Commodore Stocker-The Deadly Years

[Red Ranger]

The words you never want to hear from someone in the captain's chair: "What do I do?" Every time I hear that, I get a chill! -- RR

 

[PhoenixIreland]

Why should the 23rd Century military be any different than modern-day's. Some people politic and/or ass-kiss their way up the ladder.

There is that, and the degree of education they have.

It's got nothing to do with any of that. Surely you can't believe that everyone in the military is a line officer out in the field. Who would there be to man the bases and headquarters, to make the administrative decisions, to issue the orders that get the ships built and maintained and supplied and the personnel assigned and managed? There need to be staff officers as well as line officers. It's not a difference of competence or intelligence, simply a difference of responsibilities.

Well this has been educational for me.

I always presumed (I'm not sure why) that all officers of high rank would have had extensive field experience to earn that rank.
I assumed that once you were promoted high enough you got the desk job, but I suppose if you had no experience in administrative tasks you could not just be shoved from the field to the desk and be expected to manage everything.

Seems this guy was just stuck in a bad position.

 

[Dayton3]

There is that, and the degree of education they have.

It's got nothing to do with any of that. Surely you can't believe that everyone in the military is a line officer out in the field. Who would there be to man the bases and headquarters, to make the administrative decisions, to issue the orders that get the ships built and maintained and supplied and the personnel assigned and managed? There need to be staff officers as well as line officers. It's not a difference of competence or intelligence, simply a difference of responsibilities.

Well this has been educational for me.

I always presumed (I'm not sure why) that all officers of high rank would have had extensive field experience to earn that rank.
I assumed that once you were promoted high enough you got the desk job, but I suppose if you had no experience in administrative tasks you could not just be shoved from the field to the desk and be expected to manage everything.

Seems this guy was just stuck in a bad position.

There are a huge number of U.S. navy admirals and captains who never commanded a ship in their life.

By contrast, the commanding officer of a U.S. nuclear submarine is often only a "Commander" in terms of rank (not a Captain) and are often in their thirties.

 

[Ssosmcin]

He was - though - a bit of a weenie. First, he was obsessed with reaching his new job. And it seemed like he almost used the crisis as an excuse to take over and stop dilly dallying and get his ass to his comfy chair and paper pushing.

Now, line officer or not, would he be so blind as to ignore the "don't enter the Neutral Zone" rule that Sulu warns him of? One can take over command and still leave the details to the juniors (which is the point really). The whole encounter could have been avoided:

Sulu: "Sir, that will take us through the Romulan Neutral Zone!"
Stocker: "Really? shit. Okay, plot the shortest and fastest possible course to Starbase 10. Lickety split."

Or, okay, say Stocker still ignored Sulu. Once the Romulans showed up, why not simply say "helm, evasive action. Get us out of here." I know the Romulans surrounded then pretty fast (way too fast, they must have been assembled at the local Dunkin Donuts), but the guy just turns into a bowl of Jell-o. It's not like Kirk's combat orders were all that complex and brilliant:

"Lock phasers and return fire."
"Fire blind, lay down a pattern."
"Brace yourselves!"

And what is it with the damned Romulans? What's the point of a Neutral Zone if only Romulans can go in and fire at ships? Shouldn't a Neutral Zone be an area where both sides can meet peacefully? In that case, Stocker's decision to cut through it would actually not be a bad idea.

 

[Gotham Central]

As the highest ranking officer on board still in full command of his faculties, wouldn't starfleet have held him responsible for anything that happened whether he assumed command or not? It seems to me that Starfleet Command might take issue with him had he kept to the sidelines while the captain, the first and second officers were out of commission.

 

[Timo]

First, he was obsessed with reaching his new job.

Uh, dunno about that. He ONCE reminded Kirk that the starship did have other things to do besides hang on Gamma Hydra IV indefinitely. And that was as a direct response to Kirk's explicit "threat" to indeed stay there indefinitely.

He then offered Kirk medical help at his own starbase, which Kirk dismissed and insinuated that Stocker was anxious to get to his desk. But that's not what Stocker was trying to do. At this point, Kirk was already losing it, getting blind to the obvious solutions or to listening to advice.

It is this latter line of argument that Stocker later promotes: that Kirk is killing his own colleagues by failing to reach Starbase 10.

And it seemed like he almost used the crisis as an excuse to take over

Well, he wasn't taking over. He was pushing for Spock to do it. And being extraordinarily polite and apologetic about it all the way through.

Now, line officer or not, would he be so blind as to ignore the "don't enter the Neutral Zone" rule that Sulu warns him of?

Perhaps. He knows he's on a mission of mercy, and he knows Romulans have never made good of their threats before - Kirk has demonstrated them to be pushovers. And he lacks the experience to see the real physical danger; all the danger he could perceive would be political, something to be sorted out later by somebody else. It's not that implausible to me, not the way, say, flying close to a dangerous spatial anomaly would be.

And what is it with the damned Romulans? What's the point of a Neutral Zone if only Romulans can go in and fire at ships?

It does seem that the Romulans, being villains and all, were up to no good and were lying in wait in the Zone, against all treaties and agreements and polite manners. No doubt they had been monitoring the starship and amassing forces to intercept if she tried to penetrate - but they went a bit overboard with it and entered the Zone pseudo-defensively, then made use of the opportunity to hijack a Starfleet starship.

Which probably is why the incident had so few political repercussions: both sides had wronged, and neither was willing to file a complaint.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dayton3]

Another thing to consider:

From Commodore Stocker's perspective it must've appeared very unlikely that the Enterprise crew would've found a cure to the aging problem in time.

After all, you had the Enterprise Chief Medical Officer, Science Officer, and Chief Engineer all being debilitated by the malady at the same time.

Can you imagine what Starfleet Command would said to Stocker if he hadn't taken the Enterprise and simply stayed in orbit?

"How long were you going to stay in orbit around that dead world Stocker? Until hell froze over!?

Why weren't you hightailing it to your Starbase where a full medical team could look into the problem? Thanks to you we lost Captain Kirk not to mention one the best first officer, medical officers and engineer in the fleet!".

 

[Ssosmcin]

Good points guys. I'll keep some of them in mind the next time I watch this one.

 

[Kelso]

Charles Drake was better as Dr. Sanderson in the 1950 film Harvey (my all-time favorite movie).

 

[Outpost4]

That is the same actor in both roles, isn't it? Wow. I never noticed that. Good call, Kelso. In both The Deadly Years and Harvey, Drake plays a character who never quite grasps the turmoil that is going on around him. Maybe that was his forte as an actor.

For a long time I had the following wisdom from Elwood P. Dowd on my refrigerator: "In this world...you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. For years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You can quote me."

I think I just did.