NuTrek's Faulty Moral Compass
- Thread starter Brutal Strudel
- Start date
Gaila was originally assigned to the Enterprise, but when Uhura had her lover reassign her to the Enterprise this created an empty slot in the Farragut's crew roster and Gaila was reassigned to fill it.
Uhura kill Gaila.
Makes sense to me!
Well I don't think they have to commit war crimes.
And General Order 24 can also be used in peace time if necessary.
Although I can only think of one situation off hand in the entirety of Star Trek where it may have been necessary to kill off an entire civilian population. Maybe...
It wasn't in Armageddon though. Where it was essentially used as a bluff.
The exact details on General Order 24 might have been a bluff i.e. the destruction of an entire civlisation is probably not mandatory lol - but Scotty certainly mentions aiming at civilian targets while on the ship, which could still constitute a war crime. Perhaps the goal is to target infrastructure but there was no sign that civilians who happened to get in the way would be spared. And it's only 24th in the list of General Orders....
Just out of curiosity, where was it?
In 'Operation :Anihilate' maybe Kirk would have had to stop the parasites by destroying the people on Deneva. Kirk actually considered doing it.
I'm not sure it was necessary though. If Kirk was not able to stop the spaceships headed to another planet maybe he could just warn the next planet. Maybe he could send down people in suits to destroy any spaceships on Deneva ready to take off. Maybe he could call for reinforcements.
Indeed.
Well I can see a 'needs of the many' argument applying there, quarantine being more important or possibly even euthanising the people to end their suffering but as you say, there would have been other possible options even there.
Massacring a civilian population and destroying a civilian infrastructure to save the lives of two crewmen would be an horrific war crime.
Massacring a civilian population and destroying a civilian infrastructure to save the lives of two crewmen would be an horrific war crime.
Wasn't it 5 people?
But of course it was OTT reaction. Also you'd think Scotty would require verification from Spock though. I just fan boy it away in that Kirk knew it would never happen and they'd do anything to avoid it.
I don't like the idea that a Starship could wipe out a planet just like that though. What if you were orbiting the Earth and nightshift Commander had this vendetta against his ex-girlfriend? Or had a drug induced nightmare like McCoy did in City. He could wipe out a heap of Earth's major population centres before the rest of the crew realise it. What if Khan or Spock's Brain people took over the bridge?
He would be relieved of duty and sent to a mental hospital like Fleet Captain Garth was.
Except TOS era starships weren't able to be run by just one person that was a TNG era thing.
Unless you can sing "I'll Take You Home Again, Kathleen."
The Federations very reason for being there was to establish a "treaty port", essentially a port established by a powerful government on the territory of a lesser power against their will. Hong Kong was a treaty port, established by the British forcing the Chinese to sign at what was basically gunpoint.
The Federation's representative then ignored the warning to stay away.
The Federation is not the benign entity that some people like to think it is.
They even have a General Order already in place that gives a ship captain authority to destroy the entire population of a world. What reason would they have for establishing such a rule if it was not intended to be used at some point? It must be a common enough occurrence that they felt it was necessary to have it in the general orders.
Looking at the rest of the general orders they cover things like not interfering (#1), Travelling to Talos IV (#7 although #4 is later the only death penalty. Perhaps 7 was added to a preexisting #4 and the death penalty broadened.) Other orders cover things like communications, evacuations and the destruction of a ship after the crew has perished. Killing an entire population seems out of place but there it is, mentioned not once but twice.
And if it were a bluff it was an extremely dangerous one. Kirk was on the planet and potentially out of contact. What happens if Kirk is half an hour late? Scotty was quite prepared to carry out the order. It more of a threat than a bluff. A bluff is something that you do not intend to follow through on. A threat can be withdrawn but, in all likelihood, you are prepared to be carried out. If we assume Kirk meant what he said when he gave the order then he was counting on being able to resolve the situation in only two hours. Cutting it pretty close even for Kirk.
And the Enterprise also entered into First Federation space, destroyed a warning buoy and proceeded deeper into their territory. Why? Because Kirk thought he had the right to explore where ever he wanted to.
+1
Personally I don't mind if the Federation is portrayed as less than perfect. I don't want it to be as dysfunctional as NuBSG but even so. However, it does make me uncomfortable if it's being described by the characters as holier than thou while it is being portrayed as something else. I would prefer it if at least some of the characters (preferably those with a valid point unlike Nero) point out just how flawed and hypocritical they can be.
In the UK we have an appeal for murder going through for a British soldier who executed a wounded Taliban fighter while on camera. While I hesitate to think he should be convicted for life imprisonment I also believe such behaviour is wrong and must be punished.
Scotty Prime agreed to wipe out a civilisation while NuScotty resigned on principle over some odd torpedoes. There is a moral gulf there that I would prefer to be addressed on screen.
In the UK we have an appeal for murder going through for a British soldier who executed a wounded Taliban fighter while on camera. While I hesitate to think he should be convicted for life imprisonment I also believe such behaviour is wrong and must be punished.
Scotty Prime agreed to wipe out a civilisation while NuScotty resigned on principle over some odd torpedoes. There is a moral gulf there that I would prefer to be addressed on screen.
One difference is that Scotty Prime didn't wipe out the civilisation.
Even when they hit the Enterprise with firepower capable of destroying her if Scotty hadn't raised the shields he didn't retaliate. Even when they attempted trick him into lowering his shields he didn't do anything to harm them, just warned them if he didn't see the landing party he would carry out the orders.
At the end of the time he would have warned them again. If they didn't give up the landing party who really knows what Scotty would have done? The Vendikans could have said Kirk escaped or died while getting away. Perhaps Scotty would have accepted that.
If your British soldier had just threatened to kill the Taliban guy would he even be on trial? Even if he really meant it.
Similar threads
