Top Five Jonathan Archer Command Decisions
- Thread starter CaptainMatt
- Start date
Damn right!HopefulRomatic, I don't believe the thread specified that they had to be good decisions. 
I could possibly come up with such a list though they would probably be all from Season 4, like the example JiNX-01 pointed out in "United".
JiNX-01, my mistake for not noticing that.
If it's a problem, I can edit that out of the previous topic. My point in the matter, however, was that while the philosopher of "honesty is the best policy" sounds well and good, actually betraying an ally to a stranger is an unsound strategy in military and espionage matters.
Admiral Shran, a joke... is a story with a humorous climax.
Teacake, ah... remind me never to stand near your dog.
I could possibly come up with such a list though they would probably be all from Season 4, like the example JiNX-01 pointed out in "United".JiNX-01, my mistake for not noticing that.
If it's a problem, I can edit that out of the previous topic. My point in the matter, however, was that while the philosopher of "honesty is the best policy" sounds well and good, actually betraying an ally to a stranger is an unsound strategy in military and espionage matters.Admiral Shran, a joke... is a story with a humorous climax.
Teacake, ah... remind me never to stand near your dog.
1. When Archer decided to play pirate to get supplies in the Expanse. Perhaps my favorite decision by him as it added a grey area to Trek morals.
2. When Archer uses the shuttle simulator to trick Degra.
3. When Archer decides to threaten to throw the guy out the airlock for information.
4. When Mirror Archer decided to let the andorian ship go so that they could tell tales of the destruction unleashed by the Defiant and strike fear into the hearts of the rebels.
5. My least favorite: When he decided NOT to order Phlox to give the dying aliens the cure.
2. When Archer uses the shuttle simulator to trick Degra.
3. When Archer decides to threaten to throw the guy out the airlock for information.
4. When Mirror Archer decided to let the andorian ship go so that they could tell tales of the destruction unleashed by the Defiant and strike fear into the hearts of the rebels.
5. My least favorite: When he decided NOT to order Phlox to give the dying aliens the cure.
HopefulRomatic, I don't believe the thread specified that they had to be good decisions.
JiNX-01, my mistake for not noticing that.
Admiral Shran, a joke... is a story with a humorous climax.
Teacake, ah... remind me never to stand near your dog.
No biggie. Just wanted to make it clear I was wasn't ranking his decisions in terms of quality.
This is my favorite too and it's a lot more grey area than DS9's In the Pale Moonlight IMO. I like how the episode is called Damage because there's the obvious damage to the NX-01 and the incredible moral damage done to Archer as he chooses piracy in order to save Earth. It's a great episode because it leaps right over all of Trek's "oh noes, we cannot lose what it means to be human" dribble. Lose what it means to be human or lose Earth?
Archer's desperation was when I started appreciating the character.
I'd like to props JiNX for her adorable avatar 
It makes perfect sense if the people who made the final selection of Archer held the same opinion of Vulcans as he did.
I mean, the whole idea of the NX-01 was for the Humans to get out from under the Vulcans thumb.
I don't know Praetor, kirk was always preaching about how there is always a way out of a bad situation. I think Kirk would have done the same exact thing as Archer.
What was wrong with his decision in "The Andorian Incident"? The Vulcans were spying on the Andorians, thus violating their treaty. Giving Shran the evidence of the Vulcan listening post was the legitimate thing to do.
I'm also inclined to agree with his decision in "Dear Doctor". It's not Starfleet's business to dictate evolution.
I'm also inclined to agree with his decision in "Dear Doctor". It's not Starfleet's business to dictate evolution.
intefering with evolution is something doctors do every day. Further, Phlox' explanations were pure racist pseudoscience-saying that a race was "destined" by evolution to become the superior one is complete, full-stop nonsense. Evolution is a process-it's about adaptation to environment. It has no "goal" in mind. The writers of this episode couldn't tell Evolution from their own anuses.
As for "Andorian Incident"-Archer betrayed the main ally of Earth in a five-minute decision based on very little understanding. Had the Vulcans cut off relations or even retailiated militarily for his decision here, they would have been within their rights to do so. Archer is a clown.
Phlox never used the word "destined." He was quite careful to qualify his opinions based on his tests, studies and projections. He said the Menk had the potential to become the dominant species, under certain conditions. I thought his example about altering the Neanderthals' evolution, which would have altered the emergence of Homo sapiens, was compelling.
Either position-- a "non-interference" directive, or stepping in and altering the gradual genetic progression of the Valakian condition-- could be argued as the one to take. That was the point of the whole episode, that there was no one unequivocally "correct" resolution to the situation. The fact that viewers are still hashing it out years later is probably the best outcome the writers could have wished for.
I agree with Alienesse about "The Andorian Incident" as well. It was established early on that the Andorians suspected the presence of a spy station and were looking for it. The Vulcan monks were exposed as liars prepared to kill to keep the secret (although too clumsy about it to succeed). So much for Earth's allies being paragons of trustworthiness. Archer gave T'Pol a chance to make the case for justifying the violation of the Vulcan/Andorian treaty, and she sided with him.
Phlox never used the word "destined." He was quite careful to qualify his opinions based on his tests, studies and projections. He said the Menk had the potential to become the dominant species, under certain conditions. I thought his example about altering the Neanderthals' evolution, which would have altered the emergence of Homo sapiens, was compelling.
Either position-- a "non-interference" directive, or stepping in and altering the gradual genetic progression of the Valakian condition-- could be argued as the one to take. That was the point of the whole episode, that there was no one unequivocally "correct" resolution to the situation. The fact that viewers are still hashing it out years later is probably the best outcome the writers could have wished for.
I agree with Alienesse about "The Andorian Incident" as well. It was established early on that the Andorians suspected the presence of a spy station and were looking for it. The Vulcan monks were exposed as liars prepared to kill to keep the secret (although too clumsy about it to succeed). So much for Earth's allies being paragons of trustworthiness. Archer gave T'Pol a chance to make the case for justifying the violation of the Vulcan/Andorian treaty, and she sided with him.
that there's an "argument" about an issue doesn't mean that both sides' argunents are equally valid, or the flat Earthers would have a point. You're really equating witholding a cure and passively committing genocide to "intefering with genetic progression" as if those are even remotely equivalent outcomes?
Again, evolution's "outcome" is irrelevant-it has produced intelligent creatures who can make their own ethical decisions and use their technology and skills to interfere with evolution, as doctors do every day.
I'd like to see how humans felt if they were genetically time tabled to die out but there was a cure to prevent this.
No. The term "genocide" isn't necessarily accurate. The gradual extinction of the Valakians over a period of centuries from their genetic condition was not a foregone conclusion. We already know a cure was possible. The Valakians had the potential-- and now, more time-- to develop the cure on their own. They could have realized the Menk immunity was a key to a cure. If another warp-capable species dropped by, they could have bummed a ride, or received warp technology to build a ship (however foolhardy handing over advanced tech would be). They did not have one foot in the grave.
Let's make it interesting. What if the cure, and human survival, depended on subjugating (however benevolently) another intelligent species?
They didn't have to subjugate them, they could have changed their society to eliminate that and the other species could have freely evolved. There's no real reason why they were going to be stopped from evolving just because there was another group of humanoids on the planet, other than social reasons such as having to be in a survival mode all the time so therefore being unable to further themselves in science. This wasn't the case. The whole premise of the show was nonsensical.
I also agree with Alienesse on Archer's decision in The Andorian Incident. The Vulcans had been exposed as liars and their violations of their own treaty had been revealed. The only moral choice was to give the Andorians the information. It might be that sonak makes a good point that it wasn't the correct decision to make politically, but since when does politics trump morality?
In Star Trek, rarely. That's one of the Big Lessons Star Trek trots out. Only the bad guys employ politics over morality.
Similar threads
