Difference Between Earth Starfleet and the UESPA?

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I'd just like to jump in here and point out that I really, really hate the UESPA. Not the concept - just the name. 'United Earth Space Probe Agency' - it just sounds so damn ridiculous, like something out of a cheesy pulp novel. Just like the dozen other names considered for the Enterprise's operating authority in TOS - gems like 'Space Command', 'Star Service', etc. Those all sound just as stupid as UESPA, in some cases even more so. In fact I'm surprised the writers could even utter those phrases without laughing.

'Starfleet', on the other hand...that makes sense. Simple, honest, direct, *efficient*. And it DOESN'T sound like something from a pulp, or from stuff like "Rocky Jones, Space Ranger".

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ Don't be dissin' the pulps, yo.

 

[Stevil2001]

I think we're just used to it. It's still got that sweet pulpy texture if you spell it the old-fashioned way, "Star Fleet".

 

[Sci]

I mean, really, there's nothing you could call it that doesn't sound pulp-y. I mean, really -- "Star Fleet?" "Space Force?" "Space Command?" "Star Command?" "Extrasolar Command?" Etc.

I mean, if you follow the name construction of the aeronautical military forces of most countries -- "Air Force" -- and apply it to space, what do you get? "Space Force." "Star Force." Etc. It sounds a bit silly. I'm sure that to people living in 1887, the term "Air Force" would have sounded ridiculous, too.

 

[Timo]

Sorry, no. I refuse to cede the word to the neo-brownshirts who insist you must wear a lapel flag pin or else risk being branded a traitor.

That's what I think is wrong with the world today: your refusal (or mine) has no power over anything. Call yourself patriot in any context, and your NRA member card or Little Red/Green/Black Book materializes out of thin air and sticks to your hand, which automatically and inevitably extends in a military salute.

I mean, think about the practical aspects of this: how can you call yourself "patriotic" in public without the above consequences? What would be the practical circumstances where that would be possible?

In terms of relative power, they aren't. But it's pretty clear that both Capella and the Klingon Empire are sovereign states, possessing a defined territory, the power to make compulsory law within their territory, and the legal monopoly on the use of violence within their territory. Legally, they're both states.

But we have already agreed that there's no inter-powers law or rule above the level of major powers such as the UFP or the Klingon Empire. "Legal" sort of loses its meaning in a situation where there is no agreement over what constitutes a law...

In this practical example, I find it hard, nay, impossible to believe that the Klingon Empire would recognize Capellan sovereignity or monopoly for use of military force, even when the UFP might. Planets with precious raw materials and primitive militaries on them are just prey, not nations, to players like Klingons - even when said Klingons may perfectly well recognize the "nationhood" of honorable and substantial opponents, and play by the associated rules there.

That's always been part of the real-world setup as well, of course - the sovereignty of a nation or parts thereof is not for it or them to decide, but for the de facto most powerful player in the region, as demonstrated over the past few years in various parts. It would just be several degrees more extreme in the Trek universe.

We don't know yet whether the UFP would believe in some sort of equal rights for all "nations" (which I guess means any at least planetwide unified culture). We do have reason to suspect that the UFP would be alone in this among the major Trek players, though.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Frodo Lives]

No IGO? Have we forgotten the Organians?

 

[Timo]

...Those ultimate isolationists? I doubt they'd even remember that "governments" or other such childish nonsense existed, after they had finished shooing the annoying Klingons and Feds away from their lawn.

Okay, perhaps their influence over mortal governments would count. But then we should declare winter an IGO, for its mediating-dictating role in Germano-Russian and Franco-Russian political relationships in the early 20th and 19th centuries...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Frodo Lives]

What about the Metrons, then?

 

[Sci]

What about the Metrons, then?

For the Metrons to be an intergovernmental organization, there'd have to be some, y'know, organization. The Metrons are just a powerful race that forced two less powerful races to get along. You might as well claim that the United States is an IGO if it threatens Israel and Palestine with mutual annihilation if they don't stop fighting.

 

[Frodo Lives]

So their methods are a little unorthodox, doesn't mean they weren't good diplomats.

And you know I'm kidding, right?

You're right, there's no IGO-type body in the Trek-verse, but all the non-corporeal/super advanced aliens are as close as they've come - and who's to say not better than a simple mediating party, since they can actually do something to stop the fighting.

But then you get into that whole free will thing, and that never ends well.

 

[Christopher]

The Metrons are just a powerful race that forced two less powerful races to get along.

Actually the Metrons did nothing of the kind. They merely provided an arena (hey, there's a catchy word for it!) to allow representatives of those two races to work out their own conflict, one way or the other. The Metrons even claimed they'd destroy the ship of the loser, so as to give both captains incentive to fight. Hardly forcing them to get along -- rather the opposite, I'd say. (Though personally I've always believed they actually would've destroyed the winner's ship as the greater threat.)

 

[William Leisner]

Sorry, no. I refuse to cede the word to the neo-brownshirts who insist you must wear a lapel flag pin or else risk being branded a traitor.

That's what I think is wrong with the world today: your refusal (or mine) has no power over anything.

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I mean, really, there's nothing you could call it that doesn't sound pulp-y. I mean, really -- "Star Fleet?" "Space Force?" "Space Command?" "Star Command?" "Extrasolar Command?" Etc.

I mean, if you follow the name construction of the aeronautical military forces of most countries -- "Air Force" -- and apply it to space, what do you get? "Space Force." "Star Force." Etc. It sounds a bit silly. I'm sure that to people living in 1887, the term "Air Force" would have sounded ridiculous, too.

I just like the name 'Starfleet' (one word, not two ) the best of all. It gets rid of as much of the pulp, the cheesiness, the inefficiency, etc. as possible. Just one word: Starfleet. You can't get much clearer than that, really. I wonder who first came up with that word. Was it Gene? If so, my respect for the man just went up.

I did hear talk of a real-world movement to change the name of the actual USAF slightly, to United States Aerospace Force. I wonder if that was ever real, or just an urban legend.

 

[Timo]

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

Much seconded. I'm honestly curious - what would be the practical means of fighting this? What would you do to demonstrate your patriotism without becoming labeled militant?

I did hear talk of a real-world movement to change the name of the actual USAF slightly, to United States Aerospace Force. I wonder if that was ever real, or just an urban legend.

Ben Bova popularized the idea somewhat in his Kinsman novels where the USAF hero, during a pseudorealistically portrayed era of transition to real space age, tries to promote the new interpretation of the 'A'. I haven't heard of a real-world movement to that effect, though.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[William Leisner]

And what I think is wrong with the world today (well, one of many things) is that too many people give in to such beliefs.

Much seconded. I'm honestly curious - what would be the practical means of fighting this? What would you do to demonstrate your patriotism without becoming labeled militant?

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I mean, really, there's nothing you could call it that doesn't sound pulp-y. I mean, really -- "Star Fleet?" "Space Force?" "Space Command?" "Star Command?" "Extrasolar Command?" Etc.

I mean, if you follow the name construction of the aeronautical military forces of most countries -- "Air Force" -- and apply it to space, what do you get? "Space Force." "Star Force." Etc. It sounds a bit silly. I'm sure that to people living in 1887, the term "Air Force" would have sounded ridiculous, too.

Science fiction writers have used "Stellar Navy" which I rather like and have used for my own short fiction. It works, without such prefixes as Intra- or Inter-.

 

[Timo]

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

Oh, all right then. The militant patriots win this round, is all.

Science fiction writers have used "Stellar Navy" which I rather like and have used for my own short fiction. It works, without such prefixes as Intra- or Inter-.

...Although the secondary meaning of "stellar" as "splendid, great, dippidy-do, good show lads" gives it a bit of a comical touch.

And semantically taken, "stellar navy" or "starfleet" would seem to suggest that stars are being arranged into a naval force. Which is of course true of TV shows and movies such as Star Trek or Star Wars, but not literally true of the universes depicted therein.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[William Leisner]

I don't feel any obligation to "demonstrate" my patriotism, to you or anyone else.

Oh, all right then. The militant patriots win this round, is all.

How do you figure that? The only person questioning my patriotism here is you.

 

[Nerroth]

Calling it Star Fleet (two words, not one) works for me!

 

[prometheuspan]

well, i read the first few posts and i don't agree. I think what happened
was that there was one organization which we can think of as more or less replacing NASA. But for a few years, you'd expect to see things still labeled
with the NASA tag out of habit and inertia. But after a while NASA is a totally replaced agency. Then the same thing. I mean "probe agency"? Should say it all don't you think? Probes are unmanned craft. Starfleet at first probably starts out as a division of that agency, then overtakes it, and finally replaces
it completely.

I think whats going on is slow transitions between agencies and joint agency ventures while that transition is happening.

However, i don't really have any proof- thats just always been my supposition.