Star Fleet and Genocide

[commanderkai]

The "right" no, but likely Humanity would have faced annihilation if the Dominion had won.

Weren't they planning that anyway? I remember a conversation of Dukat and Weyoun discussing that Earth would need to be destroyed since it would probably be the prime source of any anti-Dominion resistance long term. Dukat wanted the Federation to learn that it was wrong to oppose the Dominion, THEN exterminate Earth, if necessary.

 

[Jerikka Dawn]

I think a bizarro definition of "genocide" is being used here. It has nothing to do with the taxonomic rank of "genus". We only need to go back 69 years and ask the guy who invented the word. It's the killing of groups. While killing "all homo-sapiens" would be genocide, it is not a requirement.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Heh...you beat me to it. Yes, in extreme situations, not only is genocide sanctioned by Starfleet, it's downright policy.

Starfleet will do extreme, almost immoral things when its survival is threatened. In The Pale Moonlight is a perfect example.

Starfleet doesn't believe in orbital bombardment of cities. During the war, they kept reaching to the Dominion for peace. They most likely let the Jem Hadar and their ships return to Gamma Quadrant after the war.

Picard let the Borg go, rather than unleashing a virus that would have destroyed them, under the weak notion that Hugh's individuality would affect the Borg. But it didn't work.

All the evidence says the Federation is just too nice to ever do such a thing, but when it gets desperate or scared, they just might resort to it.

It's a case by case basis. Not always an easy solution depending on who they're dealing with.

With the Borg and the Dominion, I don't think anyone would lose a whole lot of sleep about it, except for Bashir, Picard, Beverly Crusher and some others.

The Dominion was seen attempting genocide at least 4 times already.

 

[Timo]

I think a bizarro definition of "genocide" is being used here.

Well, it's a bizarro concept. "Killing of groups" is meaningless. If I kill two people, it's certainly a group, but is it genocide? Only if it turns out those two were the entire population of Big Purple Rock Island, or the only two followers of the Lesser Pumpkin Fairy. If I kill sixty million soldiers, is that genocide? Only if they come from an all-warrior culture and it turns out I thus killed a significant percentage of that culture.

As used since its introduction, "genocide" is a thoroughly racist term, establishing that killing is bad if it touches a "preferred" group of people. Like libel, it's one of those crimes where the defendant cannot know for certain he is committing it until the plaintiff establishes that he indeed "experienced" the offense in that particular manner...

Starfleet doesn't believe in orbital bombardment of cities.

As per GO24, it does, at least to the same degree USAF believes in the nuking of Russia. But the UFP doesn't appear to believe it needs to have Starfleet exercise that option, as far as we know.

What we know is very little, though, as we only witnessed very small and peripheral elements of the Dominion War for the most time. The one big fight involving a planet (or a pair of those, apparently) was that of Chin'toka, but we can't really tell one way or another what was going on wrt orbital bombardment. And how does beaming down Klingon troops differ from orbital bombardment in the genocide sense?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[TheRoyalFamily]

Starfleet will do extreme, almost immoral things when its survival is threatened. In The Pale Moonlight is a perfect example.

Starfleet didn't sanction killing the senator, just forging the record. That other bit was all Garak; I doubt Sisko told Starfleet about that part, considering the end of the episode.

 

[BillJ]

Starfleet will do extreme, almost immoral things when its survival is threatened. In The Pale Moonlight is a perfect example.

Starfleet didn't sanction killing the senator, just forging the record. That other bit was all Garak; I doubt Sisko told Starfleet about that part, considering the end of the episode.

With or without a log of admittance from Sisko, I'm sure Starfleet had no trouble piecing together what happened to Vreenak.

 

[R. Star]

Starfleet will do extreme, almost immoral things when its survival is threatened. In The Pale Moonlight is a perfect example.

Starfleet didn't sanction killing the senator, just forging the record. That other bit was all Garak; I doubt Sisko told Starfleet about that part, considering the end of the episode.

With or without a log of admittance from Sisko, I'm sure Starfleet had no trouble piecing together what happened to Vreenak.

Yeah, and Garak's sly enough to have a full confession on a datapad hidden somewhere to be mailed to the Romulan embassy on the event of his disappearance too. Starfleet can't touch him without airing their involvement in it, though Sisko can legitly claim he didn't know Vreenak was going to be murdered.

 

[T'Girl]

Starfleet didn't sanction killing the senator, just forging the record.

Starfleet placed Sisko in a position of authority, in order that he would made decisions. Starfleet is responsible for Sisko's official decisions.

It was Sisko who brought Garek into his plan. Garek, a being with basically non-existent ethics. Sisko, in this particular event, is responsible for Garek's actions. Garek's focused goal was the end result of Sisko's plan, the forged data rod wasn't going to fool the Romulans, Garek knew this.

The murder of the senator, anyone else aboard his ship, and also the murder of the original forger by Garek can all be laid at the feet of Starfleet. You might, in addition, be able to include any misdeeds carried out by the Romulans during the course of the war as a result of Sisko's plan.

( ... but Sisko only knocked over the first domino ... )

I simply love using "In the Pale Moonlight" when some Trek fans whine about section 31.

 

[Shawnster]

So, you hold Starfleet accountable for every rogue officer? Does this make Starfleet responsible for all the Yangs and Kohms Capt. Tracy killed?

 

[The Wormhole]

So, you hold Starfleet accountable for every rogue officer? Does this make Starfleet responsible for all the Yangs and Kohms Capt. Tracy killed?

Well, no. He was punished for his crimes, therefore Starfleet is off the hook.

 

[BillJ]

Well, no. He was punished for his crimes, therefore Starfleet is off the hook.

How is Starfleet off the hook? Tracy butchered thousands, I'm sure him being court-martialed made the Yangs feel all warm and fuzzy and forgiving inside.

 

[The Wormhole]

I'm sure him being court-martialed made the Yangs feel all warm and fuzzy and forgiving inside.

And so am I. Therefore, it's canon.

 

[T'Girl]

So, you hold Starfleet accountable for every rogue officer?

Was Sisko in this case a "rogue officer?"

Or was he acting within the authority granted him by Starfleet. When you place someone in a position of power, even if you aren't monitoring them second by second, you bear a on-going responsibility for their official decisions and actions.

Sisko was acting as a Starfleet officer all during "In the Pale Moonlight," not as a private citizen. Sisko was counseled by his subordinates on his plan, but none of them attempted to shut the plan down. This wasn't a spur of the moment thing, where the officers under Sisko's commander might have been caught up in the action. They had time to consider, and go over Sisko head to higher command.

Starfleet does bear responsibility for Sisko actions, and the extended results of his plan.

 

[sonak]

So, you hold Starfleet accountable for every rogue officer? Does this make Starfleet responsible for all the Yangs and Kohms Capt. Tracy killed?

there's a big difference between "going rogue" and being given a wide latitude to complete a key mission. Clearly Sisko was given a wide latitude to do what was necessary in that case, he was NOT "going rogue" even if Starfleet didn't have 100% knowledge of the specifics of what he was doing.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Starfleet didn't sanction killing the senator, just forging the record. That other bit was all Garak; I doubt Sisko told Starfleet about that part, considering the end of the episode.

True, and Sisko not telling Starfleet is a possibility, but their hands are pretty dirty under the "Clean Hands" doctrine.

When the Romaulans eventually went to war and lost millions (as the series seems to claim) that achieved the same effect as genocide.

Mainly because it was engineered by Starfleet to happen.


If they forged any records dealing with this it amounts to a cover up.

So, you hold Starfleet accountable for every rogue officer?

Star Trek TUC is a doozy.

An example of Starfleet conspiring against political figures, their own officers, considering a pre-attack against a power calling for peace discussions, willing to look away while that power faces planet-wide catastrophe.

 

[Shawnster]

Culpable dependability