Maquis vs the Federation and Sisko.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Sci said:

Babaganoosh said:
The Federation is not an empire. It doesn't conquer by force, it doesn't enslave the weak, it doesn't force planets to join that don't want to. (Simply offering them membership and pointing out the benefits thereof, is not a bad thing.)

But it does actively seek to persuade other cultures to abandon values that it finds objectionable and to adopt Federation values. (Riker in "The Last Outpost," for instance.)

Riker was acting out of, basically, lust; he wasn't on orders from above. One can hardly blame the entire Federation for his actions.

And, indeed, it's been largely successful at that -- look at how the Ferengi turned into a sexually egalitarian, capitalist-socialist hybrid only 11 years after first contact with the UFP!

No offense, but . The Ferengi reformation was because of Ishka (and her influence on Zek) and Rom.

And at how the last two Chancellors of the High Council of the Klingon Empire were installed by Starfleet officers!

Picard? The Klingons *asked* him to.
Worf? He acted under Klingon law the whole time. He and Gowron fought, Gowron lost. Worf refused the chancellorship in favor of Martok. I don't see how the Federation could have been said to interfere in this - the whole exchange was pure Klingon from the get-go.

 

[DanTheGrey]

I wouldn't have supported them, but at the same time I felt that the Federation's handling of the file was piss poor to say the least. A neutral zone would have been better than the DMZ concept.

I understand that they were trying to defend their homes and way of life, but at the same time settling in a politically volatile region of space isn't high up on my list of smart moves.