Starfleet - war criminals? (Sisko and Starfleet Command)

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I was in error. Section 31 is actually a department of Starfleet.

No, it isn't. Section 31 is a rogue organization that has no authorization to exist.

They claim that they have, but they are lying. All that the actual Section 31 of the Earth Starfleet Charter - the EARTH Starfleet Charter, I might add, not the Federation Starfleet Charter - ever said, was that allowances can be made for bending the rules in times of dire emergency. It gave NO authorization for the existence of the organization we know as Section 31.

They are Federation citizens, part of Starfleet, working on behalf of the Federation's interests.

They are working on behalf of their OWN interests, nothing more. They literally do whatever they want. They have no oversight, no accountability to the Federation government. Hell, they once had a SPY inside the President's cabinet!

 

[Tenacity]

No, it isn't. Section 31 is a rogue organization that has no authorization to exist.

Or they are fully authorized. That's one of the most interesting things about Section 31, it's ill-defined and the information we have is (deliberately?) contradictory.

They literally do whatever they want.

And what they want to do is protect the Federation.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Or they are fully authorized. That's one of the most interesting things about Section 31, it's ill-defined and the information we have is (deliberately?) contradictory.

The only information we DO have is that they have no authorization. That is all we have to go on.

And what they want to do is protect the Federation.

No, they want to protect themselves. Big difference there.

And the Federation can protect itself just fine. It has Starfleet to do it for them. Sure, there is always a need for espionage and even covert ops, but rules and ethics don't have to be tossed aside to do it. Or, to rephrase:

If Starfleet Intelligence can't do it, it doesn't deserve to get done.

 

[GabyBee]

We really don't fully know what Section 31 is, as their name is only derived from a passing reference in the Starfleet Charter (note: Starfleet, not Federation) and its membership kept clandestine from quite literally anyone and everyone outside of the organization.

At best, Section 31 is a rogue agency of Starfleet that has no official support or authorization, and conducts its affairs based on a distorted interpretation of Starfleet and Federation law.

At worst, Section 31 is a domestic terrorist group within the Federation that at times finds itself in accord with the notion that the enemy of one's enemy is an ally.

 

[Prax]

Section 31 has the support of Starfleet Command.

When Will tells the gang that he probed command about it's existence, The told him that they couldn't confirm or deny it. They say "We'll look into it."

Kira says "Sounds like a cover up."

In "Inter Arma..." Admiral Ross is working for Section 31. At the end of the episode he tells Bashir that he is not to speak of the mission to anyone, that it's classified.

Just because they're above a Captain's pay grade, does not mean they are a rogue agency. We simply don't know enough.

But they are a department of Starfleet and have the support of SFC.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Yes, because the say-so of one Admiral is enough to prove that the entire Starfleet Command is in on it.

 

[Kemaiku]

The Admiral in Insurrection was willing to commit planetary genocide and work with former Dominion allies, his conduct was entirely his own and the Council called an emergency session, likely because they didn't really know what the hell he was up to and were about to launch an investigation into how it happened.

Admirals go rogue, as do captains from time to time. Our heroes job is always to being them justice or simply stop them. S31 would just help, and cause a lot of innocent people to die.

 

[Tenacity]

If Starfleet Intelligence can't do it, it doesn't deserve to get done.

Wrong, if Starfleet intelligence can't do it, then someone else needs to step up and get the job done.

The Admiral in Insurrection was willing to commit planetary genocide

No he wasn't, you need to rewatch the movie.

and were about to launch an investigation into how it happened.

No, the Council was going to have a review, perhaps similar to the review that took place in Journey's End.

Admiral Nechayev requested a review of the evacuation mission that the Enterprise was assigned to, the Council review the plan in less than three days and decided to go ahead with the original plan.

After the review spoken of at the end of Insurrection, I expect the same thing happen. The Council would spend a couple of day looking at information and then decide to go ahead with the original plan.

The evacuation of the planet and the collection of the orbiting particles.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

if Starfleet intelligence can't do it, then someone else needs to step up and get the job done.

By any means necessary, is that it? No rules of engagement? No laws of any kind? Because that's what you're describing. It's The Star Chamber writ large. The ultimate in vigilantism.

Like I said: If Starfleet Intelligence can't do it, it shouldn't be done. SI works within the law. It follows the rules. It is accountable to a higher authority. That makes it the only legitimate option.

I suppose the pro-Section 31 crowd would care to explain why, if S31 is supposedly authorized by the Federation government and is a legitimate part of Starfleet, it had a spy in President Jaresh-Inyo's cabinet?

 

[Tenacity]

No rules of engagement?

You tell me first how many Federation lives will be saved, how much suffering prevented, how many inncoents spared, if the gloves come off .

The tell me about the rules of engagement that will allow all that horror to happen, all so some few can stand on their ethical mountain and say that they took the high road.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ That's a risk I'm prepared to take.

You don't prevent horror by CAUSING horror.

 

[Voth commando1]

Really this sort of consequentialist ethics can lead down a dark road.

Is genocide okay? Sexual assault to gain information? Murder? Torture of children?

Deception?

If those things become necessary to defend your civilization then your civilization probably isn't worth saving in the first place.

 

[Tenacity]

Really this sort of consequentialist ethics can lead down a dark road.

Okay, but how soon do you draw the line? No military, no police, no private weapons?

By simply defending yourself, you might accidentally injury your attacker.

 

[Voth commando1]

There is fine line between defending yourself and your society and a no hold's barred Hobbesian war of all against all.

If people can't find that line-then their moral scruples have been totally eroded.

 

[Prax]

Yes, because the say-so of one Admiral is enough to prove that the entire Starfleet Command is in on it.

Admirals go rogue, as do captains from time to time.

What in the world are you guys talking about? This isn't some lone Admiral. SFCommand has an OFFICIAL POSITION on S31. That position is protect their anonymity.

I suppose the pro-Section 31 crowd

As with the Maquis, this isn't an argument about our views or morals, It's about the world that is shown on screen. You continue to make impassioned comments based on how distasteful you find elements in the shows.

 

[fireproof78]

What evidence is there that S31 is official and sanctioned?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ None.

There is the occasional officer (like Admiral Ross) who works with them, but there is absolutely NO evidence that Section 31 is in any way sanctioned by the Federation.

 

[Voth commando1]

Section 31 has support from within the highest echelons of the brass and security agencies.

Anyone arguing otherwise just isn't comfortable with what Canon has nearly explicitly stated.

Section 31 has resources, training and reach that is clearly beyond what a bunch of vigilantes have access to.

They probably have people in every agency, and support from at least one or two top people in every agency.

People can't seem to understand that the law isn't reflective of reality. What is de jure doesn't always reflect what is de facto.

De jure there is supposed to be a separation of powers-de facto the presidency in the United States has become more and more imperial.

De jure-Bashir al Assad is the legitimate president of Syria moral considerations aside.

De jure-the EU operates on the principal of subsidiarity. De facto it seeks to regulate the fucking vacuum cleaners of its citizenry.

I'm sorry for the rant but this just gets so tiresome.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Section 31 has support from within the highest echelons of the brass and security agencies.

Anyone arguing otherwise just isn't comfortable with what Canon has nearly explicitly stated.

In response to this, I might argue that anyone who believes Section 31 IS sanctioned, has a personal grudge against the Federation and wishes to perceive it as evil. You wouldn't particularly care for that...would you?

 

[Voth commando1]

I'm not honestly sure what you mean "by perceive it as evil."

All in all DS9's writers admitted they couldn't play by the rules in Roddenberry's sandbox and so utterly gutted Star Trek of its optimistic core.

I'm simply going by canon, I don't necessarily like it but that's they way it is.