Starfleet General Orders

[jgdst]

Hi everyone,

I've just been reading through the General Orders for Starfleet (I used this link because it lists the most GOs I could find). Although a lot of these haven't been expressly stated onscreen or in non-canon sources such as novels, how much stock can be taken in them?

Is there anything on there that should be on there that isn't? Or something that absolutely shouldn't be on there?

Does General Order 7 still exist in the late 24th century - and if it does, does anybody know why? It surprises me in the first place that the Federation would incur the death penalty, and especially for only contacting Talos IV, when you have more damaging entities out there like the Guardian of Forever and the Crystalline Entity (when manipulated by beings like Lore).

General Orders 26 and 27 struck me as quite odd. 26 because I'm not sure how it fits in with Riker's actions in Pegasus (though he was eventually cleared, so I assume GO26 was carried out), or Janeway's treatment of the Equinox survivors. And 27 where we hear of certain vessels not having families aboard, but being assigned on various long term duties (The Enterprise-E I would've thought would need provision for civilians, although it doesn't seem practical).

So... I'm just wondering what thoughts other people have on the General Orders, whether they should be taken with a pinch of salt, or if they can/should be applied to what we've seen on screen.

 

[Timo]

Well, all the orders here are made up. Even GO1, because although we know the general gist of it, or part of it, we don't know the wording - and the wording is crucially important.

Regarding GO7 (death penalty for going to Talos, in "The Menagerie") or GO4 (death penalty for some other offense, presumably, as in "Turnabout Intruder"), the very fact that they are low-numbered General Orders would suggest that they are indeed quite "general". That is, GO7 doesn't just say "Go to Talos and we'll kill you", but is more likely to be a general rule about planetary quarantine, with a special sub-subclause that points out that only one planet ever filled the criteria for quarantine enforceable by death penalty, and doesn't do it any more after Kirk's visit to that planet. Similarly, GO4 is probably a very general rule about something else, with a subclause that allows for death penalty in case of a serious offense, and with only a single known existing offense that is serious enough to call for that punishment. Also, said single offense probably didn't exist yet during "The Menagerie", but was specified later on, no doubt because some other adventurous starship captain stumbled onto something equally dangerous on his or her late 2260s journeys.

I didn't have time to go through the other GOs, but regarding GO26, it does seem to ill fit the examples you mention. It would be a wise policy for a military that intends to guard its own - but perhaps Starfleet is less interested in that, and more interested in altruist justice. (As if!)

As for GO27, I don't think we really have examples of people separated from their families for unduly long periods of time. None of our heroes have been married with children, after all, not with people who wouldn't be on the ships or stations with them - or haven't really wanted to acknowledge their offboard families if they have had those (Worf!).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Kaziarl]

I kind of thought of the general orders and other laws that starfleet follows as an updated for of the current UCMJ and the General Orders we have in the military. Maybe looking through those could help make the starfleet GO's seem at least a little more accurate.

 

[captcalhoun]

3 and 4 sound more like they should be part of the Prime Directive...

 

[JuanBolio]

I always liked General Order 24 - If a commanding officer deems that a planet has been culturally contaminated to a point where correction is no longer viable and said culture now poses a direct threat to Starfleet personnel or Federation civilians, he may order the destruction of a planet's surface to occur within a time limit set upon invocation.

Though I don't cultural contamination necessarily has to have anything to do with it.

 

[James Bond]

General Order 24

If a commanding officer deems that a planet has been culturally contaminated to a point where correction is no longer viable and said culture now poses a direct threat to Starfleet personnel or Federation civilians, he may order the destruction of a planet's surface to occur within a time limit set upon invocation.

Say what?

 

[JuanBolio]

General Order 24

If a commanding officer deems that a planet has been culturally contaminated to a point where correction is no longer viable and said culture now poses a direct threat to Starfleet personnel or Federation civilians, he may order the destruction of a planet's surface to occur within a time limit set upon invocation.

Say what?

Total planetary bombardment. Similar to the Base Delta Zero procedure in Star Wars. Didn't you ever watch A Taste of Armageddon?

 

[Sci]

For what it's worth, the novel A Time to Kill by David Mack established that Federation Starfleet General Order 24 had been repealed and that an amendment passed to the Federation Charter called the "Eminiar Amendment" banning the destruction of a planetary surface by the Federation.

As well they should. The idea of the Federation giving genocidal power to its starship captains is bizarre.

 

[JuanBolio]

For what it's worth, the novel A Time to Kill by David Mack established that Federation Starfleet General Order 24 had been repealed and that an amendment passed to the Federation Charter called the "Eminiar Amendment" banning the destruction of a planetary surface by the Federation.

As well they should. The idea of the Federation giving genocidal power to its starship captains is bizarre.

With some of the threats starfleet captains often run across, it doesn't seem too bizarre to me.

 

[Cyke101]

For what it's worth, the novel A Time to Kill by David Mack established that Federation Starfleet General Order 24 had been repealed and that an amendment passed to the Federation Charter called the "Eminiar Amendment" banning the destruction of a planetary surface by the Federation.

As well they should. The idea of the Federation giving genocidal power to its starship captains is bizarre.

With some of the threats starfleet captains often run across, it doesn't seem too bizarre to me.

Giving anyone, let alone a captain, the power to commit genocide is pretty damn extreme in any regard.

 

[JuanBolio]

Giving anyone, let alone a captain, the power to commit genocide is pretty damn extreme in any regard.

Well, starships have pretty extreme armaments.

 

[Sci]

Giving anyone, let alone a captain, the power to commit genocide is pretty damn extreme in any regard.

Well, starships have pretty extreme armaments.

Which they need to defend themselves from other starships. But genocide is a fundamental violation of Federation principles; they shouldn't have the right to do it.

 

[JuanBolio]

With the kinds of threats the Star Trek universe contains, I find it impossible to accept that genocide isn't occasionally necessary.

 

[Cyke101]

With the kinds of threats the Star Trek universe contains, I find it impossible to accept that genocide isn't occasionally necessary.

Just a fair count, how many times have our heroes committed genocide? And how many times have our heroes faced the issue of committing genocide and ultimately turned the tide towards preventing genocide?

 

[Sci]

With the kinds of threats the Star Trek universe contains, I find it impossible to accept that genocide isn't occasionally necessary.

Show me one example where genocide is necessary.

 

[JuanBolio]

With the kinds of threats the Star Trek universe contains, I find it impossible to accept that genocide isn't occasionally necessary.

Show me one example where genocide is necessary.

Tribbles.

 

[Sci]

With the kinds of threats the Star Trek universe contains, I find it impossible to accept that genocide isn't occasionally necessary.

Show me one example where genocide is necessary.

Tribbles.

Hardly. Just introduce some predators and the population will be checked without the need for genocide.

 

[JuanBolio]

I can still think of numerous species, Trek and non-Trek, that we'd be better off without. Xenomorphs, the Q, Talosians, the Borg, etc...

Genocide works.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

That's an opinion, not necessarily true.

 

[Sci]

I can still think of numerous species, Trek and non-Trek, that we'd be better off without. Xenomorphs, the Q, Talosians, the Borg, etc...

Genocide works.

Okay, Adolf Hitler.