Learning to love "Insurrection"

[RAMA]

Oh, but they don't count because they're ugly.

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

 

[sonak]

Oh, but they don't count because they're ugly.

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

um, what does it mean that the Son'a "have an agenda?" Of course they do, as does every other race, people, or government.

The Baku agenda was to say "up yours" to the billions of sick or dying who could have benefited from the medical resources.

The Son'a agenda was to remove a tiny village to bring a medical miracle to billions of people.


I'll go with the Son'a agenda.


And it's laughable to suggest that the Baku "willingly" let back in their former colonists. The Baku were the ones who kicked out the Son'a in the first place for daring to oppose the Luddism of the Baku! They were only "let back in" as a result of the circumstances of this movie and because of Picard.


Further, it's NOT a clear violation of UFP law to do what they did.

The illegality would have come from the holoship deception plan, not the removal itself, which the UFP would have been well within their rights to do.


They only came up with the holoship idea because they thought the Baku were primitives, and so we're looking out for them.

 

[BillJ]

Oh, but they don't count because they're ugly.

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...

Though we have had our Trek related disagreements in the past, I always respected your opinion RAMA. The above was uncalled for and I lost much respect for you as a poster today.

If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

Insurrection is nothing like The Devil in the Dark and you making the comparisons make me question whether you've ever seen the latter. Starfleet was going to take the Pergium whether the Horta cooperated or not. The Horta lucked out that there was a telepath on the Starfleet ship that could communicate with it or it was literal toast.

And the fact that you see one S'ona reunite with his Ba'ku mama/girlfriend does not mean the "majority" are ready to reunite. We see a total of ten S'ona in the film and you are making a massive leap in logic to get the film to fit your worldview. But then, what else is new?

 

[RAMA]

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...

Though we have had our Trek related disagreements in the past, I always respected your opinion RAMA. The above was uncalled for and I lost much respect for you as a poster today.

If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

Insurrection is nothing like The Devil in the Dark and you making the comparisons make me question whether you've ever seen the latter. Starfleet was going to take the Pergium whether the Horta cooperated or not. The Horta lucked out that there was a telepath on the Starfleet ship that could communicate with it or it was literal toast.

And the fact that you see one S'ona reunite with his Ba'ku mama/girlfriend does not mean the "majority" are ready to reunite. We see a total of ten S'ona in the film and you are making a massive leap in logic to get the film to fit your worldview. But then, what else is new?

I didn't mean "you" personally....I mean you in the general sense...in reference to the UFP, or the US government who constantly allies itself with such nations. The context comes from the second sentence. I probably could have worded it differently. I didn't mean to suggest you were for such things.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

um, what does it mean that the Son'a "have an agenda?" Of course they do, as does every other race, people, or government.

The Baku agenda was to say "up yours" to the billions of sick or dying who could have benefited from the medical resources.

The Son'a agenda was to remove a tiny village to bring a medical miracle to billions of people.


I'll go with the Son'a agenda.


And it's laughable to suggest that the Baku "willingly" let back in their former colonists. The Baku were the ones who kicked out the Son'a in the first place for daring to oppose the Luddism of the Baku! They were only "let back in" as a result of the circumstances of this movie and because of Picard.


Further, it's NOT a clear violation of UFP law to do what they did.

The illegality would have come from the holoship deception plan, not the removal itself, which the UFP would have been well within their rights to do.


They only came up with the holoship idea because they thought the Baku were primitives, and so we're looking out for them.

Obviously you didn't understand the movie.

The S'ona wanted revenge and to use the planet for their own ends..they were dying...but who would say that's any different than the Baku...who were also small in number. The deal with the Federation was a by-product, one that they could comfortable excise when it became expedient for them, especially since they lied to them consistently. The UFP shouldn't have helped either of them.

RAMA

 

[sonak]

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

um, what does it mean that the Son'a "have an agenda?" Of course they do, as does every other race, people, or government.

The Baku agenda was to say "up yours" to the billions of sick or dying who could have benefited from the medical resources.

The Son'a agenda was to remove a tiny village to bring a medical miracle to billions of people.


I'll go with the Son'a agenda.


And it's laughable to suggest that the Baku "willingly" let back in their former colonists. The Baku were the ones who kicked out the Son'a in the first place for daring to oppose the Luddism of the Baku! They were only "let back in" as a result of the circumstances of this movie and because of Picard.


Further, it's NOT a clear violation of UFP law to do what they did.

The illegality would have come from the holoship deception plan, not the removal itself, which the UFP would have been well within their rights to do.


They only came up with the holoship idea because they thought the Baku were primitives, and so we're looking out for them.

Obviously you didn't understand the movie.

The S'ona wanted revenge and to use the planet for their own ends..they were dying...but who would say that's any different than the Baku...who were also small in number. The deal with the Federation was a by-product, one that they could comfortable excise when it became expedient for them, especially since they lied to them consistently. The UFP shouldn't have helped either of them.

RAMA

um, yeah I know they weren't doing it altruistically, but the results of their "agenda" was still the same. I brought this up about allies earlier in the thread. Allies are defined by common interests too, and the Son'a and the UFP had them here.


This is getting to be a repetitive debate, but I will reiterate that the ONLY reason to side with the Baku and against removal is if your ethics are absolutist and oriented around the idea of the inviolability of property rights no matter the outcome.


Any other kind of ethics that would allow for ANY sort of consequentalism or even flexibility would find the idea that the property rights(not even lives, just property rights) of a small few outweigh benefits to billions is just laughable.

As captrek put it earlier, it's basically extreme right-wing, Tea Party sort of "I've got mine, up yours" ideology.

 

[BillJ]

I didn't mean "you" personally....I mean you in the general sense...in reference to the UFP, or the US government who constantly allies itself with such nations. The context comes from the second sentence. I probably could have worded it differently. I didn't mean to suggest you were for such things.

RAMA

Fair enough.

 

[MasuPu'a]

I have a question.

If the Sona were so bad and morally corrupt, why did they ally themselves with the Federation in the first place? I know the movie says it's because the Ba'ku planet is in Federation territory...but considering all the crimes the Sona are accused of, why didn't they just invade and take what they wanted? They had the ships that were already capable of navigating the Briar Patch, and if it was all about revenge they could have just gone in, wasted the planet without taking the people off it first, and then left with what they needed.

The movie tries to portray the Sona as being these horrible villains. Yet villains usually don't wait politely to get permission to use someone's planet.

 

[JarodRussell]

I have a question.

If the Sona were so bad and morally corrupt, why did they ally themselves with the Federation in the first place? I know the movie says it's because the Ba'ku planet is in Federation territory...but considering all the crimes the Sona are accused of, why didn't they just invade and take what they wanted? They had the ships that were already capable of navigating the Briar Patch, and if it was all about revenge they could have just gone in, wasted the planet without taking the people off it first, and then left with what they needed.

The movie tries to portray the Sona as being these horrible villains. Yet villains usually don't wait politely to get permission to use someone's planet.

Ahh the kids, still so innocent and naive.

 

[Sandoval]

If the holoship is invisible why hide it in a lake?

 

[The Overlord]

I have a question.

If the Sona were so bad and morally corrupt, why did they ally themselves with the Federation in the first place? I know the movie says it's because the Ba'ku planet is in Federation territory...but considering all the crimes the Sona are accused of, why didn't they just invade and take what they wanted? They had the ships that were already capable of navigating the Briar Patch, and if it was all about revenge they could have just gone in, wasted the planet without taking the people off it first, and then left with what they needed.

The movie tries to portray the Sona as being these horrible villains. Yet villains usually don't wait politely to get permission to use someone's planet.

I think it was just easier for the Son'a to ally themselves with the Federation, the Son'a only have a small fleet of ships and the Federation wouldn't want alien ships from a disreputable civilization to mess around with a planet in their territory. An alliance with the Federation would mean the Son'a could focus on their main objective, rather then having to deal with the Federation while trying to get to the planet.

 

[BillJ]

If the holoship is invisible why hide it in a lake?

Why land it at all?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

If the holoship is invisible why hide it in a lake?

Why land it at all?

Maybe Dougherty isn't the sharpest blade in the toolshed.

 

[Sandoval]

Just leave the thing in orbit. Silly admirals and their ideas.

 

[Captrek]

I just watched “Progress,” a forgettable episode from DS9’s forgettable first season. How forgettable? A search of this thread reveals no mention of the episode through 374 posts, despite it dealing with almost exactly the same dilemma as the film.

I’m sure no-one will be surprised to hear my opinion that this mediocre-at-best DS9 episode tells a much better story than INS.

For those who haven’t seen, or don’t remember the episode:

Bajor is ready to begin mining a moon. The project will greatly benefit hundreds of thousands of Bajorans. Unfortunately, it will render the moon uninhabitable and there is an elderly farmer, Mullibok, who refuses to leave. Kira has the unenviable job of evacuating him.

Kira quickly develops admiration and affection for Mullibok (like Picard’s feelings for the Ba’ku, but without the nookie-nookie aspect). There’s no fountain of eternal youth here, but Mullibok opines that if he leaves he’ll die because of his intense emotional attachment to the home he has spent 40 years building. Kira hates the idea of taking this man from his home.

How does she deal with it? Kira being Kira she has a good cry about it, and then she does what has to be done.​

I’d like to hear how INS’s defenders react to this episode. Compare Kira’s handling of the situation to Picard’s. Would it have been a better episode if Kira had sabotaged the mining project, deprived Bajor of its benefits, and gotten a lot of people killed in order to protect Mullibok’s home?

 

[BillJ]

I anxiously await the Picard defenders to weigh in on Progress.

 

[RAMA]

The moral of the story: ugly people are evil.

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

um, what does it mean that the Son'a "have an agenda?" Of course they do, as does every other race, people, or government.

The Baku agenda was to say "up yours" to the billions of sick or dying who could have benefited from the medical resources.

The Son'a agenda was to remove a tiny village to bring a medical miracle to billions of people.


I'll go with the Son'a agenda.


And it's laughable to suggest that the Baku "willingly" let back in their former colonists. The Baku were the ones who kicked out the Son'a in the first place for daring to oppose the Luddism of the Baku! They were only "let back in" as a result of the circumstances of this movie and because of Picard.


Further, it's NOT a clear violation of UFP law to do what they did.

The illegality would have come from the holoship deception plan, not the removal itself, which the UFP would have been well within their rights to do.


They only came up with the holoship idea because they thought the Baku were primitives, and so we're looking out for them.

Yes the argument is repetitive...because the answer doesn't change...once you start believing you can interfere with a society because they are 'inferior' or smaller in number it starts a slippery slope(and who has the right to decide their inferiority? Most experts would suggest a culture that reaches homeostatis is as good as any other. Kirk should have looked that up in "The Apple" too)...a place the UFP doesn't w ant to go. Once the UFP found out about the ulterior motives of the Sona...which the good admiral was unaware of, then the whole "approved of" mission was cut short.

 

[RAMA]

I anxiously await the Picard defenders to weigh in on Progress.

I see that as a internal position of Bajor, and not as analogous to the B'aku situation. The UFP didn't have that much diplomatic say in the matter if I recall.

I also agree the episode was underrated, prob because it was a very dialogue dense episode.

RAMA

 

[sonak]

Wrong...it just goes to show you who you are in bed with: governments that are dictatorships, terrorist states, and so on...you don't know what agendas they have, Starfleet makes the mistake of allying with a race that had an agenda...and in fact, the B'aku are the ones totally willing to accept their former colonists back ugly or not. If anything Insurrection takes the view of "Devil in the Dark" despite the looks, intent may be deceiving..ultimately most of the S'ona appear to want to be reunited.

um, what does it mean that the Son'a "have an agenda?" Of course they do, as does every other race, people, or government.

The Baku agenda was to say "up yours" to the billions of sick or dying who could have benefited from the medical resources.

The Son'a agenda was to remove a tiny village to bring a medical miracle to billions of people.


I'll go with the Son'a agenda.


And it's laughable to suggest that the Baku "willingly" let back in their former colonists. The Baku were the ones who kicked out the Son'a in the first place for daring to oppose the Luddism of the Baku! They were only "let back in" as a result of the circumstances of this movie and because of Picard.


Further, it's NOT a clear violation of UFP law to do what they did.

The illegality would have come from the holoship deception plan, not the removal itself, which the UFP would have been well within their rights to do.


They only came up with the holoship idea because they thought the Baku were primitives, and so we're looking out for them.

Yes the argument is repetitive...because the answer doesn't change...once you start believing you can interfere with a society because they are 'inferior' or smaller in number it starts a slippery slope(and who has the right to decide their inferiority? Most experts would suggest a culture that reaches homeostatis is as good as any other. Kirk should have looked that up in "The Apple" too)...a place the UFP doesn't w ant to go. Once the UFP found out about the ulterior motives of the Sona...which the good admiral was unaware of, then the whole "approved of" mission was cut short.

um, the UFP wasn't removing the Baku because they were "inferior." They were removing them for the benefits their removal would bring to the galaxy.

The Baku would have been free to continue their peculiar lifestyle choices elsewhere, but at least then it would NOT have been at the expense of the billions who'd have benefited from the magic particles.


And again, any "ulterior motives" of the Son'a are irrelevant. No one expects their allies or partners in an endeavor to be as pure as freshly fallen snow.

 

[The Dominion]

I anxiously await the Picard defenders to weigh in on Progress.

I see that as a internal position of Bajor, and not as analogous to the B'aku situation. The UFP didn't have that much diplomatic say in the matter if I recall.

I also agree the episode was underrated, prob because it was a very dialogue dense episode.

RAMA

It's exactly the same, just replace Bajor with the UFP. The UFP were the ones that wanted the evict them for "The greater good."