Learning to love "Insurrection"

[sonak]

It violates every version, eh? Is that why Dougherty explicitly says the PD DOESN'T apply? Oh, but wait, Dougherty is the "bad guy" right, so Picard's b.s. interpretation is obviously right.

Yeah, your arguments are so wise I can't wrap my mind around their brilliance.

Yup, good way to avoid actually answering me. Of course, Dougherty also says several other things that are completely wrong and hypocritical in that conversation, as I pointed out. But he's just right about that one? Makes sense. I've also made several hundreds of points pages earlier on why it would violate the PD, which you've also never answered. This is exhausting. It's like you think just tiring someone out is going to make you right. It doesn't work that way.

1. I've already answered this before. The Baku weren't pre-warp or pre-contact, and removing them WASN'T interfering with their "natural" development, since they didn't come from the Briar Patch planet, they're just squatters.

2. Even if removing the Baku violated the Prime Directive six ways from Sunday, it would still be the right thing to do, so I don't want to get side-tracked on a debate about the finer points of the PD.

 

[sonak]

Doesn't Picard say to Doughtery that he brought the Federation into the middle of a "blood feud"? Isn't that a violation as well?

For example, the Federation refused to interfere in the internal matters of the Klingons such as with their civil war. This sounds like a similar situation.

But you'll notice Picard continues to "interfere" even after he makes the realization about the "blood feud" between the Baku and the Son'a.


Because in this movie he's a hypocrite who just wants to get in Anij's pants and doesn't care if his arguments or actions make sense.

 

[BillJ]

Doesn't Picard say to Doughtery that he brought the Federation into the middle of a "blood feud"? Isn't that a violation as well?

For example, the Federation refused to interfere in the internal matters of the Klingons such as with their civil war. This sounds like a similar situation.

At that point, Picard and Dougherty should've recused the Federation from the whole mess and allowed the Ba'ku and S'ona to sort things out. Which they didn't.

It's one of the points about Picard's overall morality in the film (violating multiple orders, going against his government, continuing to interfere after its obvious that he's dealing with an internal affair) that I've made in every single one of these threads.

It seems Picard's immoral actions are constantly overlooked in favor of bestowing him with some type of sainthood.

 

[Vasquez Rocks]

But the revelation that the Son'a and Ba'ku are the same race comes close to the end of the movie. Shortly after that revelation Picard and Anij are beamed up to Rua'fo's ship. How was Picard suppose to stop interferring? At that point the Enterprise was gone from the planet and he was being held as a prisoner aboard Rua'fo's ship.

 

[Mark 2000]

1. I've already answered this before. The Baku weren't pre-warp or pre-contact, and removing them WASN'T interfering with their "natural" development, since they didn't come from the Briar Patch planet, they're just squatters.

Still avoiding the question. Which part of the prime directive in any other episode does this not break?

And I'll ask another question that you've never answered just to show that I asked it: How is a culture from a planet established for 300 years "squatters"? Are Americans Squatters? Are Turks "Squatting" in Anatolia? Do you know what squatting means? It means sitting on someone else's property not paying rent. The Federation didn't exist when they landed there. Put you fingers in your ears and hum some more.

2. Even if removing the Baku violated the Prime Directive six ways from Sunday, it would still be the right thing to do, so I don't want to get side-tracked on a debate about the finer points of the PD.

Because you said so and really no other reason.

At that point, Picard and Dougherty should've recused the Federation from the whole mess and allowed the Ba'ku and S'ona to sort things out. Which they didn't... It's one of the points about Picard's overall morality in the film... that I've made in every single one of these threads.

But Dougherty didn't recuse the Federation, therefore it was up to Picard to stop him on the Federation's behalf. I don't get why you don't understand that. If the both of them had washed their hands of it I agree the Sona should have blown the Baku off the planet. But Picard was protecting Federation law. Then Raufo kills a Star Fleet Admiral which requires a penalty. And the Picard makes diplomatic peace between the Baku and the Sona upon their request and the Sona don't even want the rings anymore. So, you really have no point. Everything Picard did was correct except letting Raufo die in the collector - but that was really Riker's fault.

 

[T'Girl]

You know I really wish they had gone with the original idea of the film that leaving the planet would kill them ...

Okay, then how would you explain the Sona?

And moving people off their world would violate every permutation. Which episode are you basing your interpretation on?

How about Journey's End.

why did the Federation council CHANGE THEIR MINDS

Who says they did ... I mean in the end? Riker said there was going to be a pause in the Baku relocation while the council made a review.

But the particles that could help hundreds of billions of federation people were still circling the planet, the planet was still in federation space and there were still only a few hundred Baku who would be able to return to the planet in a few decades. Subsequent to the review, the federation council might confirm their original decision to collect the particles.

Yeah, democratic process. Everyone against the Baku is not getting that the Fed is a democracy.

The federation council is composed of representatives of the federation's many membership worlds, how many of the people on those worlds would have their health prosper with access to the particles? Shall all of them uproot their lifes to go and live on the planet under the particles? Or should the federation bring the particles to them.

Today, if you need medicine, do you go live next to the factory that makes it, or do they send the medicine to you (or your doctor)?

"The Prime Directive doesn't apply."

The prime directive has been shown to be malleable from TOS through to Insurrection, likely it a federation policy that gets altered and reinterpreted from time to time. Certainly it seems to have been different between Kirk's and Picard's time periods. A new council President might be of the position that the PD doesn't apply to the Baku. A political decision.

Later on we get the reason why the E-E can't even report publicly what they've found: "If the Enterprise gets through with news about their brave Captain's valiant struggle on behalf of the defenceless Ba'ku, your Federation politicians will waver, your Federation opinion polls will open a public debate, your Federation allies will want their say. ...Need I go on?"

Picard: Admiral, I have every reason to believe that they will resist any attempt to remove them. I strongly urge you to request an emergency session of the Federation Council. The issue of Dorvan Five must be reopened.

Necheyev: Captain, I made that request two days ago. The answer was no.

Wow, the federation council reached a decision on a similar matter in only two days, the decision was a confirmation of their earlier decision. Why would the decision on the particles take any longer.

Because remember, this is all about the particles.

 

[sonak]

1. I've already answered this before. The Baku weren't pre-warp or pre-contact, and removing them WASN'T interfering with their "natural" development, since they didn't come from the Briar Patch planet, they're just squatters.

Still avoiding the question. Which part of the prime directive in any other episode does this not break?

And I'll ask another question that you've never answered just to show that I asked it: How is a culture from a planet established for 300 years "squatters"? Are Americans Squatters? Are Turks "Squatting" in Anatolia? Do you know what squatting means? It means sitting on someone else's property not paying rent. The Federation didn't exist when they landed there. Put you fingers in your ears and hum some more.

2. Even if removing the Baku violated the Prime Directive six ways from Sunday, it would still be the right thing to do, so I don't want to get side-tracked on a debate about the finer points of the PD.

Because you said so and really no other reason.

At that point, Picard and Dougherty should've recused the Federation from the whole mess and allowed the Ba'ku and S'ona to sort things out. Which they didn't... It's one of the points about Picard's overall morality in the film... that I've made in every single one of these threads.

But Dougherty didn't recuse the Federation, therefore it was up to Picard to stop him on the Federation's behalf. I don't get why you don't understand that. If the both of them had washed their hands of it I agree the Sona should have blown the Baku off the planet. But Picard was protecting Federation law. Then Raufo kills a Star Fleet Admiral which requires a penalty. And the Picard makes diplomatic peace between the Baku and the Sona upon their request and the Sona don't even want the rings anymore. So, you really have no point. Everything Picard did was correct except letting Raufo die in the collector - but that was really Riker's fault.

dude, I've given you reasons throughout this thread. The fact that you write "because you said so and no other reason" shows you're not engaging in a serious argument.

You're right on one point though, they've been there long enough to not be considered squatters, but they're still not "naturally" from that planet(See? When you make a decent argument, I listen)

In this movie, Picard violates lawful orders before he knows what's really going on. He vioates lawful orders after he knows what's going on. He does a 180 on his position of "relocation for the greater good" from the episode "Journey's End," because this time there's a hot woman(YMMV) that he's interested in. Finally, after learning of the Baku-Son'a connection, he violates his own arguments once again to stay in the fight!

Your "hero" in this movie folks, Jean-Luc Picard: an insubordinate, hypocritical guy being led around by his penis like he's a horny teenager.

 

[BillJ]

Everything Picard did was correct except letting Raufo die in the collector - but that was really Riker's fault.

Um... should've never destroyed the collector. It was a S'ona weapon/tool and it wasn't being used against the Federation. You said it yourself the planet is the property of the Ba'ku (which I disagree with) and Picard said it was a "blood feud". By destroying the collector, Picard was changing the dynamics in an internal affair, a violation of your interpretation of the Prime Directive. And Picard never once said to Dougherty that the Federation should recuse itself from the matter.

Picard was being driven by his libido not his morals in Insurrection.

 

[Mark 2000]

but they're still not "naturally" from that planet(See? When you make a decent argument, I listen)

No, you haven't. And you still haven't. Sure, now you agree they aren't squatters, but you ignore my point about the United States in the process. We're non-natives too, but in another thread you were heavily in favor of us protecting ourselves. The non-native stuff is BS.

He vioates lawful orders after he knows what's going on.

What lawful orders after discovering the holoship did he break that were lawful?

He does a 180 on his position of "relocation for the greater good" from the episode "Journey's End,"

Again, continuing a point after you've been proven wrong. Journey's End involved Federation citizens and the PD doesn't apply. The Cardassians would have killed everyone on the planet. It's not different than "Ensigns of Command" and the Sheliak.

Um... should've never destroyed the collector.

Fine, I give you that. But Raufo still had to be arrested for killing an Admiral. In fact, the whole lot of them should have been arrested just for assaulting Data.

 

[BillJ]

What lawful orders after discovering the holoship did he break that were lawful?

If you accept that the orders come from the Federation Council, there are probably a whole slew of legal eagles that could tell you why it's legal under Federation law. I don't believe the Federation Council would've issued orders they couldn't back up legally. Ru'afo never seems concerned about the legality of what's going on but the popularity.

So if the orders did come from the Federation Council, Picard violated a lawful order from his government. And it would also make Dougherty's orders of "stay out of it" lawful as well.

Just depends how you choose to interpret the events of the film.

 

[sonak]

but they're still not "naturally" from that planet(See? When you make a decent argument, I listen)

No, you haven't. And you still haven't. Sure, now you agree they aren't squatters, but you ignore my point about the United States in the process. We're non-natives too, but in another thread you were heavily in favor of us protecting ourselves. The non-native stuff is BS.

He vioates lawful orders after he knows what's going on.

What lawful orders after discovering the holoship did he break that were lawful?

He does a 180 on his position of "relocation for the greater good" from the episode "Journey's End,"

Again, continuing a point after you've been proven wrong. Journey's End involved Federation citizens and the PD doesn't apply. The Cardassians would have killed everyone on the planet. It's not different than "Ensigns of Command" and the Sheliak.

Um... should've never destroyed the collector.

Fine, I give you that. But Raufo still had to be arrested for killing an Admiral. In fact, the whole lot of them should have been arrested just for assaulting Data.

being "non-native" has nothing to do with the right to self-defense. Of course countries have the right to defend themselves. Except of course the Baku are SUPPOSED to be Luddite pacifists(who are of course happy to have others fight for them)

I don't see what difference the "federation citizens" argument for "journey's end" makes. That's a legal distinction, not a moral one. They're still being moved from their homes for a greater good against their wishes.

Your argument just comes down to the legal technicality that the Baku aren't UFP citizens? umm, OK, that's a powerful ethical stand you're taking right there. "see, we treat our own citizens worse than we would ever contemplate treating non-citizens!"

 

[Vasquez Rocks]

In this movie, Picard violates lawful orders before he knows what's really going on. He vioates lawful orders after he knows what's going on. He does a 180 on his position of "relocation for the greater good" from the episode "Journey's End," because this time there's a hot woman(YMMV) that he's interested in. Finally, after learning of the Baku-Son'a connection, he violates his own arguments once again to stay in the fight!
.

No. He found out about the Son'a/Ba'ku connection during the end of the fight with the Son'a. He is then beamed up to Ru'afo's ship. As soon as he has the chance he tells Dougherty about the connection between the two races and Dougherty agrees with him to back out of there. That's when Ru'afo kills him.

So Dougherty didn't know what was going on either, but as soon as he did he agreed with Picard. It seems like no one in the Federation knew they were the same race.

 

[Mark 2000]

being "non-native" has nothing to do with the right to self-defense.

So, um, I'm confused. The Baku don't have any rights to the planet... but they have the right to defend themselves on the planet? I don't know what you're arguing for anymore.

I don't see what difference the "federation citizens" argument for "journey's end" makes. That's a legal distinction, not a moral one. They're still being moved from their homes for a greater good against their wishes.

A country has the right to protect it's citizens. Removing the colonists in Journey and Ensigns was in order to protect fed citizens from harm and for the greater good of the society that those people live in. This would be comparable to Israel removing settlements of it's citizens in disputed land in both Gaza and on the Sinai peninsula in order to prevent violence. Israel would not have the right to move people in Jordan for it's own good.

It's difficult for me to understand why you wouldn't get that. It's not exactly a subtle difference. I also don't get why, if they were indeed the same (and they're not), why you would be for moving the baku instead of being against both relocations. It's like you just hate the Baku. Hate's not a good ethical standard.

OK, that's a powerful ethical stand you're taking right there. "see, we treat our own citizens worse than we would ever contemplate treating non-citizens!"

Hypocritical. None of your arguments about Picard ignoring orders are based on ethics. They are based on "lawful orders". Maybe you've forgotten Kirk's speach in Day of the Dove, but it seems like Star Fleet encourages some free thought. Not to mention, moving the colonists was perfectly ethical as I've pointed out above. Pick which way you want to go with your arguments, because at this point everything you're saying is self contradictory.

 

[sonak]

being "non-native" has nothing to do with the right to self-defense.

So, um, I'm confused. The Baku don't have any rights to the planet... but they have the right to defend themselves on the planet? I don't know what you're arguing for anymore.

I don't see what difference the "federation citizens" argument for "journey's end" makes. That's a legal distinction, not a moral one. They're still being moved from their homes for a greater good against their wishes.

A country has the right to protect it's citizens. Removing the colonists in Journey and Ensigns was in order to protect fed citizens from harm and for the greater good of the society that those people live in. This would be comparable to Israel removing settlements of it's citizens in disputed land in both Gaza and on the Sinai peninsula in order to prevent violence. Israel would not have the right to move people in Jordan for it's own good.

It's difficult for me to understand why you wouldn't get that. It's not exactly a subtle difference. I also don't get why, if they were indeed the same (and they're not), why you would be for moving the baku instead of being against both relocations. It's like you just hate the Baku. Hate's not a good ethical standard.

OK, that's a powerful ethical stand you're taking right there. "see, we treat our own citizens worse than we would ever contemplate treating non-citizens!"

Hypocritical. None of your arguments about Picard ignoring orders are based on ethics. They are based on "lawful orders". Maybe you've forgotten Kirk's speach in Day of the Dove, but it seems like Star Fleet encourages some free thought. Not to mention, moving the colonists was perfectly ethical as I've pointed out above. Pick which way you want to go with your arguments, because at this point everything you're saying is self contradictory.

you don't seem to understand my arguments very well. I'm saying that removing BOTH the Federation colonists and the Baku was the right thing to do.

Picard is the one being inconsistent here.(and of course you as well)

his argument is basically:

"relocation for a peace treaty? fine!"

"relocation for medical cures for billions?" "now you're going too far! forced removal is wrong."


(oh, and it doesn't seem to me that his change of mind has to do with the Baku not being citizens, and that the "Journey's End" colonists" were. He just seems to be absolutely against forced relocation here, not a principle of "no relocation without representation.")

 

[BillJ]

Both Journey's End and Insurrection have the Federation involved in moving non-native populations for the greater good. And Picard did register his dissatisfaction to a point in Journey's End, right up til Nechayev threatened to give the Enterprise to a different commander for the duration of the mission.

I don't see why people have an issue with the Federation ordering this move though. We've seen them order relocations before (Journey's End, This Side of Paradise) and we've seen them meddle in the affairs of other cultures for the greater good (A Taste of Armageddon, The Cloud Minders).

We saw a Starfleet captain make a planet unlivable for its' inhabitants with no repercussions (For the Uniform). We've seen certain situations where the Prime Directive doesn't seemingly apply (Errand of Mercy, Friday's Child and The Omega Directive).

When examined in the context of other episodes, the removal of the Ba'ku for the greater good doesn't seem out of the ordinary. Nor does it seem against the law or the Prime Directive.

The needs of the many...

 

[Mark 2000]

(oh, and it doesn't seem to me that his change of mind has to do with the Baku not being citizens, and that the "Journey's End" colonists" were. He just seems to be absolutely against forced relocation here, not a principle of "no relocation without representation.")

Except that the Baku are not Federation citizens. Picard said so. You brings up the PD several times. You keep neglecting that. I made a point of it with the Israeli analogy and you ignored it. You don't seem to understand that removing people from property that doesn't belong to you is illegal on the world we live on right now. Baku is no Fed property. The Baku are not Fed citizens.

And you still want to cling to the idea that removing these people RIGHT NOW is all important for medical tech. I've already shown several times its not. You haven't shown otherwise. This keeps coming down to the fact that logic, ethics, and need don't relly matter in your argument. It's really about you not liking the film.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

You know I really wish they had gone with the original idea of the film that leaving the planet would kill them ...

Okay, then how would you explain the Sona?

In the original idea the bad guys were the Romulans. Also they were after a mineral that was important for Romulan and Federation medical technology so the Feds have an actual reason for their teaming up with the baddies.

 

[sonak]

(oh, and it doesn't seem to me that his change of mind has to do with the Baku not being citizens, and that the "Journey's End" colonists" were. He just seems to be absolutely against forced relocation here, not a principle of "no relocation without representation.")

Except that the Baku are not Federation citizens. Picard said so. You brings up the PD several times. You keep neglecting that. I made a point of it with the Israeli analogy and you ignored it. You don't seem to understand that removing people from property that doesn't belong to you is illegal on the world we live on right now. Baku is no Fed property. The Baku are not Fed citizens.

And you still want to cling to the idea that removing these people RIGHT NOW is all important for medical tech. I've already shown several times its not. You haven't shown otherwise. This keeps coming down to the fact that logic, ethics, and need don't relly matter in your argument. It's really about you not liking the film.

Oh, I'm sure Picard realizes they're not Fed citizens, it's just not the crux of his argument or the basis of his opposition to moving them. Nor is his incorrect insistence that it's a PD issue. I think he just has an admiration for the beautiful, Luddite Baku, and one Baku in particular.

And this has nothing to do with me not liking INS. I don't like TMP all that much either, but I don't think the premise of that film is flawed or anything, it's just a slow and tedious movie.

 

[BillJ]

And you still want to cling to the idea that removing these people RIGHT NOW is all important for medical tech. I've already shown several times its not.

Actually we've shown time and again that the mission was up against a deadline (as shown in the film), you continue to ignore it.

DOUGHERTY: It would take ten years of normal exposure to begin to reverse their condition. Some of them won't survive that long.

Now the number that 'some of them' equates can be debated. But the fact of the matter is that the mission was up against a deadline.

 

[Mark 2000]

Actually we've shown time and again that the mission was up against a deadline (as shown in the film), you continue to ignore it.

No, BJ, it's you who's ignoring. I answered that point already:

"(The Baku) were never meant to be immortal." Then neither were the Sona. Any argument that they were "sentenced to death" or that they need to be saved is BS from this point on.

"We'll simply be restoring (The Baku) to their natural evolution."... Again, the Sona have no more or less of a right to be immortal.