Scotty and his military comment

[Crazy Eddie]

I agree that there are other organisations that conduct themselves in a military type fashion like the coastguard and probably the 23rd Chapter of the StarTrek fanclub, Las Vegas division, the police, even the TrekBBS gives its members honorary ranks.

However the difference between 'pretend' military organisations and real ones is that real ones have great big guns to back them up.

And if that was the ONLY difference we wouldn't be having this discussion. But once again, in the example of the JMSDF we are reminded that having weapons does not make one a military anymore than not having weapons makes one a civilian.

There's military and military though. I don't think Spock or Troi or Janeway or Crusher for example would join an organisation whose sole purpose was to battle Klingons or Romulans. I believe Starfleet was like someone has mentioned before, like the time of Captain Cooks voyage. He had scientists and map makers aboard.

While I consider that a very good point, it has to be remembered that the reason military vessels were used in exploration during the age of sail is because the military had all of the best ships and the most competent sailors. Exploration therefore piggybacked on the military because it was more efficient than raising money for their own exploration vessels, and because the tools used for exploration at the time were relatively portable and required no installation.

This has ceased to be the case in modern maritime affairs where meaningful exploration requires specialized equipment and ships custom-built for that purpose; the military does almost no exploring whatsoever anymore because their ships are very poorly suited to it.

Extrapolating that same progression, it's possible that by the 23rd century affairs have swung around to the opposite direction where the military is now piggybacking on the exploration vessels because the explorers have all the best ships and even their most powerful weapons are relatively portable and easy to install.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Heck, Picard considered Kirk a "cowboy,"

As did Spock.

Pike, in the new movies, seems to think that Starfleet could use a few more mavericks like Kirk.

Which doesn't change the fact that Kirk IS a maverick and is a little quick on the draw -- in every sense of the word -- in addition to being very thoughtful and intelligent. That doesn't neccesarily make Kirk a military man... actually, it makes him a Federation stunt man, the go-to guy they usually call when they need someone to do something suicidally dangerous (e.g. the Enterprise Incident).

I understand the writer's guidelines in TOS and their attempt to show an "evolved" military of the future; later productions, I think, took that sentiment further and realized that the way Trek technology was progressing, the Federation could easily have evolved beyond the point of needing a military at all.

 

[throwback]

I know that species, like the Organians, have evolved to the point where they can defend themselves without the use of militaries. But, have we seen a truly advanced civilization in Star Trek that didn't need a military?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

I agree that there are other organisations that conduct themselves in a military type fashion like the coastguard and probably the 23rd Chapter of the StarTrek fanclub, Las Vegas division, the police, even the TrekBBS gives its members honorary ranks.

However the difference between 'pretend' military organisations and real ones is that real ones have great big guns to back them up.

And if that was the ONLY difference we wouldn't be having this discussion. But once again, in the example of the JMSDF we are reminded that having weapons does not make one a military anymore than not having weapons makes one a civilian.

Of course from what I understand having courtmartials tends to imply one is a military organization, and I don't think the JSDF has those.

Starfleet on the other hand does.

Besides I've been replaying the Mass Effect trilogy and the main character tends to do stuff that Starfleet mostly spends their time doing in Star Trek and its repeated several times that he is a member of the military. So it's not like running around exploring the universe means you can't be a military.

Especially since militaries kind of already did that stuff as well.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I know that species, like the Organians, have evolved to the point where they can defend themselves without the use of militaries. But, have we seen a truly advanced civilization in Star Trek that didn't need a military?

The Metrons.
The Aldeans.
The Paxans.
The Borg.
The First Federation.

Just off the top of my head.

Besides I've been replaying the Mass Effect trilogy and the main character tends to do stuff that Starfleet mostly spends their time doing in Star Trek and its repeated several times that he is a member of the military. So it's not like running around exploring the universe means you can't be a military.

Nobody claimed it does. The Alliance Navy from Mass Effect is partially an expeditionary force that spends ALMOST as much time exploring as it does performing military maneuvers (but even then, not nearly as much as Starfleet).

On the other hand, the Normandy SR-2 -- which is larger, more powerful and significantly better armed than the SR-1 -- is a civilian ship manufactured by Cerberus and carries a somewhat more advanced sensor suite on top of it. Commander Shepard can run the SR-2 under military discipline despite the fact that Cerberus is by no means an actual military; it's a nonprofit at best, a terrorist organization at worst.

But since you invited the comparison, what do you say we run with it? Have you noticed, yet, all of the less than subtle nuances in the Mass Effect universe -- the discipline and protocol of the crew, the emphasis in combat readiness, the absolute clarity in the ship's mission to protect Earth and her colonies at all costs, and most of all, the polished utilitarianism of the Normandy itself -- all of which are so very UNLIKE Starfleet as depicted in any Trek production so far?

If Starfleet were a formal military organization there would be no difference; Starfleet would be exactly like the Alliance Navy in almost every way, with exploration as part and parcel of their combat/patrol duties. That the differences exist AT ALL should tell us something.

 

[Belz...]

One officer brought it up as a loaded question to which the CinC was in the process of (very diplomatically) answering.

So that's THREE people discussing it. Hardly a strawman.

Well in that case your opinion doesn't trump mine

Picard's opinion does.

We have a doctrine of Picardian Infallibility, now ?

 

[trevanian]

Except in episodes where he gets chocolate spilled on him (i.e., the only INTERESTING ones.)

 

[Crazy Eddie]

One officer brought it up as a loaded question to which the CinC was in the process of (very diplomatically) answering.

So that's THREE people discussing it. Hardly a strawman.

A strawman argument REMAINS a strawman argument no matter how many people are discussing it.

We have a doctrine of Picardian Infallibility, now ?

Picard doesn't have to be infallible to know more about Starfleet than you do.

 

[Belz...]

A strawman argument REMAINS a strawman argument no matter how many people are discussing it.

It's not a strawman if people are actually discussing the possibility, is it ?

Besides, a strawman is a misrepresentation of someone's argument. The female character asked a question about the impact of the events discussed in the briefing.

Picard doesn't have to be infallible to know more about Starfleet than you do.

He doesn't know more about starfleet than I do because he's a fictional character, is slave to the writers, and doesn't have all of the Trek movies and series on DVD.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

A strawman argument REMAINS a strawman argument no matter how many people are discussing it.

It's not a strawman if people are actually discussing the possibility, is it ?

Of course it is. That's the whole point of CREATING a strawman argument: so that people will discuss THAT instead of what's actually being proposed.

Besides, a strawman is a misrepresentation of someone's argument. The female character asked a question about the impact of the events discussed in the briefing.

Which is nevertheless a misrepresentation of Spock's proposal that they NEGOTIATE the dismantling of their space stations along the neutral zone. It's an extremist overreaction to what is an otherwise very modest proposal.

Picard doesn't have to be infallible to know more about Starfleet than you do.

He doesn't know more about starfleet than I do because he's a fictional character

And Starfleet is a fictional organization, which means you actually know nothing about it.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

If a fleet is mothballed, it's not being used. Inactive. If Starfleet's exploratory and scientific programs continued, surely the fleet would continue to be used in those capacities, and there would be dozens of other miscellaneous duties more necessary and/or beneficial to the Federation than waging cold war with the Klingons to be performed. She asked if giving up the fight with the Klingons would mean giving up their ships. This straw man is raised again at the dinner aboard the Enterprise when Chang asks Kirk if he'd be willing to "give up Starfleet," as if it would cease to exist if peace were made. Fortunately, the ever logical Spock is there to save Kirk from falling into this trap of words. Of course Kirk would never give up Starfleet, but that was never what he was being called upon to do. One thing we've never seen over the years is Starfleet not having anything to do to occupy itself, irrespective of whether there's a war going on or not. It's not only a straw man, but a non sequitur as well.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

On the other hand, the Normandy SR-2 -- which is larger, more powerful and significantly better armed than the SR-1 -- is a civilian ship manufactured by Cerberus and carries a somewhat more advanced sensor suite on top of it. Commander Shepard can run the SR-2 under military discipline despite the fact that Cerberus is by no means an actual military; it's a nonprofit at best, a terrorist organization at worst.

Actually as of Mass Effect 3 the SR-2 is a part of the Systems Alliance Navy and as such is a military vessel.

But since you invited the comparison, what do you say we run with it? Have you noticed, yet, all of the less than subtle nuances in the Mass Effect universe -- the discipline and protocol of the crew, the emphasis in combat readiness, the absolute clarity in the ship's mission to protect Earth and her colonies at all costs, and most of all, the polished utilitarianism of the Normandy itself -

I'm really not seeing many differences between that and the TOS Starfleet I mean we are talking about an organization that basically that let's its personal glass entire planets under some circumstances, so I think that qualifies as at all costs.

Not to mention Kirk seemed to response to a lot of threats to his ship, various planets, the galaxy, and ect. by trying to shoot it with phasers.

Of course I don't know if the Enterprise was spartan or not based on the 60s aesthetic, but it didn't really seem as fancy and luxury linerish like the Enterprise-D.

Plus the Normandy in the Mass Effect games is a frigate that uses design elements from Human and Turian ships. We've never seen the inside of a regular human warship let alone a cruiser-class one which would be the Enterprise's actual counterpart there, so you can't say for sure if the Enterprise is spartan enough to qualify or not.

- all of which are so very UNLIKE Starfleet as depicted in any Trek production so far?

I don't know,again the TOS Enterprise didn't seem all decked out and fancy.

Also the NX-01 seemed pretty spartan. I mean it's been compared to a submarine interior.

If Starfleet were a formal military organization there would be no difference; Starfleet would be exactly like the Alliance Navy in almost every way, with exploration as part and parcel of their combat/patrol duties. That the differences exist AT ALL should tell us something.

I'm still not seeming many differences between how the two organizations operate.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

On the other hand, the Normandy SR-2 -- which is larger, more powerful and significantly better armed than the SR-1 -- is a civilian ship manufactured by Cerberus and carries a somewhat more advanced sensor suite on top of it. Commander Shepard can run the SR-2 under military discipline despite the fact that Cerberus is by no means an actual military; it's a nonprofit at best, a terrorist organization at worst.

Actually as of Mass Effect 3 the SR-2 is a part of the Systems Alliance Navy and as such is a military vessel.

And the alliance had to retrofit the living the hell out of it to bring it up to Alliance standard (I was kinda pissed about that too. You mean I have to go way the hell down to the shuttlebay just to mod my armor? Goddammit!)

But since you invited the comparison, what do you say we run with it? Have you noticed, yet, all of the less than subtle nuances in the Mass Effect universe -- the discipline and protocol of the crew, the emphasis in combat readiness, the absolute clarity in the ship's mission to protect Earth and her colonies at all costs, and most of all, the polished utilitarianism of the Normandy itself -

I'm really not seeing many differences between that and the TOS Starfleet I mean we are talking about an organization that basically that let's its personal glass entire planets under some circumstances, so I think that qualifies as at all costs.

Except the Enterprise never actually DID that, and it's far from certain that they could. And the Systems Alliance DEFINITELY couldn't.

But I'm asking you for a comparison more meaningful that "Durr... they both have guns?" Comparing various Sci-Fi organizations -- the Systems Alliance, the UNSC, the Second Empire, the Earth Alliance Space Force , etc -- there are clear differences in tone and ethos. The TOS fleet is the most martial of the Trekiverse, but it comes in as being the softest for the genre overall.

Plus the Normandy in the Mass Effect games is a frigate that uses design elements from Human and Turian ships. We've never seen the inside of a regular human warship...

Actually we do, a number of times in Mass Effect 3 on Cerberus and Alliance cruisers. The interiors are intentionally similar to the Cerberus space stations we encounter in ME2 and 3 and also the the Illusive Man's Kronos Station.

And yeah, by comparison, Normandy's a pretty regular warship.

Also the NX-01 seemed pretty spartan. I mean it's been compared to a submarine interior.

Not entirely sure what they proves since NX-01 was unquestionably built as a non-military vessel.

I'm still not seeming many differences between how the two organizations operate.

My recommendation, then, is to pick up a copy of Halo 4 and play through Spartan Ops phase -- essentially, the UNSC exploration of Requiem.

If I wanted to depict a military organization on a mission of exploration, THAT'S how I'd do it. Not that Starfleet would have to be as purely badass as the Spartans, but given the possibilities presented in 23rd century technology, I'd have to think they'd be at least close.

And as I've pointed out before, that's one of the interesting things about NX-01. It's easy to think of Starfleet as being "the Federation's military" when they're the only game in town. But in Enterprise, the speed, skill and discipline exhibitted by the MACOs frankly made Malcolm Reed's security team look like a bunch of teenagers with super soakers. If you were to encounter a MACO in the 23rd or 24th century, Strfleet security would look just plain silly.

 

[Belz...]

That's the whole point of CREATING a strawman argument: so that people will discuss THAT instead of what's actually being proposed.

Ok I'll give you that little detail. But I repeat, for the last time, that the CNC addressing the question in a way that would seem to confirm her suspicions meant she had a point, and that it wasn't a strawman.

Which is nevertheless a misrepresentation of Spock's proposal that they NEGOTIATE the dismantling of their space stations along the neutral zone.

No, it's a discussion of the consequences. Very clear.

Also remember the Klingons asking Kirk if he's willing to give up starfleet. I guess everybody is enjoying the same strawman, right ? Well, it's not a strawman if everyone thinks it's going to happen.

And Starfleet is a fictional organization, which means you actually know nothing about it.

Wrong. I know a whole lot about it because I watch the show. My point is that we can compare between characters, but if you start comparing what characters know to what real people know, the fictional ones are going to lose, because they don't exist. Apples to apples, please.

 

[KGator]

Wow, this is quite a discussion based on snippets of dialog by various writers who we pretty much understand are more interested in moving the plot along of their particular episode or movie than creating or perpetuating canon of a fictional universe.

Hey, maybe Roddenberry was an anti-military flower child in spirit and dreamed of a utopian society without wars and aggression. However he created his universe complete with external forces that threatened the Federation and its personnel. This was dealt with by having Starfleet act as the military of the Federation.

By definition a military is the armed forces of a sovereign entity. Since Starfleet fights in its battles and defends its citizens they are a military. What a state or government does with its military is entirely up to that entity. How Switzerland organizes and utilizes its military can be entirely different than the Russian military's purpose.

Its too bad people here spend so much time arguing on what their perception of a military is and thus don't recognize they making many true, yet entirely pointless observations to the bottom line of the discussion. What Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Q, Adama, Barry Manilow or Snuffleupagus say about Starfleet doesn't change the fact that they fight for the Federation and thus are not paramilitary (akin to a police force) but military in nature.

Internal impressions of current militaries and any personal beliefs of what characteristics a military must posses to be called "militaristic" are as the Borg would say . . . . irrelevant.

 

[BillJ]

By definition a military is the armed forces of a sovereign entity. Since Starfleet fights in its battles and defends its citizens they are a military. What a state or government does with its military is entirely up to that entity. How Switzerland organizes and utilizes its military can be entirely different than the Russian military's purpose.

This.

If Starfleet isn't the Federation military, then who is?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Also remember the Klingons asking Kirk if he's willing to give up starfleet. I guess everybody is enjoying the same strawman, right ?

As a matter of fact, they are.

Because I also remember Valeris quoting Kirk's words at the end of that very same briefing: "Did you not wish Gorkon dead? 'Let them die,' you said. Did I misinterpret you?"

Cartwright's co-conspirators were listening in on that conversation, either a recording or in real time. Chang brought it up in the first place as a way of baiting Kirk into saying something undiplomatic. He nearly succeeded.

If Starfleet isn't the Federation military, then who is?

The MACOs.

 

[BillJ]

If Starfleet isn't the Federation military, then who is?

The MACOs.

Care to show any type of proof that they are the Federation's military? A single instance in more than six-hundred episodes and twelve movies that they actually exist? The Siege of AR-558 would seem to indicate that they were folded into Starfleet at some point, since it is Starfleet that is fighting not only a space war but holding onto territory as well like an infantry would.

 

[KGator]

Also remember the Klingons asking Kirk if he's willing to give up starfleet. I guess everybody is enjoying the same strawman, right ?

As a matter of fact, they are.

Because I also remember Valeris quoting Kirk's words at the end of that very same briefing: "Did you not wish Gorkon dead? 'Let them die,' you said. Did I misinterpret you?"

Cartwright's co-conspirators were listening in on that conversation, either a recording or in real time. Chang brought it up in the first place as a way of baiting Kirk into saying something undiplomatic. He nearly succeeded.

If Starfleet isn't the Federation military, then who is?

The MACOs.

Again, this is superfluous and doesn't change the overriding fact that Starfleet is an armed force that fights on behalf of the Federation making them military. Whether the Federation has one military element or one thousand as a part of its armed forces contingent is irrelevant.

The Army is a military entity that carries out the directives of the US Government. Its existence doesn't make the Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard or Marine Corps paramilitary organizations. They are ALL military forces.

Starfleet is an armed force of the Federation and by definition it makes them a military.

Military: Armed Forces (Miriam Webster)

Military
1. Armed forces: a country ruled by the military.
2. Members, especially officers, of an armed force.
(freedictionary.com)

Military: The armed services (esp the army) (World English Dictionary)

The military.
a. the military establishment of a nation; the armed forces.
b. military personnel, especially commissioned officers, taken collectively.
(Dictionary.com)

Starfleet fights on behalf of the Federation. That makes them military. The idea that there can be only one military arm is some fantasy that has somehow taken traction on this board. Starfleet is armed, dangerous and engages in space and ground combat on behalf of a chain of command that leads up to the President of the Federation.

It would seem hard to argue that Starfleet is a bunch of unarmed scientists who do not engage in combat on behalf of the UFP but apparently that's the belief some on this board have.

 

[BillJ]

Starfleet fights on behalf of the Federation. That makes them military. The idea that there can be only one military arm is some fantasy that has somehow taken traction on this board. Starfleet is armed, dangerous and engages in space and ground combat.

My point was that you could make the argument that Stafleet wasn't the full-time military if there were other Federation military bodies. But without those bodies, Starfleet is the military seven days a week and three-hundred sixty five days a year.