not just Picard who has made that statement. Multiple officers in multiple series have done the same. Even Quark does, though it's through the lens of Ferengi disgust.

You can get a Ferengi to crinkle his nose, but that doesn't make him a Bajoran.

The Federation was unprepared for the Borg and, after BARELY escaping destruction at their hands, what did Starfleet do? Did they commit to a martial posture? No. They rebooted back to their default behavior, exploration with occasional peacekeeping, and did not construct even a single vessel or service division meant strictly for martial activity. You'd think a society that had been naive about the need for an army before that conflict would have their eyes wide open after. And yet the Dominion, within fairly short order, proved they had not done any of that.

Um, again. Defiant. Prometheus. Akira.

So it makes sense that, when under threat, those ships would be retasked for battle. But, until the Dominion showed up, they weren't designing ships for war or training the mass of their people for it either.

See above.

 

[JoeZhang]

The simple fact is that for the federation to exist in such a violent and opportunistic universe it must have an professional army otherwise it would have been overrun by an enemy long ago.

Agreed.
What this ground force is actually *called*, is up in the air. Federation Marines, Starfleet Marines, hell even the MACOS (they could still exist as a distinct force). All are possible. But they must have something.

And they must be separate from the rank and file of Starfleet. You can't just take any starship crew member, slap a phaser in their hand, and send them to the front lines. Military training doesn't work like that, and never will. That would be like taking a security guard at Wal-Mart and sending them to Iraq - it logically would not work. Specialization is mandatory.

Starfleet has ground troops - we all know it. They were mentioned AND SHOWN on DS9 (and the MACOS in ENT). We don't know what they're called, but they *must exist*. They are ground troops, and that must be ALL that they are.

And of course there's COLONEL West in ST VI.

Starfleet may not be militarISTIC, but it is MILITARY. There is a difference.

The thing I've always found odd about Starfleet's ground forces is how one-dimensional they are. They don't seem to possess any equipment beyond phaser rifles, they have no tanks, they have no motors or cannons - pretty much nothing (which of course is mostly likely explained by the budget of the show), their tactics and behaviour are very amateurish in nature.