As mentioned, that was self-defense.
Spoilers Does the Strange New World’s Finale Justify Discovery’s Premiere?
- Thread starter TrekTrucker
- Start date
As mentioned, that was self-defense.
Would Starfleet see it that way?
Those rules don't seem to apply in Trek... at least not in the 23rd century.
Also, as Klingon L'Rell pointed out to Cornwall... in war, there are no rules. To the Klingons, everything was fair game.
Besides, if SF did adopt some more 'do and do not' rules in war, it may not have happened until the 24th century.
We know SF generally did NOT approve of laying down mines around their space stations, etc... however, nothing was explicitly stated that hiding charges on dead bodies of their enemies was prohibited.
The Torchbearer being a Klingon national is no differen than Klingon troops killing SF officers in combat. At that point, the battle was pretty much over (the Klingons won), and both M.B. and Georgiou were trying to capture a prisoner (and save the Shenzou crew)... unless you are referring to the Klingon M.B. killed on the hull of the artifact (who wasn't a Torhcbearer... just a nameless soldier who attacked her first).
I think you might be stretching.
Given that Burnham refers to the Geneva Convention to Lorca in the next episode there are apparently some rules that do apply.
No. I'm just looking at it from the perspective of why SF would want a scapegoat. I agree it wasn't her fault; I just see why SF would want a scapegoat. Because so many things went wrong.
Some rules yes, but not all.
Klingons demonstrated (and L'Rell confirmed) that they will have 0 reservations when it comes to winning a conflict/war by any means necessary... they won't be using any 'rules' to do so.
There also might be dispensations/leeways depending on how dire circumstances get to ensure the crew's survival.
'Firing on a Klingon national' was broken when the first shots were fired by ships at each other. Klingon soldiers are also members of the Empire... so, you can't really use that particular clause in this situation... because that would have effectively negated Starfleet's ability to defend itself entirely (aka, by that rule, SF ships should have never fired back at the Klingon ships).
That's the thing... there is/was no need for a scapegoat because Starfleet wasn't the party that secretly plotted and started that war in the first place.
The surviving crew of the Shenzou would have had to testified to the fact that it was the Klingons who fired first... not Starfleet, and that while M.B. did TRY to mutiny, her actions never amounted to anything as she was thrown into the brig by Georgiou before she could do anything (the surviving bridge crew were witnesses to this).
So, either Starfleet debriefed its officers inorrectly, or the officers in question lied because they were 'blinded' by M.B. attempted mutiny... or both parties were incredibly stupid and put the blame on M.B. (who just ended up accepting whatever fate SF had in store for her because she was grief struck over Georgiou's death).
I'm going with very reactionary and that the officers were blinded by grief and their memories were influenced thusly. Starfleet felt some responsibility for the war too.
Last I checked our heroes were not Klingons. Whether the rules make sense they still abide by them.
SF may have felt some responsibility for the war yes, mainly on the ground that they may have seen it as a failure of diplomacy... however, the Klingons were adamant about engaging in a war with the Federation... so, no diplomatic action would have swayed them (in fact, diplomacy was what made them more determined to attack).
Agreed, but my point is that hiding charges among the Klingon's dead would not necessarily have been some of those rules.
These may have been mitigating circumstances where fighting for ones survival was at stake after all... and besides, its not like SF would have LEFT those charges sitting there after the deed was done... in fact, they only hid one or two charges, both of which ended up on the Klingon ship by attaching them to their dead (which served as a delivery mechanism).
I mean, maybe? We don't know for sure but Burnham cites the Geneva Convention to Lorca so some rules in some manner exist. Does that involve booby trapping the dead? We can't say for sure but it has historical precedent, including current events, as a war crime.
SF has no way to know that.
What it all comes down to is that these early episodes, like much of Disco season 1 suffered from constant change in showrunners and turnover among the writing staff. Meaning it's very likely one writer didn't know when referencing the Geneva Convention that the show had already shown its characters violating the Geneva Convention, if any of the writers were even aware that booby trapping a corpse is a war crime. Indeed, often times Star Trek writers take the "Starfleet isn't a military" belief literally and think it means they don't have to learn about military or war, even when paradoxically showing Starfleet fighting in a war.
Besides, we know that in the 24th century many rules of modern warfare are still in place, Garak made a point of ridiculing them all the time on DS9. So it would seem odd if booby trapping a corpse wasn't still a war crime in the 24th century. After all, the whole reason modern militaries have a rule against booby trapping corpses, and why they all seem to follow it, is basic quid pro quo. I won't booby trap your dead, and you won't booby trap mine. I see no reason to expect this mentality to go away.
Besides, we know that in the 24th century many rules of modern warfare are still in place, Garak made a point of ridiculing them all the time on DS9. So it would seem odd if booby trapping a corpse wasn't still a war crime in the 24th century. After all, the whole reason modern militaries have a rule against booby trapping corpses, and why they all seem to follow it, is basic quid pro quo. I won't booby trap your dead, and you won't booby trap mine. I see no reason to expect this mentality to go away.
I interpreted the Romulans entering the war as partially motivated by Vreenak's political rivals thinking he was too stupid to trust the Dominion to honor a treaty, or they were confident enough in their own war capability to believe the treaty was pointless.More like the Romulans got played by a Sisko and a Starfleet who were being pulled by Garak's strings.
Romulans vs. Garak --> Garak wins.
Interestingly, Star Trek Online supports the hawk position for the Romulans because the timeline where the Enterprise-C did not return to intervene for the Federation and Klingons in 2344, the quadrant fell to a Dominion invasion, with prominent Klingons and Romulans alike being sold off as slave labor to the Tholians by 2409.
I suspect that the Klingons would have no qualms about doing it first, whether or not Starfleet banned the practice within its own ranks. That's definitely within the Klingons' wheelhouse.
Sisko gave the Maquis colonists time to evacuate. There were no civilians (the term 'Maquis colony' implies that it was some kind of paramilitary base). And as far as we know, no casualties either. So I'm not really seeing the war crime there.
Chemical weapons are forbidden in war time even against military targets.
It was also described as a colony, so there probably was civilians down there.
I had assumed that the term 'Maquis' only applied to the ones who were doing the fighting...because surely there were colonists in the DMZ who wouldn't.
Although I doubt the Maquis thought very well of them, as groups like this rarely take kindly to those who won't join The Struggle.
Last edited:
There was a colony on the planet, but he didn't bombard it directly. He just poisoned the planet's ecosystem so they'd be forced to evacuate. That's certainly not a good thing and wasn't meant to be; the whole idea was that he was embracing the role of villain that Eddington had cast him in. But people tend to exaggerate just how bad it was. It wasn't like he killed the colonists; he just fouled the nest so they'd have to leave. If anything, the environmental destruction might be considered a graver crime.
There was no environmental "destruction", as such. The two groups of colonists simply exchanged planets. What was poison for one was not poison for the other.
As for boobytrapping the dead, it's also important to point out that the whole reason it's a war crime in the first place is because of the possible collateral damage to civilians. In Starfleet's conflict with the Klingons, obviously that would not apply...
As for boobytrapping the dead, it's also important to point out that the whole reason it's a war crime in the first place is because of the possible collateral damage to civilians. In Starfleet's conflict with the Klingons, obviously that would not apply...
Last edited:
Wow - not posted for years but was reading through and thought, why not, hi all!
Although the first season of Discovery was creatively clearly a bit of a mess, there is a story thread for Michael which drives her arc throughout the first couple of series.
Michael is being prepared by Georgiou for her first command. Like any line officer she has been trained to lead, but her actions, a definite actual mutiny, mean that while her skills and ability are not in question, her judgement is.
The show wants us to go on the journey with Michael that starts with her brilliant but inexperienced self screwing up REALLY badly, and having to learn the path to command all over again.
She hadn't and should have learnt to respect the chain of command more. She hadn't and should have learnt that while the Vulcans may have dealt with the Klingons by firing first, she's got a commission in Starfleet, so it matters what her CO wants and Starfleet's rules, not what the Vulcans might have done. She lacks experience despite her brilliance.
Comparing this to the finale of SNW... did people interpret it as Pike being wrong, or a single moment that due to the way time is working around Pike, needed Kirk at the helm, with his instincts, not Pike and his. On another day, Kirk would have started the war and Pike stopped it, but not that day.
Command isn't knowing exactly how things will turn out. Starfleet will give command generally to whoever they think has the skills and experience to make the most of the resources they have (ship, crew of geniuses) to accomplish their mission.
While we know Starfleet has 7000 ships, probably only a few hundred are the big starships that patrol the borders, solve alien mysteries and defeat implacable foes.
Michael just wasn't ready for the big chair, Pike was just on that one day, not the best guy to be sitting in it.
Although the first season of Discovery was creatively clearly a bit of a mess, there is a story thread for Michael which drives her arc throughout the first couple of series.
Michael is being prepared by Georgiou for her first command. Like any line officer she has been trained to lead, but her actions, a definite actual mutiny, mean that while her skills and ability are not in question, her judgement is.
The show wants us to go on the journey with Michael that starts with her brilliant but inexperienced self screwing up REALLY badly, and having to learn the path to command all over again.
She hadn't and should have learnt to respect the chain of command more. She hadn't and should have learnt that while the Vulcans may have dealt with the Klingons by firing first, she's got a commission in Starfleet, so it matters what her CO wants and Starfleet's rules, not what the Vulcans might have done. She lacks experience despite her brilliance.
Comparing this to the finale of SNW... did people interpret it as Pike being wrong, or a single moment that due to the way time is working around Pike, needed Kirk at the helm, with his instincts, not Pike and his. On another day, Kirk would have started the war and Pike stopped it, but not that day.
Command isn't knowing exactly how things will turn out. Starfleet will give command generally to whoever they think has the skills and experience to make the most of the resources they have (ship, crew of geniuses) to accomplish their mission.
While we know Starfleet has 7000 ships, probably only a few hundred are the big starships that patrol the borders, solve alien mysteries and defeat implacable foes.
Michael just wasn't ready for the big chair, Pike was just on that one day, not the best guy to be sitting in it.
Similar threads
