Something I find interesting: The debate over the resolution to the Borg invasion reminds me of reaction to the conclusion of the Shadow War in "Babylon Five". That was another hopeless conflict that could only end in near-total destruction -- until the ideological roots of the conflict were identified and powerful aliens were moved by the younger races into calling it off; ideals rather than might eventually being the solution. And it was another arc-conclusion that really seems to divide people. In both Bab-5 and Destiny, there was no way the heroes could win by conventional means, by military action. It was simply impossible. They could go down fighting, but they couldn't survive- the forces they were up against were just too powerful. But that didn't mean they didn't find a solution- indeed, in Bab-5's case, making a point of lying down and accepting death was essentially part of the plan- their only hope 
. Completely unconventional, but a wise course of action; because it hooked the elder races right in the ideology, the driving force behind their actions. The same is true of "Destiny". For the Borg, that driving force is their hunger, the emptiness that demands to be filled yet never can be, the perfection that can't be reached. Only now it could be- the Caeliar could try and reach out to the Borg, to "rescue" them (in doing so finding the solution to their own ideological dilemma), and it was the human(oid) characters, chief among them Hernandez, who convinced the Caeliar to do so. That is problem-solving- throwing down the weapons when they prove pointless and saying "We need a new angle because this isn't working. What must we do? What can save us?" Picard wouldn't engage in this kind of thinking due to his psychological breakdown, which is the problem with the thalaron business. Picard had indeed given up- but that was the whole point of his arc. He had hit rock bottom, and refused to believe that Dax's plan could work. Instead he wanted to try the same "hit them with weapons!" plan that wasn't working and wasn't going to work. All that was left for him was apocalypse, and he would rather streak in flashing thalaron pulses than truly try a working solution- because he was convinced there wasn't one. His entire universe had crashed down in flames around him.
I believe it was inventive, active, humanistic problem-solving that saved the day in "Destiny". Giving up with conventional weapons and violence didn't mean giving up hope- indeed, the character to give up and just surrender was in fact the one character insistant on a "keep shooting!" attitude: Picard. The others were busy identifying the one real shot at success and trying to achieve it. And as others have said, a non-violent conclusion is in keeping with the franchise of Star Trek, and is what most of us probably want to see.
How viewers respond to the end of the Shadow War depends on how they've connected with the story, I think. Some people find Bab-5 very entertaining but feel cheated or remain unconvinced by the arc's resolution, because they still relate to it as a military problem. If you see it instead as an ideological problem, the arc's conclusion is a lot more satisfying. I believe the same was true here; relating to the Borg arc in terms of military forces leads to an unsatisfying ending, because the Borg were so powerful that the story's end (which obviously has to have the Federation surviving) might seem similiar to deux ex machina. And from the military-problem viewpoint, arguments against using a weapon in such desperate situations seem...well, stupid, hence the thalaron debate. But if you instead relate to the story in terms of motives, drives, ideologies, the story is not about the Borg's war machine but their need to find a perfection beyond their grasp. Helping the Borg to find what they seek is the only way to end the threat.
Well, sorry for the mini-rant. That's my view of the situation, anyway. 
. Completely unconventional, but a wise course of action; because it hooked the elder races right in the ideology, the driving force behind their actions. The same is true of "Destiny". For the Borg, that driving force is their hunger, the emptiness that demands to be filled yet never can be, the perfection that can't be reached. Only now it could be- the Caeliar could try and reach out to the Borg, to "rescue" them (in doing so finding the solution to their own ideological dilemma), and it was the human(oid) characters, chief among them Hernandez, who convinced the Caeliar to do so. That is problem-solving- throwing down the weapons when they prove pointless and saying "We need a new angle because this isn't working. What must we do? What can save us?" Picard wouldn't engage in this kind of thinking due to his psychological breakdown, which is the problem with the thalaron business. Picard had indeed given up- but that was the whole point of his arc. He had hit rock bottom, and refused to believe that Dax's plan could work. Instead he wanted to try the same "hit them with weapons!" plan that wasn't working and wasn't going to work. All that was left for him was apocalypse, and he would rather streak in flashing thalaron pulses than truly try a working solution- because he was convinced there wasn't one. His entire universe had crashed down in flames around him. I believe it was inventive, active, humanistic problem-solving that saved the day in "Destiny". Giving up with conventional weapons and violence didn't mean giving up hope- indeed, the character to give up and just surrender was in fact the one character insistant on a "keep shooting!" attitude: Picard. The others were busy identifying the one real shot at success and trying to achieve it. And as others have said, a non-violent conclusion is in keeping with the franchise of Star Trek, and is what most of us probably want to see.
How viewers respond to the end of the Shadow War depends on how they've connected with the story, I think. Some people find Bab-5 very entertaining but feel cheated or remain unconvinced by the arc's resolution, because they still relate to it as a military problem. If you see it instead as an ideological problem, the arc's conclusion is a lot more satisfying. I believe the same was true here; relating to the Borg arc in terms of military forces leads to an unsatisfying ending, because the Borg were so powerful that the story's end (which obviously has to have the Federation surviving) might seem similiar to deux ex machina. And from the military-problem viewpoint, arguments against using a weapon in such desperate situations seem...well, stupid, hence the thalaron debate. But if you instead relate to the story in terms of motives, drives, ideologies, the story is not about the Borg's war machine but their need to find a perfection beyond their grasp. Helping the Borg to find what they seek is the only way to end the threat.
Well, sorry for the mini-rant.
That's my view of the situation, anyway. 
