In The Pale Moonlight-Would you do it?
- Thread starter WarsTrek1993
- Start date
And...to flip it on it's head... Sisko doesn't do the con job, the Romulans don't join the Federation and Klingons, and therefore the Dominion wins, and then the Romulans lose even more lives fighting alone against a stronger/larger alliance of the Dominion. So, then Sisko can face the children of even more Romulan Soldiers who died because he didn't lie them in a war.
Unless the Romulans would just give in as soon as the dominion took the Klingons and the Federation seeing the writing on the wall. No death.
Or.. if the Dominion somehow suffers massive unexpected casualities taking the Fedeartion and the Klingons completedly, the Romulans attack straight away, win after a massive bloody war and rule the entire Alpha Quadrant afterwards. Ya, lots more Romulan orphans, but they now have better future prospects.
There is more than one path to think of consequences of actions NOT taken. We can only really judge Sisko on the actions that he did take in this episode. The "If I don't do this, many more people will die than if I don't", is a very tricky slipperly moral slope to be on.
Or.. if the Dominion somehow suffers massive unexpected casualities taking the Fedeartion and the Klingons completedly, the Romulans attack straight away, win after a massive bloody war and rule the entire Alpha Quadrant afterwards. Ya, lots more Romulan orphans, but they now have better future prospects.
There is more than one path to think of consequences of actions NOT taken. We can only really judge Sisko on the actions that he did take in this episode. The "If I don't do this, many more people will die than if I don't", is a very tricky slipperly moral slope to be on.
I don't give any credence to your second scenario of the Dominion being so weakened by the Federation and Klingons going down that the Romulans could win. If the Federation and Klingons fell, the Dominion would control the Wormhole, meaning untold resources and re-enforcements being opened back up to the Dominion.
Your first scenario, yea, that's possible, but, it certainly isn't one I would expect
By the time of In the Pale Moonlight the Prophets were blocking all Dominion reinforcements from reaching the Alpha Quadrant. There are no reinforcements coming for the Alpha Quadrant Dominion at all. The Dominion cannot communicate with them either if Sisko is dead.
Its plausible that the Klingons would probably fight to the death on every single one of their planets too. That would take a massive toll out of the Jem'Hadar (unless they just nuke every Klingon world from orbit. Than at least the Dominion don't waste resources)
If potentially the Alpha Quadrant Dominion was a bit precarious/incompetant-in-victory in resources after the Klingon/Federation war, and the Romulans prepared exactly for the moment of best potential of attack, the Romulans could probably get very far indeed. The Romulans would have to be very very lucky to pull it off. But its not completedly impossible I think.
Its plausible that the Klingons would probably fight to the death on every single one of their planets too. That would take a massive toll out of the Jem'Hadar (unless they just nuke every Klingon world from orbit. Than at least the Dominion don't waste resources)
If potentially the Alpha Quadrant Dominion was a bit precarious/incompetant-in-victory in resources after the Klingon/Federation war, and the Romulans prepared exactly for the moment of best potential of attack, the Romulans could probably get very far indeed. The Romulans would have to be very very lucky to pull it off. But its not completedly impossible I think.
Had Garrak not turned the data rod into a bomb, and helped to assaniate the senateor ... the Federation still could have won the war...
It was in a dark moment that Sisko violated his own principals and did what he knew was wrong, an act of weakness. He wasnt acting based on ideals but out of fear.
The Romulans would probably going to get involved at some point... theyre not fools... but say they hadent...
You've got a situation where no re-enforcements are coming from the Gamma Quadrent and a dying soon-to-be-dead founder. The Gemjhadar ( prolly mis-spelled ) arnt going to follow the Cardassians or the Vorta... Wayoon is gonna end up dead as a door nail... and its very probably that Odo could step in and subvert the Gemjhadar.
But regardless... You either stand for somthing or you dont...
A moment of weakness is what it is and man will always face trials... but I would never advocate taking a dump all over the princapals of the greatest society in known history out of fear.
It was in a dark moment that Sisko violated his own principals and did what he knew was wrong, an act of weakness. He wasnt acting based on ideals but out of fear.
The Romulans would probably going to get involved at some point... theyre not fools... but say they hadent...
You've got a situation where no re-enforcements are coming from the Gamma Quadrent and a dying soon-to-be-dead founder. The Gemjhadar ( prolly mis-spelled ) arnt going to follow the Cardassians or the Vorta... Wayoon is gonna end up dead as a door nail... and its very probably that Odo could step in and subvert the Gemjhadar.
But regardless... You either stand for somthing or you dont...
A moment of weakness is what it is and man will always face trials... but I would never advocate taking a dump all over the princapals of the greatest society in known history out of fear.
the Romulans were happily letting the UFP and the Klingons fight their war for them. Sisko owed them nothing. Had the Dominion defeated the alliance, they'd have turned around and conquered the Romulans.
if your society is conquered or defeated, then it is incapable of fighting for any kind of ideals.
Here's a spin on the question. Sisko, through Garak, sacrificed Vreenak "for the cause.' But if you were in Vreenak's position, and instead of opposing a Federation alliance you desperately wanted to take on the Dominion, would you sacrifice yourself to get Romulus into the war? Would you be willing to give your own life, so it becomes a question not just of ideals, but of your own survival?
If you said it's OK for Sisko to do what he did, would you also be willing to offer up yourself as the sacrificial lamb?
Admiral Jarok would, justifying it as giving his daughter a chance to grow up. Spock would, since the needs of the many...but would you?
If you said it's OK for Sisko to do what he did, would you also be willing to offer up yourself as the sacrificial lamb?
Admiral Jarok would, justifying it as giving his daughter a chance to grow up. Spock would, since the needs of the many...but would you?
Sure kill an innocent Romulan Senator in order to achieve political ends... why not im sure his family/children/loved ones would understand... thats what the Federation stands for... at least it does after that episode...
Killing an innocent man is not the same as traveling back in time and shooting Hitler.
Killing an innocent man is not the same as traveling back in time and shooting Hitler.
Knight Templar
Commodore
Seems to me that Sisko's main obligation had to be the protection of the Federation. He had no legal or moral obligation to "think of the poor Romulans" given that the Romulan Empire was pretty much a declared enemy of the Federation throughout modern Star Trek.
I think many here are trying to impose a moral obligation on Sisko that he simply did not have.
pacifist societies don't tend to last long, except maybe as minority groups who are under the protection of a state that DOES fight for them. Which is kind of why there's really no such thing as true pacifism unless you're legally able to renounce and refuse police protection, military defense, etc. In which case, see the "don't tend to last long" part.
Knight Templar
Commodore
Are you referring to the people for the David Mack Borg trilogy?
If I recall correctly, they "did so well" that a handful of starship crewman were able to destroy one of their cities despite being thousands of years behind technology wise.
Moral and legal obligations? I'm pretty sure he's moraly and legaly obligated to conduct himself in a manner thats representational of Starfleet and the Federation of Planets and their moral standards,
I'm pretty sure producing fradulent evidence intended to drew a planet into a war under false pretense and facilitating an assanation of a Romulan senator exceeds the perview of a Starfleet captain... if you want to look at it from a standpoint of " moral and legal obligations "
You cant defend the Federation and Starfleet by subverting the very principals it was founded upon.
you also can't defend the Federation's principles when there is no Federation because it's been subjugated by the Dominion.
Almost every country that was involved in a war for survival would make the decision to compromise its principles during that crisis in order to ensure its continued existence.
The UFP has no moral obligation to let itself be defeated.
I don't remember much about their society, but I was thinking more in real world terms. Weren't the Caeliar either very advanced or very isolated?
Any government can and will do whatever it deems necessary to survive, yes. But if it violates its most basic moral codes and principles, then it must be prepared to face the consequences. Moral principles are, by definition, absolute; you violate them, and you lose all morality.
Besides, it is rarely *necessary* to violate such principles. There's almost always another way.
Knight Templar
Commodore
The most immoral thing you can do in a war is to lose.