Starfleet is a Space Navy (military fleet)

[Baxten]

Here is another questionable Star Trek piece that supports an earlier point:

Notice the DC Comics address at the time (1983) as "666 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY". You can search for "DC Comics location" to confirm it.

The title of "The only good Klingon . . ." is a reference to an infamous saying: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." This, in turn, was derived from another infamous saying: "The only good Indians I ever saw were dead." The latter, based on many witness accounts, is typically attributed to General Phil Sheridan (1831-1888), although he denied saying it himself. Even without the saying, he was a well-known Native American hater. Also, notice the ellipsis at the end of the title, as if it expects you to complete the sentence.

To add further to this:

"I suppose I should be ashamed to say that I take the Western view of the Indian. I don't go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every ten are, and I shouldn't like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth."
—Theodore Roosevelt, the future, at the time, President of the United States, at the New York speech of January 1886.​

Here's another one:

"My original convictions upon this subject have been confirmed by the course of events for several years, and experience is every day adding to their strength. That those tribes can not exist surrounded by our settlements and in continual contact with our citizens is certain. They have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race, and without appreciating the causes of their inferiority or seeking to control them, they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear."
—Andrew Jackson, the U.S. President, at the Fifth Annual Message to Congress, December 3, 1833.​

There were numerous treaties signed with the natives, and numerous still broken. That is numerous treaties still broken, no matter who is in power in the United States.

On the other hand, US named its top military attack helicopters after some of the bloodiest native tribes, like the Comanche and the Apache. See Top 10 Deadliest Native American Tribes.

Enter dehumanization:

dehumanize

to treat (someone) as though he or she is not a human being​

Remember that Klingons were portrayed as aliens, not humans on the show.

On the subject of lighter-skinned Klingons shown on screen, see Memory Alpha: Depicting Klignons:

"The second time [the Klingons appeared], something went wrong. I didn't see them in their makeup before they were photographed, as I usually did. The first time I saw the Klingons revisited, I was horrified. They were much paler and didn't match what we'd done before. I blew a gasket, but in television, unless it's a total disaster, you can't afford to reshoot. The third outing, we went back to them being darker." (Star Trek: Communicator issue 114, p. 24)​

Manifest Destiny, anyone? It's the term used to justify colonial conquest of America and slaughter of the indigenous population because it was all the colonizers' "destiny" to "civilize the savages".

 

[Kor]

The topic of "is Starfleet military" always goes around in endless circles with everybody repeating the same points over and over again and nobody being convinced to change their mind. Since TNG isn't in my head canon anyway, I'm just going to ignore Picard's vaunted words and go read a different thread.

Kor

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That's the second time you've attempted to "turn the table." From your passionate arguments, you've made it clear that the term "military" bothers you to no insignificant degree.

It doesn't bother me at all. It's just counterfactual.

There are lots of science fiction franchises I very much enjoy (some even more than Star Trek) that feature military organizations. The Mass Effect series, which I am now playing through for about the 87th time, is one example. The Halo series that basically filled in the gap in my scifi appetite when Star Trek was serving up nothing but smug and pretentious technobabble (aka "the Voyager Years"). Battlestar Galactica -- both versions of it -- and more recently, The Expanse, although I still liked the novels better.

The thing is, of all these different universes, the Colonial Fleet, the MCRN and the UN Navy, the UN Spacy from Macross, the Federal Forces of the Gundam franchise, the SAN of Mass Effect and Halo's UNSC are all explicitly military organizations, and it shows. They have the ethos, the organizational focus, unit discipline and clarity of purpose that one expects from a military organization. SSV Normandy (the first one, not the second) is DEFINITELY a military vessel, despite the fact that the majority of Commander Shepard's side missions are actually devoted to scientific exploration.

On the other hand, I don't play Mass Effect 2 and delude myself into thinking that Cerberus is a military organization. They're not, they're various described as a "terrorist organization" or an "evil corporation," depending on what part of the organization you're looking at; that puts Cerberus -- which has what Aria T'lok blithely describes as a "big fucking army" -- on the same footing as Starfleet as far as being a paramilitary organization. Likewise, I don't fool myself into thinking that Macross Quarter is part of the colony fleet's military; they're VERY explicit at the fact that the ship is being run by a private military contractor, which is kind of silly when you consider they have way better fighters than the U.N. Spacy, but hey, that's anime for you. Likewise, I bust out the old Zeta Gundam DVDs and I know good and damn well that both the Titans AND the AEUG are paramilitary organizations, and in fact the Titans' absorbing the regular Federation Space Force basically puts the entire planet into a constitutional crisis and triggers (well, intensifies) a planetwide civil war that sees about half the FSF revolting and joining the AEUG.

tl;dr: You don't know me, son. Don't project your own fears where they don't fit.

Your turn: why does "the military" having a negative connotation bother you so much?

All the while insisting on the term "paramilitary." A word already filled with negative connotation

I suppose you haven't been around these boards long enough to know that I used to WORK for a paramilitary organization.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I could pose the same question, just ever so slightly altered.

Why does this mean that they MUST be military?

For me it's not so much a matter of "must" as it is just keeping it consistent. And, of the 800 or whatever hours of Star Trek, Starfleet has been depicted more as being a military than not. It's a matter of creative credibility.

Truth be told, I generally don't like the heavier militaristic aspects of Star Trek. It's always been my biggest criticism of Meyer's films. You ultimately end up with something like the ridiculous scenario of TUC.

It was a pretty silly plot to begin with, but beyond that, you had Starfleet brass colluding with their enemy because they were worried about losing their jobs because they were worried Starfleet was going to be mothballed because the decades long cold war was going to end. But Starfleet isn't a military.... Whatever.

The thing is it otherwise might have been a good story if reworked a little but instead completely falls apart because the major plot point (and primary theme) hinges on the audience ignoring the lingering pretense.

And speaking of audiences, I would bet the common assumption among casual viewers is that of course Starfleet is a military. That assumption doesn't warrant correction.

The thing is, of all these different universes, the Colonial Fleet, the MCRN and the UN Navy, the UN Spacy from Macross, the Federal Forces of the Gundam franchise, the SAN of Mass Effect and Halo's UNSC are all explicitly military organizations, and it shows. They have the ethos, the organizational focus, unit discipline and clarity of purpose that one expects from a military organization.

And Starfleet doesn't

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Even if we entertain the notion that Starfleet is more into exploration, why does this mean they can't be military?

Because they SAY they're not a military. They are, therefore, paramilitary.

In the past, exploration was done by the military, and even today NASA employs a large number of active duty military officers, among them Chris Hadfield, arguably the most famous astronaut of the past decade.

And yet NASA is not a military organization. See how that works?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Manifest Destiny, anyone? It's the term used to justify colonial conquest of America and slaughter of the indigenous population because it was all the colonizers' "destiny" to "civilize the savages".

You're not actually citing "manifest destiny" as evidence of Starfleet's militarism, are you? Because that would be really, REALLY fucking ironic...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

For me it's not so much a matter of "must" as it is just keeping it consistent. And, of the 800 or whatever hours of Star Trek, Starfleet has been depicted more as being a military than not. It's a matter of creative credibility.

That's just it: from a creative standpoint, Starfleet as a "military" is actually kind of silly. They're actually depicted as a kind of half-assed military that doesn't take battlefield readiness seriously, doesn't practice decent unit cohesion, and is generally way too soft for me to take seriously as an organization whose primary role is combat.

Put that another way: casting Starfleet as the military feels a lot like casting Jackie Chan as a ruthless steely eyed assassin. It just doesn't fit. Jet Li could maybe pull it off, but Jackie Chan's characters invariably come off as "otherwise loveable fella who uses his kung fu skills to avoid getting his ass kicked."

And speaking of audiences, I would bet the common assumption among casual viewers is that of course Starfleet is a military. That assumption doesn't warrant correction.

Casual viewers assume ALOT of things that are wrong. Doesn't make them less wrong.

 

[Baxten]

Go back in time an equivalent number of years, and the entire notion of what comprised a military was completely different.

That's history, not fiction.

It's a fictional universe.

A fictional universe cannot redefine the language.

And their claims were lies.

Starfleet's aren't.

Considering that they have JAG and court-martial, Starfleet's claims are lies too.

Still don't see what this changes, since Picard never compares the Maquis to Starfleet.

Why would Picard need to specifically mention their "paramilitary" actions rather than just "actions", unless Starfleet didn't condone paramilitaries in general, which would make it a hypocrite if it were a paramilitary itself.

Except when they do.

Then it would make it a military by definition.

Well, no, it's a paramilitary that has its own JAG and the ability to conduct a courts martial.

Which, again, would make it a military, by formal definition, no matter what it calls itself. In fact, it would also make Starfleet a liar.

That's because it's a paramilitary. They know they have a combat role, it's just that the combat role isn't their primary function.

Or so they claim.

And then they retconned it. So now it's not.

Bad writing does not equal "retconned" when all the evidence points to the contrary.

Yes, Q mocking Picard is a good standard for how to define Starfleet and its mission...

Q may have been mocking Picard but it doesn't necessarily discredit his statement about "military privileges", especially when the Enterprise has a dedicated battle bridge.

It makes it Starfleet. Why would you assume otherwise?

Memory Alpha: Depicting Klingons

Gene Coon primarily modeled the Klingons, metaphorically, on contemporary Russians, making the standoff between the species and the Federation representative of that between the Russians and the Americans during the then-ongoing Cold War. (Star Trek: The Original Series 365, p. 139)

. . .​

"A Private Little War" continued the analogous use of the Klingons. In that outing, they were meant to represent the Communist foes of the United States specifically during the Vietnam War, which was being controversially fought at that time. (Star Trek: The Original Series 365, p. 222) [. . .] Gene Roddenberry was interested in increasing the degree to which the Klingons allegorically resembled North Vietnam, politically. [. . .] Coon thereafter stressed to Ingalls the importance of the Klingons being defeated by Starfleet. . . . (These Are the Voyages: TOS Season Two)​

They spell it out for you, so you don't have to assume anything. Of course, in reality, the United States lost the Vietnam War. That's no assumption.

Have you tried asking literally any German who was still alive after 1946?

Obviously, it was referring to the time of conquest, not the subsequent defeat.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Considering that they have JAG and court-martial, Starfleet's claims are lies too.

No, they just don't seem to observe the traditional definition of "JAG" and "court-martial." They're not lying at all, they just don't give a damn what YOU think those words are supposed to mean.

Why would Picard need to specifically mention their "paramilitary" actions rather than just "actions", unless Starfleet didn't condone paramilitaries in general

Starfleet doesn't condone paramilitary action in the DMZ. He's implying that the Cardassians don't either.

Then it would make it a military by definition.

Or a paramilitary that doesn't give a shit about the old definitions.

Which, again, would make it a military, by formal definition

Or a paramilitary that doesn't give a shit about the old definitions.

Bad writing does not equal "retconned"

Tell that to George Lucas. PLEASE.

Obviously, it was referring to the time of conquest, not the subsequent defeat.

Are you implying that German citizens today think the invasion of Poland, the conquest of France and the attempt to expand the Third Reich into Russia and England were actually justified at the time those actions occurred?

Because I'm pretty sure that's not true.

 

[Baxten]

Costa Rica.

LOL! US Military Bases, Quasi-bases, and Domestic Politics in Latin America (2016):

The United States had to change tune, opening a series of informal and legally ambiguous base-like arrangements -- which he calls "quasi-bases" in almost every country in the Pacific coast of the Americas (Peru, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador and Colombia, among others) [. . .] (p.177)​

US also offered its own "protection" to Costa Rica in case of war.

Clearly not the case with Starfleet.

NOAA and the Department of Public Health both have commissioned officer corps. Are those nerds military, too?

The Salvation Army literally has the word "Army" in their name. Are they a military, too?

The clothing retailer Old Navy literally has the word "Navy" in their name. Do they have aircraft carriers?

See the definitions of JAG and court-martial.

They say they're not a military, but they act like one. The word for that is "paramilitary."

Or lies and deception.

Star Trek gets a breathtaking amount of things wrong in terms of its scientific background. Its use of military-like terms in a non-military context shouldn't be all that surprising either.

Again, bad fiction cannot redefine the language. If it has JAG and court-martial, then it is a military by definition.

There. Was that so hard?

Ridiculing the obvious lie is not hard.

By that logic, everyone on Star Trek should speak either Mandarin or Spanish, rather than English.

By what logic? Feel free to explain how you arrived at that conclusion.

Why does this mean that they MUST be military?

Because they have JAG and court-martial.

 

[Voth commando1]

Was there every any doubt?

Starfleet IS more loose and lax than RL militaries-I mean you can tell your superior you disagree and they'll actually let you write a report or whatever expressing your criticisms/reservations/or whatever you still have to obey though.

It's obviously got a lot more lax discipline, the environment isn't cutthroat, and heck if your in prison you just get endless counseling sessions instead of daily beatings apparently.

So yeah its a more forgiving, broad sweeping and gentle(yeah about as best as I can describe) military than RL but it is still a military.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Or lies and deception.

If you would prefer to see Starfleet as a metaphor for some jingoistic pax americana wet dream, you're welcome to do so. Go write some fanfiction if that's your thing.

But the premise of the SHOW tells us that Starfleet is a paramilitary organization.

Again, bad fiction cannot redefine the language.

Of course it can. It's how Doctor Crusher gives people an "inoculation" for radiation poisoning, or how the crew of the Enterprise can "de-evolve" into more primitive forms of life.

On Enterprise we see:

E'LIS: Deuterium can burn almost as hot as plasma when it's ignited.​

You don't say! Deuterium can burn as hot as plasma???
Hell, there's even this little gem on Voyager:

NEELIX: A singularity is a star that's collapsed in on itself. The event horizon is a very powerful energy field surrounding it. ​

Seriously. They FILMED that shit.

Star Trek has been mutilating science for YEARS now. You really think they're going to be more accurate for an obscure legal technicality that's only relevant in the context of a set of laws the Federation doesn't even follow?

If it has JAG and court-martial, then it is a military by definition.

It isn't, though. It's a paramilitary that doesn't care about your definitions.

Ridiculing the obvious lie is not hard.

Cool story bro.

Have fun with your fanfiction.

 

[Baxten]

Because they SAY they're not a military. They are, therefore, paramilitary.

They also have JAG and court-martial. Therefore, they are a military.

And yet NASA is not a military organization. See how that works?

If NASA had JAG and courts-martial, it would be a military too. See how that works?

You're not actually citing "manifest destiny" as evidence of Starfleet's militarism, are you? Because that would be really, REALLY fucking ironic...

If you say so; especially, with the US and NATO expansionism today.

That's just it: from a creative standpoint, Starfleet as a "military" is actually kind of silly. They're actually depicted as a kind of half-assed military that doesn't take battlefield readiness seriously. . . .

Starfleet's efficiency as a military is irrelevant to the point of them being a military.

Casual viewers assume ALOT of things that are wrong. Doesn't make them less wrong.

That's why there are dictionaries and encyclopedias, which, in this case, make Star Trek wrong.

No, they just don't seem to observe the traditional definition of "JAG" and "court-martial." They're not lying at all, they just don't give a damn what YOU think those words are supposed to mean.

Starfleet not giving a "damn" is irrelevant. If it has JAG and court-martial, then it is a military by definition, no matter how ridiculous of a military it might be.

I don't know what language Star Trek is speaking but it's certainly not English. If it doesn't respect the language, then it doesn't respect the viewers. But it is still wrong.

Starfleet doesn't condone paramilitary action in the DMZ. He's implying that the Cardassians don't either.

On the contrary: Picard makes a clear comparison between the Maquis and the Cardassian civilians, and between Starfleet and Cardassian military in not condoning their actions. If he's implying anything, it's that Starfleet is a military equivalent to Cardassian military.

Or a paramilitary that doesn't give a shit about the old definitions.

We are speaking the language of the present, not the future. Therefore, Star Trek has to respect it or come up with new unique terms. Bad fiction cannot redefine the language.

Are you implying that German citizens today think the invasion of Poland, the conquest of France and the attempt to expand the Third Reich into Russia and England were actually justified at the time those actions occurred?

I don't know how you could possibly get that idea. I am saying that a conquering party, at the time of conquest, historically thinks that its cause is "just". Clear enough?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That's why there are dictionaries and encyclopedias, which, in this case, make Star Trek wrong.

That's exactly my point. It's fiction: they get shit wrong. Like, ALL THE TIME.

Black holes do not work that way, and neither does evolution; their technobabble is as nonsensical as their legal babble.

Doesn't change the fact that Starfleet is NOT a military organization and is therefore paramilitary.

Starfleet not giving a "damn" is irrelevant.

It's pretty relevant, dude. Triple Canopy or Pinkerton could literally hire a random guy and say "Congratulations, you're the judge advocate general now" and then decide for no good reason to call their internal discipline committees "court martials." Hell, WALMART could decide to start holding internal investigations and call them "court-martials" for some asinine reason. None of those things would become military organizations just because they use words incorrectly, nor could anyone actually STOP them from doing it because "has a JAG and runs something called a court martial" isn't the legally accepted definition of a "military."

"That which is not a technically a military but does what a military does" is called "paramilitary." And the only people who get to decide what is and isn't a military is the government that organization actually belongs to. If the Federation doesn't say Starfleet is a military, then it isn't, whether they have a JAG or not. If the United States doesn't say Walmart is the military, then it isn't, whether they court martial their cashiers or not.

We are speaking the language of the present, not the future. Therefore, Star Trek has to respect it or come up with new unique terms.

Star Trek can do whatever the hell it wants, it doesn't need YOUR permission to use words incorrectly (which it does, with alarming regularity, in every single iteration of the show).

Of course, I just realized I am having a conversation with someone who pretty much crawled out of the /pol/ tab on 8chan, so this is probably going to by my last response to you.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Questions of competence or political euphemisms aside, in writing, there is a commonly accepted principle of "actions speak louder than words" and a similar one of "show, don't tell".

This is particularly important in this context as the meaning of language can change over time, so it is theoritically possible that "military" has a different meaning in the Trekverse than it does in RL, but as we are never told what that is, we can only answer the question of "is Starfleet a military" or "is Starfleet a paramilitary" based on the current modern definitions thereof.

A Military (From Wikipedia):

The military, consisting of the Army, Navy and Air Force, and also called the armed forces, are forces authorised to use lethal and / or deadly force, and weapons, to support the interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually defined as defence of the state, and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military may also function as a discrete subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures, which may include housing, schools, utilities, logistics, health and medical, law, food production, finance and banking.

A Paramilitary:

A paramilitary is a semi-militarized force whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military, but which is not included as part of a state's formal armed forces.[1]


Under the law of war, a state may incorporate a paramilitary organization or armed agency (such as a national police, a private volunteer militia) into its combatant armed forces. The other parties to a conflict have to be notified thereof.[2]


The use of the term paramilitary can be debated, but the general consensus being of a combatant force or organization, more military-like than civilian. Organizations that have been described as paramilitary are as diverse as the Minutemen, Black Panthers, SS, youth groups (from scouting to the Pioneer movement), and even military-themed boarding schools.


Though a paramilitary is not a military force, it is usually equivalent to a military's light infantry force in terms of intensity, firepower, and organizational structure. A paramilitary may also commonly fall under the command of a military, even despite not being part of the military or play an assisting role for the military in times of war.

According to the above definitions, Starfleet shares some of the criteria of both: It is the offical uniformed defense force of the Federation as shown on screen many times, and has many of the "discrete subculture" elements of a military, but the defense role is not it's primary purpose so could be regarded as a "paramilitary organisation". I admit to a personal bias (I'm British, born in Northern Ireland) but to my mind, the exclusive definition of "paramilitary" rather than "military auxiliary" or "military reserve" (both of which might fit Starfleet) is a non-state actor like terrorists, insurrgents, guerillas and maybe at a stretch PMCs.

Therefore, my conclusion is that Starfleet is a military, but only when it needs to be, and therefore might be best described using the intro from Memory Alpha:

Stararfleet was the deep space exploratory and defense service maintained by the United Federation of Planets. Its principal functions included the advancement of Federation knowledge about the galaxy and its inhabitants, the advancement of Federation science and technology, the defense of the Federation, and the facilitation of Federation diplomacy.

I don't think that any of the above is contradicted by what we have been shown, do you?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I admit to a personal bias (I'm British, born in Northern Ireland) but to my mind, the exclusive definition of "paramilitary" rather than "military auxiliary" or "military reserve" (both of which might fit Starfleet) is a non-state actor like terrorists, insurrgents, guerillas and maybe at a stretch PMCs.

The company I used to work for (which under other contexts probably would have been described as a PMC) described itself as a provider of "private security and paramilitary services." Among other things, this included providing armed guards for VIPs, armored cars, banks and sensitive/proprietary materials. I never got in on that direct action, but they were very explicit on the fact that they were going for "hard" or "military-style" operations in those situations because that was what their clients expected. Again, "paramilitary" was the operative word and I got the impression they were legally required to make that distinction.

Therefore, my conclusion is that Starfleet is a military, but only when it needs to be,

Yeah... that's still "paramilitary." It's an armed force you can activate and deactivate into military service in time of need but isn't technically part of a country's declared armed forces otherwise. The French do the same thing with the Gendarmeries and so does the Australian Coast Guard.

I don't think that any of the above is contradicted by what we have been shown, do you?

The problem is, the dialog is pretty explicit on what Starfleet IS and ISN'T. So we kind of have to take it at face value when we interpret what they're SHOWING us.

So when Sulu looks at a skyline and says "San Francisco. I was born there." Well, the visuals are showing us San Francisco as it was in 1984, but that's probably not what he's talking about. Likewise, the more infamous "we don't use money" lines probably doesn't mean that that the entire Federation lacks a medium for regulated exchange. They obviously use some kind of credit system that keeps track of the allotment of goods you are trying to obtain from a particular vendor, but since they do not call this "money" we have to interpret what it REALLY is. The fact that they can't or don't directly exchange it with anyone suggests that it's really just an EARTH thing, and they have some kind of single-payer economy where the entire planet pays for everything on one gigantic credit account that is backed by a real currency everyone else in the galaxy accepts; Earth is so rich that it's literally picking up the tab for its entire population, so nobody who lives there has (or needs) any money.

Starfleet officers have said at various times that Starfleet isn't a military. Why? Because, evidently, the Federation doesn't consider it to an official combat force and sees its combat role as mostly if not entirely secondary. This puts it in a different category with both real world and science fiction militaries we're otherwise familiar with.

I mentioned Cerberus from the Mass Effect universe as a good example of a paramilitary organization in science fiction; another good example would actually be S.H.I.E.L.D. from the Marvel universe, or even the Avengers themselves. S.H.I.E.L.D. operates very much like a military; they fight wars against alien threats, they conduct readiness exercises, they develop and procure weapons. Their mobile headquarters is a flying aircraft carrier. But with all of that, the U.S. military still decided not to allow some of its aircraft to be used as props in the first "Avengers" movie: it turns out that since S.H.I.E.L.D. doesn't explicitly answer to the Department of Defense, it isn't technically a military organization, so the Pentagon decided not to cooperate with the production of the film.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Of course, I just realized I am having a conversation with someone who pretty much crawled out of the /pol/ tab on 8chan

The post, not the poster, please.

 

[Baxten]

That's exactly my point. It's fiction: they get shit wrong. Like, ALL THE TIME.

Yes, wrong like when Starfleet claims that it's not a military, despite formally having JAG and courts-martial.

Doesn't change the fact that Starfleet is NOT a military organization and is therefore paramilitary.

It is not a fact. In fact, you just admitted that it gets sh*t wrong all the time.

It's pretty relevant, dude. Triple Canopy or Pinkerton could literally hire a random guy and say "Congratulations, you're the judge advocate general now" and then decide for no good reason to call their internal discipline committees "court martials." Hell, WALMART could decide to start holding internal investigations and call them "court-martials" for some asinine reason. None of those things would become military organizations just because they use words incorrectly, nor could anyone actually STOP them from doing it because "has a JAG and runs something called a court martial" isn't the legally accepted definition of a "military."

No, it is not. You're mistaking it for informal usage. Federation and Starfleet are formal bodies. Their courts-martial are formal proceedings. Starfleet has legal authority from the Federation to administer them and enforce military law within its jurisdiction or it would be a criminal organization.

"That which is not a technically a military but does what a military does" is called "paramilitary." And the only people who get to decide what is and isn't a military is the government that organization actually belongs to.

A paramilitary does not have an authority to legally administer courts-martial. If it does, then its authority has automatically decided that it is a military. Otherwise, it's a criminal organization.

Star Trek can do whatever the hell it wants, it doesn't need YOUR permission to use words incorrectly (which it does, with alarming regularity, in every single iteration of the show).

It needs the permission from the formal and legal definition of the terms, as they are defined in a dictionary. Otherwise, Starfleet is either lying about not being a military or it is a criminal organization; or both? Because that's the definition it falls under by doing what would otherwise require a legal military authority to do: JAG and court-martial.

The fact that Starfleet has JAG and court-martial means that it is a military organization at all times, not just at the times of war.

Of course, I just realized I am having a conversation with someone who pretty much crawled out of the /pol/ tab on 8chan, so this is probably going to by my last response to you.

Have a nice day!

 

[Spot261]

The Enterprise-D did have an entire deck devoted to sentient, but not sapient, navigational cetacean life. Put on a swimsuit and eat some raw fish and you're on the team!

Have I never mentioned being a merman?

 

[Baxten]

One thing is clear: the "Starfleet is not a military" arguments need to distort the language just to make a case. Luckily, we still have other evidence to rely on.

Memory Alpha: Depicting Klingons

Gene Coon primarily modeled the Klingons, metaphorically, on contemporary Russians, making the standoff between the species and the Federation representative of that between the Russians and the Americans during the then-ongoing Cold War. (Star Trek: The Original Series 365, p. 139) [. . .] The Klingon Empire was also a metaphor for Communist China and its allies in the Vietnam War, namely North Vietnam and North Korea. (These Are the Voyages: TOS Season One) [. . .] Dave Rossi agreed, "In many ways, the Klingons were born out of our fear, as Americans, of [...] the Communists." ("Errand of Mercy" Starfleet Access, TOS Season 1 Blu-ray)

. . .

[Leonard Nimoy] gave much consideration to how the Klingons were similar to the Communists. Influenced by the contemporaneous crumbling of both the Soviet Union (which included Russia) and its border which was the Berlin Wall, Nimoy chose to represent the Klingons as encountering analogous circumstances. "Realizing that over the 25 year history of Star Trek, the Klingons have been the constant foe of the Federation, much like the Russians and Communists were to democracy. . . ." (The Making of the Trek Films, UK 3rd ed., p. 100)​

These are people behind Star Trek clearly spelling it out that the conflict between the Federation and the Klingon Empire was meant to represent primarily the conflict between the Americans and the Russians, from at least 1966 to 1991 (25 years).

Immediately, we have definitive confirmation that Star Trek from 1966 to 1991 was heavily motivated by propaganda, to say the least, making the Federation and Starfleet an allusion to USA and NATO. During the Cold War, USA was pursing an arms race (military), while NATO was created solely as a military alliance against the USSR.

That would make Starfleet, beyond all reasonable doubt, a military organization like the U.S. Navy or a military alliance like NATO. It would also confirm that any statements by Starfleet about not being a military are a lie.

By the way, the Berlin wall was built by the United States, not Soviet Union!

EDIT: Sorry. I should correct this. I vaguely remember reading about NATO being part of the cause of the Berlin Wall's existence. That, combined with a metaphorical reference to the USA/Mexico wall as "Berlin Wall", and got things mixed up. After some additional reading, I'd like to clarify:

The Warsaw Treaty Organization demanded neutralization and demilitarization of West Berlin. In 1961 NATO confirms that it will continue the presence of its armed forces in the western part of the city. Meanwhile, there is a massive propaganda from the West about a "better life" than in the East. This finally causes the construction of the Wall by East Germany.

Furthermore, there's evidence to support that the franchise has never moved on from the original propaganda.

Memory Alpha: Rurik the Damned

Rurik the Damned was a great Klingon warrior, who conquered the Zora Fel and liberated Vrax. A monumental statue of him stands in the Hall of Warriors on Ty'Gokor. (DS9: "Apocalypse Rising")​

Encyclopedia Britannica: Rurik Dynasty

Rurik Dynasty, princes of Kievan Rus and, later, Muscovy who, according to tradition, were descendants of the Varangian prince Rurik, who had been invited by the people of Novgorod to rule that city (c. 862); the Rurik princes maintained their control over Kievan Rus and, later, Muscovy until 1598.​

This particular episode (DS9: "Apocalypse Rising") has aired five years (1996) after the end of the Cold War (1991). Moreover, Rurik has nothing to do with communism. It's medieval Russia time period.

Memory Alpha: Depicting Klingons

The Klingons of ENT: "Sleeping Dogs" were based on the crew of the Russian submarine Kursk.​

This episode has aired eleven years (2002) after the end of the Cold War. Again, it is post-USSR and has nothing to do with communism, yet the allusion is still there.

What does that tell you about Star Trek's true intentions?

The above evidence clearly proves that Star Trek is still stuck in propaganda and that the Federation and Starfleet are still allusions to USA and NATO, making Starfleet a military organization and a liar.

Quod erat demonstrandum.