I like the idea in the "Armada" game that they of course fall under Federation protection...
So you are willing to spend Federation lives to protect the Ba'ku if it came to it?
Best and worst moral dilemmas in Star Trek
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
So you are willing to spend Federation lives to protect the Ba'ku if it came to it?
So just because it's in Federation space it's automatically a Federation planet?...
This film made it clear to me that there were strange occurrences in the "Federation Council". Maybe much like one arm not knowing what the other was doing?
so... you're choosing option 2 then?
It's not an UFP affair at all, and it's a blood feud between the Baku and the Son'a, right?
So why is Picard siding with and protecting the Baku? And as BillJ points out, for how long?
Are the Baku under constant protection from the UFP now?
No it is not a UFP planet,...at least a "claimed" UFP planet. If it was wouldn't they have already known that a population was there? Or was this a ruse? Get Picard in there, discover the truth, as the film ends all is well. Sounds to me Sonak that you would be the Daugherty villain to go behind council's if for the "greater good".
I like the idea in the "Armada" game that they of course fall under Federation protection...
Wow.
So the UFP are supposed to extend constant protection to one small side of what is an internal blood feud, so that one side can live their New Age pacifist lifestyle unbothered by anyone else, and contribute nothing to their own protection?
If that was your foreign policy platform I would NOT vote for you.
No the Son'a skied the Dominion for help in an episode of DS9.
So just because it's in Federation space it's automatically a Federation planet?...
This film made it clear to me that there were strange occurrences in the "Federation Council". Maybe much like one arm not knowing what the other was doing?
Given how fast the council changed their minds you get the feeling they had no idea what was going on, or that Dougherty may have lied and told them the Ba'ku were okay with everything.
The Baku could make claims about the planet all day long; what they couldn't do is enforce those claims. How does one defend against a spacefaring society or two when one has deliberatly reverted back to the Stone Age? (Yeah, I get the whole "but they never explicitly claimed the planet" argument. But if it isn't the Federation's, who does it belong to?)* This is a real problem faced countless times in history: cultures of varying technological levels fighting over the same scarce resources. The culture with the technological edge win every time and twice on Sundays.
Let's consider North America as an example. In the 17th and 18th Centuries, Europe is the most technologically advanced place on the planet. They are just starting the very baby steps of what will become the industrial revolution, there are massive cities with permanent structures, universities for higher learning, banking and trade systems, and centralized national power structures. Take someone from London, paris, Madrid, Rome, or Amsterdam and put them anywhere in North America. What do they see? Nothing like civilization. Roads are dirt paths at best, there is no writing, no permanent structures, no industry, tribes with only the loosest of ties within a "nation", no metal working, and no large scale agriculture or animal domestication for food, clothing, or work. In short, what the European sees is the vast natural resources being wasted by people who aren't doing anything productive with those resources, resources in scare supply in Europe. The Euopean, product of a culture that prgressed beyond the Neolithic is easily able to sweep aside the American Indians. It was the same story in Africa, Australia, India, China, and the rst of the Americas; the guy with the better technology wins against the guy with more primative technology. This idea that someone has a right to a piece of land just becuase he lives there, and noot because he has to fight tooth and nail to defend it, is only about a hundred years old.
It's like going to dinner with your friend. You have a gun and he doesn't. You both order food, you scarf yours down and are still hungry and notice he hasn't touched his. You ask "are you going to eat that?" If he objects, you take it anyways. He can claim the burger you needed all he wants, but he couldn't exert that claim. No matter what else happens, the Baku cannot enforce their claim. They are entirely at the mercy of the Federation, the Son'a, the Klingons, the Romulans, the Borg, or Quark, Rom, and the Grand Nagus with a butter knives simply because they don't have the means to defend their "right" to the planet.
Picard was in the wrong. The Federation recognized a bunch of space squatters on a planet they owned (and is there any real difference between pointing at a map and saying "we own everything in the blue blob" and actually putting a flag on the planet?) and said "the squatters gots to go. We need to utilize the planet. Remember mon capitane' "Ask, Tell, Make" is the continuum of force you have to use."
*Neverminding the implausibility of the scenario where a bunch of back-to-earthers tell the technologically advanced members of their village to go away and the guys who still have laser guns don't just laugh at the space luddites, and maybe vaporize a few just to prove a point.
Let's consider North America as an example. In the 17th and 18th Centuries, Europe is the most technologically advanced place on the planet. They are just starting the very baby steps of what will become the industrial revolution, there are massive cities with permanent structures, universities for higher learning, banking and trade systems, and centralized national power structures. Take someone from London, paris, Madrid, Rome, or Amsterdam and put them anywhere in North America. What do they see? Nothing like civilization. Roads are dirt paths at best, there is no writing, no permanent structures, no industry, tribes with only the loosest of ties within a "nation", no metal working, and no large scale agriculture or animal domestication for food, clothing, or work. In short, what the European sees is the vast natural resources being wasted by people who aren't doing anything productive with those resources, resources in scare supply in Europe. The Euopean, product of a culture that prgressed beyond the Neolithic is easily able to sweep aside the American Indians. It was the same story in Africa, Australia, India, China, and the rst of the Americas; the guy with the better technology wins against the guy with more primative technology. This idea that someone has a right to a piece of land just becuase he lives there, and noot because he has to fight tooth and nail to defend it, is only about a hundred years old.
It's like going to dinner with your friend. You have a gun and he doesn't. You both order food, you scarf yours down and are still hungry and notice he hasn't touched his. You ask "are you going to eat that?" If he objects, you take it anyways. He can claim the burger you needed all he wants, but he couldn't exert that claim. No matter what else happens, the Baku cannot enforce their claim. They are entirely at the mercy of the Federation, the Son'a, the Klingons, the Romulans, the Borg, or Quark, Rom, and the Grand Nagus with a butter knives simply because they don't have the means to defend their "right" to the planet.
Picard was in the wrong. The Federation recognized a bunch of space squatters on a planet they owned (and is there any real difference between pointing at a map and saying "we own everything in the blue blob" and actually putting a flag on the planet?) and said "the squatters gots to go. We need to utilize the planet. Remember mon capitane' "Ask, Tell, Make" is the continuum of force you have to use."
*Neverminding the implausibility of the scenario where a bunch of back-to-earthers tell the technologically advanced members of their village to go away and the guys who still have laser guns don't just laugh at the space luddites, and maybe vaporize a few just to prove a point.
Changed their minds? They simply held it up for review. For all we know the Ba'ku relocation went forward after the review.
Yes I would.I like the idea in the "Armada" game that they of course fall under Federation protection...
So you are willing to spend Federation lives to protect the Ba'ku if it came to it?
I thought you would say as much...you would probably give me money or credit trying to dissuade me...
No it is not a UFP planet,...at least a "claimed" UFP planet. If it was wouldn't they have already known that a population was there? Or was this a ruse? Get Picard in there, discover the truth, as the film ends all is well. Sounds to me Sonak that you would be the Daugherty villain to go behind council's if for the "greater good".
I like the idea in the "Armada" game that they of course fall under Federation protection...
Wow.
So the UFP are supposed to extend constant protection to one small side of what is an internal blood feud, so that one side can live their New Age pacifist lifestyle unbothered by anyone else, and contribute nothing to their own protection?
If that was your foreign policy platform I would NOT vote for you.
No the Son'a skied the Dominion for help in an episode of DS9.
So just because it's in Federation space it's automatically a Federation planet?...
This film made it clear to me that there were strange occurrences in the "Federation Council". Maybe much like one arm not knowing what the other was doing?
Given how fast the council changed their minds you get the feeling they had no idea what was going on, or that Dougherty may have lied and told them the Ba'ku were okay with everything.
I supose you have the CHARTER for the UFP in your possession???
Changed their minds? They simply held it up for review. For all we know the Ba'ku relocation went forward after the review.
How many? Ten thousand in casualties? Twenty thousand in casualties? Would you be willing to risk the lives of your sons or daughters to protect six hundred people who won't fight to protect themselves?
I know I wouldn't. If you're not willing to protect yourself, there's no way I'm doing it for you.
This makes absolutely no fucking sense. The charter would have absolutely zero to do with a review. You honestly think the same people who originally made the decision would now change their minds? It's not one or two people who made this decision... it was the Federation Council.
There is a FUCKING Federation Charter for Christs sake!!! whether you choose to accept it or not. To accept ALL THE FEDERATION COUNCIL to agree with such a move is asinine. They are made of hundreds of planets and cultures.
Exactly. So why do you insist that every move they make must be in accordance with human values? Like it or not, the Federation Council is a democratic body made up of 150 representatives. For the Ba'ku resolution to have originally passed meant that at least seventy-six worlds voted to move them.
Changed their minds? They simply held it up for review. For all we know the Ba'ku relocation went forward after the review.
Considering Picard was still the Enterprise captain and going through with it would like have had him removed from that position I doubt it.
So naturally, the inhuman values make up the Federation Charter? Sounds to me you and some other posters are formulating Star Trek ideas as you go.
Isn't it really more simple? If the planet is in Federation space, then it is a Federation planet-property.
Based on this argument, the Baku then are essentially illegal aliens, who are "squating" on Federation territory.
The question is, can the Federation could tell its own citizens to get off a planet for good of billions, as opposed to telling a non citizen culture to leave a planet that is "theirs"?
Then again there are probably some aliens out there who controlled the Alpha quadrant long before the modern humanoids evolved. They could make the same demands.
Based on this argument, the Baku then are essentially illegal aliens, who are "squating" on Federation territory.
The question is, can the Federation could tell its own citizens to get off a planet for good of billions, as opposed to telling a non citizen culture to leave a planet that is "theirs"?
Then again there are probably some aliens out there who controlled the Alpha quadrant long before the modern humanoids evolved. They could make the same demands.
Yes I would.I like the idea in the "Armada" game that they of course fall under Federation protection...
So you are willing to spend Federation lives to protect the Ba'ku if it came to it?
I thought you would say as much...you would probably give me money or credit trying to dissuade me...
I supose you have the CHARTER for the UFP in your possession???
Changed their minds? They simply held it up for review. For all we know the Ba'ku relocation went forward after the review.
Starfleet's really going to see a drop in recruitment when they start taking heavy casualties to prevent a tiny village of pacifists from being inconvenienced in any way.
Yes I would.
I thought you would say as much...you would probably give me money or credit trying to dissuade me...
I supose you have the CHARTER for the UFP in your possession???Changed their minds? They simply held it up for review. For all we know the Ba'ku relocation went forward after the review.
Starfleet's really going to see a drop in recruitment when they start taking heavy casualties to prevent a tiny village of pacifists from being inconvenienced in any way.
Well let me know...in about 300 years or more...
Yes I would.
I thought you would say as much...you would probably give me money or credit trying to dissuade me...
I supose you have the CHARTER for the UFP in your possession???
Starfleet's really going to see a drop in recruitment when they start taking heavy casualties to prevent a tiny village of pacifists from being inconvenienced in any way.
Well let me know...in about 300 years or more...
er, I was making a point about the long-term effects of your policy, not implying that Starfleet was real.
... And Dougherty was clearly a very astute judge of character and an incredibly savvy analyst - who demonstrated his loyalty by conspiring to destroy a Star Fleet vessel. Said vessel having done no more than try to inform the Federation of his actions.
Values of all Federation founding members would be part of the Federation charter, from the pacifist Vulcan to the warrior society of Andor to the argumentative Tellar. To think that all these disparate cultures would give up their identities and beliefs to follow humanities lead is just plain ignorant and would make the Federation no different than the Terran Empire. Hell, we know from Enterprise that non-interference originated from the Vulcans but then they also gave us "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". So who knows how they actually voted on the Ba'ku.
Even today we struggle to define right and wrong from person to person and society to society. What makes you think that 150 different alien cultures would all have the same values?
... And Dougherty was clearly a very astute judge of character and an incredibly savvy analyst - who demonstrated his loyalty by conspiring to destroy a Star Fleet vessel. Said vessel having done no more than try to inform the Federation of his actions.
I guess the question is this: do you think Riker would've followed Daugherty's lawful order to turn around? At what point does insubordination become treason?
Except they settled the planet BEFORE there ever was a federation.
... And Dougherty was clearly a very astute judge of character and an incredibly savvy analyst - who demonstrated his loyalty by conspiring to destroy a Star Fleet vessel. Said vessel having done no more than try to inform the Federation of his actions.
I guess the question is this: do you think Riker would've followed Daugherty's lawful order to turn around? At what point does insubordination become treason?
So its okay to shoot someone complaining to their government?
Also its treason to leave an area as ordered then call them back when you don't want them to complain to your bosses and they don't turn around?
Oh and I'd like to see a court that lets you get away with something for what a person MIGHT do.
Except they settled the planet BEFORE there ever was a federation.
... And Dougherty was clearly a very astute judge of character and an incredibly savvy analyst - who demonstrated his loyalty by conspiring to destroy a Star Fleet vessel. Said vessel having done no more than try to inform the Federation of his actions.
I guess the question is this: do you think Riker would've followed Daugherty's lawful order to turn around? At what point does insubordination become treason?
So its okay to shoot someone complaining to their government?
Also its treason to leave an area as ordered then call them back when you don't want them to complain to your bosses and they don't turn around?
Oh and I'd like to see a court that lets you get away with something for what a person MIGHT do.
But it's not just anyone. It's a military officer sworn to serve his/her government and using said governments assets against a government approved mission. Ru'afo's argument never made much sense as they could have had the procedure started before the Enterprise ever made contact with the Federation.
But it's another piece of stupidity in a stupid movie...
Similar threads
