It diverts resources away from a solution that would work -- intervention from an extra-dimensional entity -- towards a solution that would not work -- conventional warfare.
Destiny Why did they not... BEWARE Spoilers
- Thread starter PhotoM
- Start date
It diverts resources away from a solution that would work -- intervention from an extra-dimensional entity -- towards a solution that would not work -- conventional warfare.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
Thanks for the quick response.
IF the options are the godlike beings' intervention and warfare, then yes, it would make sense to try the supernatural intervention first. As it would make sense to keep the warfare solution in reserve - just in case the first option doesn't work.
But there is a problem. The above-mentioned "IF" is enormous. In the real universe, no one ever had intervention from God as an option. Not in the entire recorded history. Such an perfect alternative is absurdly improbable.
This is my main problem with "Star Trek Destiny". The writer wanted to give our heroes an perfectly moral choice. In an situation such as the one described in "Destiny", this can only be done by an deux ex machina, an truly improbable development.
And this makes the Destiny trilogy less than realistic. It diminishes the impact the books should have. It transforms the star trek universe into an place where our heroes will always win - even more, always find the perfect moral solution - because events will "magically" arrange themselves that way.
I disagree. The thalaron weapon was never able to stop the Borg. Even if (and that is a big if) it would have destroyed lots of Borg ships, it would not have saved humanity or all the other civilizations. All it would have done is making matters worse because it would make the Borg even more determined to exterminate the Federation.
If the Caeliar wouldn`t have wanted to help, that would have been the end.
If the Caeliar wouldn`t have wanted to help, that would have been the end.
And on another point, there soome individuals and groups of inidividuals who will not compromise their principles in the real world. (although always some exceptions within the group)
For example the Amish do not believe in using violence, even when it could cost them everything. To them, their principles are more important than their lives. Their are other individuals who feel the same way.
Since it appears that religion has a limited impact on most characters, one can argue that it wouldn't have an impact, but people do exist who have moral standards which they will not deviate from, and it appears that Picard initially failed to live up to his own moral stands. As LaForge notes, Picard was appalled by the thalaron weapon in Nemesis, a weapon he condemned, and now he is willing to order its construction.
As you might recall, he noted he could possibly win at the cost of his soul.
The truth is that people and civilizations do become extinct for a variety of reasons. And in the Star Trek universe, I believe its was the Halkans (sp) in the original series which was unwilling to allow their dilithium deposits to be used because it could be use in acts of violence, they chose this decision in the face that it was possible that they would be destroyed. (Much more likely in the Mirror Universe)
For those who believe in an afterlife and the need to follow the dictates of their conscience or religion, if you don't stand on the principles, then you really don't stand for anything.
For example the Amish do not believe in using violence, even when it could cost them everything. To them, their principles are more important than their lives. Their are other individuals who feel the same way.
Since it appears that religion has a limited impact on most characters, one can argue that it wouldn't have an impact, but people do exist who have moral standards which they will not deviate from, and it appears that Picard initially failed to live up to his own moral stands. As LaForge notes, Picard was appalled by the thalaron weapon in Nemesis, a weapon he condemned, and now he is willing to order its construction.
As you might recall, he noted he could possibly win at the cost of his soul.
The truth is that people and civilizations do become extinct for a variety of reasons. And in the Star Trek universe, I believe its was the Halkans (sp) in the original series which was unwilling to allow their dilithium deposits to be used because it could be use in acts of violence, they chose this decision in the face that it was possible that they would be destroyed. (Much more likely in the Mirror Universe)
For those who believe in an afterlife and the need to follow the dictates of their conscience or religion, if you don't stand on the principles, then you really don't stand for anything.
I don't have a lot of time to respond, but I'll say two things:
1) You may not LIKE the fact that the intervention of extra-dimensional or extra-powerful entities is an option, but it is in the Star Trek universe and has been since the Organians told the Federates and the Klingons to get off their lawn. You may not find it realistic, but I find it no less realistic than transporters.
2) I hesitate to say that David Mack was trying to give the characters perfectly moral choices. I'd have to re-read the series with an eye to that question, but I would point to Mack's Vanguard series and to his novels A Time to Kill and A Time to Heal and The Sorrows of Empire as stories involving violent conflict and difficult moral choices that Mack has presented where no character walks away without some blood on his hands or some sin staining his soul. If one interprets Destiny as giving the characters perfectly moral choices, then that makes Destiny an outlier in Mack's body of work.
1. Let us be quite clear that thalaron radiation was a plot macguffin for Nemesis. It being made illegal was so the audience knew the bad guy was really bad. Anyone offended by its use or worried about it falling into Borg hands should be just as appalled that the Federation (even Jean-Luc Picard) is using tech from the future (transphasic torpedoes) to fight.
2. "Poor Ensign Lynch", either the Borg are redeemable or they are not. If they are then it's murder across the board. Right from First Contact on. And don't try to argue about dire situations... none are more dire than what they faced at the end of Destiny Book III. If they aren't redeemable, then they're cockroaches and deserved to be squashed by any means necessary.
3. "Our primary duty is to maintain life and safety of Federation planets.", spoken by Commodore Matt Decker in The Doomsday Machine. Doesn't seem to be much room for argument here. Starfleet is the military of the Trek universe. Their job is to protect, even if the odds are dire. Pretty open and close.
4. I wouldn't count on some superior race to come save me even if I lived in the Trek universe. We are seen as anything from annoyances to competition. They get rid of us with out having to raise a finger.
5. No offense, but when you put on a military uniform you check your morals at the door. You know the whole "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". Even in the best of situations you are going to do things that could haunt you for the rest of your life... not for the timid.
6. No offense to anyone here. But Geordi's robo-sexual crush on Data has got to go. It's been sixteen months dude, time to let go.
2. "Poor Ensign Lynch", either the Borg are redeemable or they are not. If they are then it's murder across the board. Right from First Contact on. And don't try to argue about dire situations... none are more dire than what they faced at the end of Destiny Book III. If they aren't redeemable, then they're cockroaches and deserved to be squashed by any means necessary.
3. "Our primary duty is to maintain life and safety of Federation planets.", spoken by Commodore Matt Decker in The Doomsday Machine. Doesn't seem to be much room for argument here. Starfleet is the military of the Trek universe. Their job is to protect, even if the odds are dire. Pretty open and close.
4. I wouldn't count on some superior race to come save me even if I lived in the Trek universe. We are seen as anything from annoyances to competition. They get rid of us with out having to raise a finger.
5. No offense, but when you put on a military uniform you check your morals at the door. You know the whole "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". Even in the best of situations you are going to do things that could haunt you for the rest of your life... not for the timid.
6. No offense to anyone here. But Geordi's robo-sexual crush on Data has got to go. It's been sixteen months dude, time to let go.
You do realize that the Borg's super-highway to the Alpha Quadrant was closed down? Reinforcements are not hours or days away. Spock would've sacrificed millions on Rigel in The Doomsday Machine. He stated that there was no way to destroy it. Luckily for the folks on Rigel, Decker delayed him just long enough to stick around and fight.
No offense, but you are dead wrong. When you put on a military uniform you do not check your morals at the door.
When I served it was driven home that there certain actions which would never be approved; and that if we violated them then we be held accountable.
OK, maybe such reinforcements would be months, maybe a few years away. And then the Borg would come with even more ships and use even deadlier force than before.
Part of what drives me nuts in the Trek universe is the wilful disregard of it's own history/mythology.
Starfleet has been encountering the most fantastical alien technology for almost 200 years.Where are the practical applications?Where are Starfleets weapons research dept's ?
You are battling relentless adaptive killer drones? Well actually, we left some of those rusting on that "Arsenal of freedom" planet.
Kalandan holograms that can kill with one touch?Yeah,we saw those too.
Intraphasic shields/cloaks?Yep.
Hyperaccelerated humans,clone warriors,doomsday weapons?Check.
A little more realistic portrayal of Starfleet as a serious defense minded organization would be appreciated.
Starfleet has been encountering the most fantastical alien technology for almost 200 years.Where are the practical applications?Where are Starfleets weapons research dept's ?
You are battling relentless adaptive killer drones? Well actually, we left some of those rusting on that "Arsenal of freedom" planet.
Kalandan holograms that can kill with one touch?Yeah,we saw those too.
Intraphasic shields/cloaks?Yep.
Hyperaccelerated humans,clone warriors,doomsday weapons?Check.
A little more realistic portrayal of Starfleet as a serious defense minded organization would be appreciated.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
Yes, the Organians have been around since TOS. But they were almost never used since then.
Why?
For the same reason that technobabble shouldn't be used.
Because they give the characters an easy way out - no complications, moral or otherwise. One can't connect to such characters - because in the real world, such easy alternatives don't exist in life or death situations, and the viewer/reader instinctually knows this.
It makes Star Trek boring, uninspired, as some of the more sleep-inducing Voyager episodes prove.
Because they transform Star Trek into a cheesy children's tale.
That's why the Organians didn't enforce the treaty between the Federation and the Klingons. Our heroes had to find a solution themselves.
The occasional reset button or technobabble/higher being solution is fine, as long as it's confined to some forgotten episode.
Star Trek Destiny, though, should be this momentuous event in trekverse history. If televized, it could easily be an 12 episodes miniseries. It shouldn't have such a simplistic ending.
That not to say I didn't enjoy how David Mack presented the Caeliar. Some interesting concepts and I liked the imagery.
Star Trek Destiny, though, should be this momentuous event in trekverse history. If televized, it could easily be an 12 episodes miniseries. It shouldn't have such a simplistic ending.
That not to say I didn't enjoy how David Mack presented the Caeliar. Some interesting concepts and I liked the imagery.
I'm curious. How could the borg be more "determined to exterminate the Federation"?
They are already trying to end all life in the Alpha - and Beta - Quadrant. And they have sent an enormous number of ships to do that - 7400 - one for each densely populated world and significant space structure in the two quadrants.
Are they going to start twisting their moustaches? making threats? to start torturing their victims before killing them?
They can't send any more ships. Not for 70-100 years - Seven of Nine establishes that in "Mere Mortals".
As for the possible consequences of the thalaron weapon's use, i analysed them in detail in my above posts. If you are interested, I invite you to read them.
Last edited:
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
Two is better than one? Not always. For example, two identical posts are definitely NOT better than one.
Last edited:
True- but first, some things were built- the transphasic torpedo, for instance that was effective. Its hard to build something for an enemy like the Borg when you know you can only use it once since they'll adapt. Unless they're going to upgrade a Napolean era cannon...
But some things- like clone warriors... if they did that, they'd be no better than the Borg or the Dominion- those practices are vile, they're the reason millions died- to prevent those forces from taking over. Those sacrifices would be in vain if the Federation sanctioned clone warriors to be slaughtered. To that end, the Federation should have allowed the Dominion to take over the AQ, and the BQ. With all those resources (one system up for grabs near the Cardie boarder could have produced enough K White for the Dominion for years) the Dominion probably would've taken out the Borg. But we like our freedom- and it has to have ethical meaning too.
Never have seen an ethical corpse.
Truthfully I fail to see the merit in making Star trek heroes look brain-dead.Given every thing you have seen in treklit or onscreen,all the tactical naivete,the intel failures,would you trust starfleet to protect the dumpsters outside?Really?
Sitting around having a raging debate about the morals of warfare may be greatly dramatic or cinematic,but realistic?Excusable?
When billions of lives,civilization as they know it,everything they hold dear hang in the balance....they have a moral discussion?
Complete rubbish.
Truthfully I fail to see the merit in making Star trek heroes look brain-dead.Given every thing you have seen in treklit or onscreen,all the tactical naivete,the intel failures,would you trust starfleet to protect the dumpsters outside?Really?
Sitting around having a raging debate about the morals of warfare may be greatly dramatic or cinematic,but realistic?Excusable?
When billions of lives,civilization as they know it,everything they hold dear hang in the balance....they have a moral discussion?
Complete rubbish.
Wrong.When you're facing death is the perfect test of your moral strength;are you going to sell out your life's purpose to live another day?
When the Caeliar were dying on Mantillis,several choose death by 'becoming the gestalt' to keep the rest of the group alive long enough to find a way out.
They didn't have to do that,ya know.
But for the sake of saving life ,they choose death.
And guess who of the group followed your example and threw morality out the window for survival?
Sedin.
The Caeliar gave themselves up for the greater good... the survival of those around them. I think I'd sacrifice my morals to save those around me... for those who don't get a say (the civilian population) is the greater good.
Agreed.
Maybe a civilization is doomed when it comes to the point that its hands are 'morally' tied in the face of extinction.
Oh...oh...oh... don't use a cloaking device... it is teh evil (how is it a fair fight when the enemy can't see you?)... and illegal (per the Treaty of Algeron)!!!
You imply a non-existent difference.The Caeliar had laws that probibited degrading past a certain point,for the very reason of what took place with Sedin.It would have been real convenient to prop up an argument to say the laws didn't apply,as they're 4000 years in the past.
It comes down to this;there are unforseen consequences to breaking your own laws to secure your survival.Sedin refused to return to the gestalt as her laws connmanded because she wanted to survive.Had she put her morals/laws ahead of her survival instincts 60 billion people would still be alive,and the Alpha Quadrant wouldn't be facing extermination.
After all,who's to say your decision to violate the law won't kill the people you're trying to save?
Let's indulge the idea that your thalaron idea works.After the dust settles,we now have starving civilizations armed with mutagenic weaponry.
Oops.
How many millions will then die because you decided that a thalaron weapon was necessary and Federation law wasn't?
I'm not knocking your motivation,but some of the worst events in history started with good intentions.
Man, this must be triple post day.
BillJ, triple posting in a thread in a short timespan is considered spamming. Consider this a friendly. In the future if you have multiple people to respond to utilize the Multi-Quote buttons. Or if you just find you have more to say after having submitted your post, use the Edit button on your post.
I will have to start issuing warnings for these in the future.
Thanks
Similar threads
