I see no reason to trust anything Pressman says. Especially if he is, as I suspect, a member of Section 31.
Starfleet Marine Corps
- Thread starter Danlav05
- Start date
I see no reason to trust anything Pressman says. Especially if he is, as I suspect, a member of Section 31.
Maybe it's just me, but I've always thought id there was such an organization it would be more probably called the United Federation Marine Corps (UFMC), rather than "Starfleet Marines".
I mean, go find a US Marine and try telling him he's a US Navy Marine. I'm sure you'll get a reaction. You might want to stand back a bit though.
I mean, go find a US Marine and try telling him he's a US Navy Marine. I'm sure you'll get a reaction. You might want to stand back a bit though.
Starfleet ground troops might indeed not call themselves Marines. If this is true, they could simply wear a unique uniform, and of course have ground-based ranks, but other than that, make absolutely no reference to any organization name other than just plain 'Starfleet'.
If you see a Starfleet officer wearing a uniform color you've never seen before, and using a rank like Major, Colonel or General, you can guess what they are. They don't really need to use the term 'Marines'. Their rank and uniform will tell you what they are doing.
It would surely fit Kirk's description of Starfleet as a 'combined service'.
If you see a Starfleet officer wearing a uniform color you've never seen before, and using a rank like Major, Colonel or General, you can guess what they are. They don't really need to use the term 'Marines'. Their rank and uniform will tell you what they are doing.
It would surely fit Kirk's description of Starfleet as a 'combined service'.
Last edited:
Which brings us back to the myth of the US, Royal Marines, Airborne Ranger SAS Delta and how special he is and only he a a Foreign Legionnaire can actually fight on the ground.
I am of the camp that starship technology is so overwhelming. that the small numbers of recruits will always be special, should they be helmsmen or security. We just want to call them Delta SAS Marine Rangers because Security sounds like Mall Cop to our ears
I am of the camp that starship technology is so overwhelming. that the small numbers of recruits will always be special, should they be helmsmen or security. We just want to call them Delta SAS Marine Rangers because Security sounds like Mall Cop to our ears
There is no evidence it was a special case.
We have no data on this one way or the other. All we know is that Betazed fell to the Dominion, period; no other information about Federation policy towards Betazed was established.
I am at a loss as to determine how the Federation -- not its members; the Federation -- could negotiate, ratify, and enact a peace treaty if it cannot also declare war.
It was sovereign Federation territory under Federation law; Cardassian claims did not affect the territory's status under Federation law until the Federation ratified a treaty yielding it to the Cardassian Union. An alliance cannot yield sovereign territory the way the Federation did.
Your parents' home owners association cannot enact a speed limit across the entire nation.
1. Alliances cannot themselves make territorial claims.
2. Territory has been described on numerous occasions as "Federation space" -- such as Picard ordering an invading Borg ship to withdraw from Federation space in "The Best of Both Worlds." Not Earth space. Not Vulcan space. Federation space. It's Federation territory. Sovereign Federation territory -- as evidenced by the Federation's legal ability to yield it to foreign states.
Alliances do not possess their own militaries; they coordinate member states' militaries. The Federation has its own military.
The Federation has been shown on numerous occasions to possess and enact all of the powers of a sovereign state.
ETA:
Also:
Alliances do not have constitutions that guarantee civil rights to all persons within their territory. The Federation does.
Last edited:
If you watched that episode of DS9 where Sisko was getting visions of a ancient Bajoran city and what it looked like while the visions were killing him slowly, there was a conversation with the visiting admiral that if the Bajoran's joined, there would be alot of work to do in integrating the Bajoran militia into Starfleet.
From what I can tell, every member race of the UFP basically gives up their own standing military and integrate it into Starfleet where Starfleet is responsible for providing defense to every member planet / colony / territory.
IMO, that is a reasonable method of doing things when you are part of a bigger group.
From what I can tell, every member race of the UFP basically gives up their own standing military and integrate it into Starfleet where Starfleet is responsible for providing defense to every member planet / colony / territory.
IMO, that is a reasonable method of doing things when you are part of a bigger group.
^ When a new member world joins the Federation, most of its existing military is absorbed into Starfleet. Not all of it.
From DSN: "Tribunal":
From TNG: "The Best of Both Worlds, Part I:"
From TNG: "The Most Toys:"
From DSN: "Rules of Engagement:"
From VOY: "Dark Frontier, Part I:"
From Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home:
From Star Trek: Insurrection:
Bold added.
Sounds like it's the Federation's Starfleet to me.
That presumes their existence, while merely begging the question on what they're called. I prefer that they be acknowledged as existing, and think that they should be called as such, because it fits the way Roddenberry started, using the 18th C Royal Navy situation, with the modern navy structure to fit viewer's background knowledge.
Sci said:
EU makes laws that are binding to its members all the time and it is not a sovereign state...
As for negotiating the peace, obviously the Federation members (through the council or directly) have given the president the authority to negotiate on such a treaty. EU has representatives that negotiate on its behalf.
Last edited:
It's a private lake, the HOA owns and controls the only boat launch, and home owners actually on the lake have all signed a covenance. A nearby HOA decided to ban fueled motors on their lake. A few years back a third HOA held a private boat (placed a lean?) until the violating owner from out of the area paid a two hundred dollar "usage fee."
Darkwing, it has to do with control. If the Federation isn't a state, but it's allied members can exercise control over a area of interstellar space, then they are in fact in control of that space.
If the Federation can't exercise control, then it doesn't make any different if they're a state or a alliance, they don't control it.
Which seems to prove the point of Merry Christmas - it's never United Federation Starfleet.
Of course, it might well be United Federation of Planets Starfleet officially. But since that's a mouthful, nobody in his, her or its right mind will ever use the official form verbally, not even in the most formal situations. So we get things like "Federation Starfleet" or "United Starship" instead of the official "UFP Starfleet" or "UFP Starship". Indeed, the mysterious USS in front of ship names might well stand for UFP Starfleet Starship"...
Why?
Starfleet engineers are a proud bunch of specialists, but they don't wear special uniforms or use special ranks. Ditto for Starfleet doctors. Starfleet security personnel blend in, too. Starfleet just isn't an organization that would use special uniforms, even if it is ready to change uniform patterns at the drop of the hat-they-dropped-in-the-2250s-for-good-already.
As for Starfleet infantry using Air Force ranks, why needlessly confuse matters? We never hear of such a thing happening in Star Trek.
Timo Saloniemi
That's how it plays out in the novels, but canonically speakinga planet's entire military being absorbed into Starfleet would explain why we never see any military service within the Federation other than Starfleet. Hell, aside from Vulcan having its own intelligence agency on TNG, we have every indication that Starfleet covers all security and defense of the Federation.
The European Union is a sui generis entity -- something more than an alliance but less than a true sovereign state -- that has been evolving in the direction of becoming a sovereign state for decades. But that in-between status is unsustainable -- it will either become one or the other, because in-between cannot last. And indeed, the impossibility of having a monetary union without a fiscal union (just look at the crisis that horrible combo has produced in Greece) will inevitably push the E.U. to either become a sovereign state in its own right, or to fully dis-establish itself as a mere alliance.
I could find no reference to the E.U. itself being able to sign and enact treaties with non-E.U. states in the Wiki article on E.U. external relations -- merely that E.U. diplomatic missions are delegated certain authorities from its member states for the day to day purposes of representation, particularly from the national embassies of whichever country is currently serving in the rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that E.U. member states still have to sign and ratify actual treaties, because they are the true sovereigns. Further, the E.U. is only delegated authority in certain areas, with most foreign policy remaining in the hands of the individual E.U. member states.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the Federation's member governments sign and ratify UFP treaties, nor indeed that they have the kinds of veto powers over Federation foreign policy possessed by E.U. member states.
In other words, the HOA does not have the authority to issue a nation-wide speed limit. The Federation Council does.
I am truly at a loss as to what the distinction is between "Federation Starfleet" and "United Federation Starfleet." "Federation" happens to be the adjective to describe institutions of the UFP rather than "United Federation." Are we contending that Starfleet is not a Federation institution because it is the Federation Starfleet rather than called "the United Federation Starfleet?"
Are we also contending that the Royal Navy is not the United Kingdom's navy just because it doesn't have the term "United Kingdom" in its name?
Maybe we should.
I mean, it doesn't really make much sense having, say, an Admiral in charge of troops, does it? Admirals are in charge of FLEETS. Their responsibility is ships, not ground troops.
Separate rank systems exist for a reason.
There is no practical reason, it is just a meaningless tradition. The leader can be called Head Chef and the organisation works just as well.
^ It's not meaningless. As I said, separate rank systems exist for a reason. When's the last time you saw a Navy which had ranks like Major or Colonel or General (well, outside of Babylon 5 of course 
) or a Marine Corps or Army with commanders and admirals?
) or a Marine Corps or Army with commanders and admirals?Similar threads
