The Romulan War: Beneath the Raptor's Wing - Discuss (SPOILERS)

[Christopher]

Sociopathic would be a pretty accurate way to describe Section 31, come to think of it.

To an extent, if we're talking about the 24th-century version. But the 22nd-century version was nowhere near as extreme or criminal. And even the 24th-century S31 isn't completely irrational, and that's what the idea of assassinating T'Pau is. Again, she's not an enemy, not a direct threat, merely a more half-hearted ally than Earth would like.

Besides, even if S31 did wish to bring about a change of leadership on Vulcan, it's ludicrous to suggest that they'd default to murder. Vulcan isn't a dictatorship where the only way to remove a leader is by death. It's a democratic, apparently parliamentary society. If they wanted to remove T'Pau from office, they'd just support her opposition, maybe engineer a scandal that would make T'Pau look bad and trigger a vote of no confidence. Defaulting to assassination would be an insane case of overkill. There is simply no reason to even contemplate it as a possibility in this case. I'm still bewildered that it was even brought up.

 

[Mach5]

Besides, even if S31 did wish to bring about a change of leadership on Vulcan, it's ludicrous to suggest that they'd default to murder. Vulcan isn't a dictatorship where the only way to remove a leader is by death. It's a democratic, apparently parliamentary society. If they wanted to remove T'Pau from office, they'd just support her opposition, maybe engineer a scandal that would make T'Pau look bad and trigger a vote of no confidence. Defaulting to assassination would be an insane case of overkill. There is simply no reason to even contemplate it as a possibility in this case. I'm still bewildered that it was even brought up.

I also mentioned impeachment, but finding a way to discredit her would also have been an option to consider. I wasn't fixated on this assassination thing at all, I only mentioned it as a last resort, the most radical and extreme option. But still an option.

Have you even read the book?

I did, and I enjoyed it very much (though it had boring parts, like those martian chapters).

Anyway, this assassination thing went too far, I'm dropping the subject.

 

[Christopher]

I thought the Martian chapters were very interesting. It's rare in ST that we get any sense of colonial human cultures; usually humanity is equated with Earth and a homogenized, Westernized culture. Here we actually got to see some real diversity within humanity. And it was nice to see some of the backstory of the Native American cultures seen in TNG: "Journey's End" and in VGR with Chakotay. Plus the depiction of Martian colonies and colonists clearly owes a lot to Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, lending some welcome science-fictional texture.

 

[Mach5]

I thought the Martian chapters were very interesting. It's rare in ST that we get any sense of colonial human cultures; usually humanity is equated with Earth and a homogenized, Westernized culture. Here we actually got to see some real diversity within humanity. And it was nice to see some of the backstory of the Native American cultures seen in TNG: "Journey's End" and in VGR with Chakotay. Plus the depiction of Martian colonies and colonists clearly owes a lot to Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, lending some welcome science-fictional texture.

To each his own. I just wasn't interested in reading a "Jurney's End" back story, even though I loved that episode. I was actually hoping for some insight into the Romulan people's war-time state of mind. But I guess Romulan civilians were already completely used to the Empire waging a war against some distant race they knew nothing about.

I was hoping to learn more about Ejhoi Ormiin though.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I thought the Martian chapters were very interesting. It's rare in ST that we get any sense of colonial human cultures; usually humanity is equated with Earth and a homogenized, Westernized culture. Here we actually got to see some real diversity within humanity. And it was nice to see some of the backstory of the Native American cultures seen in TNG: "Journey's End" and in VGR with Chakotay. Plus the depiction of Martian colonies and colonists clearly owes a lot to Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, lending some welcome science-fictional texture.

Those Martian colonists *were* Chakotay's tribe, weren't they?

Also, am I understanding it correctly that since Mars had not yet been terraformed, the colony was completely underground?

 

[Sci]

I for one enjoyed reading about the Martian colonies and Human colonies on other words. In particular, I enjoyed learning a bit about the history of the Martian colonies and about how they fought for independence to become the Confederated Martian Colonies -- an independent state in theory equal to United Earth, but in reality treated as a secondhand state.

Though the constant comparisons to Canada started to wear thin to me. Canada's on the rise in real life -- it's not quite the second-rate country Martin seemed to be implying it was.

 

[EmperorKalan]

I thought the Martian chapters were very interesting. It's rare in ST that we get any sense of colonial human cultures; usually humanity is equated with Earth and a homogenized, Westernized culture. Here we actually got to see some real diversity within humanity. And it was nice to see some of the backstory of the Native American cultures seen in TNG: "Journey's End" and in VGR with Chakotay. Plus the depiction of Martian colonies and colonists clearly owes a lot to Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, lending some welcome science-fictional texture.

Those Martian colonists *were* Chakotay's tribe, weren't they?

Also, am I understanding it correctly that since Mars had not yet been terraformed, the colony was completely underground?

No, they were likely the "Journey's End" group. Chakotay's people ware supposedly Central American in origin.

And yes, the colony was a combination of underground and sealed enclosures.

 

[ToddCam]

Just to put my two cents in on the assassination idea: I have to disagree with the idea that assassination is somehow so outrageous an idea that Section 31 would never call for it. First, what basis do we have that S31 is "gentler" in the 22nd century than in the 24th? As far as we know, we have only met two agents (four if you count Trip and Reed). Do we really know that Phuong and Harris have never killed anyone? Do we know that they have a firm line that they do not cross, where they don't assassinate leaders of dubious allies? I have seen no evidence that Harris or Phuong or any of the presumably many other agents wouldn't be perfectly willing to kill someone. And a trend of two is not much of a trend.

To me, the idea of assassinating T'Pau is fully within the thinking of Section 31, as I have no reason to think they are not as ruthless as their 24th century form. And in the 24th century, they assassinated the Federation President! Not an ally who they disagreed with, but their own leader, and not to prevent something from happening, but to cover something up. It's totally up their alley to think, "Oh, T'Pau is keeping needed assistance away? Well, let's be rid of her, then." There could be plenty of reasons for their not assassinating her, such as deciding it would not help (if the Vulcan government is the parliamentary one people are assuming), or too risky (that Vulcan might discover the truth) or even they know T'Pau's true motives (beyond obsessive pacifism).

Also, there is a false equivalency here. Just because a reader believes that it makes sense for a character to do something does not mean that the reader is advocating it. If I say that it was likely for the Punisher to gun down Archie when he mistook the kid for a criminal, does that mean I think it's ok to gun down criminals? No. It's within the character of the Punisher to do so. Not me. I think it is unfair to cast aspersions on Mach5 for that. If anything, maybe he is more capable of thinking outside of his own perspective. I didn't even consider the possibility of assassinating T'Pau, but once it was said, it made sense that some might consider it an option.

And finally, yes, we all know T'Pau is alive in "Amok Time." We also know that Earth will survive, the Romulan/Vulcan connection will not be discovered at large for another 100 years, Trip survives til 2238, and despite all likelihood at this point, the Federation is founded. Mach5 was not calling for the assassination, he was wondering if there could be an attempt, knowing full well that it failed.

 

[Christopher]

Just to put my two cents in on the assassination idea: I have to disagree with the idea that assassination is somehow so outrageous an idea that Section 31 would never call for it.

Don't mistake the specific for the general. I'm not saying they'd never consider it, I'm saying it makes no sense to think they'd consider it in this specific instance. T'Pau is not actively trying to hurt Earth, and even if her policies are detrimental, there are many other less extreme options a covert agency could use to remove her from power.

I have seen no evidence that Harris or Phuong or any of the presumably many other agents wouldn't be perfectly willing to kill someone.

I'm sure they would if they felt it were necessary. I just think it's ludicrous to suggest that they'd think that in this particular case, when the need is not there and when multiple other options are present. This is not even remotely a case where assassination is the only possible remedy, so the only reason to contemplate such an unnecessarily excessive response is sheer sociopathy or outright evil.

And in the 24th century, they assassinated the Federation President!

Yes, but the situation there was rather more extreme. And I think many people (myself among them) feel that doing so in that case was an excessive and extremely foolish move on S31's part, because it would undoubtedly raise questions when a former president of the Federation vanished completely. Assassinating T'Pau would be at least as foolish a move, because if Vulcan found out that Earth operatives had assassinated their leader, Earth might well have ended up fighting a war on two fronts, which would be exactly the opposite of the professed goal of the act.

There could be plenty of reasons for their not assassinating her, such as deciding it would not help (if the Vulcan government is the parliamentary one people are assuming), or too risky (that Vulcan might discover the truth) or even they know T'Pau's true motives (beyond obsessive pacifism).

Isn't that exactly what I've been arguing all along?

Also, there is a false equivalency here. Just because a reader believes that it makes sense for a character to do something does not mean that the reader is advocating it.

I'm not saying anyone here is advocating assassination as a political strategy. I'm just saying that I think it's a gross and bizarre misreading of the situation to think it would be an option worth proposing within the fictional context.

 

[Ronald Held]

Instead, how about offering here a seat on the newly formed Federation Council(post 2161)?

 

[Turtletrekker]

^They will. She'll turn it down.

 

[DEWLine]

Though the constant comparisons to Canada started to wear thin to me. Canada's on the rise in real life -- it's not quite the second-rate country Martin seemed to be implying it was.

Hmmm...not having read the whole thing right through yet...I'm inclined to question your perception of "on the rise" re: my home country at the moment. I'm personally a little worried of the odds of us falling prey to the First Law of Petropolitics right now. But we can discuss that elsewhere on TrekBBS.

 

[ToddCam]

And I think many people (myself among them) feel that doing so in that case was an excessive and extremely foolish move on S31's part, because it would undoubtedly raise questions when a former president of the Federation vanished completely. Assassinating T'Pau would be at least as foolish a move, because if Vulcan found out that Earth operatives had assassinated their leader, Earth might well have ended up fighting a war on two fronts, which would be exactly the opposite of the professed goal of the act.

Totally agree. It makes no logical sense for someone to assassinate T'Pau or Zife. I'm just saying that Section 31 has a track record of ignoring reason.

 

[Christopher]

But the Section 31 of the ENT novels is over 220 years removed from the Section 31 of DS9. Despite having the same name, it would be unwise to treat them as the same entity. Institutions rarely go unchanged for that long. Heck, less than half a century ago, the Republican Party was the party of civil rights and environmentalism. Whatever Section 31 does in the 24th century is irrelevant to an evaluation of how it would behave in the 22nd century. The only relevant information is what we see of the institution of that name that exists at that time.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I would like to think that good men such as Malcolm Reed and Trip Tucker would never join an organization as batshit insane as DS9-era Section 31...

 

[rahullak]

^
The good that men would do...

 

[DEWLine]

Just got my copy today.

Wow.

Just...wow.

 

[DEWLine]

^They will. She'll turn it down.

And I think we saw part of the reasons why here in this volume. Let the debate commence on how she'll get from this point to that decision.

 

[Ronald Held]

I will be interested in seeing how T'Pau changes from this novel to the TOS era.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I will be interested in seeing how T'Pau changes from this novel to the TOS era.

Especially her accent.