Opinions on Michael Eddington

[Spot261]

Without the cook you would starve to death, a hospital without cleaners is a deathtrap a hospital without doctors is just like your home.

This.

Not everyone can be the general or the president, what Eddigton did was to cause a great deal of suffering so he could find a way to the top of something. He did not intend to cause harm, he certainly wasn't an evil man, but he simply had no perspective on the consequences of sating his own ego.

 

[Nyotarules]

T

The Federation is utterly afraid of Just Wars. It's only willing to fight if it's very survival is at stake, beyond that Border Skirmishes are apparently a drain on its resources.

Which is further backed up by the Yesterday's Enteprise timeline. Apparently the Federation can't defeat a rival competitor(Klingon Empire).

It vacillates between Bashirian idealism and Sloanian cynicism without full committal or the look at other choices. Namely just wars carried to victory that preserve idealism and self interest.

The moral decision was to wage war against the Cardassians/support a democratic movement. Until the whole equilibrium had shifted-either the federation conquers Cardassia and forces them to change their ways or puts a government in place that will one day join.

The federation so terrified of expending a some blood and treasure ends up loosing a lot of good people and spending more blood and treasure than if it had taken the fight to the Cardassians a decade prior.

And this tactic works so well in real life does it not (cough, cough Iran, Libya, Afghanistan etc)

 

[Nyotarules]

I hate to be that guy but WW2 was necessary(forgive me I genuinely hate that sort of cliche). The American Revolutionary War was necessary. The Reconquista was necessary. The Israeli War of Independence was necessary. WW1(depending on the power) was necessary. The Russian Revolution was necessary. The American Civil war was necessary(depends upon idealogy more so here. The Judean Revolt in 70 AD was necessary. The crusades were necessary.

Due to the cockups of previous politicians

WW2 was the result of treating Germany like shit after WW1. WW1 lead to Hitler. WW1 - a family squabble between European powers.
American revolutionay war - if they had representation in Parliament you all would be colonists until the 19th century
Israeli War - I would not touch that one with a barge pole. The Palestine issue promise both sides the same piece of land and this is what you get (Hello British Empire!)
Russian Revolution - If the Tsar had listened and set up reforms e.g a constitutional monarchy Lenin would not have stood a chance. The Bolsheviks stitched up the Meneheviks
American Civil war - well if this was the only way to stop states rights from meaning 'treat other human beings with brown skin like shit' then so be it

 

[Nyotarules]

Michael Eddington - a classic example of the way to hell being paved with good intentions.

 

[Voth commando1]

Without the cook you would starve to death, a hospital without cleaners is a deathtrap a hospital without doctors is just like your home.

But there is no glory in being a cook

 

[Voth commando1]

Due to the cockups of previous politicians

WW2 was the result of treating Germany like shit after WW1. WW1 lead to Hitler. WW1 - a family squabble between European powers.
American revolutionay war - if they had representation in Parliament you all would be colonists until the 19th century
Israeli War - I would not touch that one with a barge pole. The Palestine issue promise both sides the same piece of land and this is what you get (Hello British Empire!)
Russian Revolution - If the Tsar had listened and set up reforms e.g a constitutional monarchy Lenin would not have stood a chance. The Bolsheviks stitched up the Meneheviks
American Civil war - well if this was the only way to stop states rights from meaning 'treat other human beings with brown skin like shit' then so be it

WW1-powers vied for spheres of influence and to keep their rivals from becoming hegemon
American Revolutionary War-And? For what it would have been a great blow to the enlightenment
Russian Civil War-I'm going to guess your not a Marxist or anything remotely close
American Civil War-I won't touch it either
Israeli War of Independence-smart choice to avoid discussing it.

 

[DonIago]

Just to say as I read this thread both sides arguments are so well presented I keep swinging back and forth. However why did the Federation allow colonies so close to Cardassian space? And they did the same thing when they discovered the Gamma quadrant. Why not keep your ass at home!

I'm okay with people settling wherever the heck they feel like settling as long as they're made aware of what they're walking into.

At best the colonists knew they were settling on the edge of unexplored space. At worst they knew they were settling next to a known neutral at best and hostile at worst power.

I find it highly improbable that they walked into this with their eyes closed, much less that the Federation simploy dropped them off and said, "Well, best of luck to you! We'll check in...sometime."

Hell, even Khan was given a choice of whether or not to settle on a challenging planet.

 

[Voth commando1]

They were assuming the federation would back them up, they didn't start out as renegades(well some did). The Indians in Journey's end for example.

 

[LJones41]

Michael Eddington - a classic example of the way to hell being paved with good intentions.

Sounds like the Federation, as well.

 

[DonIago]

They were assuming the federation would back them up, they didn't start out as renegades(well some did). The Indians in Journey's end for example.

The Federation did back them up for as long as they were practically able to. And when it was determined that the best option for that slice of the galaxy was to trade colonies with the Cardassians, the Federation did everything they could to ease that process.

It really does sound like you would have rather had a second Federation-Cardassian war. I fail to see how anyone would have won that, especially the colonists.

 

[Voth commando1]

The Federation did back them up for as long as they were practically able to. And when it was determined that the best option for that slice of the galaxy was to trade colonies with the Cardassians, the Federation did everything they could to ease that process.

It really does sound like you would have rather had a second Federation-Cardassian war. I fail to see how anyone would have won that, especially the colonists.

It would have been better for the federation and the colonists wouldn't have been forced to turn against their own state.

A federation-cardassian war in the late 2360s carried to conclusion(victory on Cardassia) or democratic government installed would have been better for the alpha quadrant, the federation, the colonists, and the Cardassians themselves.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

But there is no glory in being a cook

Tough shit.

Nobody has the "right" to glory.

 

[Voth commando1]

Tough shit.

Nobody has the "right" to glory.

Of course not and that's precisely why it's worth striving for.

No you don't have the right to it, but you can seek it. Glory wouldn't glory if it just hand holding.

For that reason glory often involves killing/removing those who would deny it to you.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

For that reason glory often involves killing/removing those who would deny it to you.

Thank you for finally showing your true colors.

You and Osama should have a lot to talk about in hell.

 

[Voth commando1]

Thank you for finally showing your true colors.

You and Osama should have a lot to talk about in hell.

I didn't say it was a good thing just a necessary thing. Joe Bloe with a conscience never achieves his full potential.

I know I'm getting into Nietzchean territory here but sometimes if you want to be significant you have to put aside inhibitions and values and sentiments that are natural to hold.

Unless of course your Jesus Christ or Muhummad or someone like that.

Glory isn't something for the masses, and it isn't something for the humble or those who seek quietness and contentment and God over themselves.

 

[Voth commando1]

I'm sorry if that upsets or offends you. I don't like the implications of Total self seeking Nietzcheanism either. Ultimately to become glorious or great or a world-historical personage or an ubermentensch. You have to abandon moral restraints and deal bravely and brightly with the consequences of such an act.

The glorious aren't concerned with morality or guilt-at least not publicly. There not concerned with eternal damnation even. Again not publicly or openly. They don't care what their enemies or the masses think either. And then not publicly or privately.

The path of glory and self seeking is a dangerous one and a hard one. To seek glory, fame(beyond the vapid sense), honor, and renown you have put aside empathy, compassion, humanity and gentleness. You have to look into the Dark(or the Beast) smile and walk into it.

 

[Nyotarules]

Of course not and that's precisely why it's worth striving for.

No you don't have the right to it, but you can seek it. Glory wouldn't glory if it just hand holding.

For that reason glory often involves killing/removing those who would deny it to you.

Sounds like a psychopath's mission statement

 

[Voth commando1]

Sounds like a psychopath's mission statement

As I said it's not for those who don't subscribe to Nietzchean thinking about themselves, the world, and morality. Or anyone with a shred of conscience or decency, Glory is besides death probably one of the most relateable and eternal human impulses and one of the most dangerous.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Who the hell cares what Nietzsche thinks? He would have advocated a world without a shred of human decency or compassion, and that's not a world I'd ever want to live in.

 

[Voth commando1]

Who the hell cares what Nietzsche thinks? He would have advocated a world without a shred of human decency or compassion, and that's not a world I'd ever want to live in.

Nietzche is key reading for those who seek glory though.