Sisko's Pale Moonlight

[RobertScorpio]

I have a friend who absolutely believes TREK went down hill the moment In A Pale Moonlight aired...that Sisko's actions dishonored all that had come before him. No matter if the Federation faced certain doom, a Captain should never be involved with measures like those.

In fact he compares Sisko to George W Bush. That if we don't excuse Bush for his actions then you are a hypocrite for not applying that same logic to Sisko...

What do you think...check out the poll

Sisko; The Verdict

(by the way, I am not making a political statement about Bush-Cheney. I am just offering the poll in this way for those who may have an opinion on the matter)

Rob
Scorpio

 

[ZERO_of_ZERO]

Sisko saw the writing on the wall; Federation's defeat. His actions saved us all. He is a hero!

He definetly the right choice!

(Brilliant episode)

 

[Mr. Fergy]

^Agreed. This is no contest. Sisko saved the Federation!

 

[Hermiod]

Sisko saved the Federation, the Klingon Empire and guess what - the Romulan Star Empire too.

Yes, he tricked them, but what would have happened to the Romulans if the Federation and the Klingons had fallen. His conversation with Dax was right, the Dominion would have consolidated their position, bred millions more Jem'Hadar and launched an invasion the Romulans would have no chance of repelling.

 

[Wowbagger]

As a Bush-Cheney supporter, I refuse to vote in that rather pointed poll.

However, I don't agree that the ends ever justify the means. What Sisko did makes him no better than Section 31, with its genocidal attempt on the Founders. I love ITPM, because it is easily the toughest ethical dilemma in Trek's history, but, in the end, Sisko went the wrong way. He became a willing accessory to murder on the off chance that he could personally manipulate events that would lead to the winning of the war--and, given the events of the rest of the series, he is extraordinarily lucky that everything went off as planned. It is even less likely that there were no other options, or that an alternative would not have eventually revealed itself. After all, "there are always possibilities."

Finally, I guarantee you, one day Sisko's actions in ITPM will come back to bite him and the Federation... hard.

In short, I feel for Sisko and the decision he felt compelled to make, but it was absolutely the wrong call. He will forever justify his evil acts by deluding himself that he, Ben Sisko, saved all humanity by doing this one thing, and this is simply not the case. Honor, sacrifice, genius, determination, and above all fate saved the peoples of the Federation, not Ben Sisko's assistance in the killing of Senator Vreenak. Worse, by "saving" the Federation through the murder of a neutral ambassador, Sisko sold away everything that made the Federation worth saving in order to save it.

 

[dave_R_treker]

I don't see the simalrities between the two. Bush-Cheney STARTED a war that we had no business starting. Sisko was trying to save themselves from a REAL threat to them. Iraq didn't poes a imediate threat to us.

 

[Photon]

I don't see the simalrities between the two. Bush-Cheney STARTED a war that we had no business starting. Sisko was trying to save themselves from a REAL threat to them. Iraq didn't poes a imediate threat to us.

Wow Bush musta been piloting that plane that hit the NYTC and Cheney the Pentagon.

Much like Reagan, the world and US' red Kool-Aide drinkers will come to see that Bush's "war" was the right thing to do. I hate the see what might have happened had he pulled Chamberlain. This is the same kook fringe who thought RR would destroy the world back in the 80's;we now know he helped bring down the evil empire. Of course, most of the fringers feel an affinity towards the evil empire and prolly hated to see it go down.

 

[DanCPA]

The man is a hero...
He did what he had to do to make sure his people won

 

[Sci]

There is a huge fucking difference between Sisko's actions and Bush's.

The situations aren't even slightly comparable. The United States does not face an existential threat to its national security and has not faced such a threat since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Republic of Iraq posed no genuine military threat to the United States; what potential for danger it posed could easily have been contained through diplomacy. The decision to invade Iraq was a completely unnecessary decision based upon a lie to the American people that has done more to harm Iraq than to help it.

The Dominion, on the other hand, posed a fundamental threat to the existence of the Federation. The situation between the Dominion and the Federation is more comparable to that between Great Britain and Nazi Germany during World War II than to that between the United States and the Republic of Iraq in 2003, quite frankly. And if tomorrow we were to find out that Winston Churchill (or someone in the Royal Navy) was responsible for perpetuating a fraud upon the United States in order to manipulate it into going to war with the Nazis, guess what? I'd probably say that it was justified in retrospect, because the threat posed by the Nazis and the Axis was an existential threat to the entire world, just like the threat posed by the Dominion was an existential threat to every civilization in the Alpha Quadrant.

 

[Sci]

I don't see the simalrities between the two. Bush-Cheney STARTED a war that we had no business starting. Sisko was trying to save themselves from a REAL threat to them. Iraq didn't poes a imediate threat to us.

Wow Bush musta been piloting that plane that hit the NYTC and Cheney the Pentagon.

Attacking Iraq in reaction to 9/11 is like attacking Peru in response to Pearl Harbor.

I hate the see what might have happened had he pulled Chamberlain.

What is it with the inability of some people to understand the distinction between diplomacy and appeasement? Iraq had already been contained for a decade and a half through the use of diplomacy and sanctions. Hell, Bush's own Secretary of State was running around saying that containment had worked on Saddam Hussein in 2001. And guess what? Saddam wasn't invading any neighboring countries like Hitler did during Chamberlain's time; hell, Saddam didn't even control two-thirds of Iraq because of the No-Fly Zones. The idea that it would even be possible to "pull a Chamberlain" is laughable; it's not like there was a "Czechoslavakia" to give him.

Of course, most of the fringers feel an affinity towards the evil empire and prolly hated to see it go down.

I for one feel no affinity towards the Soviet Union and think that its collapse is one of the greatest moments in the history of liberty. I also think that its collapse was due to the success of a project of diplomacy and containment (undertaken by 50 years' worth of Democrats and Republicans) rather than warfare.

 

[psikeyhackr]

As a Bush-Cheney supporter,

We need to have you kidnapped and tortured by Cardassians.

psik

PS - I voted against that moron twice.

 

[Sci]

As a Bush-Cheney supporter,

We need to have you kidnapped and tortured by Cardassians.

Or, you know, not, since that kind of behavior is just as much a human rights violation as torturing detainees in Guantanamo, and joking about torturing people whose political opinions you disagree with is just disgusting.

 

[Wowbagger]

As a Bush-Cheney supporter,

We need to have you kidnapped and tortured by Cardassians.

psik

PS - I voted against that moron twice.

You voted against Gore twice? Good man, although you should know he wasn't on the ballot in '04.

Seriously, though, I think this convo needs to get back to the topic--apparently, the vote here is that Sisko's ends justified his means, and there's a lot to talk about there--or we should all take this thread to TNZ.

'preciate it, Sci.

 

[chancellorjake]

There is a huge fucking difference between Sisko's actions and Bush's.

The situations aren't even slightly comparable. The United States does not face an existential threat to its national security and has not faced such a threat since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Republic of Iraq posed no genuine military threat to the United States; what potential for danger it posed could easily have been contained through diplomacy. The decision to invade Iraq was a completely unnecessary decision based upon a lie to the American people that has done more to harm Iraq than to help it.

The Dominion, on the other hand, posed a fundamental threat to the existence of the Federation. The situation between the Dominion and the Federation is more comparable to that between Great Britain and Nazi Germany during World War II than to that between the United States and the Republic of Iraq in 2003, quite frankly. And if tomorrow we were to find out that Winston Churchill (or someone in the Royal Navy) was responsible for perpetuating a fraud upon the United States in order to manipulate it into going to war with the Nazis, guess what? I'd probably say that it was justified in retrospect, because the threat posed by the Nazis and the Axis was an existential threat to the entire world, just like the threat posed by the Dominion was an existential threat to every civilization in the Alpha Quadrant.

I'm in total agreement with your post, Sci. I should mention that I'm a highly disenfranchised Republican who voted for Bush-Cheney in 2004 (unfortunately).

On the topic. Sisko saved the Federation from the Dominion with his actions in ITPM. Yes, he did turn to the "dark side" of ethics with his subterfuge plans, but it was necessary to save his civilization. Remember, he wasn't initially aware of Garak's secondary plan. He only became aware of it after Garak had carried out the assassination. To reveal the information, after the fact, would have been stupid and suicidal.
Plus, If he hadn't been a part of Garak's assassination plot, someone else would have. I've no doubt in my mind that Section 31 was fully aware of Sisko's subterfuge plans (and fully aware of Garak's assassination plans). They certainly would have carried them out if Sisko and Garak had failed. The costs were simply too high. If the Dominion had succeed, they would have surely slaughtered every person on Earth and several other Federation worlds.
I'm, also, certain that Section 31 has made sure that the Romulans will never discover the truth about the assassination. They have absolutely no morals and they are very through.

 

[Sci]

There is a huge fucking difference between Sisko's actions and Bush's.

The situations aren't even slightly comparable. The United States does not face an existential threat to its national security and has not faced such a threat since the fall of the Soviet Union. The Republic of Iraq posed no genuine military threat to the United States; what potential for danger it posed could easily have been contained through diplomacy. The decision to invade Iraq was a completely unnecessary decision based upon a lie to the American people that has done more to harm Iraq than to help it.

The Dominion, on the other hand, posed a fundamental threat to the existence of the Federation. The situation between the Dominion and the Federation is more comparable to that between Great Britain and Nazi Germany during World War II than to that between the United States and the Republic of Iraq in 2003, quite frankly. And if tomorrow we were to find out that Winston Churchill (or someone in the Royal Navy) was responsible for perpetuating a fraud upon the United States in order to manipulate it into going to war with the Nazis, guess what? I'd probably say that it was justified in retrospect, because the threat posed by the Nazis and the Axis was an existential threat to the entire world, just like the threat posed by the Dominion was an existential threat to every civilization in the Alpha Quadrant.

I'm in total agreement with your post, Sci. I should mention that I'm a highly disenfranchised Republican who voted for Bush-Cheney in 2004 (unfortunately).

On the topic. Sisko saved the Federation from the Dominion with his actions in ITPM. Yes, he did turn to the "dark side" of ethics with his subterfuge plans, but it was necessary to save his civilization. Remember, he wasn't initially aware of Garak's secondary plan. He only became aware of it after Garak had carried out the assassination. To reveal the information, after the fact, would have been stupid and suicidal.
Plus, If he hadn't been a part of Garak's assassination plot, someone else would have. I've no doubt in my mind that Section 31 was fully aware of Sisko's subterfuge plans (and fully aware of Garak's assassination plans). They certainly would have carried them out if Sisko and Garak had failed. The costs were simply too high. If the Dominion had succeed, they would have surely slaughtered every person on Earth and several other Federation worlds.
I'm, also, certain that Section 31 has made sure that the Romulans will never discover the truth about the assassination. They have absolutely no morals and they are very through.

Actually, if anything, Section 31 has shown itself to be consistently incompetent in its black operations. They trusted a Klingon admiral in "Affliction/Divergence" on ENT and ended up being double-crossed; in "Inquisition," they didn't keep close enough watch on Bashir in the hours immediately prior to abducting him to produce an accurate holosimulation, and then they allowed Bashir to reveal their existence to his commanding officer and to officers of the Bajoran Militia, a foreign government. In "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" they put the Chairman of the Tal Shiar on the Romulan Continuing Committee over a Senator with pro-Federation sympathies on the basis of the rather dubious proposition that he could be trusted to be a Section 31 agent, and in "Extreme Measures," they sent only one operative to retrieve the cure to the Changeling virus from Bashir, and that one allowed himself to be captured and have the cure forcibly removed. And on top of all that, their biggest blunder is almost certain the Founder virus itself; attempting to commit pre-emptive genocide against the Founders actually backfired on them, because it made the normally pragmatic Founders so bitter and nihilistic that they continued ordering Dominion troops to fight long after a Great Link not facing certain death would have just retreated, and only the intervention of Odo prevented the Female Shapeshifter from ordering that the Allies be given a pyrrich victory.

And I've no doubt that at some point, Sisko's and Garak's fraud will be discovered by the Romulans and that the Federation will then have hell to pay. It may well cause another war -- and there's a certain logic to the idea that the Federation would deserve it. At the very least, in a just world, Sisko and Garak would certainly be handed over to the Romulans to be charged and tried and punished according to Romulan law, since they did commit crimes against the Romulan state.

But it was still the best option that Sisko and the Federates had at the time. There may be a price to pay later -- but it would almost certainly not include the possible destruction and enslavement of the entire Alpha Quadrant.

For the record, the short story "Stone Cold Truths" from Tales of the Dominion War establishes that somewhere along the line in the 25th Century, the Romulans did find out about the fraud and did launch a war against the Federation in retaliation.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Finally, I guarantee you, one day Sisko's actions in ITPM will come back to bite him and the Federation... hard.

Sisko is now a non corporeal being living with his fellow prophets in the wormhole so how exactly is anything going to come back and bite him...hard? and secondly the only other person besides Sisko who knew about what happened is Garak and having been trained within the Obsidian order to keep his mouth shut I find it hard to believe he'll go shooting his mouth off, also i'm inclined to believe he'll likely forget about the whole thing anyway because he'll be too busy helping to rebuild cardassia so I find it extremely unlikely anything will come back and bite the Federation...hard also.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

In the novel Hollow Men, Sisko reveals his actions to a few admirals in Starfleet Command (I know that Vice Admiral Marta Batanides is one, and I think that Ross is another). And there could be more who know as well.

Plus, let's not underestimate the Romulan penchant for mistrust of others, as well as the fact that somewhere there is proof of what happened. Who's to say that people couldn't somehow put Sisko's log entry back? Although he says "Delete entry", does that really mean that it's fully deleted, like with current computers where your hard drive still has copies of everything?

 

[DanCPA]

The plan was approved by Starfleet command, so some people know about this.
And that's cannon, not novel

 

[Hofner]

The plan was approved by Starfleet command, so some people know about this.
And that's cannon, not novel

Exactly. Starfleet Command had to know what happened. They knew everything Sisko knew.

Garak had two plans. One he outlined to Sisko who passed it on to Starfleet Command for approval which they gave. Garak of course kept his second plan to himself.

Just like Sisko, the moment Starfleet Command finds out Vreenal's shuttle was destroyed they'd know what happened. They probably knew even before Sisko did.

Robert

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Sisko is superior to Bush/Cheney not because of morality but because of smarts. Let's face it, if Bush/Cheney had been smart enough that their actions resulted in good things and not disaster, history would have forgiven them anything - plenty of leaders have done sketchy things without having their reputations sullied. People don't want morality so much as they want results.

However, I don't agree that the ends ever justify the means.

Except for in the real world. Any honest history book will offer copious supporting examples of ends-justifies-means actions that nobody complains about (or even much thinks about) nowadays.

Bush-Cheney STARTED a war that we had no business starting. Sisko was trying to save themselves from a REAL threat to them.

It's a legitimate comparison because both involve judgement calls in ambiguous situations. Bush/Cheney exaggerated and cherry picked evidence, but they didn't invent it whole cloth. Sisko might have had much better judgement than those clowns, but the whole thing could easily have blown up horribly in his face anyway - what if the Romulans had joined the Dominion due to Federation treachery? Sisko could have lost the whole damn war right then.

But I'm of the opinion that the Rommies knew the whole story and Sisko & Garak were fooling themselves to think they'd fooled anyone. Vreenak's enemies were happy to see him vanish.