Because her comment had nothing whatsoever to do with what was actually being discussed.
So you think that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
She knows what she's talking about, and she knows good and damn well that "mothballing Starfleet" is not something that is even remotely being discussed.
It's amazing how peopel can dismiss the movie's script...
Spock doesn't mention decommissioning starships in the script either, thus it REMAINS a strawman for the reasons already mentioned.
It's NOT a "straw man " argument!
Again from the SCRIPT AND ONSCREEN DIALOGUE:
Changes nothing. Spock mentioned negotiations for "the dismantling of our space stations and starbases along the neutral zone. There's no discussion whatsoever about "mothballing the fleet." Cartwright even takes it a step further, calling the neutral zone disarmament an offer of "safe haven."
Neither of them are actually raising valid concerns, they're mainly just being dicks.
To me that implies that the more combat oriented vessels in the fleet were facing getting mothballed, with the more scientific and exploratory oriented vessels remaining viable in the planned peacetime reorganization.
But again, nobody was talking about
vessels. Spock mentions outposts and space stations, which means the fleet would be REDEPLOYED to other duties, not decommissioned as such.
Which is probably what the "but" was leading to. "I'm sure our exploration and scientific programs would be unaffected, but we can definitely afford to ease the schedule on our border patrol units."
This is just speculation and not necessarily true. In the US Civil War a great number of high ranking federal officers resigned and fought for the sessecionists.
Which they were only able to do because prior to the civil war the States maintained more direct control over their militaries than they do now, nor was there a great deal of mixing of out-of-state soldiers across state lines. When a state seceded from the union, the military resources it controlled seceded with it. The presence of the few Federal garrisons that WEREN'T loyal to state governments (e.g. Fort Sumter) were what ultimately triggered the war in the first place.
In a coup situation you would likely have various commanders or perhaps entire commands, army groups, corps, brigades, military installations, etc, who could choose to side with one side or the other.
Instead of "regional local defense fleets" battling Starfleet forces you would just as easily have Starfleet Force A battling Starfleet Force B. Especially if many of these installations fall within and are maintained/supported by local races or governments who withdraw from the Federation after the coup.
Although that's a possibility, the fact remains that we have rarely actually seen a Starfleet vessel run by a non-human crew. Quite a few on these boards have tried to claim that these ships (or the alternate space forces of other Federation members) do not exist purely because we've never seen them. I for one refuse to believe that the Andorians and the Tellarites have somehow gone extinct since the 23rd century and I find it VERY difficult to believe that their respective fleets are not at least as large as the Earth branch of Starfleet.
And given all that, we have no reason to expect the Andorians OR the Tellarites would use the same types of starships as the Earth fleet branch. In point of fact, it's entirely possible that the Norway and Steamrunner classes that appeared for the first time in First Contact really ARE native Andorian designs and may not even be their newest ships (Steamrunner might be Andor's equivalent of the Miranda class).
There never has been any evidence that Federation member worlds have their own military forces. Indeed, it is mentioned on DS9 that when Bajor was admitted into the Federation the Bajoran Militia would be absorbed into Starfleet. Of course in the novels, we do see Federation member worlds do have their own militaries and even the Bajoran Militia continues after Bajor's admittance into the Federation.
As I said, I just don't see the Andorians putting their security in the hands of a bunch of pinkskins. Although not quite as warlike as the Klingons, their space force predates Starfleet by nearly a century and is UNDENIABLY continuous with their past military tradition.
There are really only two ways to explain the absence of Andorian military forces in Trek.
1) They were there all along, but everyone takes them for granted and nobody goes out of their way to mention them.
2) Federation law prohibits any member to have a spaceborne military and the Andorians -- like everyone else -- was forced to disarm or use similar "it's not really a military" loopholes to get around it.
The second explanation makes the most sense to me, since it would explain why Starfleet doesn't consider itself to be a military organization: the Federation isn't ALLOWED to have a military organization because people like the Andorians or the Tellarites or even the Vulcans have a nasty habit of starting wars with their neighbors and then dragging the rest of the Federation into it with them. Starfleet is allowed to act as a de facto military because it's founding mission is peaceful exploration, and because the pinkskins haven't been in space long enough to really form political ties with anyone other than the existing Federation members.
Not really, because again, at its foundation Starfleet is a scientific and exploratory program.
Wait, how the hell do you know that?
Picard's line in "The Measure of a Man."
"
Starfleet was created to seek out new life."
That was, incidentally, also the entire premise of Star Trek: Enterprise.
Furthermore, despite various allusions to military imagery, there is ZERO dialog that suggests that Starfleet was
founded for the purpose of defense or combat. Thus the question of this thread is not whether or not Starfleet IS a military, but whether or not it BECAME a military, and if so, when?