Are we all on the same page about Michael starting the war with the Klingons? To me she is not guilty of starting it is something she has been made a scapegoat for. That's one reason why she is restored in rank by Starfleet at the end of the war. She had every right to defend herself on the Klingon Ship of the Dead given the circumstances. The Klingons were going to attack even if she had never been there. It seems to me that gossip and misunderstanding about her mutiny among Starfleet rank and file took on a life of its own divorced from the facts. Michael's reasoning about firing first was to smash a would be strongman before he could use aggression against the Federation to further his own ambition (even though he also had an ideology that he genuinely believed in about keeping racial and cultural purity). Anyway T'Kuvma was going to push the Klingons into war regardless of anything Michael did or didn't do. I ask because I saw a ScreenRant article that seemed to think Michael was held to a higher standard than Kirk and Spock would be for later actions that seriously violated the chain of command. For Michael she really did break the rules but a war broke out where it didn't for Kirk and Spock even though it was probably *going to happen no matter what she did. There was a need to have her made a scapegoat for more than her actions really amounted to. *There was logic to her Vulcan influenced belief about hitting the Klingons first and humiliating T'Kuvma before he could impress the other Houses into joining his war. It might have been right but it wasn't her call to make. Or was it?