• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Anyone here who HATES "in the pale moonlight"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought it was good. It showed that in time of war, even good men must do "bad" things for the greater good.

It does beg the question though, would Sisko murder Tuvix? :lol:
 
The only thing I disliked was that Sisko got permission from StarFleet for his actions. Sisko should have acted alone.
 
The thing about Roddenberry's 'No conflict' edict is that it barred the writers from laziness. Interpersonal conflict can be great, but only if it's original, character driven interpersonal conflict. The 'Roddenberry box' took away a crutch and forced the writers to be creative.

And the DS9 writers were very creative in general, but not when it came to interpersonal conflict. When Worf came aboard and had difficulty accepting that Odo was security chief and not him, that was lazy, and it turned out to be a very bad episode that made Worf look more like a pathetic child than a Starfleet officer.

DS9 was at it's best when it wasn't focusing on interpersonal conflict among the cast. When DS9 had interpersonal conflict is when the cast seemed the most like spoiled children.
 
The thing about Roddenberry's 'No conflict' edict is that it barred the writers from laziness. Interpersonal conflict can be great, but only if it's original, character driven interpersonal conflict. The 'Roddenberry box' took away a crutch and forced the writers to be creative.

If by "creative" you mean "having less ways to be lazy," then I suppose you are right. Still doesn't stop lazy writers from being lazy, as Roddenberry TNG showed - we just got more of the same junk. Inter-crew conflict would have at least added some variety.
 
I loved it, and to me, there is no "dilemma" there. If Sisko doesn't act, the UFP is in danger of losing the war.

Well the dilemma is at what cost will the Federation be saved. The cost is deceiving an empire into war.


um, and...?

had they not been brought in, the war would have been lost, the UFP would have been conquered, and eventually the Romulan Empire as well.

Sisko was saving both, while at the cost of some deception and a few lives.

As I wrote, Garak's quote sums it up
 
Whenever I think of good Trek vs. bad Trek, I always compare this episode to Enterprise's "Dear, Doctor". Where as Sisko ends this story with self-guilt and no respect for what he's done, Archer is openly confident in his decision to let a whole species die out and earns respect from his crew.
 
I loved it, and to me, there is no "dilemma" there. If Sisko doesn't act, the UFP is in danger of losing the war.

Well the dilemma is at what cost will the Federation be saved. The cost is deceiving an empire into war.


um, and...?

And saving the Federation doesn't warrant that.
had they not been brought in, the war would have been lost, the UFP would have been conquered, and eventually the Romulan Empire as well.

Which Sisko could not prove totally.

Sisko was saving both, while at the cost of some deception and a few lives.

As I wrote, Garak's quote sums it up

When?
 
Whenever I think of good Trek vs. bad Trek, I always compare this episode to Enterprise's "Dear, Doctor". Where as Sisko ends this story with self-guilt and no respect for what he's done, Archer is openly confident in his decision to let a whole species die out and earns respect from his crew.

We have no idea what Archer's crew though beyond Phlox. We don't even get T'Pol's thoughts on withholding the cure.
 
Well the dilemma is at what cost will the Federation be saved. The cost is deceiving an empire into war.


um, and...?

And saving the Federation doesn't warrant that.
had they not been brought in, the war would have been lost, the UFP would have been conquered, and eventually the Romulan Empire as well.
Which Sisko could not prove totally.

Sisko was saving both, while at the cost of some deception and a few lives.

As I wrote, Garak's quote sums it up
When?


saving the Federation doesn't warrant that?:wtf: Your "principles" won't mean a thing when the peoples of the Federation are killed or enslaved. A government's first responsibility is self-defense. They owed the Romulans nothing. The Romulans would have been fine with watching the UFP and the Klingons be destroyed while fighting for the freedom of the Alpha Quadrant.


The Garak quote is something like "you probably saved the Alpha Quadrant. And all it cost was the life of one criminal, one senator, and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I'd call that a bargain."
 
In my opinion it was one of the best Star Trek episode and Garak was great.

The Garak quote is something like "you probably saved the Alpha Quadrant. And all it cost was the life of one criminal, one senator, and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I'd call that a bargain."

Geat line
 
um, and...?

And saving the Federation doesn't warrant that.
Which Sisko could not prove totally.

Sisko was saving both, while at the cost of some deception and a few lives.

As I wrote, Garak's quote sums it up
When?


saving the Federation doesn't warrant that?:wtf: Your "principles" won't mean a thing when the peoples of the Federation are killed or enslaved. A government's first responsibility is self-defense. They owed the Romulans nothing. The Romulans would have been fine with watching the UFP and the Klingons be destroyed while fighting for the freedom of the Alpha Quadrant.


The Garak quote is something like "you probably saved the Alpha Quadrant. And all it cost was the life of one criminal, one senator, and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I'd call that a bargain."

lol.. Sisko tricked an entire Empire into war. I don't see how that deceit was justified, based upon the Romulans who may have died in the war. As for the Romulans, they didn't need to give a shit, the Federation was their long-term enemy, whilst they were blood enemies of the Klingons. Who says a government's first responsibility is self-defence?
 
lol.. Sisko tricked an entire Empire into war. I don't see how that deceit was justified, based upon the Romulans who may have died in the war. As for the Romulans, they didn't need to give a shit, the Federation was their long-term enemy, whilst they were blood enemies of the Klingons. Who says a government's first responsibility is self-defence?

In the Pale Moonlight said:
SISKO: The Founders see it as their sacred duty to bring order to the galaxy. Their order. Do you think they'll sit idly by while you keep your chaotic empire right next to their perfect order? No. If you watch us go under, then what you're really doing is signing your own death warrant.

In the Pale Moonlight said:
SISKO: I'd pick the side most likely to leave us in peace when the dust settles. Maybe you're right. Maybe the Dominion will win in the end. Then the Founders will control what we now call Cardassia, the Klingon Empire and the Federation. So, instead of facing three separate opponents with three separate agendas, you'll find yourselves facing the same opponent on every side. There's a word for that. Surrounded.

The Founders weren't going to allow the Romulan Empire to exist free from Dominion control when they controlled the rest of the quadrant.
 
I'd agree with that, but just because Sisko said so isn't exactly hard evidence.

It's really just simple logic. The Founders, who fear solids, weren't going to take over the Federation, the Cardassians and the Klingons and yet allow the Romulan Empire to continue to operate as it always has.

After conquering the rest, they would have been controlling Romulus inside of six weeks.
 
I'd agree with that, but just because Sisko said so isn't exactly hard evidence.

It's really just simple logic. The Founders, who fear solids, weren't going to take over the Federation, the Cardassians and the Klingons and yet allow the Romulan Empire to continue to operate as it always has.

After conquering the rest, they would have been controlling Romulus inside of six weeks.

Dax(as Romulan advocate): That's speculation.
 
And saving the Federation doesn't warrant that.
Which Sisko could not prove totally.

When?


saving the Federation doesn't warrant that?:wtf: Your "principles" won't mean a thing when the peoples of the Federation are killed or enslaved. A government's first responsibility is self-defense. They owed the Romulans nothing. The Romulans would have been fine with watching the UFP and the Klingons be destroyed while fighting for the freedom of the Alpha Quadrant.


The Garak quote is something like "you probably saved the Alpha Quadrant. And all it cost was the life of one criminal, one senator, and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I'd call that a bargain."

lol.. Sisko tricked an entire Empire into war. I don't see how that deceit was justified, based upon the Romulans who may have died in the war. As for the Romulans, they didn't need to give a shit, the Federation was their long-term enemy, whilst they were blood enemies of the Klingons. Who says a government's first responsibility is self-defence?


if you don't think a government's first responsibility is self-defense then there's no point in arguing this. A government cannot carry out ANY OTHER responsibilities if it is destroyed or conquered. Arguing about "federation principles" when there is no federation left is just silly.

The Federation and the Klingons were fighting FOR the Romulans whether the Romulans would admit it or not. The Dominion would have gone after them next.
 
I'd agree with that, but just because Sisko said so isn't exactly hard evidence.

It's really just simple logic. The Founders, who fear solids, weren't going to take over the Federation, the Cardassians and the Klingons and yet allow the Romulan Empire to continue to operate as it always has.

After conquering the rest, they would have been controlling Romulus inside of six weeks.

Dax(as Romulan advocate): That's speculation.

If the Romulans can't see that the fall of the Federation, Klingons and Cardassians to an extra-quadrant power isn't bad for their long-term sustainability, then they deserved to fall.
 
Could be. But the war wasn't ever -that- one sided. The momentum swung back and forth a number of times. The Federation and Klingons managed to hold the line and take DS9 by themselves. Betazed falling... unfortunate but happens. Sisko indicated it was more because the Fed fleet was out of position than sheer overwhelming force though.

The power disparity couldn't have been that great because when the Romulans joined that tilted the balance of power to the Federation's side and they went on the offensive in Chintaka. It took the Breen joining up with the Dominion for them to get the initiative back and even then that was mainly due to their super weapon which once countered, the good guys were right back on the offensive.

Without bring tricked into having a personal stake in the war... from the Romulans perspective their two greatest rivals are slugging it out. Yeah... too bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top