No-Win Scenarios...

[Farscape One]

A VOYAGER thread about the phage got me thinking.

How often do we see our captains in truly no-win scenarios? I mean, when each option is just a degree of bad.

In "PHAGE", Janeway ultimately let the Vidiians go because she had really no other choice... no base to put them on trial, a brig was just too costly for them in the long run, and no ability to put Neelix's lungs back. It's only the last minute conscience change that the Vidiian had that saved the day, so to speak.

Had that not happened, it would be a no-win scenario. So... how about sone examples of a no-win have our captains really faced?

My first one goes immediately to "TUVIX". No matter what Janeway decided, itvwas a loss of someone.

An argument can be said for "IN THE PSLE MOONLIGHT", as Sisko ultimately chose to set aside ethics to assure a victory against the Dominion, but that choice definitely cost millions of Romulan lives.

What other scenarios do you all say are no-win?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Before going further, are you sure that the better concept here isn't high opportunity cost? In Pale Moonlight, Sisko clearly wins, but experiences high loss of dignity and personal self worth because of his choice. Indeed, Garak puts it clearly that what is lost is "the self respect of one Starfleet officer," something Garak does not value.

 

[somebuddyX]

Children of Time because no matter what they do that colony is still screwed. The Defiant can warp away and the colony disappears or they can do the timewarp again but since events will play out differently because of the Defiant crew's foreknowledge of events, then the colony will still basically disappear since it will be replaced by a different version.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

"Call to Arms" pops into my mind.

Given the aggression of the Dominion, mixed with the paranoia of the Cardassians, war was inevitable--a war they could very well lose. Sisko had to choose between going to war now or later, either way wouldn't be good for the quadrant. Pressing forward 'now' means Dominion forces aren't as sizable (still huge though) although Starfleet isn't exactly geared up for another full on conflict (so soon after a war with the Klingons and a Borg incursion), but waiting for later means Starfleet has time to prep its forces but so too does the Dominion (which has already proven to be more advanced and geared towards combat).

 

[at Quark's]

I think TOS is interesting in this regard. "City on the edge of forever" is a no-win scenario. Either Kirk loses the girl, or he loses the future of humanity. (OK, put in such terms the choice doesn't seem too hard, but still very painful for Kirk). However, as the Kobayashi Maru challenge shows, it can be well worth the effort to see if a scenario is truly no-win or only appears to be so, in which case breaking some rules might solve it. So in a sense I think TOS's message was: ""surrender gracefully to the inevitable, but no sooner than that".

 

[Farscape One]

Before going further, are you sure that the better concept here isn't high opportunity cost? In Pale Moonlight, Sisko clearly wins, but experiences high loss of dignity and personal self worth because of his choice. Indeed, Garak puts it clearly that what is lost is "the self respect of one Starfleet officer," something Garak does not value.

I suppose "IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT" could be seen as not a situation where Sisko was dealt the situation from things out of his control. From the outset, it was his idea to try to bring them in the war. In cases like "TUVIX" and the others mentioned above, the captains were presented with the situation by things out of their control, and not their idea to begin with. So maybe "IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT" doesn't work in this context.

 

[Hofner]

The tos episode charlie X was a no win scenario with Charlie being banished from the rest of humanity for life.

I imagine a lot of people have no sympathy for Charlie but to me, it wasn't really his fault that he was an adolescent with god like powers. I certainly remember myself how frustrating it was to go through my adolescent years so I sympasize with him.

Robert

 

[Farscape One]

Those are some good choices.

Though in the case of "CHARLIE X", I'm not sure what Kirk could have done. The Thasians were so much more powerful that he had no choice but to let them have Charlie, despite his pleas otherwise.

Archer had a good one in "DAMAGE". He actively decided to steal the warp coil and strand those people, but it was either that or miss the meeting and lose any chance of stopping the Xindi weapon. That really was a best of bad choices scenario.

 

[Farscape One]

I wonder if Picard's decision to not give the freighter parts in "Symbiosis" could be considered a no-win. True, he was upholding the Prime Directive, but it was a sucky situation... help them, and the Ornarans continue to be drug addicts or not give the parts and very likely cause a massively bad situation on their world. Can't even inform them of their addiction and what the Brekkians were doing to them.

One no-win for Picard... "Q Who". Their defenses were gone, about to be boarded again. If he didn't ask Q for help, they were dead.

And for Kirk... "A PRIVATE LITTLE WAR". His decision at the end to arm equally will almost certainly plunge that world into war, but not doing anything would have led to the eventual extinction of the Hill People.

 

[DonIago]

"Cogenitor" was one of the first episodes I thought of. Either Our Heroes leave a situation at least one of them (and many viewers) finds unsavory alone, or they interfere and cause no end of trouble for themselves and an alien civilization.

 

[Farscape One]

Ooh, good example. Archer comes down hard on Trip. I think probably the reason why is because he did it in secret, basically. He did set a bad precedent as a senior officer. His heart was in the right place, but he went about it badly.

 

[DonIago]

The fact that he went about it so badly that someone died probably didn't help either.

 

[AresB]

The DSC: The Vulcan Hello / Battle at the Binary Stars. T'Kuvma was determined to have his war, it was just a matter of who throws the first punch.

 

[at Quark's]

Star Trek Generations.

Picard could have left the Nexus at any time, which makes it so heartrending that probably his sense of ethics absolutely forbade him to interfere with things that already happened, and travel just a few days prior, saving his family, the ent-D, arresting Soran at a time he wasn't at his guard, and granting Kirk a leash on 24th century life in the process too. Truly a no-win scenario!

 

[Oddish]

Deanna faces a no win scenario in "Thine Own Self". The scenario forces her to choose the lesser of two evils.

 

[DonIago]

Deanna faces a no win scenario in "Thine Own Self". The scenario forces her to choose the lesser of two evils.

I was never very impressed by the solution being to order a hologram to "kill" itself.

 

[Oddish]

Deanna should not have passed the test, since it was a test of character, not a puzzle. A worthy captain analyzes the situation. He understands that to save the ship, someone must die. He asks his engineer if he can do the work himself: he who would demand that others sacrifice themselves must be willing to do so himself. If the answer is no, he gives the order and lives with the guilt as best he can.

For Deanna, it was a puzzle. And because of that, she should have stayed at LCDR.

 

[Farscape One]

Troi did tell Will that she couldn't order him to his death and should not have passed. It was Riker who gave her that chance.

What he should have done was give her some duty shifts as Bridge Watch officer, and assign some missions and assignments that would be a sort of training ground, but still on active duty. Things happen all the time, and after a few weeks or month or so, then he promote her... if she showed she could handle it.

 

[dupersuper]

Star Trek Generations.

Picard could have left the Nexus at any time, which makes it so heartrending that probably his sense of ethics absolutely forbade him to interfere with things that already happened, and travel just a few days prior, saving his family, the ent-D, arresting Soran at a time he wasn't at his guard, and granting Kirk a leash on 24th century life in the process too. Truly a no-win scenario!

Was it his sense of ethics? I always considered it bad writing...

Or, head canon, you could leave any time, but only where the nexus had already been.

 

[at Quark's]

Was it his sense of ethics? I always considered it bad writing...

Well, when I wrote this, I was being sarcastic. Of course it's just sloppy writing, at least that's how I see it. He could have prevented way more had he chosen to travel just that little further back. And ethical or not, it certainly isn't a no-win scenario.

Though I wouldn't be surprised had Picard actually had moral issues with going back further in time than he did. I would have been interested in hearing his reasoning about it, though. Was it OK to "correct" the fate of the pre-industrial Veridian IV species, but not the other casualties because their destruction could be seen as a violation of the Prime Directive, for example? (a theory I don't subscribe to as Soran wasn't a Starfleet member).