• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

I've seen discussion here about Starfleet being or not being military, so here's another viewpoint.

STARFLEET sends it's ships to enforce treaties, and respond to foreign aggressors. They are sent to borders in response to battle cruisers. Their officers are subject to a chain of command with trials being a military court, or courts martial. You can be confined by order of your commanding officer without any other legal action.

It genuinely breaks my mind a little that this is a question.
 
While I generally agree with “Well, of course it’s a military!”, it’s worth noting that Starfleet’s self-image changes depending on the era. Before the launch of the NX-01 and for the first couple of years before the Xindi attack, Starfleet doesn’t seem to perceive itself that way. It certainly does during the TOS era (arguably, because of DISCO’s Klingon War some years before). It makes a big show of pretending not to be in early TNG, or at least Picard does, but this clearly changes as it goes along. In the late 32nd century, there’s no question about it: it’s got self-described “capital ships”, and a straight-up War College. It’s not only a military, but a military it very much is, more so in that era than in some others, and understandably so.
 
Last edited:
The only real answer is "depends on the writer/episode/series", surely. Some people just write them as essentially the 20th century US Navy, others write them as almost total pacifists dedicated entirely to exploration and adventure.
 
They lost a war somewhere, or maybe it was part of the Romulan war agreement, and Starfleet isn't military in the same way the Japan Self-Defence Force isn't an army.
 
While I generally agree with “Well, of course it’s a military!”, it’s worth noting that Starfleet’s self-image changes depending on the era.

Agreed.

But on the other hand, the basis for them having the legal powers and authorisations typically accorded to militaries and only militaries since the mid-20th Century never changes
 
Last edited:
Any decent commanding officer would have reacted the same way. Wanna make googly eyes at each other? Do it on your own time.
It's good to be the dancing Captain from ''Methuselah.'' Admittedly, Rayna was a metallic knockout.

Perhaps Cheekoof was attempting to emulate the top yellowshirt. Kirky certainly had his share of first-year squeezes. The Ruth illusion was just one of them. During a tense crisis.
 
don't think that's the definer, as civilians in star trek, federation ones even, also have weapons, both personal and shipboard
Correct.

It's a matter of authority and ability to use that authority to enforce their government's policy, defend borders and repel foreign intruders. This isn't an authority that can be switched on and off.

Nor so we see any other power work in a similar capacity for the Federation. It's always STARFLEET. Why? If they are not a military their approaching highly military level conflicts with no authority to resolve it.
 
It's a matter of authority and ability to use that authority to enforce their government's policy, defend borders and repel foreign intruders. This isn't an authority that can be switched on and off

And this is why it doesn't matter if Starfleet is its own thing or a combined service.

Starfleet is the militarized arm of Federation that, as depicted, defends the Federation against foreign and domestic threats. The fact that Starfleet chooses to distance itself from the term military is semantics.

While it is true there are other agencies and organizations within the Federation, including civilians, that carry weapons is irrelevant. It is not their stated role or function to serve as the defender of the Federation.

Starfleet is what it is.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top