Starfleet...Military or Not

[Silvercrest]

Well, with due respect to you and your service to the military, I don't think that your statement that "the military isn't dedicated to scientific exploration" is historically true.

What we need to take into account is that Starfleet isn't like the military now, in our day and age when the entire surface of the planet is known and quantified and the only mission objectives that a military has are of either a peacekeeping or warmongering nature..... no, Starfleet is instead like the military back in the golden age of sail, in the 17th and 18th centuries, when much of the world was yet to be explored, and the great military leaders were not just fighters and tactitians, but explorers and scientists as well. Bare in mind that two of the most important people in the militaries of old were the cartographers, whose job it was to map out the coastlines of strange new lands, and botanists, whose job was to, once landfall had been made, take samples of local flora and fauna for scientific study.

Basically, militaries have always had a primary objective of territorial expansion (as you put it, "war"). But their secondary objective, in the old days, included discovering more about the world, and adding to the collective knowledge of humanity. Charting 'the great unknown', as it were. Sounds a lot like Starfleet to me.

This. 100% this. And Shawnster's example of the HMS Beagle is absolutely spot-on.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

No DS9 shows Starfleet has ground forces.

Are they actually Starfleet though, and not some other orginization that was taken to places by Starfleet to use in times of war. We only see these people during the war with the Klingons.

They wore uniforms with color divisions the same as Starfleet, and they have Starfleet issue communicators.

 

[C.E. Evans]

For me, this all revolves around Picard's assertion in "Peak Performance" that "Starfleet is not a military organization." I think that was a simple case of poor writing, or at the very least a line being written by someone with little to no military experience. I don't know very much about David Kemper (the episode's writer), but I can't find any evidence that he ever served in the armed forces.

It may not have been Kemper's idea for all we know. It could have come down from Berman, who probably got the idea from Roddenberry.

In the end, it's just quibbling over a label or at best trying to define the futuristic Starfleet in 20th-Century terms, if not earlier.

In-universe, it could just be a matter of politics that the Federation--at least by the 24th-Century--chose to define Starfleet as something different than we would in our time. In a way, though, what we'd call Starfleet is totally irreverent, but it probably would make some of us sleep better I guess.

 

[Ithekro]

No DS9 shows Starfleet has ground forces.

Are they actually Starfleet though, and not some other orginization that was taken to places by Starfleet to use in times of war. We only see these people during the war with the Klingons.

They wore uniforms with color divisions the same as Starfleet, and they have Starfleet issue communicators.

The NOAA has naval uniforms and some naval equiment, but are not the Navy.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And the ground troops are referred to in dialogue as Starfleet as well. Definitely in "The Siege of AR-558", anyway.

 

[wildsulu]

Obviously the military, Starfleet just won't admit it for some reason

24th century politically correctness no doubt.

So you guys are saying they delude themselves out of political correctness and lie to non federationers? Great utopia!

I see starfleet as an armed diplomatic corps (with a mission of exploration), who can be turned into military by 1 comunicator-call from the president. And for all non-federationers,.. yes they're basically an army. But they're not exactly military because they have lots of kids on their "warships" and also lots of scientists with odd fields of expertise

 

[IrishNero]

Unless by the 24th century, they consider military to mean army, again. A force that is used to take planets and fight on the ground. That is definately not Starfleet's usual method of conducting themselves.

No DS9 shows Starfleet has ground forces.

And a fat lot of good they do.

They make great hostages, and boy can they run right into a bad situation...and make it worse.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Obviously the military, Starfleet just won't admit it for some reason

24th century politically correctness no doubt.

So you guys are saying they delude themselves out of political correctness and lie to non federationers? Great utopia!

I see starfleet as an armed diplomatic corps (with a mission of exploration), who can be turned into military by 1 comunicator-call from the president. And for all non-federationers,.. yes they're basically an army. But they're not exactly military because they have lots of kids on their "warships" and also lots of scientists with odd fields of expertise

WTF is an armed diplomatic corps? And why?

As an ex Air Force Brat, I lived on base as a child. We had other civilians on base, too. (My teachers) Pretty sure that didn't stop the USAF from being military.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Obviously the military, Starfleet just won't admit it for some reason

24th century politically correctness no doubt.

Apparently, their way of thinking is, military=bad. Having the form and shape of a military is OK. But calling Starfleet the military is considered insulting.

Obviously the military, Starfleet just won't admit it for some reason

24th century politically correctness no doubt.

So you guys are saying they delude themselves out of political correctness and lie to non federationers? Great utopia!

I see starfleet as an armed diplomatic corps (with a mission of exploration), who can be turned into military by 1 comunicator-call from the president. And for all non-federationers,.. yes they're basically an army. But they're not exactly military because they have lots of kids on their "warships" and also lots of scientists with odd fields of expertise

I've always wondered why can't they see themselves for what they are--the military!

I don't think they're losing anything by calling themselves that. The Bajorans have a 'militia' and they seem very peaceful.

If anything, being in denial seems to put them at a disadvantage at times.

So in the event of a sudden hostile situation, they have rush to a starbase, wait and offload the families, then rush to wherever the situation is.

If they can't find a place to offload the families--then they may have to face a violent situation with them onboard. That's what happened with the Borg incident.

 

[Vger23]

I hate when this discussion comes up. The Church of Roddenberry fans and the "true believers" in Trek philosophy all come out swinging like crazy people trying to rationalize and dismiss the obvious. They sound like Picard after too much Earl Gray!

Starfleet is military.

They have a rank system. They have an academy that trains officers. They are trained in combat effectiveness and tactics. They are tasked with defense of the Federation. They use force when necessary. They have court-martials. They perform espionage missions, rescue missions, etc. They engage in ship-to-ship wargame exercises. Their ships are armed to the teeth.

Just because they also explore planets, go on diplomatic missions, and catalogue gaseous anomalies in Beta Quadrent doesn't mean they aren't the military.

Starfleet is a military. I don't understand how to there can be any argument to the contrary.

"Forgive me gentlemen. I'm a soldier, not a diplomat."
-James T. Kirk Errand of Mercy

 

[Hatshepsut]

Apparently, their way of thinking is, military=bad.

Indeed. Military security is, however, the only known way to have peace. Americans, especially those of liberal political leanings, decry the killing in Syria, yet the lack of a strong military that can keep someone in charge of the country and defend its borders is much worse, in terms of the rate at which people are being hurt in conflicts there, than the repressive Baathist government ever was at its peak of power.

Not to say dictatorship is good, but political correctness has brought a denial of this truth.

How military force will play out on a future interstellar scale, or even whether it will have any role, is beyond me. Science Fiction is limited to concepts available today and the remote future will bring things we can't imagine clearly. But it seems that an ideal galactic community will still need security arrangements of some kind. Not everyone will be benevolent.

The Federation seems pretty modest militarily. There are what, about 20 starships in its fleet? (in the TOS) Not many for all those thousands of worlds they must protect, in addition to the science missions they spend most of their time on. So it must be a fairly peaceful galaxy in general.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

If they can't find a place to offload the families--then they may have to face a violent situation with them onboard. That's what happened with the Borg incident.

To be fair thats why the Enterprise-D had the saucer separation ability, so they could chuck the kids in the saucer and then go kick the bad guy's ass with their more combat capable stardrive section.

 

[Elias Vaughn]

Every time this question comes up, I shake my head and wonder how we can see Starfleet fight a war and still be confused about whether or not they're a military. Of course they are.

Yes, Starfleet's primary directive isn't to wage war, but I think that says less about Starfleet's military-ness and more about humanity's priorities in the 23rd/24th century.

 

[StarCruiser]

Starfleet IS a military organization - but one that has evolved beyond what we currently think of.

If you look at the military today (USA, Europe, Japan, Australia mostly) you see a force designed to fight wars AND provide aid and rescue and on and on. While most of their resources are not designed for humanitarian work, many are easily adapted to those tasks.

Just sending a US Navy Amphib ship to a flooded nation with supplies and medical aid is a good example of being more than just a military.

Starfleet is the result of centuries of progress in that direction. They are still soldiers defending the Federation but, can also aid others and perform science missions.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Military with additional responsibilities that today's military forces don't have.

What exactly does that mean? Everything we see Starfleet do has been done my militaries either today or in the past.

Defence, offence, exploration, first contact situations, engage in diplomacy/treaties, form alliances, pure science missions, mapping, help after natural disasters, search for natural resources.

And more.

Yep. Pretty much what I would've said if I'd logged on sooner. Kirk's Enterprise also did things like supply runs for remote outposts, transport of refugees and diplomats, and rescue operations. But I was primarily talking about the exploration and scientific research that today's military is not especially concerned with.

And "in the past" doesn't really enter into what I wrote, since I specifically said 'today's military."

 

[Mudd]

They're supposed to be a uniformed service that is, like someone already said, as military or as civilian as the writers of a particular story want them to be.

There can't be a right answer to this, because there are no facts to appeal to - just varying statements from different episodes and movies about a non-existent organization.

 

[Vger23]

"I'm a soldier, not a diplomat." - Kirk in Errand of Mercy.

Kor

Without having seen this first, I used the same quote!

 

[IrishNero]

There seems to be some confusion between being military and being a total war machine. I spent 23 years in the military and 90 percent of that time was spent in occupational endeavors that did not involve any type of combat or combat support. Among other things, I assisted with Hurricane Katrina relief in New Orleans, Typhoon Relief in Bangladesh, famine relief in Africa, Volcano Eruption-related evacuation (Mt. Pinatubo) and drug interdiction assistance in South America. I can honestly say that I'm much more 'proud' of those times when I helped people than the times I had a weapon in my hand. Using diplomacy and civil/peaceful tactics doesn't make you a civilian any more than having guns makes you military.

One thing that is fairly consistent in Star Trek is the premise of avoiding hostile contact, but Federation starships aren't naively designed without an array of weapons for times when diplomacy doesn't work. The measure of a great society is its intelligent use of forethought and diplomacy far in advance of an actual conflict, but when faced with conflict, you have the means to face it. As President Roosevelt said: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick." I hope that human societies progress to that point but we're not there yet. I'd like to think that the Federation is the military of tomorrow: One known far more for peace than war.

 

[1001001]

I hate when this discussion comes up. The Church of Roddenberry fans and the "true believers" in Trek philosophy all come out swinging like crazy people trying to rationalize and dismiss the obvious.

That's a bit much...

 

[Mudd]

"The obvious" is that a fictional entity has no fixed nature. There can be no authoritative referent other than the fiction itself; therefore when the narrative contradicts itself no single right answer can be derived from the source material.

Bringing Roddenberry's statements into the argument is primarily an effort to establish authorial intent. Not everyone considers the author's intent to be decisive in understanding any fictional work.