Starfleet Harshness

[GeekUSACarl]

Except, of course, the Klingons DID fire first.

They were going to anyway, can't stop a fanatic.

Her assaulting her captain should be punished but she absolutely didn't start the war.

She was a total scapegoat, it's not fair, but I also can't say that if I were in place of the brass that I'd do something different. There cannot be, among a military operation, any loss off unity, any questions. At the doorstep of a war she did attempt a mutiny, unfortunately an overly harsh penalty may be necessary for perception unto the rank and file.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Except, of course, the Klingons DID fire first.

And she attacked her captain, tried to take command of the ship and killed the Klingon leader against orders. What’s Starfleet supposed to think? That she had a good reason?

 

[Charles Phipps]

And she attacked her captain, tried to take command of the ship and killed the Klingon leader against orders. What’s Starfleet supposed to think? That she had a good reason?

Well, they have Saru and the ship's records to say that she's guilty of attacking her captain and trying to take over the ship.

However, there's no sign she started the war.

 

[Ithekro]

Michael's own testimony. She blames herself for starting the war and she put it on her own record at her trail. That was not one of her charges. She charged herself with it and pleaded guilty.

Lorca would not be court marshaled for the loss of his ship in a time of war if there wasn't a reasonable suspicion of negligence on hos part, or Starfleet needed a scapegoat for something stupid they did or didn't do to make the situation worse (see the court marshal of Captain McVay of the USS Indianapolis).

Picard lost his ship in what seemed like a first contact situation. That is failing your job.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Well, they have Saru and the ship's records to say that she's guilty of attacking her captain and trying to take over the ship.

However, there's no sign she started the war.

The plan was to take the Klingon leader as a prisoner. It’s likely in the log and known by the crew. Burnham came back, her captain is dead and so is the Klingon leader. Now they’re being attacked by Klingons.

While the Klingons did shoot first, Starfleet protocol, based on how they’ve been portrayed throughout the franchise, will require them to de-escalate the situation and only engage if there is no alternative. It could be argued that she intentionally attacked and made what could have been negotiated into all out war.

 

[BillJ]

While the Klingons did shoot first, Starfleet protocol, based on how they’ve been portrayed throughout the franchise, will require them to de-escalate the situation and only engage if there is no alternative. It could be argued that she intentionally attacked and made what could have been negotiated into all out war.

Starfleet had no intention of de-escalating. If they did, they wouldn't have sent a dozen starships to stand toe-to-toe with the Klingons. There were going to be no negotiations, T'Kuvma made sure of that when he rammed the Europa after accepting an offered cease fire.

And capturing T'Kuvma was guesswork on Burnham's part. Robbing a Klingon national of his honor would have just as likely be seen as hostile by the Klingons.

The Klingons in this show are so fucking one-note it drives me bonkers. I've yet to see any of them show any kind of redeeming qualities.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Klingons have never been written well.

 

[XCV330]

Klingons have never been written well.

I liked them in TMP.

 

[Ithekro]

It was already an all out war by the point Burnham beams over to the crippled Klingon vessel. The Klingons made that clear when they rammed the USS Europa and jumped in another half dozen starships to rip apart another three or more Federation starships rapidly. The rest of the Klingon fleet left to press the war into Federation space. It was too late. Burnham was making at attempt to capture the Klingon claiming to be the second coming of Kahless in an effort to dishonor him by being taken alive and maybe give the Federation a bargaining tool to end the war.

A. She failed due to emotions.

B. As it turns out, the Klingons could care less now that the war has started. They didn't even bother to go looking for that ship for six months, nor did they really give him much respect to begin with. He made a nice rally cry to unite the houses in war against someone worthy of fighting. The Federation proof was already done. The houses needed nothing else after that really.

C. What would actually stop the Klingons in war mode? What does stop the Klingons in war mode in other series?

 

[Charles Phipps]

C. What would actually stop the Klingons in war mode? What does stop the Klingons in war mode in other series?

I think the Klingons are getting united under House Kor and transforming into the military dictatorship of TOS. Which means that they're going to be losing a lot of their more chaotic qualities. However, it'll be the Organians and Gorkon who set them more on the path to proper behavior again.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

Starfleet had no intention of de-escalating. If they did, they wouldn't have sent a dozen starships to stand toe-to-toe with the Klingons.

Ya know, the we come in peace and the attempt at negotiation peacefully later,

De-escalation doesn't mean you don't position yourself for defense just in case, simply having ships there isn't "not de-escalating"

pardon my double negative.

 

[The Wormhole]

Lorca would not be court marshaled for the loss of his ship in a time of war if there wasn't a reasonable suspicion of negligence on hos part,

He murdered his crew by his own admission. That alone should be an automatic court-martial, time of war or not. That alone should be sufficient grounds to have someone drummed out of the service.

Picard lost his ship in what seemed like a first contact situation. That is failing your job.

Picard lost the Stargazer when it was ambushed by an unknown enemy launching an unprovoked attack. In the end, he defeated the enemy, created a new tactic which was named after him, and though the Stargazer had to be abandoned, most of the crew survived. That is not failing by any definition.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Starfleet of this era had a death penalty for visiting planets deemed ultra dangerous. This was established in 1966.

A life sentence for mutiny that may or may not have triggered a war which cost 8,000+ lives in it's opening battle sounds about right.

 

[Athena28]

In Janeway's case (at least) she'd have a hard time sentencing someone to a long prison sentence (with the exception of Lon Suder who was too violent to be around the crew & not germane to the story or the running of the ship). She had no replacement crew.

 

[Brainsucker]

In Discovery we see Michael Burnham Gets sentenced to life in prison for mutiny that seems a bit harsh, i mean in Voyager We see Tom Paris and a alien blow up a oxygen refinery or something and gets a MONTH in the brig AND get to keep his commission!! Also in Voyager B'lanna Torres, Assaults [technically] the EMH and has him preform a illegal and unnecessary surgery on her and her child, We see NO punishment at all!!
How is that fair?

Simple, in the previous Star Trek, they would get a harsh punishment when they did those. But unfortunately the story has been reset when the episode end. So basically those mutiny / fault didn't really occur in the plot.

 

[Timo]

We shouldn't forget that "punishment" is a thing of the past in TOS already. Dr. Adams has been working on outdating the practice for 20 years at that point, and even though he subsequently flies high over the cuckoo's nest, his teachings (and his neutralizer equipment!) remain in use. It's never punitive jailing or fines for Feds after that, only therapy to prevent repeat offenses (with apparent 100% success rate).

Starfleet of course still regularly flogs its ablespacemen for reasons of stubborn tradition, but Tom Paris didn't seem to get any special treatment for being an offender in Starfleet employ (no special yellow coveralls, no reference to continuing military status), and his time at the penal colony was probably supposed to be therapeutical, too (no fixed sentence length, but something negotiable and subject to evaluations).

So the contrast between what Burnham gets and what other Trek characters get is artificially high for futuristic in-universe reasons already. Perhaps life sentences and death penalties were quite commonplace until the end of the 2250s? We don't hear much about pre-Discovery sentencing: Dr. Soong probably avoided being drawn and quartered chiefly because his work was so valued, and other offenders were either outside Starfleet's league, or dead by the end of the episode.

Timo Saloniemi