Where do you place the priority?Worst case is that Archer effectively killed an innocent ship's crew to save billions of humans.
Obviously, Archer did what was necessary. You do what you have to do, even if it makes you sick, gives you nightmares, or leaves you hating yourself until your dying day. I expect that he arranged for help to be sent as soon as possible. But it's very possible that he was too late. Even so, a ship lost for a planet saved is a more than fair trade.Where do you place the priority?
Archer's choice was a bad choice...it was also the ONLY choice
I like to think of myself as a "Good Guy" who is opposed to evil in all its forms. Spent 13 years on active duty in the ASA and six more as an "Independant Contractor to the DoD, St.Dept. AND various foreign Governments" chasing bad guys, so I object to doing bad things and getting away with it!I don't know whether they did I feel like at the least the Xindi might have at Enterprise's request. In the end, I don't want them to be dead so I just hope/assume they got rescued. I think them all dying is too much to put on Archer's character and expect the audience to be sympathetic to him. In a different show you could do that, maybe something like a Battlestar Galactica universe, but they would also go more in depth and explore it more and maybe Archer wouldn't have gotten away with it or Earth would have swept it under the rug. I don't think it needed to be followed up. It's like Sisko in "In The Pale Moonlight. They both did a bad thing and they got away with it.
It does. The way Sisko's actions in "In the Pale Moonlight" did.I never saw that episode, but think it goes against everything I believed Star Trek stood for!
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.